DOCSLIB.ORG

The Economic Value of Ecosystem Services from and for Wilderness

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Economic Value of Ecosystem Services from and for Wilderness Benefits of Wilderness Areas The Economic Value of Ecosystem Services from and for Wilderness BY TRISTA PATTERSON Introduction sibility that the value of the commons is In the Sierra Club classic On the Loose (1967), Terry and Renny Russell reject attempts greater than the sum total of all the to place economic values on wilderness, emphasizing that the true rewards of the things we own as individuals. In addi- wilderness experience are spiritual: the freedom of self-reliance and the uplifting tion to neoclassical economic tools, beauty of wild nature. At the same time, citing Winston Churchill, they issue a key social science deliberative and consen- challenge: to learn the game one has to play for more than one can afford to lose. sus methods, multicriteria and conjoint Some wilderness scholars are taking up this challenge by reexamining and reem- analysis, and ecological pricing (e.g., ploying economic tools they had long since dismissed. emergy and exergy) can elucidate and Economic valuations of wilderness have concentrated on direct benefits (e.g., convey values from multiple perspec- commodity goods, recreation) and nonuse benefits (e.g., existence, bequest) (Haynes tives (Patterson 2005). These are and Horne 1997; Schuster et al. 2006; Cordell et al. 1998; Loomis 2000; Loomis and necessary to relating willingness-to-pay Walsh 1992; Loomis and Richardson 2001; Richardson 2002; Walsh et al. 1984; Walsh to the market, the market to the econ- and Loomis 1989). Increasing public importance has been noted for indirect values omy, and the economy to wilderness. from wilderness, such as ecosystem services (see figure 1) (Morton 1999, 2000; Cordell et al. 2003). Ecosystem services are the naturally occurring contributions to Distinguishing Growth from life support and quality of life that people normally do not have to pay for (Daily Development 1997; Costanza et al. 1997; de Groot et al. 2002). Actual typologies vary, however (see The term economic growth is often used Boyd and Banzhaf 2005; Costanza et al. 1997; de Groot et al. 2002; Alcamo et al. 2003; interchangeably with economic develop- Heal et al. 2005; Brown et al. 2006). They can be experienced directly (provisioning ment (Daly 1977), but with different food, freshwater, and cultural and recreational opportunities), or indirectly (regulating implications for wilderness (Czech 2000). floods or climate or supporting the other services through soil formation or nutrients) Growth (a quantitative attribute) involves (Millennium Ecosystem Association 2005; Chapin this issue). increasing economic activity, commonly Creative experiments are bringing values of ecosystem services into the market- a result of increasing population and/or place, including carbon markets, wetland and habitat banking, water temperature per capita energy/material consumption. credits, certifications, and tax incentives (Wunder 2005). Market values have helped raise Technology often does not fully mitigate awareness for ecosystem service contributions to quality of life, and help harness funds the impacts of growth, and sometimes we for their protection. Achieving these outcomes for wilderness involves particular chal- allow the negative impacts to be borne lenges. This article discusses four of these challenges. out in future generations. The increasing land areas and use intensity needed to Broadening the Methods support economic growth can ultimately One challenge is that reducing a multifaceted issue such as wilderness to the market compete with, or adversely impact is by nature a subjective and exclusionary process (Funtowicz and Ravetz 1994; wilderness. This occurs not only at geo- Funtowicz et al. 1999), one that will reflect only a subset of the many values associ- graphic boundaries (White et al. 2000), ated with wilderness around the world. When Costanza et al. (1997) estimated the but also with systemic changes in cli- value of the world’s ecosystem services as US$33 trillion, 1.8 times the world’s GDP, mate, species dynamics, and soil and some logically wondered how people’s willingness to pay could exceed what they had water transport. In contrast, develop- (Bockstael et al. 2000). The overreliance on certain methodologies can obscure the pos- ment (a qualitative attribute) can be 24 | The Wild Planet Project | May 2007 achieved by economic rearrangement, in theory improving the ability of wilderness and the human-made econ- omy to coincide. This must be the center of our focus if economic tools are to be harnessed effectively from and for wilderness. Accounting ecosystem serv- ices from wilderness can help to distinguish these qualitative improve- ments. Developing Creative Markets, Flexible Institutions The characteristics of various goods and services affect the ease with which mar- ket-based tools can elicit their value. Marketed goods are most often excludable (a legal concept that allows an owner to prevent another person from using the Figure 1—Morton’s (2000) total economic valuation framework for estimating wilderness benefits asset), and rival (where consumption or based on seven categories, arranged from left to right in order use reduces the amount available for of decreasing tangibility to humans other people), whereas most ecosystem services are nonexcludable, and nonrival that are rarely congruent with market nomic value through broad-scale ecosys- (see Daly and Farley 2004 for applica- and property boundaries. Time lags and tem services, buffering severity and tions). To some extent, social agreements feedback loops can also muddle the directionality of environmental change, can engineer