Conservation Wilderness Values Wilderness Education Tanzania, Italy, Russia, Guianas INTERNATIONAL Journal of Wilderness

APRIL 2005 VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1

FEATURES INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES (continued) EDITORIAL PERSPECTIVES 31 The Ruaha National Park, Tanzania 3 Can We Let Wilderness Just Be Wilderness? BY SUE STOLBERGER BY CHAD P. DAWSON 35 Wilderness Is More Than “” SOUL OF THE WILDERNESS BY FRANCO ZUNINO 4 A Wilderness Challenge BY MICHAEL FROME 38 Plant Community Monitoring in Vodlozhersky National Park, Karelia, Russia BY RALPH DUNMORE 8 , Ethics, and Action BY WILDERNESS DIGEST 43 Announcements and Wilderness Calendar SCIENCE AND RESEARCH 14 A GIS–based Inductive Study of Wilderness Values Book Reviews BY GREGORY BROWN and LILIAN ALESSA 46 The Enduring Wilderness: Protecting Our through the Wilderness Act PERSPECTIVES FROM THE ALDO LEOPOLD by Doug Scott WILDERNESS RESEARCH INSTITUTE REVIEW BY JOHN SHULTIS, IJW BOOK EDITOR 19 The Fire Effects Planning Framework BY ANNE BLACK 46 Wildland Recreation Policy: An Introduction, 2nd ed. by J. Douglas Wellman and Dennis B. Propst REVIEW BY CHAD DAWSON EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION 21 Wilderness Education 46 : Impacts, Management The Ultimate Commitment to Quality and Planning Wilderness Stewardship edited by Karen Higginbottom BY GREG HANSEN and TOM CARLSON REVIEW BY SARAH ELMELIGI

INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES 26 Conservation Planning in the Tropics FRONT COVER A ’s dream day at Mount McKinley, Lessons Learned from the Denali National Park, Alaska. Photo by Cathy Hart. Guianan Ecoregion Complex INSET Cristina Mittermeier looking a dung beetle in the eye, BY G. JAN SCHIPPER Tembe Elephant Reserve, KwaZulu Natal, South Africa. Photo by Vance Martin. International Journal of Wilderness The International Journal of Wilderness links wilderness professionals, scientists, educators, , and interested citizens worldwide with a forum for reporting and discussing wilderness ideas and events; inspirational ideas; planning, management, and allocation strategies; education; and research and policy aspects of wilderness stewardship.

EDITORIAL BOARD Perry Brown, University of Montana, Missoula, Mont., USA Vance G. Martin, WILD Foundation, Ojai, Calif., USA Alan Watson, Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute, Missoula, Mont., USA John Shultis, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, B.C., Canada Steve Hollenhorst, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, USA Wayne A. Freimund, University of Montana, Missoula, Mont., USA Rebecca Oreskes, White Mountain National Forest, Gorham, N.H., USA

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF John C. Hendee, Professor Emeritus, University of Idaho Wilderness Research Center, Moscow, Idaho, USA

MANAGING EDITOR Chad P. Dawson, SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, N.Y., USA

ASSOCIATE EDITORS—INTERNATIONAL Gordon Cessford, Department of Conservation, Wellington, New Zealand; Karen Fox, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; Andrew Muir, Wilderness Foundation Eastern Cape, South Africa; Ian Player, South Africa National Parks Board and The Wilderness Foundation, Howick, Natal, Republic of South Africa; Vicki A. M. Sahanatien, Fundy National Park, Alma, Canada; Won Sop Shin, Chungbuk National University, Chungbuk, Korea; Anna-Liisa Sippola, University of Lapland, Rovaniemi, Finland; Franco Zunino, Associazione Italiana per la Wilderness, Murialdo, Italy.

ASSOCIATE EDITORS—UNITED STATES Greg Aplet, The Wilderness Society, Denver, Colo.; David Cole, Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute, Missoula, Mont.; John Daigle, University of Maine, Orono, Maine; Don Fisher, USFS, Washington D.C.; Joseph , East Carolina University, Greenville, N.C.; Lewis Glenn, Outward Bound USA, Garrison, N.Y.; Glenn Haas, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colo.; Troy Hall, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho; William Hammit, Clemson University, Clemson, S.C.; Greg Hansen, U.S. Forest Service, Mesa, Ariz.; Dave Harmon, Bureau of Land Management, Portland, Oreg.; Bill Hendricks, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, Calif.; Ed Krumpe, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho; Jim Mahoney, Bureau of Land Management, Sierra Vista, Ariz.; Bob Manning, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vt.; Jeffrey Marion, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg, Va.; Leo McAvoy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn.; Michael McCloskey, Sierra Club; Christopher Monz, St. Lawrence University, Canton, N.Y.; Connie Myers, Arthur Carhart Wilderness Training Center, Missoula, Mont.; Roderick Nash, University of California, Santa Barbara, Calif.; David Ostergren, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Ariz.; Marilyn Riley, Wilderness Transitions Inc., Sausalito, Calif.; Joe Roggenbuck, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg, Va.; Holmes Rolston III, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins, Colo.; Susan Sater, U.S. Forest Service, Portland, Oreg.; Tod Schimelpfenig, National Outdoor Leadership School, Lander, Wyo.; Rudy Schuster, SUNY-ESF, Syracuse, N.Y.; Elizabeth Thorndike, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.; Jay Watson, The Wilderness Society, San Francisco, Calif.; Dave White, Arizona State University, Tempe, Ariz.

International Journal of Wilderness (IJW) publishes three issues per year Submissions: Contributions pertinent to wilderness worldwide are (April, August, and December). IJW is a not-for-profit publication. solicited, including articles on wilderness planning, management, and allocation strategies; wilderness education, including descriptions Manuscripts to: Chad P. Dawson, SUNY-ESF, 320 Bray Hall, One of key programs using wilderness for personal growth, therapy, and Forestry Drive, Syracuse, N.Y. 13210, USA. Telephone: (315) 470-6567. ; wilderness-related science and research from Fax: (315) 470-6535. E-mail: [email protected]. all disciplines addressing physical, biological, and social aspects of wilderness; and international perspectives describing wilderness Business Management and Subscriptions: WILD Foundation, P.O. Box 1380, worldwide. Articles, commentaries, letters to the editor, photos, book Ojai, CA 93024, USA. Telephone: (805) 640-0390. Fax: (805) 640-0230. reviews, announcements, and information for the wilderness digest are E-mail: [email protected]. encouraged. A complete list of manuscript submission guidelines is available from the managing editor. Subscription rates (per volume calendar year): Subscription costs are in U.S. dollars only—$35 for individuals and $55 for organizations/ Artwork: Submission of artwork and with captions are libraries. Subscriptions from Canada and , add $10; outside North encouraged. Photo credits will appear in a byline; artwork may be signed America, add $20. Back issues are available for $15. by the author. All materials printed in the International Journal of Wilderness, copyright World Wide Website: www.ijw.org. © 2005 by the International Wilderness Leadership (WILD) Foundation. Individuals, and nonprofit libraries acting for them, are permitted to make Printed on recycled paper. fair use of material from the journal. ISSN # 1086-5519.

SPONSORING ORGANIZATIONS • Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute • Conservation International • National Outdoor Leadership School (NOLS) • Outward Bound™ • SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry • The WILD® Foundation • The Wilderness Society • University of Idaho Wilderness Research Center • University of Montana, School of Forestry and Wilderness Institute • USDA Forest Service • USDI Bureau of Land Management • USDI Fish and Wildlife Service • USDI National Park Service • Wilderness Foundation (South Africa) • Wilderness Leadership School (South Africa)

2 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 FEATURES

EDITORIAL PERSPECTIVES

Can We Let Wilderness Just Be Wilderness? BY CHAD P. DAWSON

hether you take a quick or a thorough review The worrisome factor is that, in spite of the legislation, of the history of the human species on this humans will still go on being humans and will attempt to W planet, you may arrive at the observation that manipulate and use wilderness resources. This tendency as humans we seem almost incapable of just letting wilderness and warning to managers was mentioned even by early be wilderness. We seem to have a nearly insatiable need to wilderness preservationists. For example, Howard Zahniser “improve” and manipulate everything in our environment. in his essay Wilderness Forever tells us to be prepared to The field of human genetics might suggest that this drive keep our support of wilderness in perpetuity, like the wil- to manage our environment has been genetically selected derness itself: “We are not slowing down a force that inevitably to ensure that we survive, thrive, and prosper as a species. will destroy all the wilderness there is. We are generating Some might argue that our “successes” at manipulating the another force, never to be wholly spent, that, renewed genera- environment might also be sowing the seeds of our own tion after generation, will be always effective in preserving environmental self-destruction. wilderness” (in W. Schwartz, ed., Voices for the Wilderness, So how do we change that which is so thoroughly New York: Ballantine Books, 1969, 106). embedded in humans as individuals and in our societies? In this issue of IJW, Michael Frome outlines a strong and Although some have mused about making wilderness sac- personal case for a wilderness challenge to keep wilderness rosanct or a sacred place in a religious sense to create a protection foremost in all designation and legislation discus- social agreement to protect wilderness areas, the most suc- sions about wilderness and to avoid the compromises that cessful social experiment to date has been to use legislation can creep into political processes. The concept of environ- that protects those special remnants of wild places and eco- mental stewardship as a national agenda includes wilderness systems. After accomplishing this legislative protection in preservation, according to Frome, and he advocates for greater some countries of the world, the designated land manage- public awareness of the wilderness concept. Cristina ment agencies are left with the task of continuing to hold Mittermeier articulates the value of photography in making off the human tendency to incrementally want to “improve” the public aware of conservation and preservation issues. or use what they rationalize as “just some small part of the Her argument that powerful photographic imagery saved wilderness.” Such proposals generally argue that these some areas in can be echoed in the United States if activities have little or no measurable or significant impact one recalls the use of photography by well-known wilder- (e.g., allowing mountain bike use or commercialized tourism ness advocates such as and David Brower. The use, collecting fossils for research, permitting cattle grazing). use of powerful images can generate public awareness at both Multiple counterarguments can be made, including the the conscious and subconscious levels—a kind of inner cumulative impacts of such activities, the apparent and real inspiration that will “elicit concern and emotion that can conflicts in use, and others. direct human behavior,” according to Mittermeier. IJW

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 3 FEATURES

SOUL OF THE WILDERNESS

A Wilderness Challenge BY MICHAEL FROME

he first time I read about the Wilderness Act—or temples; the forests, sacred groves. In our own era, the cel- the Wilderness Bill at that time—was in The New ebrated photographer Ansel Adams expressed the idea: “Here T York Times of May 15, 1956.In the column headed are worlds of experience beyond the world of aggressive man, “Conservation,” John B. Oakes reported that Senator Hubert beyond history, beyond science. The moods and qualities of Humphrey of Minnesota was sponsoring legislation to nature and the relations of great art are difficult to define; we establish a national wilderness preservation system. “The can grasp them only in the depths of our perceptive spirit.” idea is certainly worth exploring,” Oakes wrote, “if what is I found such lofty expressions from political leaders left of our country in a natural state is worth saving, as too—leaders of both major political parties. One hundred many of us believe it is.” years ago Charles Evans Hughes, Republican governor of Oakes outlined the problem as follows: New York and later chief justice of the Supreme Court, declared at the dedication of Palisades Interstate Park: This isn’t just a question of city folks seeking outdoor recreation, or enjoying spectacular scenery, or breath- Of what avail would be the benefits of gainful occu- ing unpoisoned air. It goes much deeper; it springs pation, what would be the promise of prosperous from the inextricable relationship of man with nature, communities, with wealth of products and freedom a relationship that even the most insensitive and of exchange, were it not for opportunities to culti- complex civilization can never dissipate. Man needs vate the love of the beautiful? The preservation of nature; he may within limits control it, but to destroy the scenery of the Hudson is the highest duty with it is to begin the destruction of man himself. We can- respect to this river imposed upon those who are the not live on a sterile planet, nor would we want to. trustees of its manifest benefits.

John Oakes stirred my In Maine, Governor Percival Baxter, the son of a wealthy conscience, and my curios- family, found in Mount Katahdin the gift he wished to ity, to learn more. I give with his own money to the people of his state. By determined in due course stipulating that the area “forever shall be held in its natu- that he was voicing a view- ral wild state,” Governor Baxter passed on his point deeply rooted in understanding of the need for wild places in modern civi- American and his- lization. “The works of men are short-lived,” he declared tory, manifest in earlier days on November 30, 1941. “Monuments decay, buildings through the works of James crumble and wealth vanishes, but Katahdin in its massive Fenimore Cooper, William grandeur will forever remain the mountain of the people Cullen Bryant, John J. of Maine. Throughout the ages it will stand as an inspira- Audubon, Ralph Waldo tion to the men and women of this State.” Emerson, Henry David Attainments in preservation, as in any manifestation of Thoreau, and John Muir. ethics and idealism, do not come easily. In the case of the Muir felt uplifted and exalted Wilderness Act, fruition came after eight years of discus- in the wild sanctuary: Wil- sion and debate by the Senate and House of Representatives, derness to him was an and after 18 separate hearings conducted by congressional Figure 1—Arthur Carhart, a strong wilderness expression of God on committees around the country. I believe it would never advocate. Photo courtesy of the U.S. Forest Service. earth—the mountains, God’s have happened without the unflinching commitment of a

4 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 very broad coalition that rallied we can all contribute to the solution. people—all kinds of people—around Reconstituting the coalition—of citi- the wilderness cause. zen conservationists, scientists, elected Now I believe the time is at hand public officials, public servants in the to review the scope and strengths of resource agencies, writers, artists, and that coalition, and to renew it to meet the media – will make it happen. We new challenges. On one hand, Ameri- all love our country. Although we don’t cans can be proud of the 106 million say it enough, that is what brings us acres (42.9 million ha) safeguarded together. by the Wilderness Act. It defines wil- I think of the campaigners for the derness in law and public policy and Wilderness Act as true patriots. how it should be cared for and used. Howard Zahniser, the principal author It does even more, encouraging us to and advocate of the Wilderness Act of conserve the feeling and skills of self- 1964, was studious, articulate, and reliance. That we have set aside these compassionate. “We are not fighting special places is known throughout the progress,” Zahniser said. “We are world; wilderness preservation treats making it. We are not dealing with a

ecology as the economics of nature, vanishing wilderness. We are working Figure 2—Howard Zahniser wrote the first draft of the in a manner directly related to the eco- for a wilderness forever.” In 1956 Wilderness Bill in 1956. nomics of humankind. Keeping biotic Representative John P. Saylor of Penn- diversity alive, for example, is the surest sylvania introduced the Wilderness When Senator Church conducted means of keeping humanity alive. But Bill in the House of Representatives. I hearings in different sections of Idaho, conservation transcends economics—it knew Saylor as a friend and hero. In people who had never spoken pub- illuminates the human condition by re- many ways he was a conservative licly before stood up and responded fusing to put a price tag on the priceless. Republican. Nevertheless, for eight to him, opening their hearts in praise years he led the bill’s uphill legislative of an area larger and wilder than Reconstituting battle and never gave up. In 1961, Yellowstone. The designation of this the Coalition when the going was tough, Saylor great area as the Frank Church River On the other hand, I see the wilder- declared: “I cannot believe the Ameri- of No Return Wilderness certainly is a ness concept diluted in proposal after can people have become so crass, so deserved recognition of Senator proposal before Congress, and in man- dollar-minded, so exploitation-con- Church’s service to his own state and agement plan after management plan scious that they must develop every the nation. prepared by our resource agencies. I last little bit of wilderness that still I have known and worked with able feel deep concern about the effects of exists.” scientists, such as John and Frank overuse, misuse, and commercializa- I remember Senator Frank Church Craighead, the experts on the grizzly tion; about allowing motorized of Idaho as one of the courageous con- bear, and with committed wilderness equipment inside wilderness, and servationists in Congress, and recall in advocates in the federal agencies. To about the willingness to accept some- particular the battle over reclassifica- my mind, Bill Worf ranks with Arthur thing-less-than-wilderness in the tion of the old Idaho Primitive Area as Carhart, Robert Marshall, and Aldo National Wilderness Preservation Sys- the River of No Return Wilderness. Leopold, Forest Service professionals tem (NWPS). When you read legislation providing for “conservation, recreation, and development” in the I see the wilderness concept diluted in proposal same package, you can bet your bot- tom dollar that wilderness protection after proposal before Congress, and in management will come last and least. plan after management plan prepared by I don’t mean to target any group or individuals for blame, for we are all our resource agencies. part of the problem. More important,

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 5 ultimately the agency withdrew its We should not allow the mismanagement of our horrendous antiwilderness plan. public lands, whether classified as wilderness or not. Wilderness Legacy Looking back, I remember environ- who led the way in wilderness aware- such as Sigurd Olson, Richard Neuberger, mental leaders of 40 or 50 years ago as ness and management. Worf came to Wallace Stegner, and Paul Brooks, and missionaries. Those people gave us Washington, D.C., soon after the act journalists, notably John Oakes, a cham- broad shoulders to stand on. They want was passed, to write implementing pion of wilderness, civil rights, and all us to work together through tough and regulations for the agency. He is a pub- good causes, who rose to be editorial page trying times, to sound the alarm and to lic servant who never quit, establishing editor of The New York Times. alert the public, from the grass roots to and leading the wonderfully construc- The best defense clearly is an aware, Washington, in defense of wild places. tive organization Wilderness Watch alert, and involved public. It makes That is why I feel we should not al- after he retired. things happen. It has worked in times low the mismanagement of our public I’ve known others like him else- past. It starts at the grass roots with lands, whether classified as wilderness where in the Forest Service and in the individual citizens who care about the or not. I believe strongly in the prin- other agencies as well. I think also of beauty of the earth. I will illustrate by ciple of public land ownership and in the late Paul Fritz. He was a feisty, citing a case history of defeat turned the professional agencies that adminis- stocky New Yorker, who came west to into victory. In 1966 the National Park ter them. I feel alarm at moves to study architecture at Utah Service chose the Great Smoky Moun- disassemble and privatize national State University, worked for a time for tains of North Carolina in Tennessee parks, national forests, national wild- the Forest Service, then transferred to as the site of its first proposed wilder- life refuges, and areas administered by the National Park Service. In 1966 he ness designation under the Wilderness the Bureau of Land Management. I was placed in charge of Craters of the Act of 1964. Unfortunately, the plan hope we will not allow it, for public Moon National Monument, a striking was terrible, designed to destroy rather lands are the last open spaces, last wil- Idaho landscape of lava fields studded than defend wilderness. But it seemed dernesses, last wildlife havens. with cinder cones. Disregarding bu- like a done deal, with all the political I feel the same about charging fees reaucratic admonitions in his own power behind it. for recreation on public lands. It’s a agency, he gained support from local Harvey Broome, of Knoxville, Ten- terrible idea. National parks in the communities and environmental nessee, however, felt otherwise. He United States are being reduced from groups for the Craters of the Moon wil- was my friend and mentor. He earned sanctuaries to popcorn playgrounds, derness, established in 1970 as the first a law degree at Harvard and had a suc- managed as theme parks in the Disney national park unit added to the NWPS. cessful law practice, but he was mode rather than by park profession- But my favorite heroes have been my committed to the work of the Wilder- als in the public interest. own breed, writers who were activists, ness Society, of which he was one of The role of government in recreation— the founders and subsequently presi- of government at all levels—should be to dent. So he accepted a job as clerk to support conservation, physical fitness, and a judge with the understanding that healthful outdoor leisure away from a he would be allowed time off when mechanized supercivilized world. A needs of the Wilderness Society required wholesome provides it. With his right-hand man, Ernie the foundation for a wholesome human Dickerman, Harvey led in mobilizing environment. We can’t have one without defense of the Great Smoky Moun- the other. The preservation of nature is a tains. Newspapers from The New York use in its own right—a “wise use.” Gifford Times to the Portland Oregonian responded Pinchot, the 20th-century conservation with powerful editorials; thousands of pioneer, said it this way: Figure 3—Canoeing in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area citizens wrote letters demanding The planned and orderly de- Wilderness, managed by the U.S. Forest Service, Minnesota. better stewardship from the National velopment and conservation of Photo by Thomas Kaffine ([email protected]). Park Service. It took six years, but our natural resources is the first