excludability or rivalness, or cause-effect relations needed to reflect and helping us understand the way create a proxy (consider carbon “credits”) marginal gains. Wilderness affects nature works. One barrier to stemming to make ecosystem services marketable. ecosystem services and vice versa: forest the losses of ecosystem services and Wilderness (often on public land) requires loss in Amazonia reduces rainfall in Texas wilderness alike is an inability to additional creativity because most mar- (Avissar and Werth 2005), and carbon account for their nonmonetary contribu- ket-based mechanisms are salient to emissions from cities affect Arctic tions to quality of life, or the damage private lands. That said, offsets elsewhere wilderness (Bachelet et al. 2005). costs to be incurred when they are lost. can benefit the wildland network as a Conditions that satisfy market effi- Broadening assessment of value to whole, and ecosystem services that are ciency don’t include environmental include the indirect (public) goods and not marketable (e.g., biodiversity) can be sustainability or socially just distribu- services can prevent assets of “the com- bundled to one that is (e.g., water tem- tion (Daly and Farley 2004). For the mons” from taking a backseat to private perature credits). world’s poorest, ecosystem services pro- profit, sensu Hardin (1968). This article Regulations (laws and standards), vide “natural insurance” for people has mentioned four challenges particular market incentives, information (e.g., cer- living in or near wilderness as has been to wilderness: ensuring that the market tification), and institutional flexibility all documented in Peru, the Amazon and willingness-to-pay is not the only way influence the longer standing success of (Takasaki et al. 2004), Knuckles we elucidate economic value, distinguish- attempts to bring wilderness attributes Wilderness in Sri Lanka (Gunatilake et ing economic growth (a quantitative goal) to market. Simply because the market is al. 1993), and others (Pattanayak and from economic development (a qualitative trading carbon credits in quantity does Sills 2001). Despite this, wilderness con- goal), employing creativity and skill with not mean abatement is occurring. servation has at times been cast as economic instruments and flexibility with Market price for carbon was more than elitist, because demographic disparities social institutions, and looking beyond halved in April 2006 when European exist in those who access it (Johnson et market efficiency to social and environ- countries set first-round emission tar- al. 2004). Exclusive focus on direct mental justice issues. gets too high. (rather than indirect or nonuse) benefits The economic approach is not for can obscure important distributive jus- everyone. If the Russell brothers had been Cultivating Socially and tice benefits of wilderness. asked to put a dollar value on wilderness, Environmentally Just Markets they probably would have responded Links between wilderness and ecosystem Conclusion with a public mooning. Yet the market is services often involve broad spatial scales Wilderness contributes to indirect eco- already valuing wilderness by way of a May 2007 | The Wild Planet Project | 25 nature’s value. Resources 158: 16–19. classification, description and valuation Brown, T., J. Loomis, and J. Bergstrom. 2006. for ecosystem functions, goods and Ecosystem goods and services: services. Ecological Economics 41: Definition, valuation and provision. 393–408. USDA Forest Service, RMRS-RWU-4851 Funtowicz S., J. Martinez-Aler, G. Munda, and Discussion Paper. J. R. Ravetz. 1999. Information Tools for Cordell, K., M. Tarrant, and G. Green. 2003. Environmental Policy under Conditions of Is the public viewpoint of wilderness Complexity. Environmental Issues Series shifting? International Journal of 9. Copenhagen, Denmark: EEA. Wilderness 9(2): 27–32. Funtowicz S., and J. R. Ravetz. 1994
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 11 the Natural Ecological Value of Wilderness
    204 h The Multiple Values of Wilderness USDA Forest Service. (2002).National and regional project results: 2002 National Chapter 11 Forest Visitor Use Report. Retrieved February 1,2005. from http:Nwww.fs.fed.usl recreation/pmgrams/nvum/ The Natural Ecological Value USDA Forest Service. (200 1). National und regional project results: FY2001 National Foresr ViorUse Report. Retrieved February 1,2005, from http:llwww.fs.fed.usI of Wilderness recreation/pmgrams/nvum/ USDA Forest Service. (2000).National and regional project results: CY20a) Notional Fowst Visitor Use Repor?. Retrieved February 1,2005, from http://www.fs.fed.usl recreation/programs/nvud H. Ken Cordell Senior Research Scientist and Project Leader Vias. A.C. (1999). Jobs folIow people in the nual Rocky Mountain west. Rural Devel- opmenr Perspectives, 14(2), 14-23. USDA Forest Service, Athens, Georgia Danielle Murphy j Research Coordinator, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia Kurt Riitters Research Scientist USDA Forest Service, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina J. E, Harvard Ill former University of Georgia employee Authors' Note: Deepest appreciation is extended to Peter Landres of the Leopold Wilderness Research Institute for initial ideas for approach, data. and analysis and for a thorough and very helpful review of this chapter. Chapter I I-The Natural Ecological Value of Wilderness & 207 The most important characteristic of an organism is that capacity modem broad-scale external influences, such as nonpoint source pollutants. for self-renewal known QS hcaltk There are two organisms whose - processes of self-renewal have been subjected to human interfer- altered distribution of species, and global climate change (Landres, Morgan ence and control.
    [Show full text]
  • Earth Day Turns 50 on April 22 © Kevin Mcneal
    America’s Wilderness MEMBER NEWSLETTER • WINTER 2019-2020 • VOL. XXII, NO. 1 • WWW.WILDERNESS.ORG Earth Day Turns 50 on April 22 © Kevin McNeal Mount Rainier National Park, Washington A half-century ago, on April 22, 1970, Earth Day erupted Earth Day 2020 gives us an opportunity into the national consciousness, bringing unprecedented to generate bold action on climate attention to the importance of protecting the planet that sustains us. More than just a one-day demonstration, and leave an impact as powerful and that first Earth Day awakened a sense of urgency about enduring as Earth Day 1970. the health of our environment and ignited a demand for change that altered the course of history. to the streets to voice their disgust over dirty air and water and to demand a new set of priorities for a livable planet. Former Wilderness Society leader Gaylord Nelson conceived the idea for a national day to focus on the Earth Day changed the world. It motivated political environment while he was serving as a U.S. Senator from leaders of every stripe to work together to pass 28 critical Wisconsin. Under his leadership, 20 million Americans took environmental laws in the decade that followed, including continued on page 3 WHAT YOU THE FORESTS YOU SAVE 13 DAYS IN THE YOUR 2 CAN DO 4 WILL HELP SAVE US 6 THE ARCTIC REFUGE 7 IMPACT EARTH DAY TURNS 50 ON APRIL 22 continued from page 1 the Clean Air, Clean Water and Endangered Species which wildlife and natural systems can thrive, and most Acts.
    [Show full text]
  • Legend Wilderness Gardens Hiking Trails
    Wilderness Gardens Hiking Trails RULES AND REGULATIONS WILDERNESS There are over three miles of hiking trails in the preserve, and all are considered easy to moderate. ACCIDENTS: The County of San Diego shall not be All trailheads are identified by name, and trails are clearly marked with intermittent signposts. responsible for loss or accidents. GARDENS ALCOHOLIC Alcoholic beverages are permitted providing BEVERAGES: the alcohol content does not exceed 20%. COUNTY PRESERVE DEFACEMENT No person shall remove, deface, or destroy PROHIBITED: trail markers, monuments, fences, trees, A San Diego County park amenities, or other preserve facilities. DRONES: Remotely piloted aircraft and drones Open Space Preserve are prohibited. FIRE HAZARDS Smoking, including the use of AND SMOKING: vaporizing products, is not permitted in County parks. LITTERING: Littering is prohibited. MOTOR The unauthorized operation of motor VEHICLES: vehicles is prohibited. NO HUNTING: No person shall use, transport, carry, fire, or discharge any firearms, air guns, archery device, slingshot, fireworks, or Legend explosive device of any kind in a preserve. Ranger Station Mileage Marker PRESERVATION All wildlife, plants, and geologic OF TRAIL features are protected and are not to Restrooms Hiking Trails FEATURES: be damaged or removed. All historical resources are to be left in place. Picnic Are Park Boundaries Preserve Hours Park Entrance River The Upper Meadow Trail is the most scenic C trail in the preserve, offering commanding views 8 a.m. – 4 p.m. • Thursday – Tuesday Sickler Brothers Grist Mill Intermittent Creek of the Pauma Valley and the mountains to the east. Closed Wednesdays and the month of August This trail is moderate in difficulty.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Growth, Ecological Economics, and Wilderness Preservation