6 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 duty of the United States. It is the only form of insurance that When you read legislation providing for “conservation, will certainly protect us against the disasters that lack of fore- recreation and development” in the same package, sight has in the past repeatedly brought down on nations since you can bet your bottom dollar that wilderness passed away. A nation deprived of liberty may win it, a nation protection will come last and least. divided may reunite, but a na- tion whose natural resources are destroyed must inevitably pay the penalty of poverty, deg- in San Francisco. He hadn’t started egated to an insubstantial minor- radation and decay. as a professional writer—he had ear- ity. If it affects everyone—and I believe it does—then we must lier been a teacher and a guide—and Perhaps the most important role of find out how to tell the world didn’t complete his first book until public lands is to safeguard wilderness, why it affects everyone. Only he was 55. Yet it became the first of when we put wilderness on that nature untamed. Wilderness is at the nine, filled with his perceptions of broad base will we have a good core of a healthy society. Wilderness, North country water wilderness in chance of saving it. above all its definitions, purposes, and the center of the continent. Now the uses, is sacred space, with sacred Sierra Club has honored him with the I thought at the time his words were a power, the heart of a moral world. John Muir Award for “the excellence challenge meant for me. But no, they Wilderness preservation is not so of his writing and leadership in con- are a legacy meant for us all. IJW much a system or a tactic, but a way servation that will truly make a of understanding the sacred connec- MICHAEL FROME, author, educator, and difference a hundred years from now tion with all of life, with people, plants, activist, has written 18 books, including in the face of this land and in the mind animals, water, sunlight, and clouds. Greenspeak, Green Ink, and Battle for the of man [and woman].” This is what Wilderness. Former U.S. Senator Gaylord It’s an attitude and way of life with a Sigurd said in accepting the award: Nelson of Wisconsin said of him: “No spiritual ecological dimension. Make the wilderness so impor- writer in America has more persistently I remember listening to Sigurd tant, so understandable, so argued for the need of a national ethic of Olson speaking at the 1967 Sierra clearly seen as vital to human environmental stewardship.” He lives in Club Biennial Wilderness Conference happiness that it cannot be rel- Port Washington, Wisconsin.

From CONSERVATION PLANNING on page 30

Gascon, C., J. R. Malcolm, J. L. Patton, M. N. F. Mol, J. H., and P. E. Ouboter. 2004. Downstream Pressey, R. L., H. P. Possingham, V. S. Logan, J. Da Silva, J. P. Bogart, S. C. Lougheed, C. A. effects of erosion from small-scale gold R. Day, and P. H. Williams. 1999. Effects of Peres, S. Neckel, and P. T. Boag. 2000. River- on the instream habitat and fish com- data characteristics on the results of reserve ine barriers and the geographic distribution munity of a small neotropical rainforest selection algorithms. Journal of Biogeogra- of Amazonian species. Proceedings of the stream. 18(1): 201–14. phy 26(1): 179–91. National Academy of Sciences of the United Mori, S. A. 1991. The Guayana Lowland Floris- Pressey, R. L., T. C. Hager, K. M. Ryan, J. Schwarz, States of America 97(25): 13,672–677. tic Province. C. R. Soc. Biogéogr. 67: 67–75. S. Wall, S. Ferrier, and P. M. Creaser. 2000. Lougheed, S. C., C. Gascon, D. A. Jones, J. P. Olson, D. M., E. Dinerstein, E. D. Wikramanayake, Using abiotic data for conservation assessments Bogart, and P. T. Boag. 1999. Ridges and N. D. Burgess, G. V. N. Powell, E. C. over extensive regions: Quantitative methods rivers: A test of competing hypotheses of Underwood, J. A. D’Amico, et al. et al. 2001. applied across New South Wales, . Amazonian diversification using a dart-poi- Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: A new map Biological Conservation 96(1): 55–82. son frog (Epipedobates femoralis). Proceed- of life of earth. BioScience 16: 933–38. Pressey, R. L., R. M. Cowling, and M. Rouget. ings of the Royal Society of London Series Pearce, J. L., K. Cherry, M. Drielsma, S. Ferrier, 2003. Formulating conservation targets for B-Biological Sciences 266(1431): 1829–35. and G. Whish. 2001. Incorporating expert pattern and process in the Cape Margules, C. R., and R. L. Pressey. 2000. Systematic opinion and fine-scale vegetation mapping Floristic Region, South Africa. Biological conservation planning. Nature 405: 243–53. into statistical models of faunal distribution. Conservation 112(1–2): 99–127. Margules, C. R., R. L. Pressey, and P. H. Williams. Journal of Applied Ecology 38(2): 412–24. 2002. Representing biodiversity: Data and pro- Pressey, R. L., and R. M. Cowling. 2001. G. JAN SCHIPPER, NSF-IGERT fellow, cedures for identifying priority areas for con- Reserve selection algorithms and the real CATIE, Sede Central 7170,Turrialba, Costa servation. Journal of Biosciences 27: 309–26. world. Conservation Biology 15: 275–77. Rica. E-mail: [email protected].

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 7 STEWARDSHIP

Conservation Photography Art, Ethics, and Action

BY CRISTINA MITTERMEIER

ature photography talent combined with environmental understanding and is one of the most conservation commitment. N versatile artistic en- In recognition of the importance of images for conser- deavors. It allows practitioners vation and of the growing numbers of professional to specialize in myriad par- who specialize in producing those images, ticular subjects within the the first-ever Conservation Photography symposium will natural world, from numerous convene from September 30 to October 6, 2005, in An- different perspectives—from chorage, Alaska, during the 8th World Wilderness Congress the journalistic documenta- (WWC). Conservation-minded photographers from all over tion of a species or a landscape, the world will assemble with scientists, policy makers, gov- to gallery-quality printed ernment officials, lawyers, writers, indigenous leaders, and pieces of fine art depicting others to help craft local and global conservation solutions. flora or fauna, macro- or The significance of this event is not only that it is the very microscale, realistic or im- first time nature photographers have been offered a work- pressionistic. The possible ing seat at an international conservation forum, but it will subjects and areas of special- also allow photographers themselves to decide if creating a Article author Cristina Mittermeier at work in ization are as diverse as nature new and distinct discipline in the field of nature photogra- Australia. itself. phy is justified. However, there is an additional step that can be taken Numerous items are on the agenda, including the criti- by the nature photographer, one in which the practitioner cal importance of professionally executed images to is not just interested in documenting nature or creating achieving conservation outcomes; how to harness the mar- works of art, but in making images that, in fact, protect the ket potential of the tens of thousands of amateur nature subject they depict. This is conservation photography. photographers around the world who are yet not involved Conservation photography showcases both the vanish- in conservation—and need to be; and recommending that ing beauty of our planet and its disappearing spirit, and it conservation organizations legitimize their reliance on im- puts the image “to work.” It is the pictorial voice used by ages by adding line items to their budgets for the service of many conservation organizations to further their messages. image professionals. For many purposes, amateur photos are good enough to With the exception of the most technical, peer-reviewed do the job, but professional quality is needed to create im- scientific journals, photographs are a necessary and con- ages that inspire people and empower them to change stant element of conservation communications. Be it to behaviors and take action. Anyone can purchase the equip- document, illustrate, compare, or inspire, images are an ment, travel to interesting regions, and learn the secrets of indispensable element of the conservation toolbox. Never- wildlife behavior well enough to capture it on film—or in theless, despite their critical importance in the crafting and . The empathy, sense of urgency, and the personal delivery of messages, conservation professionals often opt commitment necessary to create awe-inspiring images, and for “homemade” amateur or poorly executed images, based to discover avenues through which those images can help simply on the argument of cost. The advent of easy-to-use ensure that the wild world persists cannot be purchased. digital has exacerbated the situation by giving the Conservation photography is the result of photographic impression that taking pictures is a simple undertaking.

8 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 Morning light on Little Horn, Cradle Mountain, Lake St. Clair National Park, Tasmania. Photo by , courtesy of Liz Dombrovskis.

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 9 However, it is essential to acknowl- edge the importance of donating images, time, and talent to small grassroots conservation organizations and other environmental causes that may lack the resources to carry out large, complex projects and for whom it is much harder to find funds to hire the services of professional photogra- phers. This is a matter of civic duty and a personal commitment to help those causes we believe in. Although the donation of images is a great way to begin on the road toward making a living as a photographer, we need to be able to aspire to make a decent liv- ing from our craft. It is clear that much discussion on these matters will be needed at the 8th WWC. We will need to clearly articu- The highland of Papua New Guinea were not discovered by Westerners until the 1930s. Although much as changed late the irreplaceable contribution of since then, some things thankfully remain the same. This playful moment during the annual cultural sing-sing at Mt. Hagen reminds me that children are the same all around the world, even in some of the most remote regions of our planet. Photo by images to achieve measurable conser- Cristina Mittermeier. vation outcomes, and we will need to become active participants in the con- But learning photography is like learn- of photographers. Professional photog- servation process in order to create the ing a new language: amateur snapshots raphers justifiably feel that if everyone images most relevant to the ever-evolv- are the few words necessary for elemen- else has a budget line in conservation ing conservation agenda. The tal communication, whereas the proposals, photographers—particularly symposium’s mission is to make the images created by gifted professionals, given the significance of their contribu- case for the recognition of our craft as those that inspire and enrich our soul, tion—should have one as well. an indispensable instrument in the are the equivalent of poetry. Thankfully, there are a few conservation conservation arena, not just in terms Of equal concern as the poor use and organizations leading the way that of artistic appreciation, but monetary selection of visual materials for conser- already understand the importance of compensation as well. vation, is the unfair practice of requesting photography and are serious enough to donated images from professionals. Too dedicate staff and resources to acquir- Conservation often, after a project is finished and no ing images and paying professional Photography in Tasmania usable images are found on the nongov- photographers. This effort is evident in But how does conservation photogra- ernmental organization’s inaugural the high-quality materials they produce phy differ from ? digital card of its brand-new , and in the achievement of their conser- Although the similarities are many, the organizations often resort to the charity vation goals. most outstanding difference lies in the fact that conservation photography is born out of purpose. From the early The first-ever Conservation Photography symposium achievements of Ansel Adams in cap- turing the imagination of the American will convene from September 30 to October 6, 2005, public with his well-crafted images of in Anchorage, Alaska, during the 8th wild America, to the brilliantly executed images made by National Geographic’s World Wilderness Congress. “Nick” Nichols during an epic trek across the Congo that has recently led to the

10 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 creation of an entirely new to save the jagged system in Gabon, conservation photog- contours of the wild raphy has a well-established, yet seldom landscape it depicted. recognized record. I felt it. That story, as The significance of conservation it turned out, was just photography was evident to me when one chapter in the I first saw the work of Peter Dom- long history of brovskis, a Tasmanian photographer Tasmania’s environ- who was instrumental in saving the mental struggles. Tasmanian wilderness from massive Tasmania, like destruction wrought by proposed dam most European colo- construction. Working with intuitive nies, has seen its commitment and professional talent, share of ecological his became one of the finest examples and ethnological of conservation photography. blunders, many of When I first encountered Dom- them devastating. Its brovskis’s work, most of my own first irreversible loss photographic education had been came in 1876 with focused on learning the specialized the extermination of techniques and endless paraphernalia the last Tasmanian photographers employed. At the time, Aborigine—less than I was making progress in technique, a century after Euro- but I felt my images were lacking an peans first arrived. Its elemental, visceral quality. The discov- next major tragedy ery of Dombrovskis’s images during came in 1936 with Frost on Snow Berry (Gaultheria hispida) leaves, Milles Track, June, Mount Wellington, my first trip to Tasmania gave me a the extinction of its Tasmania. Photo by Peter Dombrovskis, courtesy of Liz Dombrovskis. clear vision for my own career, both largest endemic in terms of craft and—most impor- mammal, the Tasmanian tiger, which with photographs and films of the tantly—in terms of mission. His was followed by the careless introduc- area, Truchanas took the fight to the philosophy was a clarion call for pho- tion of hundreds of invasive species government and the people. To raise tographers to create technically that to this day continue to threaten public awareness, he called public superior, enduring images, that also the delicate native flora and fauna of meetings in the Town Hall and, demand that the wild world endure. the island. But it was the obliteration in his now-famous audiovisual dis- His philosophy is the guiding principle of , a magnificent and an- plays, played to capacity audiences in my photographic career, and the cient glacial lake—centerpiece of a breathtaking scenes of what was about context in which lives the spirit of con- national park, and one of Tasmania’s to disappear forever. Sadly, despite an servation photography. most outstanding natural wonders— impassioned fight, the government I discovered Dombrovskis’s genius that finally spurred public indignation. succeeded in damming the Huon and among the tourist souvenirs of the It has been said that had it not been Serpentine Rivers, and in doing so they Hobart (Tasmania) Airport gift shop. destroyed, Pedder would occupy today drowned both the cries of the protest- His images, like paper jewels, stood out as prominent an iconic place in Aus- ers and the exquisite beauty of the wild from the surrounding Aussie parapher- tralian lore as Ayers Rock and Kakadu. lake. Devastating as this defeat was, nalia. The perfect scene of a beautiful At the center of the opposition to the silver lining came in the birth of a morning-lit outcrop in Cradle Moun- dam Lake Pedder was Lithuanian-born major movement to use photography tain National Park was beautiful and photographer and conservationist for conservation. technically perfect in and of itself, but , a man who even- The fight over waterpower, however, it had something else. It contained an tually became a mentor and father was not over. Despite being less than 1% invisible sense of the fierce fight that figure for Peter Dombrovskis, who was the size of Australia as a whole, Tasmania had been waged just a few years before himself a Latvian immigrant. Armed possesses half of the country’s

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 11 Tasmanian wilderness came under Beyond documenting nature as an art form, attack. An ethic of the land is indeed what we need as conservation conservation photography responds to the mission challenges gather speed. Our images of protecting nature. need to inform and galvanize to action, as well as inspire. When asked, Peter would say about hydroelectric potential, much of it from lose. In the end, the modest beauty his own work: “I am not a the powerful, free-flowing rivers that and tranquility reflected in his photographer, I am just making a surge through the island’s rugged images—still published extensively statement.” Today other photographers, western half. And so, soon after the even years after his death—were hikers, adventurers, the people of dramatic loss of Lake Pedder, another enough to turn public opinion. Tasmania, and those from around the proposal emerged to dam the Franklin The opposition prevailed, and the world are able to enjoy the beauty of River and thus flood one of the last great federal government compensated one of the most pristine Wilderness wilderness areas in the world. This time, Tasmania for the estimated lost World Heritage Areas on the planet. however, the idea was met with a mighty revenue of the hydroelectric dam, and Tasmanians also realize the benefits opposition. At the center of the battle then took it one step further by from an expanded and thriving nature was a well-organized protest that took creating the Franklin–Gordon Rivers tourism industry, and prosper from the the fight to the court of international National Park. This new park became many services provided by opinion, including the 2nd WWC in the major piece in a series of the wildlands that cover most of the 1980, with the support of world-class contiguous, north-south national island. A fine statement, indeed. photographs by numerous artists, parks that cover a major portion of including Peter Dombrovskis. Tasmania’s western half. Mission of When Australian premier Robin It became clear to me that the Protecting Nature Gray declared the wild river “a brown magical quality in Dombrovskis’s Tasmania provides a clear example of leech-ridden ditch,” Dombrovskis—a images came from his passion to the power of images for achieving shy, quiet man—chose to raise his convey a profound sense of place for conservation outcomes. Can the camera instead of raising his voice. an area he loved, one that was at great success of this model be replicated to Despite the devastating loss of risk, rather than only through the protect nature and indigenous peoples Truchanas, who had died in a kayaking flawless technical merits of his work. in other regions? In today’s inter- accident, Dombrovskis headed out I also understood that it was this connected global society, perhaps the into the wilderness to illustrate his special mission that invested his Web should be the equivalent of the personal disagreement with the images with “soul.” Peter once said Hobart Town Hall, where images can premier. He did not intend to make that something of the photographer alert people to what is being rapidly campaign images, but inevitably his himself should be evident in every lost all over the world. images became the center of a image; something of how the Beyond documenting nature as an massively successful public photographer felt should leap from art form, conservation photography movement. He eventually remarked, every photo. Otherwise, the photo is responds to the mission of protecting “In any sort of campaign where you just a piece of paper. You can catch nature. After Dombrovskis’s death are trying to get people to feel for an glimpses of Dombrovskis in all his people remarked that it was not so area, to make some sort of decision photographs: the father, the naturalist, much that he photographed in about it, you need powerful images to the son, the poet, the gardener, the protected areas, but that protected areas show people, to give people an idea husband, the conservationist, and, yes, were created where he photographed. of what those areas are like.” the photographer. “An ethic of the land In conservation photography, the Like Truchanas before him, is needed because remaining subject is conveyed by aesthetics and Dombrovskis succeeded in capturing wilderness is threatened by defined by conservation priorities. the soul of Tasmania in images. He, commercial exploitation that will Although limited to specific places and too, was able to show the people of destroy its value to future generations,” issues, conservation photography’s Tasmania what they were about to wrote Dombrovskis when his beloved purpose is to elicit concern and

12 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 Full-time Pro Photographers: The Ultimate Endangered Species?

BY WENDY SHATTIL AND BOB ROZINSKI

he number of nature photographers has increased plant may be of great value to a particular biodiversity T exponentially in the past decade, and the trend group, but of no interest to editorial publications. With shows no sign of changing. Many are hobbyists who time and resources, however, a pro is capable of creat- love taking pictures of the outdoors, or those who do ing a diverse body of work that thoroughly documents not need to generate a substantial living from selling that plant and its habitat, and provides an in-depth story nature photos. This is a boon to conservation organi- that advances the conservation cause through higher zations with low or no budgets for photo use, but a visibility in the mainstream media. detriment to seasoned full-time professional nature Professional photography is a proven catalyst in cre- photographers whose sole source of income is through ating public conservation awareness. In the 1870s the the sale of their work. Hayden expeditions to Yellowstone hired William H. No one goes into the field of conservation photog- Jackson to record images that eventually influenced raphy to make a fortune, but, if the bills aren’t paid, Congress to create America’s first national park. The pros can’t afford to keep creating images. Longtime pro work of today’s professionals is visible in books, maga- photographers have the vast knowledge and field ex- zines, and countless conservation publications, perience to document a critical species or location, and spreading the word through their photographs. to tell a conservation story. Experienced professional The key to protecting the environment is to moti- photographers have the ability to communicate with vate those who are in a position to do so. Politicians, all involved, from scientists to administrators, and of- private foundations, the general public, and corpora- ten have the opportunity to add to the story’s tions are impacted by great photos by great through their long-established networks. photographers. Let’s make sure that the photographers The rigors of freelancing make it difficult for the pro can continue to do this critically important work! to invest the time and money in creating images that are useful to conservation groups but are of little interest to WENDY SHATTIL and BOB ROZINSKI’S work can be viewed at general photo buyers. An image of a rare or endangered www.dancingpelican.com. E-mail: [email protected].

emotion that can direct human places and, on the other, the raw, CRISTINA GOETTSCH MITTERMEIER is a behavior. Photographers also need to uncompromising reality of their marine biologist currently pursuing a shoot the whole scene and not just the destruction. career in photography. She has visited and photographed in more than 50 countries, is select pieces that we, the architects of As conservation challenges in- on the board of Nature’s Best Photography the image, choose to show the public. crease, the need is growing for Foundation, and serves as director of We also need to work with editors and images that touch people’s hearts and communications for Nature’s Best publishers to convince them to make change their minds. Photographers Photography Magazine; e-mail: available the layout room that may be of great conviction have already [email protected]. She is co- the single most important factor in blazed a trail for us, and it is our job organizing the Conservation Photography Symposium at the 8th World Wilderness eventually saving an area or a species. to do the same for the legions of new Congress (www.8wwc.org). In fact, conservation photography photographers who must become an needs to have a dual strategy: on the indispensable part of the con- REFERENCES one hand, showing the world the servation movement. IJW Dombrovskis, Liz, B. Brown, and J. Kirkpatrick, beauty and inspiration found in wild 1998. Dombrovskis: a photographic collection. Hobart, Australia: West Wind Press. pp. 6–14.

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 13 SCIENCE and RESEARCH

A GIS–based Inductive Study of Wilderness Values BY GREGORY BROWN AND LILIAN ALESSA

Abstract: This study presents the results of spatial analysis of wilderness values in Alaska. Using data from two regional planning studies, perceived landscape values from inside and outside wilderness areas were com- pared to determine if proportionate value differences exist between wilderness and nonwilderness areas. Multiple regression analysis was used to confirm the results and determine the relative strength of general landscape values as predictors of wilderness value. Results indicate that wilderness areas reflect values asso- ciated with indirect, intangible, or deferred human uses of the landscape—life-sustaining, intrinsic, and future values—whereas landscape values outside wilderness areas reflect more direct, tangible, and immediate uses of the landscape—economic, recreation, and subsistence values.

Introduction wilderness areas can then be compared to those reported One approach to measuring wil- from national survey results. derness values in the United As part of the Chugach National Forest (CNF) planning pro- States has been to survey the cess, Brown and Reed (2000) developed a landscape values general public as part of the typology to provide residents of local communities with the National Survey on Recreation opportunity to rank and spatially identify landscape values. The and the Environment (NSRE) values typology, although somewhat different from the WVS, (Cordell et al. 2003; Cordell et shares 9 out of 13 values with the WVS used in the NSRE (see Co-article author Gregory Brown al. 1998). The 13-item Wilder- Table 1). One of the important issues in the development of the ness Values Scale (WVS) used in initial values typology was whether “wilderness” value consti- the survey measures both use and nonuse values (e.g., pres- tuted a separate landscape value, or whether wilderness value ervation) for wilderness in the National Wilderness was an emergent characteristic resulting from a combination of Preservation System (NWPS). This national survey approach other landscape values. In the end, wilderness value was not presents the NWPS as a generalized, abstract system for the included as a separate value in the CNF value typology. general public to evaluate. The most recent results suggest In 2002 the authors measured landscape values for a differ- that ecological and existence values are central to Americans’ ent planning area in Alaska, the Kenai Peninsula. In this study viewpoint on wilderness (Cordell et al. 2003) and that direct we included wilderness value as a separately defined value in use values are generally less important than ecological, envi- the landscape values typology. By including wilderness value as ronmental quality, and off-site values (Cordell et al. 1998). a separate landscape value, we set the stage for this study to An alternative, inductive approach to examining wilder- determine which nonwilderness landscape values are predic- ness values, and the method presented herein, is to present tive of wilderness values and which landscape values tend to as tabulae rasae to the general public at both associate with de facto or actual wilderness units in the NWPS. the community and regional levels, so individuals can spa- Thus, the purpose of this empirical study was threefold: tially identify landscape values, including those associated (1) to examine the mix of landscape values that the public with wilderness areas. Presumably, if wilderness areas pos- identifies inside actual or de facto wilderness areas to compare sess a range of landscape values that are proportionately with values identified outside wilderness areas in order to different from landscapes outside of wilderness areas, these determine what, if any, proportional value differences exist; value differences will emerge as a result of inductive analy- (2) to determine which landscape values best predict perceived sis of the spatial location of values. The emergent values of wilderness values from the Kenai Peninsula study using

14 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 multiple regression, using the full range Table 1. Value Typologies from Three Surveys of landscape values; and (3) to compare our study results with the 2000 NSRE Used in This Study. survey results on wilderness values (i.e., Chugach National Kenai NSRE (2000) landscape values that appear dispropor- Forest study1 Peninsula study2 Wilderness Values tionately inside wilderness areas could (1998) (2002) Scale3 be significant predictors of wilderness Aesthetic Aesthetic Scenic beauty values in a regression model). Economic Economic Tourism income Recreation Recreation Recreation opportunities Methods Learning Learning Scientific study Spiritual Spiritual Spiritual inspiration Survey Methods Intrinsic Intrinsic Knowing it exists The CNF planning survey was imple- Future Future Option for future mented in March 1998 using a generations Option for personal use modified Dillman (1978) total design Life sustaining Life sustaining Protecting water quality survey methodology. A survey book- Protecting air quality let, consisting of five sections, along Biological diversity Biological diversity Protecting wildlife habitat with a CNF map was sent to Preserving unique wild plants and animals 2,766 randomly selected households Protecting rare and in 12 communities (Anchorage, Coo- endangered species per Landing, Cordova, Girdwood, Therapeutic Therapeutic N/A4 Hope/Sunrise, Kenai, Moose Pass, Cultural Cultural N/A Subsistence Subsistence N/A Seward, Soldotna, Sterling, Valdez, Historic Historic N/A and Whittier) in close proximity to the N/A Wilderness N/A forest. In addition, a smaller, statewide 1See Brown and Reed (2000). random sample of households was 2See Brown et al. (2004). 3See Cordell et al. (2003). selected for inclusion in the study. 4N/A—not available; no comparable value item included. Of relevance to this study was the part of the survey that asked partici- Kenai, Nanwalek/Port Graham, Nikiski, likely not have known actual wilder- pants to place mnemonically coded Ninilchik, Seldovia, and Seward). ness boundaries. Thus, survey 1 sticker dots ( /4 inch) representing 13 In addition to the same 13 landscape participants were “blind” to the research landscape values on the CNF map pro- values included in the CNF study, the question—perceptions of perceived vided with the survey. Upon return, the Kenai study also included three “wil- wilderness value were based on per- landscape value locations were digitized derness” value sticker dots per survey. ceived landscape attributes, not onto a scanned and georectified CNF Similar to the CNF study, the dot loca- wilderness boundary considerations. map image using ArcView GIS software. tions were digitized onto a scanned and The map scale was approximately 1 georectified map image. The map scale Landscape Value Spatial Analysis 1 inch equal to 8 miles, with the /4-inch was approximately 1 inch equal to 7 To determine whether the proportion of 1 diameter dot covering 2 miles across. miles with the /4-inch diameter dot landscape values differs based on value A total of 768 maps (28% response rate) covering 1.8 miles across. location inside or outside a wilderness were returned, with 16,839 point lo- One important methodological con- area, landscape value point locations cations digitized for analysis. sideration is that the wilderness study were divided into two sets—those fall- The Kenai Peninsula planning survey area in the Chugach National Forest ing inside and those falling outside the was implemented in spring 2002. A sur- and the designated wilderness area in wilderness boundary. In the CNF study, vey booklet, consisting of six sections, the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge were the wilderness study area defined by the along with a grayscale map of the study not identified on the maps enclosed Alaska National Interests Lands Conser- area were sent to 2,582 randomly se- with the surveys. We make the assump- vation Act (1980) and identified as lected households in 12 Kenai proximate tion that the survey participants, even “recommended wilderness” in the 1984 communities (Anchorage, Anchor Point, if knowledgeable about the existence Chugach Land and Resource Manage- Clam Gulch, Homer, Hope, Kasilof, of these wilderness designations, would ment Plan, was used as the wilderness

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 15 criteria (1,500-meter [0.9-mile] grid Table 2. Similarities and Differences in the Distribution cell, 5,000 meter [3.1-mile] search of Landscape Values Inside/Outside Wilderness Areas radius). Each grid was then clipped to from Two Alaska Studies. the study area polygon, resulting in Chugach NF study (1998) Kenai Peninsula study (2002) 11,779 grid cells for analysis. Each grid cell represents three val- Inside1 Life sustaining (16.4% vs. 9.6%) Life sustaining (10.1% vs. 6.1%) ues (x, y, z), with x and y denoting Intrinsic (11.3% vs. 5.4%) Intrinsic (11.9% vs. 6.1%) unique spatial coordinates (latitude and Future (13.7% vs. 9.0%) Future (9.8% vs. 6.1%) longitude) and z denoting the calculated Spiritual (6.2% vs. 4.9%) landscape value density. Thus, a given Wilderness (21.7% vs. 8.3%) Outside grid cell would have 14 separate land- Economic (6.5% vs. 4.2%) Economic (8.3% vs. 2.3%) scape value density attributes (including Historic (5.5% vs. 3.2%) Historic (6.9% vs. 3.9%) wilderness value) associated with it. The Subsistence (7.3 vs. 4.0%) Subsistence (7.6% vs. 4.7%) Aesthetic (12.0% vs. 9.4%) 14 value grids were exported as (x, y, z) Recreation (13.5% vs. 7.1%) data and imported into SPSS software for multiple regression analysis. No difference2 Biological diversity Biological diversity The purpose of the regression analy- Learning Learning sis was to determine the relative Therapeutic Therapeutic strength of the predictor variables, not Cultural Cultural to validate a wilderness values predic- Recreation Aesthetic tive model per se. With wilderness Spiritual value density as the dependent variable,

1Inside and outside classifications represent statistically significant differences in value proportions multiple regression was performed with (chi-square, p < .05). the 13 other landscape value densities 2“No difference” indicates landscape value proportions located inside vs. outside wilderness areas as independent variables. Lacking are not statistically significant (chi-square, p > .05), but the relative abundance of values located inside/outside is noted. sound theoretical reasons for including or excluding predictors in the regres- boundary. In the Kenai Peninsula study, inside the wilderness boundary result sion model, the “stepwise” method of the congressionally designated wilder- in higher chi-square values and a lower regression was chosen to select predic- ness area within the Kenai National probability that the distribution of tors based on a purely mathematical Wildlife Refuge was used as the wilder- values is due to chance alone. criterion. The primary methodologi- ness boundary. Using a spatial “clip” cal concern is with the expected operation on wilderness boundaries, Multiple Regression Analysis collinearity, which can influence the landscape value locations were classified To conduct multiple regression analy- importance of predictor variables as either being inside or outside the wil- sis on wilderness value in the Kenai shown by the model’s standardized derness boundaries. Peninsula study, some preliminary beta coefficients. In the absence of seri- After assigning an inside or outside data preparation was required. A study ous collinearity problems, larger wilderness attribute to each landscape area polygon was established to cap- absolute values of standardized beta value, cross-tabulations with chi- ture most respondent-identified value coefficients indicate stronger predic- square analysis were completed in locations, but to exclude obvious point tors of the dependent variable. SPSS software for each landscape value outliers. The selected study area poly- to determine whether the relative pro- gon consisted of the Kenai Peninsula Results portion of values located inside the coastline buffered to approximately A total of 880 full or partially completed wilderness area deviated from what 5,000 meters (3.1 miles) offshore. surveys were returned for an aggregate would be expected based on the over- Each of the 14 landscape value point response rate of 32%. A total of 561 all proportion of landscape value distributions were then converted to full or partially completed surveys were locations in the study area. Large de- raster data (grids) in ArcView Spatial returned for an aggregate response rate viations between the number of Analyst by calculating the density of of 23%. A total of 497 maps (20.4% observed and expected landscape values point locations using a consistent density response rate) were returned, with

16 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 20,415 point locations digitized for Table 3. Stepwise Regression Results for Wilderness Value analysis. Density (Dependent Variable) as a Function of Landscape Value Densities (Independent Variables). Landscape Values in Wilderness Areas ——— Model fit ——— The relative proportion of landscape val- Multiple R .646 ues located inside and outside wilderness R2 .417 Standard error .02774 areas in the two studies appears in Table 2. The similarity in landscapes values ——— Model results ——— appearing inside and outside wilderness df SS MS F Sig. areas in the two studies is striking. In the Regression 6.485 12 .540 702.32 .000 Residual 9.053 11766 .001 CNF study, proportionately more life-sus- taining, intrinsic, future, and spiritual ——— Final variables in the equation ——— values were located inside the wilderness UnstandardizedStandardized Collinearity Statistics study area (chi-square, p < .05), whereas Variable B SE B Beta t Sig. Tolerance VIF proportionally more economic, aesthetic, Economic -.202 .006 -.505 -33.016 .000 .212 4.718 recreation, historic, and subsistence val- Intrinsic .395 .014 .342 27.250 .000 .314 3.182 Aesthetic .118 .007 .332 16.344 .000 .120 8.321 ues were located outside the wilderness Future .316 .015 .283 20.624 .000 .264 3.790 study area (chi-square, p < .05). There Recreation -.080 .008 -.194 -10.350 .000 .141 7.113 was no difference in the proportion of bio- Life sustaining .196 .013 .193 14.644 .000 .286 3.501 logical diversity, learning, therapeutic, and Subsistence -.054 .007 -.109 -8.199 .000 .282 3.544 Historic .047 .009 .081 5.194 .000 .203 4.924 cultural values located inside and outside Biological .030 .009 .055 3.149 .002 .164 6.087 the wilderness study area. Spiritual -.026 .010 -.031 -2.589 .010 .355 2.820 In the Kenai Peninsula study, pro- Constant .017 .000 51.30 .000 portionately more life-sustaining, intrinsic, and future values were lo- Prediction of Wilderness Value strength and direction of relationship cated inside the wilderness study area The 13 values in the typology were between the predictor landscape val- (chi-square, p < .05), whereas propor- used to predict the location of wilder- ues and wilderness value. The most tionally more economic, historic, and ness values in the Kenai Peninsula significant predictor variables, based on subsistence values were located out- study. One value, cultural, failed to the standardized beta coefficients, were side the wilderness area (chi-square, enter the regression model because the economic value (negatively associated p < .05). There was no difference in predefined tolerance level (.000) to with wilderness), intrinsic value (posi- the proportion of biological diversity, avoid significant multicollinearity was tively associated with wilderness), learning, therapeutic, cultural, recre- not satisfied. Of the 12 remaining pre- aesthetic value (positively associated), ation, aesthetic, and spiritual values dictor variables, 10 were found to be future value (positively associated), rec- located inside and outside the wilder- statistically significant predictors of reation value (negatively associated), ness area. Even where the differences wilderness value through stepwise re- life sustaining (positively associated), in proportions were not statistically gression (see Table 3). All six variables and subsistence value (negatively asso- significant, the relative abundance of that were statistically significant in the ciated). Economic value (ß = -.505), landscape values located inside and inside/outside analysis were also sta- intrinsic value (ß = .342), and aesthetic outside the wilderness boundary was tistically significant predictors in the value (ß = .332) were particularly similar in the two studies. regression analysis model. The over- strong predictors of wilderness value. One important result is that the all fit of the regression model was The two variables dropped from the proportion of wilderness values lo- statistically significant (R = .65). regression equation were therapeutic cated in the Kenai National Wildlife Whereas the inside/outside analysis value and scientific (knowledge) value. Refuge wilderness area was signifi- measures whether landscape value as- These results are consistent with the cantly higher than the proportion of sociations are likely to exist, the beta 2000 NSRE results that showed “sci- wilderness values located outside the coefficients from regression analysis add ence” and “recreation” values to be in wilderness area (21.7% vs. 8.3%). a second information dimension—the the lower echelon of wilderness values.