    Economic Growth, Ecological Economics, and Wilderness Preservation Brian Czech Abstract—Economic growth is a perennial national goal. Per- wilderness preservation if, for example, it consisted entirely petual economic growth and wilderness preservation are mutually of arable land. The lack of tallgrass or Palouse wilderness is exclusive. Wilderness scholarship has not addressed this conflict. evidence for the susceptibility of arable lands to develop- The economics profession is unlikely to contribute to resolution, ment, as is the high percentage of designated wilderness because the neoclassical paradigm holds that there is no limit to that is rugged, arid or otherwise difficult to develop. economic growth. A corollary of the paradigm is that wilderness can Second, the United States contains an unrivalled wealth be preserved in a perpetually growing economy. The alternative, and diversity of natural resources. Few of these resources ecological economics paradigm faces a formidable struggle for cred- were employed at the dawn of American history, partly ibility in the policy arena. Wilderness scholars are encouraged to because the Native American tribes had been decimated by develop research programs that dovetail with ecological economics, diseases that swept the continent ahead of the European and wilderness managers are encouraged to become conversant immigrants (Stannard 1992). The extremely high ratio of with macroeconomic policy implications. natural resources (including acreage) to humans allowed the new American civilization to quickly amass vast amounts of money, which could then be spent on wilderness preserva- tion and other “amenities.” While this history supports the Economic growth is an increase in the production and notion that economic growth once contributed to wilderness consumption of goods and services.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Evaluating Air Pollution Impacts on Class I Wilderness Areas in the Pacific Northwest
    United States Department of Guidelines for Evaluating Agriculture Forest Service Air Pollution Impacts on Pacific Northwest Research Station Class I Wilderness Areas General Technical in the Pacific Northwest Report PNW-GTR-299 May 1992 Janice Peterson, Daniel Schmoldt, David Peterson, Joseph Eilers, Richard Fisher, and Robert Bachman Authors JANICE PETERSON is a research forester, US. Department of Agriculture Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 4043 Roosevelt Way NE, Seattle, WA 98105 DANIEL SCHMOLDT is a research forest products technologist, U.S. Depart- ment of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Blacksburg, VA 24081; DAVID PETERSON is a research biologist and associate professor, National Park Service, Cooperative Park Studies Unit, College of Forest Resources, University of Washington, AR-10, Seattle, WA 98195; JOSEPH EILERS a principal scientist, E & S Environmental Chemistry, Inc., P.O. Box 609, Corvallis, OR 97339 RICHARD FISHER is an air resource management specialist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service National Office, c/o Rocky Mountain Research Station, 240 Prospect Street, Fort Collins, CO 80526 and ROBERT BACHMAN is an air resource manager, US. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, P.O. Box 3823, Portland, OR 97208-3823. Guidelines for Evaluating Air Pollution Impacts on Class I Wilderness Areas in the Pacific Northwest From a workshop held in May 1990, Orcas Island, Washington Janice Peterson, Daniel Schmoldt, David Peterson, Joseph Eilers, Richard Fisher, and Robert Bachman U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station Portland, Oregon General Technical Report PNW-GTR-299 May 1992 Abstract Peterson, Janice; Schmoldt, Daniel; Peterson, David; Eilers, Joseph; Fisher, Richard; Bachman, Robert.