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 17 Collinearity diagnostics on the re- to assessing wilderness quality—devel- based wilderness quality assessments. gression suggest probable collinearity oping indicators of naturalness and Future research will seek to determine in the independent variables, but this remoteness—does not incorporate so- how GIS-based methods that use re- was not unexpected, as landscape val- cial values in the assessment (Lesslie and moteness and naturalness attributes ues are not presumed to be spatially Maslen 1995). And yet there is recogni- compare to methods based on mapping independent. The collinearity diagnos- tion that inclusion of social and cultural perceived landscape values. IJW tics show weak independent variable criteria could improve the quality of dependencies, with Variance Inflation wilderness assessment (Ananda and REFERENCES Factors (VIF) values ranging from 2.8 Herath 2002), and some research has Ananda, J., and G. Herath. 2002. Assessment of wilderness quality using the Analytic Hi- to 8.3, below the threshold of 10 for actually mapped perceptions of wilder- erarchy Process. Tourism Economics 8(2): obvious concern (Myers 1990). ness conditions for integration with GIS 189–206. (Kliskey and Kearsley 1993). Brown, G. 2002. Alaska Wilderness: Is it ex- ceptional? IJW 8(2): 14–18. The challenge of integrating mul- Discussion Brown, G., and P. Reed. 2000. Validation of a If national surveys of Americans con- tiple ethnocentric definitions of forest values typology for use in national for- clude that nonuse values of wilderness wilderness into wilderness quality est planning. Forest Science 46(2): 240–47. as a system are increasingly important, mapping has resulted in wilderness Brown, G., C. Smith, L. Alessa, and A. Kliskey. 2004. A comparison of perceptions of bio- then one ought to find evidence in spe- inventory methods that largely rely on logical value with scientific assessment of cific wilderness areas at the state or physical landscape features to the ex- biological importance. Applied Geography regional level. Our data from wilder- clusion of perceptual measures. The 24(2): 161–80. ness areas in Alaska indicate landscape values method reported Cordell, H. K, M. A. Tarrant, and G. T. Green. 2003. Is the public viewpoint of wilderness disproportionately more values asso- herein suggests it may be possible to shifting? IJW 9(2): 27–32. ciated with indirect, intangible, or identify areas with perceived wilder- Cordell, H. K., and J. Stokes. 2000. Future roles: deferred human uses of the land- ness values without actually asking The social value of wilderness: A Forest Ser- vice perspective. IJW 6(2): 23–24. scape—life-sustaining, intrinsic, and individuals about the specific location Cordell, H. K, M. A. Tarrant, B. L. McDonald, future values. Values outside wilder- of wilderness. An indirect method of and J. C. Bergstrom. 1998. How the public ness areas reflect disproportionately measuring wilderness quality that in- views wilderness: More results from the more direct, tangible, and immediate corporates human perceptions can be U.S.A. survey on recreation and the envi- ronment. IJW 4(3): 28–31. uses of the landscape—economic, rec- highly advantageous where the wilder- Dillman, D. A. 1978. Mail and telephone sur- reation, and subsistence values. These ness concept has become bound up veys. New York: John Wiley and Sons. results were confirmed through mul- in political ideology, as in Alaska. If Kliskey, A. D., and G. W. Kearsley. 1993. Map- tiple regression analysis showing wilderness policy discourse focuses on ping multiple perceptions of wilderness in southern New Zealand. Applied Geography intrinsic, aesthetic, future, and life- the mix of publicly perceived land- 13(3): 203–23. sustaining values to be relatively strong scape values that are known to Lesslie, R., and M. Maslen. 1995. National wil- positive predictors of wilderness value, correlate with wilderness quality and derness inventory: Handbook of procedures, content, and usage, 2nd ed. Australian Heri- whereas economic and recreation val- not the designation of wilderness per tage Commission. ues were relatively strong antipodal se, it may be possible to maintain or Myers, R. 1990. Classical and modern regression predictors of wilderness value. These even expand de facto wilderness ar- with applications, 2nd ed. Boston: Duxbury. regional results from Alaska are wholly eas in an unfavorable political climate. consistent with the 2000 NSRE results In practice, the moderate strength of GREGORY BROWN is senior lecturer in the and reflect the historical increase in the regression model indicates it may not School of Natural and Built Environments, University of South Australia, Mawson nonuse values of wilderness, particu- be possible to derive a simple linear com- Lakes Campus, Mawson Lakes, South larly life-support values. bination of landscape values that wholly Australia 5095. E-mail: Aside from the value of triangulating describes a wilderness landscape. But the [email protected]. national survey results, our results sug- landscape values approach to mapping LILIAN ALESSA is assistant professor, gest the potential for using perceived wilderness does appear to provide Department of Biological Sciences, landscape values to complement tradi- enough predictive power, and is suffi- University of Alaska, 3211 Providence tional GIS-based wilderness quality ciently operational to warrant further Drive, Anchorage, AK 99508, USA. assessments. The traditional approach research into its use with future GIS- E-mail: [email protected].

18 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 SCIENCE and RESEARCH

PERSPECTIVES FROM THE ALDO LEOPOLD WILDERNESS RESEARCH INSTITUTE The Fire Effects Planning Framework BY ANNE BLACK

he fire lookouts began calling in at 4:30 P.M. on Sat- urday July 20 2004. There were several fires on T Green Ridge and in Scimitar Creek on the West Fork Ranger District of the Bitterroot National Forest (BRF). The area allows Wildland Fire Use (WFU) as a management option. As part of the Wildland Fire Implementation Plan (WFIP), the Stage I analysis must be completed within two hours to determine whether to allow the fire to burn or to suppress it. Dave Campbell, district ranger, and Bart Hoag, fire behavior analyst, turned to the BRF’s Fire Effect Map Library to locate the fire in relation to lynx habitat and ex- isting whitebark pine stands. Both lynx and whitebark pine by mapping out where fire under particular weather are sensitive species in the forest. The area has substantial conditions meaningful to tactical and strategic fire suitable habitat, although there are no known lynx in the management may be beneficial, neutral, or detrimental to forest and there is woefully little foraging habitat at present. species or other management objectives. In addition to Most of the whitebark pine stands have a significant com- assisting with incident planning, the maps are useful for ponent of spruce and fir growing in them, and recruitment fire management plan development and revision, as well as of young trees is low. But instead of looking to see if they revision of long-range management plans. needed to keep fire out of these areas, Campbell and Hoag were using the maps to provide an indication of whether Why FEPF? the fire might actually benefit these species. In this case, the The idea arose after review of various fire and planning fire was not in the appropriate habitat, but they turned back procedures revealed a stubborn disconnect between fire and to the library once again, this time to the fire behavior maps, other resource management planning. Despite a clear to quickly assess the 24-hour-size-up potential of the fire. biophysical link, few agency planning efforts specifically During the preseason, forest fire ecologist Tonja detail how fire is likely to influence the systems under their Opperman had built both fire behavior and fire effects map management (see ’s Fire Management libraries for each of the four ranger districts. The Forest- Plan for a notable exception). The resulting characterization wide Geographic Information System datasets are housed of fire as either categorically good (WFU zones and on the BRF’s computer server. District-specific hard-copy wilderness areas) or bad (all other lands) provides little maps and associated descriptions were distributed to each guidance for fire managers who must decide under what ranger district. To create these maps, Opperman used the strategy to manage a fire (wildland fire use, aggressive Fire Effects Planning Framework (FEPF). FEPF is an analytic suppression, containment), and where on the landscape framework conceived of at the Leopold Institute by the they should use which strategies (where to hit the fire hard, author, Carol Miller, and Peter Landres, and demonstrated where to herd it, where to play it’s natural role). by Tonja on the Bitterroot. FEPF’s purpose is to help The map libraries provide fire managers with a quick, effective managers functionally link fire and resource management tool for functionally integrating their work into long-range

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 19 management goals, helping to answer the condition is likely to affect the fire on habitat parameters documented questions: should I try to influence this management objective (or the habitat in the scientific literature or developed fire, and, if so, what areas should I attempt parameters on which it depends, such through expert-knowledge systems. to keep fire away from and where should as large, early seral trees); and use this I try to encourage the fire to go? This link between fire behavior and Where to Find information is integrated with knowledge management objective to create a fire More Information of now classic “values at risk” (e.g., power effects library. The choice of computer As part of our Research Applications lines, residences) to create a more models to generate habitat and fire Program, we have established a website for complete picture of potential benefits and behavior is up to the user. Here in the the FEPF (http://leopold.wilderness.net/ risks of fire. The map libraries provide United States, FireFamilyPlus (FF+) can research/fprojects/F001.htm) on which we resource staff with a means to quickly be used to determine the typical fuel have posted fact sheets, background assess the impact of a fire, or a fire season, moisture and ambient weather information, and a draft User’s Guide on on progress toward and ability to meet conditions associated with each of the the FEPF. The User’s Guide, which we management objectivess. threshold conditions. FlamMap can be hope to release in early 2005, provides used to generate a wall-to-wall map of both conceptual and detailed instructions How Does FEPF Work? a number of fire behavior parameters for generating the necessary FF+ and The logic behind FEPF is straight- (fireline intensity, crown fire potential, FlamMap analysis, creating the linkages forward: identify and map where rate of spread, heat per unit area). Other and using the output to address various management objectives exist on the countries may have different programs planning questions. If you use FEFP, landscape (or where their important that generate similar information. Base please let us know. We’re interested in habitats exist); identify critical fire vegetation and fuels conditions are improving our science delivery weather threshold conditions (such as derived from existing techniques. IJW 80th, 90th, 99th percentile Energy or modeled via a vegetation dynamics ANNE BLACK, postdoctoral ecologist, Release Component) and map fire simulation model. The assessment of Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research behavior under each of these; identify fire effects is based on species-habitat Institute, P.O. Box 8089, Missoula, MT, how fire under each threshold relationships and the known effects of 59807, USA. E-mail: [email protected].

From WILDERNESS IS MORE on page 37

communes, regional forest services, and The general masses of Italian environ- pean wilderness concept if we want private owners. And of all 36 areas, one mentalists love animals such as the to obtain some real central European is designated by a regional forest ser- wolf and the bear, but not so much wilderness areas. IJW vice, 27 are designated and managed their habitat. They are interested in the by communes (two of them enlarged by protection of the species. They do not FRANCO ZUNINO is active in wilderness regional forest services), and seven are block the building of roads that bisect preservation in Italy and the Italian designated and managed on private the wolf habitat, or stop the mass tour- Wilderness Society. in collaboration with the ist use of its habitat, which is accepted REFERENCES Italian Wilderness Society. as “ecocompatible” (for example, the Weinzierl, Hubert. 2003. Courage for wilder- In Italy and other European coun- Abruzzo brown bear has almost been ness. IJW 9(3): 4–6. tries, most of the environmentalists are exterminated due to this so-called Nash, Roderick. 2001. Wilderness and the American mind (4th ed.). Yale University not really interested in wilderness “ecocompatible” tourism). These natu- Press, New Haven, Connecticut. preservation; rather, they are natural- ralists are more interested in the Diemer, M., Held, M. and Hofmeister, F. 2003. ists. A very few people are really animal than its habitat. So, we must Urban wilderness in central Europe: rewilding interested in wilderness preservation. work to build up a real central Euro- at the urban fringe. IJW 9(3): 7–11.

20 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 EDUCATION and COMMUNICATION

Wilderness Education The Ultimate Commitment to Quality Wilderness Stewardship

BY GREG HANSEN and TOM CARLSON

Introduction Why has education become a critical tool for wilderness managers? How can you effectively plan, implement, and monitor a successful wilderness education program that will produce measurable results for your specific needs? And why will education increase in importance in the fu- ture as funding for personnel and on-the-ground wilderness management continues to be inconsistent and/or inad- equate? These and other pressing questions will be discussed below in an effort to establish consistent wilderness educa- Article co-authors Greg Hansen (left) and Tom Carlson. tion program standards for managers who are currently utilizing education or who desire to develop a new wilder- a foundation for proper land use in future users such as ness education program. school children, innovative education programs can be ef- So what are the advantages of conducting wilderness fective in reaching young minds receptive to the new and education, you ask? Besides the obvious benefits of reduc- engaging ideology of wilderness. ing physical impacts to the resource and receiving higher The author’s combined wilderness management experience compliance with regulation, myriad other payoffs exist. of more than 45 years supports the idea that education is in- Increasing visitor awareness of misunderstood wilderness valuable in building wilderness constituency, as it provides a programs, such as natural fire or exotic species eradication, proactive human approach to solving problems. The indirect can be achieved by blending pertinent information on such method of educating the public often far outweighs direct topics into more general wilderness educational program- heavy-handed regulatory approaches when attempting to im- ming. Promoting nonrecreational values, such as scientific prove visitor behavior or make the public more aware of the research or maintaining air and watersheds, can be accom- purpose behind legally designating wilderness. When regula- plished by integrating education messaging related to these tions are necessary, education helps gain compliance by values into other wilderness management functions—for explaining the necessity for restricting visitor activities to pro- example, in-town outreach efforts and backcountry visitor tect the wilderness resource. Although education must be contact programs. supported by proficient law enforcement, at the end of the Furthermore, wilderness education can serve to develop day, it is unyielding in its effectiveness if it is well laid out, and solidify quality partnerships that not only benefit wil- implemented properly, monitored, and supported by admin- derness but foster gains that reach far beyond the wilderness istration. Read on to find out more about developing an boundary. Educators can extend themselves through out- education program that meets your needs and why education reach efforts in a positive and professional manner, thus truly is the key to future wilderness preservation. working to establish and build contact with prospective partners or maintain existing relationships with established Program Planning user groups, nongovernmental organizations, and other The expression “failure to plan is planning to fail” is appli- cooperative land management agencies. If you are a proac- cable to wilderness education. These efforts require tive manager who understands the significance of building investments of staff time and some funding in order to show

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 21 following categories: issues, target audiences, messages, actions, and monitoring. The template prompts the user to follow a sequence of steps to identify an issue, describe why it is a problem for wilderness stewardship, select key audiences associated with the issue, and then develop the mes- sages, actions, and monitoring necessary at each level of the manag- ing organization. Part II of the template is the Edu- cation Plan Format. This is a suggested format for preparing a long-term, multiyear Wilderness Education Plan. It provides a seven-part outline of a Wilderness Education Plan that begins Figure 1—Wilderness education planning. Photo by Greg Hansen. with issues and ends with the Annual Action or Implementation Plan. results (see Figure 1). Creating, imple- funding requirements, and a time line A sampling of current Wilderness menting, and monitoring the results for when projects will be implemented Education Plans is provided in the Is- of an education plan provides a throughout the year. If a Wilderness sues Toolbox section of Wilderness.net method to focus limited resources and Implementation Schedule is prepared at www.wilderness.net/toolboxes/. The help ensure success. annually, this Wilderness Education sample plans provided vary in detail, Action Plan could be a part of that format, and length but serve to dem- Long-term Plans broader effort. onstrate various approaches to The long-term, multiyear Wilderness A Wilderness Education Plan Tem- wilderness education planning and Education Plan is typically a document plate has been prepared as a suggested implementation. that is in effect for three to five years guide for preparation of a multiyear or longer. It should be both general in Wilderness Education Plan (see http: Program Implementation scope, by looking at past efforts and //www.wilderness.net/toolboxes/docu- The primary goals for implementing results and current and foreseeable ments/Web-Wilderness Education wilderness education programs are to objectives, but also as specific as pos- Plan Template.doc). This template was • solve problems, sible to identify issues, audiences, developed by identifying common • resolve conflicts, themes, and methodology. The plan successful items in examples of exist- • improve user behavior, should provide a road map for imple- ing Wilderness Education Plans • reduce physical and social impacts, mentation of the comprehensive solicited from all federal land manage- and wilderness management plan. ment agencies. The template is not • make the public or agency more federal agency policy, but can be used aware of wilderness values. Annual Action/ as a tool to help identify the key Implementation Plans issues, audiences, messages, and Implementation Strategies The Annual Action Plan is a wilder- monitoring necessary to prepare and A few key concepts should be consid- ness education Program of Work for implement successful long-term Wil- ered when implementing any type of the current year that guides implemen- derness Education Plans and annual wilderness education program. When tation of the long-term Wilderness action plans. first starting out, it is imperative to Education Plan. It describes specific Part I of the template is the Educa- focus your educational efforts on one objectives, projects, audiences, neces- tion Plan Process. This process is a tool or two priority issues. If you are suc- sary monitoring, and any required for identifying specific priorities for cessful in resolving these first issues, reporting, as well as personnel needs, each wilderness organized by the move on to the next set of priorities,

22 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 as administering wilderness is a reduce social and physical personnel at road heads, or manage- never-ending cycle of management impressions upon the land. ment problems exist that dictate such challenges. Expect that there will be a Most people visit a managing action, education stations can be set crossover of issues that you are asked agency office before entering wilder- up throughout the year or during to deal with, especially if you manage ness, and this is an opportune time to high-use times. Although education an area for any length of time. educate. Although the majority of of- might be the main objective at wilder- Therefore, managers must continu- fice visits do not exceed a total of five ness entry points, other management ally monitor and evaluate their minutes, a great deal can be accom- duties, such as visitor use data collec- education success and be able to plished if front desk personnel tion and law enforcement patrol, can modify their education programming understand both wilderness and the be accomplished simultaneously. in order to keep up with the inevitable information they are asked to share Information boards and signs can reality of change. The point here is to with the public. Training office person- be used to pass educational informa- focus in on one or two priority issues, nel to communicate the most pertinent tion along to users at access points. with long-term objectives of program information to visitors is well worth Signs are certainly not as effective as a modification and possibly eventual the effort, as these front liners can be uniformed presence, however, as most expansion. very influential with the large num- people are in hurry to get their trip If your primary goals for imple- bers of people they contact. started and pass by without even stop- menting a wilderness education Wilderness entry points can be ping. Message boards that include program are more generic in nature, used to promote responsible wilder- some type of “hook,” such as a car- such as making the public more aware ness use, especially if an area is limited toon or one or two well-designed color of wilderness benefits, then a more to a few main access portals, as your pictures, can help to draw the visitor general means of educational messag- audience is funneled in and out of (Cole 1998), but the amount of time ing should be instituted. Avoid falling semicontrolled locations. But manag- actually spent reading text is fewer into the trap of trying to contact the ers should be cautious not to force than five minutes, according to some general public using a shotgun-style education contacts on visitors, as this research studies. approach, unless this technique is can be interpreted by some as being Traditionally, much of the educa- truly merited, as it will result in vague in conflict with the very philosophy tion conducted in wilderness occurred and inefficient messaging, and your behind the ideal of primitive and un- alongside the trail or in backcountry overall attainments will be limited. confined wilderness recreation. If settings, such as campsites. Although visitors are receptive to having agency not as effective as educating visitors Implementation Techniques An endless number of techniques are available to managers who are inter- ested in implementing a wilderness education program (Doucette and Cole 1993). Outreach or in-town education, by comparison, are sub- stantially more efficient than all other wilderness related education methods. Educating users before they visit wilderness can help better prepare them for their trip, as these users will now have a clear under- standing of what is expected of them and what to expect from the area they are visiting (see Figure 2). This effort results in higher compliance with regulations and can serve to Figure 2—Wilderness education implementation of a visitor kiosk. Photo by Greg Hansen.

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 23 sonnel are informing the public that they must camp at least 200 feet away from any water source, but field rang- ers are only issuing citations to anybody camping within 100 feet of water, litigation is sure to follow. Be consistent with your information in every detail and diligent in your ef- forts to update educational messaging as issues and management actions change or are modified. Wilderness education can and should be integrated into all aspects of wilderness management. However, this is a progressive process that takes time, commitment, money, and support. When implementing a wilderness Figure 3—Wilderness education evaluation is a necessary process. Courtesy of Greg Hansen. education program, begin with a simple plan that focuses on priority in town before they arrive, keeping in mind that these do not have issues, and expand only when these backcountry education is useful and the same power to change visitor be- issues are resolved or can be managed should be an integral element of any havior as issue-specific leaflets. at an acceptable level. Many wilder- wilderness management program. In Today, electronic communication is ness education implementation regards to education efficiency in the an extremely useful mechanism for dis- techniques exist, and managers must backcountry, trailside contacts are seminating wilderness educational take the most desirable and integrate much more successful than speaking materials to a very large audience. Online these into a program that best meets with users in their campsites. This is wilderness education websites can take their specific education program so because educators have the oppor- the viewer on a computerized wilder- needs. By incorporating field-tested tunity to discuss issues such as proper ness education experience that is fun and concepts and techniques, managers camp selection and fire restrictions interactive. Many wilderness areas pro- can realistically improve and correct before the user sets up camp and cre- vide education information via their user behavior, increase regulation ates impacts that may be completely agency-based website. To access these compliance, and foster strong public unintentional. Education duties can be sites, go to http://www.wilderness.net/ support for designated wildlands—all combined with normal backcountry nwps/ and click on the state and wilder- resulting in a more pristine resource tasks, such as trail maintenance or re- ness area of interest. To view a quality and a higher quality wilderness expe- source monitoring work, by simply wilderness education website, visit the rience for the visiting public. training all field employees to educate National Park Service’s Wilderness Views and by making it a formal part of their website at http://www2.nature.nps.gov/ Program Evaluation position description. synthesis/views/#, Celebrate Wilder- Why should managers spend time and Written materials are another ness’s wilderness education and money monitoring and evaluating means of disseminating educational interpretation handbook at http:// education efforts? information. Text can be added on the www.wilderness.nps.gov/ • Evaluation offers managers a guide back of a wilderness map, covering toolbox21.cfm, and the Central Sierra for achieving education goals. topics such as group size limits and Wilderness Education website at http:// • Evaluation provides feedback for other pertinent land ethic information. wildlink.wilderness.net/. the purpose of improving and re- Brochures that cover a few specific Credibility with the public is essen- vising education content and problem areas are most efficient, but tial to any manager’s success, and delivery. more general pamphlets can also be therefore all education efforts must be • Evaluation allows for an objective developed and disseminated, while consistent. For example, if office per- measure of the effectiveness of

24 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 both indirect and direct methods aspects of the wilderness education pleted at the end of every primary in relation to solving management program are deemed to be inefficient. education work season and through- problems. Evaluation is a challenge to accom- out the fiscal year. • Evaluation creates a written track plish but allows managers to record for education efforts. systematically measure their overall Summary and Conclusion • Evaluation provides documented education effectiveness, which can be Throughout the past 40 years, wilder- results for gaining future funding. instrumental in justifying the need for ness has become a place for social • Evaluation can justify wilderness education and for funding educational relaxation and natural healing for our education program budgeting and programming. relentlessly fast-paced society. Wilder- personnel. Reporting the results of your edu- ness education and information is a • Evaluation monitors the effective- cation program will not only show basic, fundamental, and essential part ness of Wilderness Education Plan that you have taken the time to track of managing wilderness for future gen- implementation. your successes, it can also be ex- erations. Most administrative actions tremely beneficial when fighting to implemented as part of wilderness The primary goal of any evaluation maintain or increase budgeting for stewardship are focused on manage- process is to determine the effective- your program. Reporting can be as ment of human-caused impacts and ness of education and communication simple as handing in an accomplish- providing opportunities for wilder- efforts (Meyer and Thomas 1989). Meyer and Thomas explained that the evaluation process includes an under- Wilderness education can and should be integrated standing of what made the program successful or not, and how the pro- into all aspects of wilderness management. gram might be improved for the future. Meyer and Thomas stated that ment report at the end of the fiscal ness-dependent recreation or solitude. realistic and attainable goals and ob- year, or as detailed as sitting down Without an adequate education and jectives are essential to the evaluation with your supervisor weekly during information program, other types of process. Monitoring existing condi- normal staff briefings and sharing management actions (e.g., regulations, tions prior to any education program education accomplishment results restoration, etc.) are far less likely to must be completed before any form (see Figure 3). Be sure to go through succeed. of evaluation can begin, as the man- the proper chain of command first, A complete wilderness education ager must have a clear picture of how but sending education program re- program will include the plans, imple- education changed and/or improved sults to upper-level offices and mentation projects, and monitoring. existing conditions. wilderness management leadership in The successful wilderness education Evaluation should be carried out your agency can help to show your program will be part of a comprehen- during the education program and af- unit’s commitment to and success in sive wilderness stewardship program ter the project has been completed. improving wilderness conditions, that incorporates indicators of change Evaluating educational success can be thus establishing your program. from natural conditions and wilder- done in many ways, such as partnering Although submitting successful ness character, resource inventory, with agency scientific stations, univer- wilderness education programs for monitoring of program results, visitor sities, or private research companies recognition and awards can seem self- information and contact programs, to develop evaluation agendas. It is serving, future budgeting may law enforcement, and partnerships also possible to develop your own depend upon your ability first to be with other wilderness stewardship or- evaluation process, in consultation successful, and second to show your ganizations. with these types of organizations, and success through formal recognition. Wilderness education is the ulti- then implement the process utilizing Effective reporting and recognition of mate commitment to quality your own personnel. your wilderness education efforts is wilderness stewardship, as the future Quality evaluation and monitoring central both to maintaining educa- of protected wildlands will depend offers managers the chance to make tional funding and attaining increased updates and changes when specific funding. Reporting should be com- Continued on page 34

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 25 INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES

Conservation Planning in the Tropics Lessons Learned from the Guianan Ecoregion Complex

BY G. JAN SCHIPPER

Introduction Foster 2003; Mori 1991). The classification of various dis- Undeveloped tropical areas retain large portions of the earth’s tinct species assemblages, and thereby subregions, in the biodiversity in relatively natural conditions and offer an Amazon basin is largely attributed to several biogeographic opportunity for proactive resource planning to combine con- characteristics: riverine barriers (Hall and Harvey 2002), servation with sustainable development goals. These areas ancient ridges (crystalline arches) (Lougheed et al. 1999), present a number of conservation challenges (see Table 1), and a Pleistocene/Holocene lake system (Frailey et al. 1988). including huge gaps in knowledge of the biodiversity. Un- However, the significance of these theories is the subject of like many heavily disturbed regions, there is still time to set continued debate (Gascon et al. 2000), thus I followed aside large areas for conservation while simultaneously pro- widely recognized ecoregional delimitations for this study viding opportunities for socioeconomic development. (Dinerstein et al. 1995). Participatory planning exercises (e.g., stakeholder and The ecoregions comprising the Guianan Ecoregion Com- expert workshops) can be a useful tool to fill information plex (GEC) (see Figure 2 and Table 2) are large biogeographical gaps and to provide multidisciplinary input. We begin by units delimited at a scale appropriate for conservation plan- asking the question, where do we best invest scarce resources ning (Olson et al. 2001). This relatively pristine area has recently to ensure long-term species persistence and maintenance of received much international attention due to its “wilderness ecological integrity and environmental services? potential.” While the mind’s eye wanders over huge tracts of Amazonia is among the largest intact tracts of undevel- pristine rain forest and savanna enclaves, it is important to oped tropical forest and savanna on the planet. The Guiana remember that dispersed tribes of Amerindians have occu- Shield (see Figure 1) is a biogeographical subregion of north- pied these forests for many thousands of years. ern Amazonia (north of the Rio Negro/Amazon), which is With the human population rapidly increasing and cen- both faunistically and floristically distinct (Huber and tralizing, this pristine vision is now changing. Threats are mounting as the natural resources are dis- covered by international mining and timber interests, among others. From a satellite im- age, the forest cover of the Guianas appears nearly continuous, yet just beneath the lush forest canopy are a few surprises. As human settlements increase in size and number, pressures are amplified across the range of many game species. In addition, il- legal small-scale gold mining in the Guiana Shield region and elsewhere has resulted in high levels of mercury and other toxins be- ing released into the headwaters (Mol and Figure 1—The Guianas are located in the northeastern corner of the South American continent. Ouboter 2004). Although these are relatively

26 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 minor threats to biodiversity when compared to large-scale clear-cutting, Table 1. Challenges to Reserve Design and Conservation there may be reason for concern. Planning in Undeveloped Tropical Areas. There is a growing body of literature 1. Data deficiency: As a general rule, few scientists have explored these describing systematic conservation plan- regions and thus there is very little data on even presence or absence of ning versus ad hoc reserve design biodiversity features. (Margules and Pressey 2000) and the need 2. Human diversity: Areas are often multinational, multicultural, and to involve stakeholders at all stages of the multilingual. planning process (Cowling and Pressey 3. Human interests: Many large tracts of forest are either inhabited by 2003). Reserve selection algorithms Amerindians, set aside as concessions, or otherwise accounted for in (Pressey and Cowling 2001) are simply national development goals. tools for translating the current state of 4. Area-sensitivity: Many of the megacharismatic species have large home knowledge for a region into a systematic ranges and require large intact habitats to maintain populations. context from which data can be analyzed 5. Seamless maps: National land cover and infrastructure maps exist at a and iteratively modeled for representing coarse resolution, but classifications are different in each country and biodiversity (Margules et al 2002). Pearce cannot be merged. et al. (2001) described a process for map- 6. Vegetation classification: Few maps distinguish between the different ping vegetation with expert opinion, and types of “moist forest” in lowland tropics. readers are referred to Faith et al. (2003), 7. Species distribution: Extent of occurrence for most species can be Ferrier (2002), and Pressey et al. (1999, modeled, but area of occupancy at a landscape scale is not known. 2000, and 2003) for further discussions on methods and examples of systematic conservation planning. Table 2. Ecoregions of the Guianan Ecoregion Complex.

Challenges 1. Guianan Moist Forest: Lowland moist forests (rain forest) extending from patches along the coast to the Tumucumaque and Acarai Mountains to and Opportunities the south. The great diversity of habitat types and associated species and processes that 2. Guianan Savannas: Patches of savanna mixed with forest enclaves and riparian gallery forest. Predominantly three regions: the Sipaliwini, occur in the GEC present a number of Rupununi, and Gran Sabana. daunting challenges for conservation 3. Guianan Highlands Moist Forests: Moist forest above 500 meters (1,640 priority setting. These challenges are feet) elevation, predominantly occurring in the western ecoregions confounded not only by the complex- complex (Pakaraima Mts.) but along ridges and peaks moving east. ity of the habitat associations present 4. Pantepuis: These small disparate regions consist of high granitic flat-top but also by the complexity of geopo- mountains (tepuis), with steep cliff faces and montane floral elements on litical units (Venezuela, Brazil, Guyana, the peaks. Suriname, and La Guyane), each with 5. Guianan Mangroves: Coastal zone strip extending in patches up to 5 km different policy mechanisms, unique (3.1 miles) or more inland and along river mouths. decision-making processes and legal 6. Guianan Freshwater Swamp Forest: Inland coastal zone strip of seasonally systems, varying priorities and eco- and permanently flooded forests. nomic security, five different lan- guages, and a great diversity of cultural scale conservation planning based on of scale. When an ecoregion is consid- and ethnic realities. At the scale of habitat representation, we must learn ered the framework for conservation ecoregion-based conservation, this to think across political borders. This planning (as opposed to a continent, complexity presents a daunting task issue is further complicated by vari- country, or protected area), there must to both biological and social scientists ous disputes between political bound- be consideration of the trade-off and managers. Moreover, the species aries, but that discussion is beyond the between social and economic realities and ecological processes unique to this scope of this article. and biogeographic and ecological pro- region do not recognize these bound- The conservation planning process cesses (Faith and Walker 2002). The aries, thus if we are to achieve large- for the GEC rapidly becomes an issue two must then be reconciled into a

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 27 often conducted in the mountainous headwaters, the effects can be detected across many watersheds and with as yet unmeasured effects to stream and human health. Ecosystem processes have rarely been quantified, financially or ecologically, to an extent that is useful in long-term planning for conservation or development. Given the relatively intact of the GEC, opportunity exists to mitigate development in areas where ecological process and subsequent ecosystem service is maintained. For instance, since the majority of human impact occurs along the coast in the GEC, Figure 2—The Guianas biogeographical region consists of a mosaic of six ecoregions, which when merged there is a disproportionate amount of together form the Guianan Ecoregion Complex (GEC). threat placed on freshwater swamp, the white sand savanna belt, and on cohesive conservation portfolio, with give alternative scenarios to planners— mangrove habitats. By using a habitat consideration of scale at each stage of while maintaining the option to representation approach, this problem the process. This approach ensures continuously improve the process as can be address by looking at the that any support of decision making biological, social, and economic irreplaceability of such unique is made with biological and social con- considerations fluctuate over time. By landscape features. In other words, sideration, and can be framed at a not having to rush to save every piece of where there are threatened and unique policy scale. remaining habitat, which is costly both biological representation units, the There is great need and opportunity financially and politically, we can greatly degree of threat to each can be for conservation in the GEC, including reduce costs of implementation and examined and addressed in the larger the designation of wilderness and other develop a long-term conservation vision conservation portfolio. Designation of protected areas. The region represents and action plan for the Guianas with the wilderness and other strict protected among the last areas in Latin America full participation and collaboration of a area classifications may be suitable in to be opened to logging and mining. wide variety of stakeholders. high priority areas where development The numerous navigable rivers have Because multiple large-scale threats pressure remains small, whereas other served as highways for merchants and are not the driving force in large parts conservation tools may be used in settlers for centuries. As a result, road of the GEC, biological targets and areas more attractive for development. systems are extremely limited, and priorities can be addressed in a cohesive Furthermore, the opportunity exists to roadless areas are extensive. manner. This allows for in-depth collaborate with a full range of the The relatively intact ecosystems of the examination of specific threats to both stakeholders in the ecoregion complex to region thus lend an unusual twist to freshwater and terrestrial biological develop a succinct and cohesive plan, with conservation priority setting. Planners priorities, as in the case of illegal gold buy-in from the various biological, social, don’t have to focus on crisis management mining. Small-scale illegal gold mining and economic interest groups. Rarely is and reactive planning. Opportunity is a terrestrial-based threat with many there such an opportunity to develop a exists to create a dynamic conservation freshwater consequences (Mol and multidisciplinary action plan for both strategy that can be implemented and Ouboter 2004). Although in and of conservation and development of a region. changed as new information becomes itself gold mining has a small effect on This challenge embodies the scale of available. In this sense we are able to forests, it dramatically increases the consideration in planning within an take the limited information we have, ambient mercury level in the ecoregion complex, allowing for a holistic make the best decisions possible, and watershed. Because these activities are approach to conservation planning and for

28 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 developing a strategy that embodies workshop was arranged between a A gap analysis was conducted for all compromise, understanding, and sacrifice subset of the major stakeholders at the focal species (defined by endemism and from all perspectives. This presents the ecoregion complex scale. Thus the scale threat) and all vegetation types, both to possibility of mitigating conflict between of consideration for this workshop was take stock of their representation within conservation and development, such that narrowed to the GEC, and members of the current reserve network and to the two can be implemented together. the prominent decision-making and identify areas that are a priority for planning organizations were invited to protected area designation in the future. Lessons Learned participate. This stakeholder workshop An algorithm was derived for weighting from the GEC was convened in March 2003 to focal species representation in the The first stumbling block to evaluate and refine the expert software analysis based on range size, conservation in many undeveloped workshop information such that the degree of endemism, and the results of intact ecoregions is the overall lack of results could be scaled down to the gap analysis. Experts from national biological information. To overcome policy level. Although Brazil and working groups were asked to modify this obstacle, conservation organi- Venezuela were not present, the the criteria used in the software analysis, zations often seek expert opinion and countries of the Guianas met to discuss and a variety of scenarios were derived knowledge to fill in the gaps in the planning issues both within and based on scaled representation targets available literature and current between political boundaries. By for focal species and vegetation types. understanding of the ecoregion. In the combining social and biological Finally, experts were invited to GEC, an expert workshop was held in priority-setting goals across country participate in a yearlong project to Paramaribo, Suriname, in 2002 (Huber boundaries, participants were able to finalize the datasets—specifically the and Foster 2003) in which biological identify key factors for moving the seamless maps, weighting of the focal and social science experts convened in process forward to a policy scale. species algorithm, and a systematic various thematic and regional groups In 2004 a series of national expert review of criteria for landscape selection. to compile what is known of the greater workshops were conducted to increase the The results of the national working GEC. The integrated result was a broad- resolution of this exercise and develop groups described above were presented scale priority-setting map, with fairly seamless maps of biological and in Paramaribo (March 2004) to the coarse polygons, representing an socioeconomic features. These national broader international stakeholder overlap of priorities presented by the workshops culminated in an international group, with the experts also present. various thematic working groups. This stakeholder workshop in Paramaribo, The result was a cohesive draft and first “first cut” at priority setting has the Suriname (March 2004). The focus of this iteration of the biodiversity vision advantage of expert consensus, but the workshop was to refine the scale of analysis presented for review by implementing disadvantage of lacking policy-oriented to individual conservation landscapes, agencies, such that their input could recommendations at a scale that can be species, and focal elements using expert be taken into account for finalizing the useful. In the end, the maps produced opinion combined with spatial decision- draft vision and action plan. from this endeavor are very useful in support software (MARXAN, http:// By maintaining a transparent process identifying gaps in the current www.ecology.uq.edu.au/marxan.htm) to and by using systematic software it was knowledge of the region, but they are provide an objective and systematic possible to capture the attention of difficult to interpret at a scale useful to approach using the best available stakeholders otherwise suspicious of a the establishment of an action plan for knowledge. Using this approach, scientists presumed bias in expert opinion. For policy makers. were able to begin developing seamless example, mining and logging compa- The success of the 2002 workshop maps of species area of occupancy, nies seemed more apt to buy into a was largely the result of combining the vegetation, cost, and opportunity. process when it isolated the opinions social and biological expert opinions on one map, with clear (albeit broad-scale) priority areas ranked to degree of threat Amazonia is among the largest intact tracts and biological importance. However, what remained was the challenge of of undeveloped tropical forest and savanna how to apply these results on the on the planet. ground. To address this task, a second