    [Show full text]
  • Practices for Wilderness and Backcountry David N
    United States Department of Agriculture Low-Impact Recreational Forest Service Intermountain Practices for Wilderness Research Station General Technical and Backcountry Report INT-265 August 1989 David N. Cole THE AUTHOR There are three primary ways of accessing information on specific practices. Someone interested in all of the practices DAVID N. COLE is research biologist and Project Leader for useful in avoiding specific problems can use the lists follow- the Intermountain Station’s Wilderness Management Re- ing the discussions of each management problem. Major search Work Unit at the Forestry Sciences Laboratory, categories of practices, such as all those that pertain to the Missoula. Dr. Cole received his B.A. degree in geography use of campfires, can be located in the table of contents. from the University of California, Berkeley, in 1972. He Specific practices are listed in appendix A. received his Ph.D., also in geography, from the University of Oregon in 1977. He has written many papers on wilderness CONTENTS management, particularly the ecological effects of recrea- tional use. Introduction ..........................................................................l Education-A Personal Perspective ................................... .2 PREFACE Management Problems.. ......................................................3 Trail Problems ................................................................. 3 This report summarizes information on low-impact recrea- Campsite Problems .........................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Black Mountain Backpack Camp
    Black Mountain Backpack Camp Piper Nicolosi Efren Alvarez Green Tip Save paper! Did you know this Preserve map is available online at www.openspace.org/camping and can be downloaded and saved to your mobile device? Please do your part by returning or recycling maps when you’re through. For More Information Karl Gohl For further information about the Black Mountain Check trail conditions and seasonal closures by calling the Midpen office at 650 - 691-1200 or visiting the website www.openspace.org. Backpack Camp at Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, or any of the Midpen open space preserves, Be Aware and Be Prepared please call, write, or visit Midpeninsula Regional Sleep Under the Stars... Open Space District, 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, Drinking water is not available at most Midpen CA 94022-1404. The telephone number is preserves— carry water with you. Rattlesnakes are 650-691-1200, email to [email protected], Monte Bello native to this area and are especially active in warm or visit www.openspace.org. weather. Poison oak grows on most preserves; learn Open Space Preserve to identify and avoid it in all seasons. Be aware that ticks are present in this area and may carry hether you’re looking for a stopping diseases. Mountain lions are a natural part of this place on your backpacking trip from the Jack Gescheidt region’s environment and are occasionally sighted. W valley to the coast, or you’re simply looking Be aware that cellular telephones may not have reception in the Preserve. A pay phone is located for a relaxing local overnight filled with at the Backpack Camp.
    [Show full text]
  • Wilderness As a Place for Scientific Inquiry; 1999 May 23–27; Missoula, MT
    Global Change in Wilderness Areas: Disentangling Natural and Anthropogenic Changes Lisa J. Graumlich Abstract—Human impacts on the Earth’s ecosystems are globally carbon dioxide and associated changes in climate, or cumu- pervasive. Wilderness areas, although largely protected from direct lative global changes, such as changes in fire regime or human impact at local scales, nevertheless are subject to global invasive species. changes in atmospheric composition, climate and biodiversity. Re- Given that human impacts on ecosystems increasingly search in wilderness areas plays a critical role in disentangling extend to areas previously considered pristine, what role can natural and anthropogenic changes in ecosystems by providing a wilderness, or more generally protected areas, play in scien- network of sites where local impacts are minimized relative to tific research? The answer lies in two veins of inquiry that adjacent, more intensely managed areas. Three case studies are have become increasingly important in the attempt to disen- discussed to illustrate the role of wilderness areas in global change tangle natural and anthropogenic environmental changes. research and, specifically, how paleoecological data provide baseline First, research based in wilderness and other less managed documentation of variability in climate and ecosystem processes. areas is critical to detecting the impact of climate change because it uses settings with minimal human influence. In essence, protected areas can be thought of as the “canaries in the coal mine,” that is, sites where impacts may initially The motivation to designate wilderness areas as research be manifest. Second, research in protected areas offers a sites stems from a recognition that human influences on the powerful approach to the problem of attributing change to Earth’s ecosystems are multiple and pervasive.
    [Show full text]
  • The Biosphere Reserve Program in the United States