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 29 of scientists from the data. A constant to ensure long-term species persistence and Eric Dinerstein. Michele Fontaine, challenge when working with experts and maintenance of ecological integrity director of WWF-Guianas, who devel- is to encourage them to focus on the and environmental services. oped the Biodiversity Vision and Action big picture and not simply their study The process and lessons detailed Plan. The Biodiversity Vision is devel- sites. This is especially challenging in above use a theoretical framework de- oped through funding from the Dutch an area as data-poor as the Guianas, veloped to work at multiple scales, in a Global Environmental Fund, the where expert opinion ultimately is the region with poor biological data cover- French Global Environmental Fund, only source of knowledge. age and to facilitate expert and and WWF-Netherlands. Thanks to stakeholder collaboration with system- Gary Clarke, Bart de Dijn, Samoe Conclusions atic planning tools such as software. Schelts, Marie-Louise Felix, Ted Janz, The initial goal of this planning process After years of trial and error, I see this as and Mark Plotkin. IJW was to develop a document that (1) is a way to accomplish the goals of con- representative of all important servation planning set forth in the REFERENCES Cowling, R. M., R. L. Pressey, R. Sims-Castley, A. biodiversity features, (2) incorporates context of sustainable development for Le Roux, E. Baard, C. J. Burgers, and G. socioeconomic data, (3) requires less fi- a wilderness area. It is essential to rec- Palmer. 2003. The expert or the algorithm?— nancial resources over the long term, (4) ognize here the importance of defining Comparison of priority conservation areas in overcomes unwieldy information gaps, these goals clearly from the outset and the Cape Floristic Region identified by park managers and reserve selection software. and (5) is developed across disciplines then modifying them as feasibility be- Biological Conservation 112:147–67. to maximize efficiency and stakeholder comes clearer during scenario Cowling, R. M. and R. L. Pressey. 2003. Intro- buy-in. In achieving representation I development. The Guianas have been duction to systematic conservation planning in the Cape Floristic Region. Biological Con- found that weighted algorithms have an excellent case study in applying these servation 112(1–2): 1-13. proved useful in setting variable targets techniques, and I continue to improve Dinerstein, E., D. Olson, D. Graham, A. Webster, for species and vegetation scaled by them as new information and concep- S. Primm, M. Bookbinder, and G. Ledec. threat, extent of occurrence, and results tual models take form. I have tried to 1995. A conservation assessment of the ter- restrial ecoregions of Latin America and the of gap analysis. I found that socioeco- move beyond ad hoc planning and have Caribbean. Washington, DC: World Bank. nomic data became most useful as found that integrating multidisciplinary Hall, J. P. W., and D. J. Harvey. 2002. The seamless maps of conservation cost and data through expert knowledge via a phylogeography of Amazonia revisited: opportunity. The relative lack of immi- software mechanism presents a great New evidence from riodinid butterflies. Evo- lution 56(7): 1489–97. nent threat allowed for a proactive number of challenges. However, the pro- Huber, O., and M. Foster, eds.. 2003. Conser- approach that greatly reduced costs in cess of working through these challenges vation priorities for the Guayana Shield: 2002 both the planning and implementation has been the cornerstone to successful consensus. Washington, DC: Conservation International—CABS, Netherlands Commit- stage. I found that using a combination buy-in and has put us on the path to tee for IUCN/GuianaShield Initiative. of expert opinion and systematic plan- developing iterative scenarios to help Faith, D. P., G. Carter, G. Cassis, S. Ferrier, and ning tools, such as spatial decision decision makers translate biological data L. Wilkie. 2003. Complementarity, support systems (e.g., MARXAN, C- into policy. I recommend conservation biodiversity viability analysis, and policy- based algorithms for conservation. Environ- Plan, SPOT) provides the most usable planners explore a process by which mental Science and Policy 6(3): 311–28. knowledge in a data-deficient area. transparency is maintained between all Faith, D. P., and P. A. Walker 2002. The role of These same software systems have pro- stakeholders such that designing con- trade-offs in biodiversity conservation plan- vided an unbiased approach and are servation landscapes can complement ning: Linking local management, regional planning and global conservation efforts. useful in defining conservation land- national development goals to provide Journal of Biosciences 27(4): 393–407. scapes only when there is a consensus options for a sustainable future. Ferrier, S. 2002. Mapping spatial patterns in concerning the targets being used (i.e., biodiversity for regional conservation plan- ning: Where to from here? 2002 System- representation percentages). Because this Acknowledgments atic Biology 51(2): 331–63. is an iterative process that produces vari- This project was supported by NSF- Frailey, C. D., E. L. Lavina, A. Rancy, and J. P. de ous scenarios suited to the decision IGERT grant 0114304, the World Souza Filho. 1988. A proposed Pleistocene/ makers, the data input layers can be pro- Wildlife Fund-Guianas Program, and Holocene lake in the Amazon basin and its sig- nificance to Amazonian geology and bioge- gressively improved over time to more WWF-U.S. Conservation Science Pro- ography. Acta Amazonica 18 (3–4): 119–43. exactly answer the question, where to gram, especially Tom Allnutt, Suzanne best invest scarce conservation resources Palminteri, George Powell, Robin Abell, Continued on page 7

30 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES

The Ruaha National Park, Tanzania

BY SUE STOLBERGER

Editors Note: This is the second of two articles concerning the Ruaha National Park (RNP), located in south-central Tanzania, and describes how a local nongovernmental organization (NGO) can work with the local parks authority toward achieving common goals in a challenging environment, using wilderness as a common denominator. The first article, written by Mr. MGG Mtahiko, chief warden of the park, appeared in the December 2004 issue of IJW. RNP is still an exceptionally wild, undisturbed area. The Wilderness Zone in Ruaha National Park comprises 6,022 square kilometers (2,325 sq. mi.). Within this area lies a seldom-visited and remote wilderness core known as the Isunkaviula Plateau. The WILD Foundation and the Sierra Club have supported the preparation of a wilderness management plan for the Isunkaviula area. The Friends of Ruaha Society (FORS), a local NGO, works closely with Tanzania National Parks (TANAPA) inside RNP to facilitate its wilderness agenda. Outside RNP, FORS works with local communities to develop environmental education programs at 10 local schools and to assist in local community programs operating in surrounding buffer zones. FORS also has consis- tently sounded alarm bells concerning the drying up of the Great Ruaha River that runs through the park, caused by upstream irrigation projects.

The Friends of the Ruaha Society in the UK), and implemented myriad other ideas to help The first written record of the Ruaha area was in 1877, create incentives for the park’s game rangers. when it was noted by early explorers as a wildlife haven. In 1912 the Germans established it as a game reserve. Later, it was enlarged by the British, and finally, in 1964, the Tanzanian government declared the area to be a national park encompassing more than 10,200 square kilometers (3,938 sq. mi.). Subsequently, several game reserves were added to the north, east, and west so that today, the whole ecosystem is more than 45,000 square kilometers (17,375 sq. mi.). In the early years, the park was underfunded and underresourced, tourists were extremely few, and the park struggled. In 1984 the Fox family, who had recently built a lodge in Ruaha National Park (RNP), gathered together a group of interested people in Tanzania and formed the Friends of Ruaha Society (FORS) to support those responsible for protecting Ruaha’s wildlife. Funds were raised locally to buy boots and water bottles for patrols and diesel fuel and spare parts for vehicles and machinery. The group helped with antipoaching patrols through use of the Artist Sue Stolberger shares a with the park botanist, Gladys Ng’umbi. Photo by FORS plane, a Cessna 182 (largely funded by the Tusk Trust Michael Sweatman.

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 31 the British government to reallocate hunting revenues back to the commu- nities living in the WMA. FORS continued to assist the park in any way it could, such as by installing VHF ra- dios in all the ranger posts and vehicles, donating the HF radio link e-mail system for park headquarters, upgrading the clinic, and equipping the ranger posts with rechargeable flashlights. In 1999 FORS was approached by Dr. Dulle, a Tanzanian veterinarian working for the government. Inter- ested in the need to protect wilderness areas, he realized the ur- gency in educating his fellow Figure 1—Looking up the escarpment into the wilderness area, Ruaha National Park. Photo by Michael Sweatman Tanzanians on the importance of looking after its rich natural heritage. By the early 1990s, due to the con- the society shifted its focus to ways to Within a short space of time FORS siderable increase in tourist revenue, promote the park and to tackle envi- and Dr. Dulle devised an environ- Tanzania National Parks (TANAPA) ronmental issues. Initially they mental education project that served became better able to support its many produced a color leaflet on RNP that the primary schools in the areas sur- parks and staff. The role of FORS be- TANAPA still uses for publicity pur- rounding the Ruaha National Park. gan to alter. In 1994, instead of buying poses. FORS also highlighted the As a result, FORS established envi- the nuts and bolts needed for the park, ecological disaster that occurred when ronmental education programs in 10 the Great Ruaha schools. At first, FORS used educational River dried up in extension officers to introduce the pro- 1993, due to exces- gram into the schools. Now, two sive agricultural use full-time education program officers, of water upstream. Anna Marie Malya from Tanzania and Meanwhile, FORS Sarah Vatland from the United States, continued to fly the have been employed. When new top- antipoaching pa- ics are introduced into each program, trols over the vast each school undertakes training. After protected area. In four to six weeks, follow-up visits by addition, FORS put FORS staff address problems and ob- considerable effort tain feedback. Initial results are very into protecting the encouraging, and FORS is considering southern buffer preparing a comprehensive guide that zone of the park by will be easily replicable at schools employing and throughout Tanzania. equipping village Other small income-generating rangers, working projects have also been started in the closely with the new villages, such as growing vegetables Wildlife Manage- suitable for use by the camps and a ment Areas (WMA) lodge situated in the RNP. The produc- Figure 2—Michael Sweatman from The WILD Foundation, presented with gifts by local established by a tion of honey and other food items for students. Photo by FORS project funded by use by the camps and lodges are other

32 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 examples of small industries emerg- ing due to FORS’s efforts. FORS continues to assist the park in many ways. As funds become avail- able, the Idodi Secondary School will receive the environmental education program. FORS also hopes to soon stimulate interest in nature guiding courses and other tourist-related mat- ters, incorporating local knowledge and traditions into the program as much as possible.

Ruaha Wilderness Zone Ruaha is an exceptional area, situated in the convergence zone of northern and southern species and habitats (in Figure 3—TANAPA Game Ranger Jonathon Simbeye on guard duty in Ruaha. Photo by Michael Sweatman the eastern African context). The park is composed of an area of Rift Valley Wilderness these poachers to make easier access floor, where the Great Ruaha River Management Issues routes for themselves, they light many meanders for 150 kilometers (93 m.), Unfortunately, the plateau area is used fires that continue to destroy the re- with mainly mixed acacia/ by poachers as an access route to maining forests, with much damage combretum/baobab woodlands and other areas of the park. Well-used evident. This is a critical issue as the open areas. This vast area is mainly bicycle trails are encountered. On remaining stands of this ancient for- brachystegia woodland (commonly inspection of these tracks, there are est area are very small. This area is in known as miombo). The river valley obvious signs that the bicycles are urgent need of protection. However, area rises to form the escarpment heavily laden on the return trip, prob- with the RNP already struggling to edge of the Rift. ably with dried meat from keep up the required standards In the remote western corner of the camps located in other remote, inac- needed in the areas used by tourists, park, the Isunkaviula Plateau rises to cessible areas of RNP. In order for areas such as Isunkaviula are very more than 1,800 meters (5,900 ft.) and is regarded as the core wilderness zone. Due to difficult access, this eco- logically important area has not been studied in detail and forms an ex- tremely valuable part of the Ruaha Park resource. Initial research indicates that high altitude and isolation over a very long period have formed an extremely important niche of biodiversity. Furthermore, the species in the Isunkaviula Plateau appear to be affiliated with western species rather than with those in Africa’s East- ern Arc. Therefore, RNP may well be the convergence zone of both north- ern and southern species, plus the eastern and western species (in the Figure 4—Curriculum feedback session, local teachers with Friends of Ruaha Society staff, Sarah Votland and African context). Anna Marie Malya. Photo by Michael Sweatman

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 33 calling for the first time. When the bird Initial research indicates that high altitude and was finished, the scout turned to me and said, “When that bird starts to call, isolation over a very long period have formed an the village people know that the rain extremely important niche of biodiversity. will come very soon, and that it is now time to plant their crops.” I asked him: “How can you be so sure that the birds vulnerable as funds and resources are antipoaching patrols along the western are right?” The reply came swiftly, limited. boundary. Soon a temporary ranger post without hesitation. “They know: these Looking after wilderness areas is a deli- will be established that will enable the rang- birds talk to the rain.” cate balancing act. It requires extremely ers to be based closer to this unique area. FORS’s challenge is to honor and careful handling with low impact devel- The people who live around the help maintain these natural and hu- opment, such as walking trails and remote peripheral areas of the park are hunter- man-made systems in an effort to keep camping areas accessible only by foot. Al- gatherers by tradition, with intimate the balance of Ruaha as it has always though the Isunkaviula Plateau would be local knowledge of nature handed been—using local knowledge, folk- a magnificent addition to Ruaha’s already down from generation to generation. lore, and tradition to form an integral stunning array of wildland experiences, it FORS is anxious to keep these very part of the Ruaha experience. IJW will require funding. FORS has been col- valuable skills alive. The group aims laborating with the chief park warden, Mr. to start by establishing a program, us- SUE STOLBERGER is an internationally MGG Mtahiko, to see how they could as- ing the Idodi Secondary School as a known artist and former chairperson of the Friends of Ruaha Society. Her home is a sist with protecting this very special and base for the training of guides, using tent inside the RNP on the banks of the unique area from destruction. A start has as much local “bush craft” as possible. Great Ruaha River. Mail: Ruaha National been made with the WILD Foundation When walking one day with one of Park, P.O. Box 369, Iringa, Tanzania. and Sierra Club supporting the creation our village scouts, we stopped to lis- of an easier, peripheral access route for the ten to a red chested cuckoo that was

From WILDERNESS EDUCATION on page 25

upon the manager’s ability to educate ations of effectiveness. Journal of Park and GREG HANSEN worked for 20 years in the public on how to responsibly en- Recreation Administration 16(1): 65–79 wilderness management and is retired as Gunderson, K., and L.H. McAvoy. 2003. An joy wilderness while understanding the U.S. Forest Service National Leave No evaluation of the wilderness and land ethic Trace Outdoor Ethics program coordinator. curriculum and teacher workshops, Interna- the many benefits this unique resource He currently is serving as a technical tional Journal of Wilderness 9(1): 38–40, 35. provides to all people. IJW consultant/instructor for the Arthur Carhart Hendricks, William W. 1999. Persuasive com- Wilderness Training Center and as a munication and grade level effects on be- REFERENCES: havioral intentions within a wilderness natural resource management instructor. Doucette, Joseph E., and David N. Cole. 1993. education program, International Journal of E-mail: [email protected]. Wilderness visitor education: Information Wilderness 5(2): 21–25. TOM CARLSON has had 26 years in about alternative techniques. Gen. Tech. Rep. Hendee, John C. and Dawson, Chad P., 2002, INT-295. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Wilderness Management, Third Edition: wilderness management and is the U.S. Intermountain Research Station. 481–483, 497, 499–500 Forest Service representative to the Arthur Cole, David N. 1998. Written appeals for atten- Meyer, Kristen, and Susan Thomas. 1989. Design- Carhart National Wilderness Training tion to low-impact messages on wilderness ing your wilderness education action plan. U.S. Center in Missoula, Montana. E-mail: trailside bulletin boards: Experimental evalu- Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. [email protected].

34 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES

Wilderness Is More Than “Nature”

BY FRANCO ZUNINO

Editor’s note: This article provides a continuing commentary on the emergence of a “wilderness move- ment” in Europe. The author (previously published in IJW) here comments on other IJW articles, primarily Weinzierl (2003) and Deimer Held and Hofmeister (2003). We welcome this escalating and serious appraisal of European wildness and wilderness.

n recent years, in Italy and other countries of Europe its roots in America, not in (certainly in Switzerland and ), the word wil- Europe, Italy, or Greece. I derness has been discovered, and this may be a good The philosophy about thing. Yet there is a problem of interpretation: too many nature is another story. people are speaking of wilderness as nature, and they sim- Wilderness is not nature, ply use this “new” American word when they previously wilderness is also nature; used the term nature. However, this is not a correct use of this is a point of confusion the word wilderness because wilderness is a philosophy and that is spreading in all concept of preservation. central European countries. Very few know the connection of the word to the wil- From what I know of derness philosophy and the wilderness concept of Germany, there are some preservation. The best-informed people are saying that wil- small parcels of almost- derness areas are the very small pieces of virgin—or almost wild or near-virgin or virgin—or pristine woods of these countries. Obviously, rewilded woods and biologically speaking, this interpretation is correct, but it mountains, but almost no has gone astray because wilderness is not only an environ- large area without roads. Article author Franco Zunino. Photo by Massimo Odella. mental subject, it is also a concept of preservation and An area of 1,000 hectares conservation. This concept is meant to be about a large (2,470 acres) is a rarity, I think. Small, wild, wooded areas expanse of the environment, or land, not dissected by roads may not be classified wilderness, and it is correct to call and other human structures. them what they were called until recently: a nature reserve I found the articles of H. Weinzierl and of M. Diemer, if protected, or wild woods if not protected. M. Held, and S. Hofmeister that appeared in the IJW It is important not to cause confusion or create (December 2003) very interesting because the European misinformation with the use of the words wilderness and authors are writing of wilderness in a country very near wilderness area. If we began to call wilderness what mine. These authors appeared to me to make the same errors previously we called nature, we would do a disservice to of many Italian naturalists and protectionists by calling the wilderness philosophy and a worse disservice to the wilderness what was called nature until few years ago. wilderness concept of preservation. The “forever wild” idea Also, in Roderick Nash’s (2001) book Wilderness and the is the spirit of the Wilderness Act and was used by American Mind, I think that some of the author’s ideas about Americans in the middle of the last century (e.g., Robert the roots of the wilderness philosophy are incorrect: as with Marshall, Aldo Leopold, Howard Zahniser, Arthur Carhart, many Italians today, he confuses the words nature and and others) as the concept for wilderness as a designation wilderness. The wilderness concept is an American idea, with of a special area and not simply any natural area.