    tions recommending widespread phosphorus 15. For example, T. P. Murphy, D. R. S. Lean, visualize a laboratory bioassay experi- control as a solution to eutrophication. Almost and C. Nalewajko [Science 192, 900 (1976)] ment that could realistically represent all all of the freshwater scientists in the world were showed that Anabaena requires iron for fixation represented. of atmospheric nitrogen and that this genus of these parameters. 3. For example, see J. W. G. Lund [Nature (Lon- can suppress the growth of other species of On the basis of data from several don) 249, 797 (1974)] for a critique of phos- algae by excretion of a growth-inhibiting phorus control, including my report of the same substance. studies of the carbon, nitrogen, and year (4). 16. M. Turner and R. Flett, unpublished data. As 4. D. W. Schindler, Science 184, 897 (1974). yet no quantitative estimates of nitrogen fixation phosphorus cycle, I hypothesize that 5. P. Dillon and F. Rigler,J. Fish. Res. Board Can. for an entire season are available. G. Persson, S. schemes for controlling nitrogen input to 32, 1519 (1975); R. A. Vollenweider, Schweiz. Z. K. Holmgren, M. Jansson, A. Lundgren, and C. Hydrol. 37, 53 (1975); D. W. Schindler, Limnol. Anell [in Proceedings of the NRC-CNC lakes may actually affect water quality Oceanogr., in press. (SCOPE) Circumpolar Conference on Northern adversely by causing low N/P ratios, 6. See papers in G. E. Likens, Ed., Am. Soc. Ecology (Ottawa, 15 to 18 September 1975)] Limnol. Oceanogr. Spec. Symp. No. 1 (1972). reported similar results for a lake in Sweden that which favor the vacuolate, nitrogen-fix- 7.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wilderness Act of 1964
    THE WILDERNESS ACT Public Law 88-577 (16 U.S.C. 1131-1136) 88th Congress, Second Session September 3, 1964 (As amended) AN ACT To establish a National Wilderness Preservation System for the permanent good of the whole people, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SHORT TITLE SECTION 1. This Act may be cited as the "Wilderness Act". WILDERNESS SYSTEM ESTABLISHED STATEMENT OF POLICY SECTION 2. (a) In order to assure that an increasing population, accompanied by expanding settlement and growing mechanization, does not occupy and modify all areas within the United States and its possessions, leaving no lands designated for preservation and protection in their natural condition, it is hereby declared to be the policy of the Congress to secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness. For this purpose there is hereby established a National Wilderness Preservation System to be composed of federally owned areas designated by Congress as "wilderness areas", and these shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use and enjoyment as wilderness; and no Federal lands shall be designated as "wilderness areas" except as provided for in this Act or by a subsequent Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Written Testimony of Jamie Williams President the Wilderness Society
    Written Testimony of Jamie Williams President The Wilderness Society Washington, D.C. Before the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Energy and Minerals “Oil and Gas Development: Impacts of Business-as-Usual on the Climate and Public Health” Tuesday, July 16, 2019 Good afternoon Chairman Lowenthal, Ranking Member Gosar, and Members of the Subcommittee. My name is Jamie Williams and I am the President of The Wilderness Society. For more than 80 years, The Wilderness Society has worked to protect America’s wild, public lands. These lands include our national parks, wilderness areas, and forests – places of spectacular beauty that define who we are as a country. They are critical to the clean air we breathe and the clean water we drink. They provide recreation opportunities and an irreplaceable cultural and spiritual connection for past, present and future generations. Now, many people think just because public lands are public, they are protected – but that is simply not the case. Page 1 The majority of our public lands are not in a National Park, Wilderness or other protected designation but are lands managed for multiple uses including oil and gas development and mining. The U.S. Department of the Interior manages over 2.4 billion acres of subsurface mineral rights including energy resources like coal, crude oil and natural gas both onshore and offshore.1 The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is responsible for coal leasing on about 570 million acres, and oil and gas leasing on approximately 700 million acres of onshore BLM, national forest and other federal lands, as well as private lands where the federal government has retained mineral rights.2 The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management oversees approximately 1.7 billion offshore acres on the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Renewable Energy in Wilderness Landscapes: Visitors' Perspectives
    sustainability Article Renewable Energy in Wilderness Landscapes: Visitors’ Perspectives Edita Tverijonaite 1,*, Anna Dóra Sæþórsdóttir 1 , Rannveig Ólafsdóttir 1 and C. Michael Hall 2 1 Faculty of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Iceland, 101 Reykjavik, Iceland; [email protected] (A.D.S.); [email protected] (R.Ó.) 2 Department of Management, Marketing and Entrepreneurship, University of Canterbury, Christchurch 8140 2, New Zealand; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +354-8476-121 Received: 11 September 2019; Accepted: 16 October 2019; Published: 19 October 2019 Abstract: Increasing the share of renewable energy in the energy mix is of crucial importance for climate change mitigation. However, as renewable energy development often changes the visual appearance of landscapes and might affect other industries relying on them, such as nature-based tourism, it therefore requires careful planning. This is especially true in Iceland, a country rich in renewable energy resources and a popular nature-based tourism destination. The present study investigated the potential impacts on tourism of the proposed Hverfisfljót hydropower plant by identifying the main attractions of the area as well as by analyzing visitors’ perceptions, preferences and attitudes, and the place meanings they assign to the landscape of the area. The data for the study were collected using onsite questionnaire surveys, interviews with visitors to the area, open-ended diaries, and participant observation. The results reveal that the area of the proposed power plant is perceived as wilderness by its visitors, who seek environmental settings related to the components of a wilderness experience. Visitors were highly satisfied with the present settings and preferred to protect the area from development to ensure the provision of currently available recreational opportunities.
    [Show full text]