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 35 gin or wild woods cannot be called wilderness, if they are not enclosed in larger areas with characters of wild country (valley, ravines, plateaus, or large areas of plain woods), where it is possible to walk for hours without seeing roads or other human struc- tures. So we must be very careful not to risk overuse of the term wilderness and the essence of wilderness areas. We must remember that when Aldo Leopold visited Germany he did not accept their approach to forest management, a practice that eventu- ally spread to most of the central European countries. This German Figure 1—Bric Zionia Wilderness Area (Liguria Region). One of the first wilderness areas designated by a school of forestry regards the forests municipality; afterwards enlarged by an agreement with a private landowner. Photo by Franco Zunino. and mountains as “fields” for the cul- tivation of trees, crossed with many inspired by the U.S. Wilderness Acts. small and large forest roads. Weinzierl Also, in Europe, an area cannot be wrote that “foresters, hunters, anglers, wilderness simply because it contains water managers and road builders all populations of wolf, brown bear, or assume that the good Lord is incapable lynx; otherwise a large part of my over- of keeping his creation in order with- populated and urbanized country out their help,” (2003, p. 5) and this could be considered wilderness. is true in almost all central European Wilderness areas are the wildest ex- countries. Since it is very hard to stew- amples of nature in a cultural, ard a new vision of nature, we must ecological, and political context. They “show more courage” for wilderness. Figure 2—Val di Vesta Wilderness Area, in the Alto Garda Bresciano Regional Park (Lombardia Region). Designated by the must meet some minimum criteria for We must hinder the current trend of Regional Forest Service. Photo by Franco Zunino. wildness. It is difficult, therefore, to our media to speak of wilderness classify many European areas as wilder- rather than of nature, because unless What if we began to refer to any ness, especially when compared to we obtain more knowledge about the national park, protected area, or elsewhere. In Italy we have adopted the word wilderness, we run the risk of environmental area as wilderness? With term wilderness area to maintain a di- reducing the intrinsic and very real such criteria, almost all the North rect connection to the spirit of the sense of its philosophy. Wilderness is America is wilderness. And I think that wilderness concept. But we are con- not only “to live and to let live” very few American conservationists or scious that our wilderness areas are only (Weinzierl, 2003, p.5), above all it is preservationists would agree to such an small, and likely less-wild examples of to let wild! interpretation of the term wilderness. the (normally much larger) wilderness Biologically or environmentally We in Italy have classified very areas in the United States, Australia, speaking, it is correct to consider that “a small wooded parcels that we directly South Africa, and elsewhere. Therefore, number of isolated wilderness areas ex- obtained (about 112 hectares, or 276 it is correct to classify our wilderness ist in relatively remote locations acres) or acquired (until now 3.5 hect- areas in a different category from those throughout central Europe” (Diemer, ares, or 8.6 acres) as wilderness, but areas protected by national legislation Held, and Hofmeister 2003, p. 7), but it these woods are part of larger wild ar- in the United States and elsewhere. is not correct to consider them “… syn- eas without roads. It is possible to It is not easy to establish how large onymous with national parks of which classify these areas as wilderness ac- a wild area must be to be classified as they comprise core zones,” because cording to the wilderness concept wilderness, but I think that small vir- with such a definition we negate the

36 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 wilderness concept. Preserving small parcels of pristine or rewilded habitat is Too many people are speaking of wilderness as not an act of wilderness preservation, but only one of biological preservation. nature, and they simply use this “new” American In Europe, the focal point for wil- word when they previously used the term nature. derness area designation should not be based on an environmental state such as pristine habitat nor on “tracts Europe, we risk confusing the wilder- 15 years to obtain the designation of 36 of land specifically set aside to evolve ness philosophy and criteria of what a wilderness areas for a total of about without human interference” (Diemer, wilderness area must be with a large 28,000 hectares (69,200 acres). Of these Held, and Hofmeister 2003, p. 10), expanse of continuous natural environ- wilderness areas, three are in national but rather on the existence of a large ment. The spirit of the U.S. Wilderness parks (one established by the national wild area without paved roads, forest Act and the Eastern Wilderness Act parks authority itself, and the other two roads, or other modern human struc- teaches that is the philosophical path by a commune), and seven are in re- tures. The environmental state may we must follow in Italy. If national parks gional parks but designated by not be “without human interference” and other reserves are to declare wil- Continued on page 20 in a European wilderness area, because derness areas within their boundaries, human use may be include primitive the area must have an official desig- methods (by foot or horse) and use of nation by the authorities that manage natural renewable resources (e.g., it. Otherwise, it cannot be a wilderness hunting wildlife). area, because a de facto wilderness is A small wood divided up or sur- not a wilderness preserved by a law, rounded by roads, even one in a decree, or formal act that designates pristine state, cannot be designated as and protects it through management a wilderness area. If we adopt that cri- direction. terion in Italy, almost all the nature This type of designation that I first reserves would be called wilderness. heard at the 3rd World Wilderness Con- Figure 3—Amici di “Scolopax” Wilderness Area, now in the This designation would be incorrect gress, in Findhorn, Scotland, in 1983, Partenio Regional Park (Campania). Designated thanks to a hunters’ society. Photo by Franco Zunino. because these nature reserves, al- is one we have used in Italy over the last though biologically preserved (no pastures, no cutting of woods), are managed simply as nature parks with roads, marked paths, and recreation facilities—use that is not in the spirit of the wilderness concept. We are bat- tling to obtain formal wilderness designation for these nature reserves by subtracting the normal tourist use and maintaining their wildness with “forever wild” criteria. It is absolutely absurd to postulate that proposed urban wilderness could “complement the more remote wilder- ness areas, such as national parks and reserves throughout central Europe and elsewhere” (Diemer, Held, and Hofmeister 2003, p. 11). The small Figure 4—Burrone di Lodisio Wilderness Area (Liguria Region). One of the Italian Wilderness Areas designated through an “urban wildernesses” described by agreement with a private , and afterwards enlarged with a direct purchase of land by the Italian Wilderness Society. the authors are a good thing, but in Photo by Franco Zunino.

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 37 INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES

Plant Community Monitoring in Vodlozhersky National Park, Karelia, Russia

BY RALPH DUNMORE

Introduction n.d.), and lies on a mire plain containing a number of National parks are rela- paleovolcanic and rift formations. Its climate is of the bo- tively new in the system of real-temperate-continental type (Danilov-Daniljan 1995), Russian nature reserves; in which precipitation exceeds evaporation, favoring for- the first two were created mation of mires. in 1983. The primary func- The park’s forest complex, part of the northern-middle tions of national parks European taiga, is almost 10 times larger than other Euro- (managed by the Federal pean sites of this type, and may be one of the world’s largest. Forest Service) are to pro- VNP’s forests are within the virgin basin of the Ileksa River tect and restore natural and and Vodlero Lake. About 96% of the park’s area consists of cultural heritage, maintain climax ecosystems. As of 1996, 90% of VNP’s territory was public access to lands for untouched by commercial logging or other human activi- recreation, educate the ties (Danilov-Daniljan 1995). public on environmental Typical taiga coniferous forest occupies the middle por- Article author Ralph Dunmore. and conservation issues, tion of VNP, composed of spruce forests (54%) and pine foster conservation science forests (44%), with secondary growth of birch and aspen for the protection of nature and culture, and carry out eco- forests (2%). Within a natural succession stimulated by fires logical monitoring (Colwell et al. 1997). and windfalls, the park’s trees range in age from 200 to 280 The location of this study, Vodlozhersky National Park years; some dated samples are 500 to 600 years old. (VNP), lies within eastern Karelia (Pudozh District) and Mires constitute the second major ecosystem in VNP, the western part of the Arkhangelsk region (Onega Dis- making up about 200,000 hectares (80,939 acres) and 41% trict) to the north. Established in 1991, VNP comprises of its area. Most mires in the park form complex systems of 467,000 hectares (188,992 acres) (Antipin and Tokarev 5,000 hectares (2,024 acres) each (Antipin and Tokarev n.d.). According to Danilov-Daniljan (1995), the Vodlozhero mire complex in the south of the park “has no equal in Europe The park’s forest complex, part of the [for] its size and state of preservation.” These mires provide very large reserves of berry-producing species such as cran- northern-middle European taiga, is berry (Vaccinium oxycoccus) and cloudberry (Rubus chamaemorus). Most of VNP’s mires are of the raised, transi- almost 10 times larger than other tional type. In the Ileksa River basin, oligotrophic sphagnum European sites of this type, and may be moss and pine-undershrub mires occupy about 20% to 30% of the area. Over such a large tract, a great number of transi- one of the world’s largest. tional mires are found in the park, and for that reason Danilov-Daniljan (1995) stated that they could be considered

38 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 “a standard of a kind.” Reflecting two Table 1. Importance Values for Live Trees in major mire floristic provinces, VNP’s Four Community Types at the Ileksa Site, 1996. local mires are significant for their very high flora diversity and complex eco- Species logical structure. Site Pinus Picea abies (L.) Betula pendula Salix spp. VNP lies within the northwest section sylvestris L. Karst Roth of Russia’s taiga forests. These forested Community Small Large Small Large Small Large Small Large reaches are composed primarily of pine, trees trees trees trees trees trees trees trees spruce, fir, cedar, larch, birch, and aspen. Mature pine — 75.0 — — — — — — The Republic of Karelia is heavily forested Mature (about 70% of its area is covered by pine pine-spruce — 67.1 91.2 28.7 13.7 — 7.7 — and fir) and is a major supplier of wood Forest-mire and wood products. In addition, this re- boundary 60.9 91.7 16.0 — 23.1 — — — gion has many complex mires. Kuznetsov Mire 91.7 79.2 — — — — — — (n.d.) reports 283 plant species occurring in Karelian mires, 22% of which are re- garded as rare in some parts, or all, of the surveys, (2) focus attention on the through early September 1996. These republic. unique opportunities for ecological re- surveys constitute a baseline for fur- Occupying a low plateau, Karelia search in the Ileksa area of VNP, and (3) ther monitoring of the sites at five-year has many rivers and lakes, including invite hemispheric collaboration and de- intervals. Europe’s two largest lakes, Ladoga and velopment of scientific, conservation, One representative circular plot Onega. Geologically, Karelia lies within and educational efforts within VNP. (201 square meters, 240 square yards) the eastern part of the Baltic Shield was chosen a priori in each of four (Elina and Filimonova 1996), and be- Field Methods nearby plant communities: mature cause of glaciations, about two-thirds A permanent camp, on the east bank pine, mature pine-spruce, forest-mire of the republic’s territory is a flat mire/ of the Ileksa River (see Figure 1), ap- boundary, and mire. Structural classes morainal plain; the remaining area has proximately 75 meters (69 yards) for tree species included seedlings, water-glacial forms: lakes, outwash south of its confluence with the saplings, small trees, and large trees. plains, and lake terraces. The region Novguda River, was a base for the field Data taken at each plot for live trees has long, snowy, severe winters and studies conducted mid-August included species, number of live stems short summers. Inland waters are iced over for more than half of each year Russian scientists have begun design- ing a coordinated system for monitoring biological diversity in their country (Blagovidov et al. 1995). Thus, the Eco- logical Centre of VNP and the Karelian Research Centre of the Russian Acad- emy of Science have initiated ecological studies to establish a scientific basis for the management, conservation, and preservation of plant communities within VNP. As part of my doctoral in- ternship in , I joined with Russian scientific colleagues for the es- tablishment of plant community monitoring sites in one section of VNP. The goals of this article are to: (1) report Figure 1—Norway spruces above silver birches along the Ileksa River. Photo by Ralph Dunmore. some representative results of these plant

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 39 saplings, and 22-fold for seedlings. Table 2. Regeneration (stems per ha.) of Within the mature pine community (the Dominant Canopy Potential Tree Species in the driest community), only P. sylvestris (of Four Community Types at the Ileksa Site, 1996. the two potential canopy-dominant spe- Small Large cies) had any regeneration, and only as Community Type Species Seedlings Saplings trees trees large trees (see Table 2). Mature pine Pinus sylvestris L. — — — 2,188 Overall, P. sylvestris regenerated in Picea abies (L.) all four classes in the two wettest com- Karst — — — — munities (forest-mire boundary and Mature pine-spruce Pinus sylvestris — — — 1,194 mire), but only as large trees in the two Picea abies — 199 2,586 796 less moist communities (mature pine Forest-mire Pinus sylvestris 796 2,586 1,592 1,393 and mature pine-spruce). P. abies, how- boundary Picea abies 398 398 398 — ever, showed no regeneration in the driest site (mature pine community) Mire Pinus sylvestris 8,754 1,990 1,592 398 and only as large trees in the next Picea abies ———— moistest community (mature pine- spruce). It attained regeneration as (all four structural classes), azimuth Betula verricosa occurred together as small trees, saplings, and seedlings in reading, and estimates of height and the only tree species in the two ma- the wet forest-mire boundary commu- crown cover. Importance Values (IV) ture-tree communities (pine and nity, but no regeneration in the wettest were computed as relative density plus pine-spruce), primarily in the small- (mire) community. relative frequency plus relative basal tree class, with P. abies attaining the Seedling regeneration occurred area divided by 3. highest IV values. Populus tremula oc- only in the forest-mire community and For shrubs, herbaceons plants, and curred only as small trees in the moist, mire community (see Table 2). Both mosses, data were collected from eight mature pine-spruce forest, and the potential dominant-canopy species 40-square centimeter, (258-square wetter forest-mire boundary commu- produced seedlings; stems/hectare for inch) subplots within each plot, and nity. All four tree species occurred P. sylvestris exceeded that of P. abies in included species and estimates of per- together in only one community type, the forest-mire community by a fac- cent cover. IVs were calculated as the mature pine-spruce forest, with P. tor of 1.8. Only P. sylvestris produced relative cover plus relative frequency abies alone found in both tree size seedling regeneration in the mire com- divided by 2. munity. The IV for P. sylvestris exceeded that of P. abies in the forest- mire community. Vodlozhersky is a wondrous postglacial landscape IVs for Vaccinium vitis-idaea were highest among all 11 species (nine of extensive wetlands and old-growth forests. shrubs and two herbaceous plants) in the mature pine, mature pine-spruce, and forest-mire boundary communi- Results classes. P. abies also had the highest IV ties. In the mire community, Among the two potential canopy tree in that community. Chamaedaphne calyculata attained the species, Pinus sylvestris and Picea abies, In large-tree regeneration (see Table highest IV. Overall, the three highest only P. sylvestris occurred in all four 2), the highest value (stems/hectare IVs among all communities were re- community types, as large trees (see [2.47 acres]) attained by P. sylvestris sur- corded in the mature pine and Table 1). Highest IVs, both for small- passed the highest of P. abies by 2.8-fold. pine-spruce forests (V. vitis-idaea [2] tree and large-tree classes, also were However, for small trees, the greatest and Calluna vulgaris [1]). Only V. vitis- attained by P. sylvestris. This species regeneration of P. abies exceeded the idaea and V. myrtilis occurred in all four occurred only as small trees in the highest of P. sylvestris by a factor of 1.6. communities. The fourth highest IV wettest community types (forest-mire Similarly, regeneration of P. sylvestris ex- was noted for C. calyculata in the mire boundary and mire). Picea abies and ceeded that of P. abies by 6.5-fold for community.

40 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 A total of 13 other plant species (one each of sedge, lichen, and lycopodium, Some of our planet’s largest unbroken tracts of and 10 sphagnum mosses) was counted in the four communities. Species diver- wilderness lie within Russia’s 14 principal bioregions. sity was highest (S = 10) in the second wettest community (forest-mire bound- “untouched” tract in northwestern Rus- reserve is primarily a boreal forest eco- ary), and lowest (S = 4) in the driest sia. Yet, even though 50% to 100% of system, containing some of the last community (mature pine). lands within any Russian national park remaining uncut pine-spruce forests in may be designated as a reserve for rec- Europe (Zeljadt 2001). Realizing the im- Discussion reational, educational, and scientific portance of integrating local peoples VNP’s Ileksa locality offers unique op- activities, remaining lands are open to with their economies, Vodlozhersky Bio- portunities for long-term ecological resource exploitation. Thus, several sphere Reserve will focus, among other inquiries into the complex of interact- years after formation of VNP, Danilov- efforts, on monitoring fish populations ing abiotic factors (soil type, geological Daniljan (1995) was concerned that the and reviving traditional forms of forest formation, water table and flow, light, Russian timber industry continued to agriculture,including the cultivation and and available nutrients) and natural use areas adjacent to the park for log- harvesting of native berry species such disturbances (fire, windthrow) and ging, and had proposed to build a road as cranberry and cloudberry. how they affect plant ecology (species for timber transport through the park’s Vodlozhersky’s new title is indicative composition, regeneration, and re- center. In addition, open mines and of its precious floral, ecological, and geo- placement within and between facilities for ore processing were logical status. Its new status is a clear communities) in a large taiga ecosys- planned for construction near VNP’s invitation to European and North tem with minimal effects from historic borders. American scientists, especially botanists, human activities (logging, mining, In September 2001 VNP became the ecologists, land managers, conservation water pollution, soil disturbance, first Russian national park designated as biologists, and teachers, to join their roads, pipelines, and settlements). a UNESCO Reserve, as ap- Russian colleagues in long-term studies Some of our planet’s largest unbro- proved by the Bureau of the of a near-pristine complex ecosystem, in ken tracts of wilderness lie within International Coordinating Council of a national park that is really a test case Russia’s 14 principal bioregions that organization’s Man and the Bio- to see how Russian national parks will (Dinerstein et al. 1994; Blagovidov et sphere Programme. VNP is now the core fare as biosphere reserves (Gräbener al. 1995; Martynov et al. 1995). Even of the 862,360-hectare (348,992-acre) 2001). As Colwell et al. (1997) point out, though Russia itself is the world’s biosphere reserve of the same name. This an effective reserve system needs to be greatest region of temperate and bo- real biological diversity (Colwell et al. 1997), that country’s nature reserves face threats of degradation from the ever-changing face of Russian econom- ics—as evidenced by developing markets—which exploit its natural resources (Colwell et al.). Concurrent with Russia’s financial woes, that country’s governmental support for conservation has faltered, with sharply reduced funding for the protection of biological diversity (Simonov and Stepanitsky 1995). In the face of these challenges to re- source conservation, the establishment

of VNP in 1991 represented much- Figure 2—Vodlozhersky National Park scientists conducting a mire survey. Left to right: Pavel Tokarev, Nikolai Balykov, and needed protection of a large, relatively Vladimir Antipin. Photo by Ralph Dunmore.

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 41 able to maintain ecosystem processes, interested scientists are urged to con- rescue Russia’s biological diversity. Conser- such as hydrological cycles, nutrient tact Dr. Vladimir Antipin, Karelian vation Biology 8:934–39. Elina, G. A., and L. V. Filimonova. 1996. Rus- cycling, predator-prey interactions, Research Centre, Russian Academy of sian Karelia. In Paleological events during and natural disturbance regimes. Sciences, Institute of Biology (e-mail: the past 15,000 years (regional syntheses Vodlozhersky is a wondrous post- [email protected]). Visits and of paleological studies of lakes and mires in Europe), ed. B. E. Berglund, H. J. B. Birks, glacial landscape of extensive exchanges of conservation students, M. Ralska-Jasiewiczowa and H.E. Wright, wetlands and old-growth forests, managers, and teachers can be facili- 353–66. New York: Wiley. moose (Alces alces) and wolf (Canis tated by Pocono Environmental Gräbener, U. 2001. A personal appraisal of lupus), capercaille (Tetrao urogallus) Education Center (e-mail: [email protected]) the implementation of the Seville strategy in Russia. Russian Conservation News 27:15. and the elusive great gray owl (Strix and Margaret Williams (editor), Rus- Kuznetsov, O. N.d. Rare and protected vascu- nebulosa), giant ant mounds and sian Conservation News (e-mail: lar plants of the flora of mires in eastern stunted poplars, summer white [email protected]). IJW Fennoscandia. Petrozavodsk. Russian Acad- nights and shimmering Aurora bo- emy of Sciences. Martynov, A. S., V. V. Artyjkhov, Yu. A. Bobov, realis. Its long-term success as a vital REFERENCES Antipin, V., and P. Tokarev. N. d. Mire ecosys- S. N. Bobylev, E. N. Bukvareva, R. O. part of the Russian reserve system tems of the Vodlozhersky National Park, Butovsky, N. B. Chelintsev, V. E. Flint, I. E. can be assured by active collabora- northern Russia. Petrozavodsk: Russian Kamennove, Yu. G. Puzachenko, and T. O. Yanitskaya. 1995. Analysis of social and tions among scientists, students, Academy of Sciences. Blagovidov, A., I. Chebakova, and M. Williams. economic factors influencing the biodiversity land managers, and conservation 1995. Priorities for investment: Action plan of Russia. Moscow: PAIMS Publishing House. teachers from both Russia and other for protected area system of Russia. Mos- Simonov, E., and V. Stepanitsky. 1995. Leaders parts of the West. cow: The World Bank. of Russia’s protected areas take desperate Colwell, M. A., A. V. Dubynin, A. Y. Korolink, measures in a desperate situation. Russian and N. A. Sobolev. 1997. Russian News 2:3. Acknowledgments reserves and conservation of biological di- Zeljadt, E. 2001. New biosphere reserves I extend thanks and gratitude to my versity. Natural Areas Journal 17(1): 56–68. established in northern Eurasia. Russian Russian friends and colleagues Danilov-Daniljan, V. I. 1995. Nomination of Conservation News 7:41. Vladimir Antipin, Pavel Tokarev, and Vodlozhersky National Park for inclusion in the World Heritage List. Moscow. Dr. RALPH DUNMORE is an enthusiastic Nikolai Balykov. For collaboration with Dinerstein, E., V. Krever, D. M. Olson, and L. naturalist and gardener who can be contacted the staff of VNP/Biosphere Reserve, Williams. 1994. An emergency strategy to by e-mail at [email protected].

Eroding hoodoos and their remnants in the Bisti/De-Na-Zin Wilderness (Bureau of Land Management, New Mexico). Photo by Chris Barns.

42 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 WILDERNESS DIGEST

Announcements and Wilderness Calendar

COMPILED BY STEVE HOLLENHORST

Largest Amount of Wilderness Ever IJW Solicits Nominations Designated in Nevada for Stewardship Award On November 30, 2004, President George W. Bush signed the Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation, The IJW solicits nominations for the Keith Corrigal Excellence in and Development Act of 2004. Wilderness Stewardship award to honor persons whose efforts to Supported by the state’s entire protect and manage wilderness are worthy of special recognition. congressional delegation, the act The award honors the late Keith Corrigall, who was wilderness designates 14 new wilderness areas branch chief for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) during its totaling 768,294 acres (311,050 ha) wilderness program’s formative years, from the mid-1980s to the in eastern Nevada’s Lincoln County. mid-1990s. Keith was a strong leader and advocate for wilderness The areas range in size from 5,371 to education, protection of wilderness and wilderness study areas, low 157,938 acres (2,174 to 63,942 ha). impact use of all public lands, and wilderness skills training. His The final legislation contained several influence extended beyond BLM to all the wilderness agencies, uni- provisions that conservationists versities, and environmental organizations. Keith’s quiet opposed—including grants of rights- determination, passion, and high standards for wilderness and all of-way for utility and water pipeline resource management provided leadership and mentoring to all his corridors and shortcuts for effective colleagues and cooperators. Rarely outspoken, he set an outstand- environmental review. Important ing example of dependability, vision, and professionalism that areas were also left unprotected, charted direction and fostered cooperation. The Keith Corrigal Award including the Pahranagat Range, a for Excellence in Wilderness Stewardship is given annually to an in- rugged and scenic mountain range dividual or team of persons whose efforts to protect and/or steward just an hour and a half north of Las wilderness is worthy of special recognition. Nominees may be pro- Vegas that contains a stunning array fessionals or citizens involved in wilderness work. Nominations are of petroglyphs and other cultural solicited until August 30 each year for the annual award. To submit a resources. Nonetheless, the act nomination, send a 500-word statement and a second supporting let- represents the largest single ter to Steve Hollenhorst, IJW Digest editor, IJW Corrigal Award (e-mail: wilderness designation in the state’s history and one of the largest such [email protected]), describing why the award is deserved, with congressional actions in the last complete postal, e-mail, and telephone contact information for the decade. nominee(s) and the person(s) making the nomination.

Submit announcements and short news articles to STEVE HOLLENHORST, IJW Wilderness Digest editor. E-mail: [email protected].

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 43 New Wisconsin Funding has also been committed Conservation Monitoring Centre in Wilderness Honors by environmental groups, the partnership with the IUCN World Gaylord Nelson Canadian Parks and Wilderness Commission on Protected Areas and The Gaylord A. Nelson Apostle Society and its partners, World the World Database on Protected Islands National Lakeshore Wildlife Fund Canada, Ducks Areas Consortium. The WDPA is a Wilderness permanently protects Unlimited Canada, and the govern- fully relational database containing 33,500 acres (13,562 ha) of wildland ment of the Northwest Territories. information on the status, environ- on the waters of Lake Superior. Together this funding will allow ment, and management of Known as the ancestral home of the implementation of the PAS in the individual protected areas. The Ojibwe people, the Apostle Islands Mackenzie Valley to take place ahead WDPA allows for protected area include remarkable cliff formations, of proposed industrial developments searches by site name, country, and sea caves, and some of the most such as the Mackenzie Valley international program or conven- pristine sand landscapes remaining in Pipeline. The NWT Protected Areas tion. Statistical information relating the Great Lakes region. Wilderness Strategy is a partnership that to WDPA datasets is also available, permanently protects 80% of the 21 includes eight aboriginal organi- in addition to information on the forested islands that form the Apostle zations in the NWT, the territorial definitions and categorization of Islands archipelago and 12 miles of and federal governments, northern- protected areas worldwide. The pristine shoreline located on Lake based environmental organizations, WDPA can be downloaded at http:// Superior’s southern shore in north- and representatives from the oil, gas, sea.unep-wcmc.org/wdbpa/. western Wisconsin. Broad bipartisan and mining industries. The PAS support from both Republican and allows communities to protect areas New Protected Area Democratic parties, local municipalities that are important for culture and Conservation Awards for and unprecedented public support wildlife in order to balance economic Young Conservationists ensured that the process moved quickly. development with the protection of The IUCN World Commission on Over the last few years visitors to the the land for future generations. A Protected Areas (WCPA) announces islands (including sailors, hikers, five-year Action Plan has been two new awards for young people campers, kayakers, and sightseers of the developed by the PAS partners to working in protected area and historical lighthouses) have numbered achieve these goals in the Mackenzie biodiversity related conservation. The 170,000 to 186,000. The founder of Valley. The funding will allow for the first award is made available through Earth Day, Gaylord Nelson is the elder implementation of the plan before WCPA and the Consortium for statesman of the environmental conservation opportunities are lost International Protected Area movement and a long-time leader of the through industrial development. For Management (CIPAM) and will give wilderness movement. The Apostle more information on the PAS, visit two training scholarships to young Islands wilderness designation is a the Canadian Parks and Wilderness professionals in protected areas each fitting testament honoring the Society at http://www.cpaws.org/. year. The second, an annual award for continuing conservation legacy of this young conservation leaders, will be former U.S. senator and governor from World Database on offered jointly by WCPA and the Wisconsin. Protected Areas International Rangers Federation The 2005 version of the World (IRF). Awardees for the joint WCPA- Funding for Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) CIPAM prize will be selected based on Northwest Territories was released at the International a global essay competition and take Protected Areas Strategy Union for Conservation of Nature and part in international protected area The Canadian federal government Natural Resources (IUCN) in training seminars organized by announced $9 million of funding Bangkok, Thailand, on the CIPAM. For the joint WCPA-IRF over five years to protect important November 18, 2004. The WDPA award, a call for nominations will be ecological and cultural lands in the provides the most comprehensive posted on both the IRF and WCPA Mackenzie Valley of the Northwest dataset on protected areas worldwide websites in the near future. “It is about Territories (NWT) through the NWT and is managed by United Nations time that young people’s efforts in this Protected Areas Strategy (PAS). Environment Programme Wilderness field are recognized,” said David Zeller,

44 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 president of the International Rangers countries that border the Green Belt amount of fieldwork and data Federation. For more information on agreed that this project has an collection—a challenge for the awards, visit the WCPA website at important role to play in the future resource-strapped managers. New http://www.iucn.org/themes/wcpa/. of trans-boundary cooperation. The scorecards, produced by the World Iron Curtain, a political, ideological Bank, provides a simple, site-level Vietnam Designates and physical barrier that separated tool to help managers and New Marine Reserve Europe for more than 40 years, stakeholders assess their protected More than 160 coral reefs off the coast created a forbidden zone to people areas without additional field level of the Vietnamese province Quang along its entire length. Elsewhere research. A version for marine Nam, harboring more than 200 fish, landscapes were being shaped and protected areas is available online coral, and reptile species, are now modified by intensive agricultural at http://www.mpascorecard.net. A protected. The new Cu Lao Cham and development processes, but terrestrial version can be found at Marine Reserve, set up with assistance habitats within the forbidden zone www.panda.org/downloads/forests/ from the government of Denmark, is were given a 40-year breath of life. Summary_final.pdf. The scorecards the second Marine Protected Area Thus, many of Europe’s important are not intended to replace more (MPA) in Vietnam. The reserve protects habitats and ecosystems fall along the thorough methods of assessment. an important part of Vietnam’s marine route of the former Iron Curtain. For Rather, they provide managers with biodiversity and is a critical element in further information, see www. an overview of the progress of their efforts to reestablish a healthy fishery greenbelteurope.org and www.iucn.org. management efforts and illustrate and preserve coral reefs and pristine gaps in management that should be turquoise water for sustainable tourism. Assessing Protected Area addressed. The scorecards are The establishment of Cu Lao Cham also Management Effectiveness designed to be filled in by managers marks a positive trend, as Vietnam Measuring the success of protected or other site staff, and are adaptable plans to establish a total of 15 MPAs in areas in meeting their planned to site and regional needs. the future. A collaborative management goals can involve a significant model will be implemented at the Cu Lao Cham Marine Reserve in which local communities are involved in the park management, the park contributes to their income, and tourism activities IJW First 10 Years are developed in accordance with the park’s management plan. For more on CD information, visit http://www.iucn.org/ info_and_news/press/vietnamese- A new CD due out in the summer of 2005 will feature the first 10 MPA.pdf. years of IJW, including all 30 issues complete with front covers, Once the Iron Curtain, tables of contents, and 48 pages of content. The CD will be Now the European packaged as an interactive Adobe Acrobat version that is readable Green Belt and searchable and with standard security to prevent copying of At a meeting of European con- text and figures. The CD will be available for both Macintosh and servationists at Fert-Hanság National IBM-type personal computers. The CD is meant to offer a complete Park, the European Green Belt Project set of IJW issues through 2004 for new subscribers, teachers, was recently launched to create a managers, advocates, and libraries without a complete set, as back single ecological corridor out of the issues are not available for most older issues. The new product “rubble” of the former Iron Curtain. It is hoped that the Green Belt will will be for sale in a color cardstock CD sleeve and available through become an icon for nature conservation Fulcrum Publishing. Order information will be available in the and sustainable development in August 2005 issue of IJW. Europe. Experts from the 22

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 45 WILDERNESS DIGEST

Book Reviews

The Enduring Wilderness: “however sincere the promises of pro- ing Wilderness succeeds magnificently Protecting Our Natural tection in administration orders and in stimulating readers’ awareness of plans [in agencies] may be, anything these issues, and assures us of the need Heritage through the less than statutory protection is tem- to keep fighting for additional desig- Wilderness Act porary at best and illusory to boot” nations of wilderness in the United by Doug Scott. 2004. Fulcrum Publishing, Golden, CO. 200 pp., (107). Finally, the act hastened the States. As seven of eight acres of wil- $12.95 (paper). formation of a grassroots, decentral- derness on federal lands are de facto ized wilderness movement, including wilderness rather than designated wil- This book, as part of the Speaker’s people like Doug Scott. derness, advocates are keenly needed Corner book series recently intro- Scott also provides an interesting to ensure that agencies give a fair, thor- duced by Fulcrum Publishing, is discussion of the current political cli- ough evaluation of public lands for designed to stimulate, educate, and mate in the United States regarding wilderness designation. foster discussion on significant public wilderness designation, noting that the Review by JOHN SHULTIS policy issues in the United States. current administration is attempting IJW Book Editor Doug Scott, long-time wilderness ad- to bypass or weaken the permanence vocate and currently the policy director of wilderness designation promised by for the Campaign for America’s Wil- the Wilderness Act. Scott is a strong Wildland Recreation Policy: derness, takes this opportunity to offer supporter of compromise over dog- an illuminating history of the passing matic advocacy, and believes the An Introduction, 2nd ed. by J. Douglas Wellman and Dennis B. of the Wilderness Act, highlight its wilderness movement, although hav- Propst. 2004. Krieger Publishing, ramifications and significance, and ing broad public support, “must Malabar, FL. 374 pp., $49.50 (paper). provide a clarion call for grassroots identify, persuade and enlist new con- advocates to continue to create new stituents for wilderness” (122). He The American wildland and wilder- wilderness areas in the United States. prefers the term wilderness stewardship ness estate had its roots in the early The historical component of the to wilderness management, as he feels land use policies and philosophies of book provides an excellent overview it better reflects the Wilderness Act’s utilitarian conservation and the ro- of the battle to pass the Wilderness Act mention of nonhuman influences. mantic notions of preservation and in 1964. Scott emphasizes that con- A strength of the book is its use of nature appreciation. The interest in cern over the impermanence of numerous, well-selected sidebar protecting wildlands and natural land- existing wilderness designations led to quotes, although there are several in- scapes has created a complex system the Wilderness Society’s attempt to stances of repeated quotes in the text, of policies and institutions, with man- create the Wilderness Act. Scott also and the lack of an index is unfortu- agement responsibilities from publicly focuses on the unforeseen impacts of nate. In sum, however, Doug Scott owned urban lands to remote wilder- Representative Wayne Aspinall’s insis- provides a wonderful, deeply personal ness areas. tence that only Congress could add view of where the wilderness move- The authors build a 140-year his- any new wilderness areas to the wil- ment came from, reminds us of the torical policy review by focusing on the derness system. Although initially seen continuing significance and ramifica- philosophical roots of policy, its formu- as a major blow to the legislation, wil- tions of the Wilderness Act, reviews lation, implementation, and the derness advocates soon realized that the current political challenges facing management of wildlands. How wild- Congress was often far more willing the wilderness movement, and high- land resources came to be central to the to create designated wilderness than lights the need for more advocates to provision of public recreation is illus- land management agencies. Moreover, continue this long battle. The Endur- trated through a brief review of the

46 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 institutional origins of the U.S. Forest and its management for recreation. This broad definition leaves the indi- Service (USFS) and National Park Ser- My only concern about the book is vidual authors of each chapter the vice (NPS). The chronology is selective that a reader could arrive at the mis- freedom to discuss various issues re- to provide a broad overview of the taken impression that wilderness is garding WT, ranging from zoo people and events that shaped the in- predominantly a place for recreation, tourism, to hunting and fishing, to stitutions and policies of wildland when that is but one of numerous val- nonconsumptive recreation in wilder- recreation. The chapters find a good ues of wilderness as defined in ness. Through this variety, the reader balance of efficiently outlining the his- wilderness legislation. Overall, the acquires a deeper understanding of the toric milestones to bring life and interest authors succeed in providing an in- immense and international signifi- to the topic without tediously trying to troductory text suitable for students, cance of the WT industry. recapitulate too much of the complex managers, policy makers, and wild- Wildlife Tourism provides informa- history of the debate and issues. land users studying how the policy tion on (1) the history and scope of The themes of (1) balancing pres- processes affect wildland manage- activities related to WT, (2) the envi- ervation versus use and economic ment issues today. ronmental impacts of WT, and (3) sus- development and (2) competition be- This is a well-organized book that tainable management frameworks and tween the USFS and NPS lead the gives examples of how recreation plan- business plans for the future. This di- reader through the early conflicts that ners and managers have had a vision and presentation of the mate- led to U.S. wilderness policies and profound and pivotal role in the policy rial is logical and clear, even for those legislation. Urban national parks and process. Chapter 11 focuses on the who have little background in this urban forestry programs led to the realities of policy implementation field. The first two sections of the book formulation of wildland recreation through specific examples of the dy- discuss definitions and types of WT, policy within urban landscapes and namic nature of a manager’s job in followed by their positive and nega- environments. situations that have no easy or single tive impacts on communities, species, The chapter on origins and formu- solutions. The authors show how over- habitats, and economies. The second lation of policy leads to two chapters all policy affects specific decisions in section is by far the book’s best, pre- on the implementation of the policies wildland resource and recreation man- senting information in a clear and and the difficult issues of allocation agement, and this approach is effective comprehensive manner that should and management of wildland re- in this second edition of a very read- interest people of all levels of exper- sources. The current issues, conflicts, able book. tise and interest. The last section of and management dilemmas are more Review by CHAD DAWSON, the book—managing and planning understandable given the background IJW Managing Editor wildlife tourism—is perhaps the most provided. The multiple dilemmas of difficult, as it does not flow as balancing preservation versus use, rec- smoothly as it could from the previ- onciling very changeable and diverse ous sections. When reading this com- public interests and providing public Wildlife Tourism: Impacts, ponent, I became confused about the benefits, are brought into focus. The Management and Planning desired audience for Wildlife Tourism; implication for managers today is that edited by Karen Higginbottom. 2004. there is much discussion of markets, they must understand how we arrived Cooperative Research Centre for business plans, and a brief how-to sec- Sustainable Tourism, Griffith University, at the current challenges if they are to Gold Coast MC, Australia. 277 pp. tion for starting a WT operation. integrate the origin and evolution of $89.95 AUS. Given the subtitle, I anticipated this policy into contemporary decision section would outline the current making. Wildlife tourism (WT) is a rapidly management problems and offer Wildland Recreation Policy works growing sector of the nature tourism management solutions that would on two levels: (1) as a case study of industry, and it is already a strong con- ensure the sustainability of the indus- the policy process from philosophi- tributor to many local and national try. To be fair, these issues are briefly cal origins to formulation and economies. In the first chapter of Wild- addressed in chapter 11 (“Managing implementation; and (2) as an over- life Tourism, WT is defined as “tourism Impacts of WT on Wildlife”). Here, a view of the social and political forces based on encounters with non-domes- useful general management frame- that shaped the wildland resource ticated (non-human) animals” (2). work (213) is presented and further

International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1 47 broken down into suggestions ad- Each chapter in Wildlife Tourism increasingly important field, contain- dressing specific management goals contains several boxes highlighting ing many relevant and educational (218–19). These few pages are likely case studies and references to current international examples of this form the most valuable in Wildlife Tour- literature that support the specific is- of tourism, both successful and un- ism. Readers interested in additional sue being addressed. These are successful. information on planning and man- extremely useful for understanding the aging WT may wish to read Michael concepts and providing examples of Review by SARAH ELMELIGI, master’s Manfredo’s (2002) excellent book, various management approaches, candidate in the Resource Recreation and Wildlife Viewing: A Management which are discussed on an interna- Tourism Program at the University of Handbook, from Oregon State Uni- tional scale. In sum, Wildlife Tourism Northern British Columbia, Prince George, versity Press. is a very good introduction to this BC, Canada. E-mail: [email protected].

Salmon Glacier along the Alaska/Canada border in the Misty Fjords National Monument Wilderness (U.S. Forest Service, Alaska). Photo by Lynn Kolund.

48 International Journal of Wilderness APRIL 2005 • VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1