United States

Department

of Agriculture

Forest Service

Rocky Mountain

Research Station

Proceedings

RMRS-P-27

August 2003

Science and Stewardship

to Protect and Sustain

Wilderness Values:

Seventh World Wilderness

Congress Symposium

2001 November 2–8

Port Elizabeth, South Africa
Abstract

Compilers

Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship to protect and sustain

wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8;

Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc. RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 272 p.

The Seventh World Wilderness Congress met in Port Elizabeth, South Africa, in 2001. The symposium

on science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values was one of several symposia held

in conjunction with the Congress. The papers contained in this proceedings were presented at this

symposium and cover seven topics: state-of-knowledge on protected areas issues in South Africa;

traditional and ecological values of nature; wilderness systems and approaches to protection; protection

of coastal/marine and river/lake wilderness; spiritual benefits, religious beliefs, and new stories; personal

and societal values of wilderness; and the role of science, education, and collaborative planning in

wilderness protection and restoration.

Keywords: biodiversity, protected areas, tourism, economics, recreation, wildlife, alien species, spiritual

values

Alan E. Watson is the Research Social Scientist with the Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute and

Executive Editor for science for the International Journal of Wilderness. The Aldo Leopold Wilderness

Research Institute is an interagency (Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, National Park

Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey) unit administered by the USDA Forest

Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. The Leopold Institute is located on the campus of the

University of Montana, Missoula. Dr. Watson’s research interests are primarily in understanding the

values humans associate with wilderness, experience quality, and conflicts arising from divergent

orientations toward wilderness resources. Besides national U.S. leadership in wilderness social science

issues, as a Fulbright Scholar and a Senior Fulbright Protected Area Specialist, Dr. Watson has been most

active in research in other Circumpolar North countries and in South Africa, New Zealand, and Australia.

Janet Sproull is a Project Coordinator at the Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute. Ms. Sproull

co-coordinated technical symposia for the 6th and 7th World Wilderness Congresses (India and South

Africa) and assisted with compilation of Congress proceedings. More recently, she helped with

compilation of the Wilderness in the Circumpolar North proceedings. As a dedicated conservationist,

Ms. Sproull donates her time and expertise to several community organizations, including local land

trust, Save Open Space (SOS); the Missoula Parks, Recreation and Urban Forestry Board; and the

Mount Jumbo Advisory Committee. Grant writing efforts by Ms. Sproull have provided funding for

improvements at City Wetlands Parks and for activation of an Integrated Pest Management Plan for two

SOS conservation easements. She is currently developing a series of interpretive signs featuring

Watchable Wildflowers of Waterworks Hill.
Science and Stewardship to Protect

and Sustain Wilderness Values:

Seventh World Wilderness

Congress Symposium

2001 November 2–8

Port Elizabeth, South Africa

Compilers:

Alan Watson

Janet Sproull

Concerning the front cover background photo of the BAOBAB tree:

“It is said, briefly, that the Great Spirit had created the Universe for reasons that nobody must endeavour to fathom. The Great Spirit used a being called the First Goddess, who worked as a tool under His

directions. In answer to a request she was granted as a companion...The Tree of Life, the most

revered deity throughout Bantu Africa, even today.”

And from the First Goddess...

“A countless number of human beings was born.”

And the Tree of Life...

“Bore living, snarling, howling animal fruit.”

And

“Birds of all kinds came flying and waddling forth.”

“The earth which had hitherto been lifeless and dead,

Began to live, and sounds of all kinds

Resounded from the forests and the valleys.”

“Birds sang their happiness loudly

Towards the smiling sun.

The Song of Life had begun on earth.”

“The most sacred tree is the baobab

With which are associated the souls of

Future witchdoctors, wise women, midwives and those people

Who will care for and control the lives of others.”

“It is believed that the baobab is a direct descendant of the Tree of Life.

It is noted with great concern that the baobab is fast disappearing over great areas

And this is the basis of a belief that good people will become fewer.”

Credo Mutwa, Indaba, My Children

iii

Preface

The World Wilderness Congress returned to South Africa in

2001, under the banner “Wilderness & Human Communities—

The Spirit of the 21st Century.” The Congress first met in South

Africa in 1977, followed by meetings in Australia (1980), Scotland (1983), the United States of America (1987), Norway

(1993), and India (1998). While the wilderness movement in

South Africa is heavily connected to the KwaZulu-Natal Province, in the true spirit of the 21st century, the Mayor and

residents of Port Elizabeth, in the Nelson Mandella Municipality, welcomed this world event, associated symposia, and

Wilderness Summit on behalf of the South African people.

The papers included in this proceedings represent the knowledge brought together and shared at the symposium entitled

“Science and Stewardship to Protect and Sustain Wilderness

Values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress Symposium on

Research, Management, and Allocation.” Every paper in this

proceedings received peer edit by at least one of the compilers

and one other reviewer. All copyrights are released by contributing authors except as noted on the articles.

The Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute and the

USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station are

proud to cooperate in compiling and distributing this publication. We thank the International Programs Office of the Forest

Service for strong support of this symposium and this proceedings through contributions toward travel for U.S. managers and

for publication expenses. The Wild Foundation of South Africa

exhibited patience and leadership in coordinating facilities and

schedules. And we thank the Rocky Mountain Research Station Publishing Services Staff for an outstanding job, once

again, of editing and publishing these proceedings.

We hope that the knowledge compiled here will contribute to

understanding the links between wilderness places and human

communities around the world. Congress delegates from over

40 countries will be forever changed by the presentations,

heightened cultural awareness, and the friendship shared in

South Africa at this World Wilderness Congress. Sustainability

of wilderness and human communities into the next century will

depend upon the spirit created here.

The Compilers, August 2003

v

Contents

Page

1. State-of-Knowledge on Protected Areas Issues in South Africa ...................................................................... 1

W. D. Densham Planning and Management of the Umfolozi Wilderness Area in

A. J. Conway Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa: A Model for Managing African

Wilderness Areas ................................................................................................................ 3

N. Guy Palmer Wilderness Conservation in the Western Cape Province, South

Maretha E. Shroyer Africa: Where We Are Going ............................................................................................. 13

Nigel Wessels

William R. Bainbridge Establishment of Buffer Zone in the Peripheries of Wilderness Areas

in the Ukhahlamba-Drakensberg Park World Heritage Site,

KwaZulu-Natal Province, Republic of South Africa ........................................................... 20

M. E. Shroyer Mountain Conservation in South Africa ............................................................................. 26

P. Blignaut

W. D. Densham WAG-CEAD Alliance: Commitment to Wilderness Training and

R. J. Fincham Protection in South Africa .................................................................................................. 34

Stefanie Freitag-Ronaldson Wilderness, Wilderness Quality Management, and Recreational

Ralf H. Kalwa Opportunities Zoning Within Kruger National Park, South Africa ...................................... 39

Jaco C. Badenhorst

Jan P. Erasmus

Freek J. Venter

Flip J. Nel

Ralf H. Kalwa Cross-Boundary Impacts in the Crocodile River Valley:

A National Parks Perspective ............................................................................................ 50

2. Traditional and Ecological Values of Nature ..............................................................................................55

Malcolm Draper In Quest of African Wilderness .......................................................................................... 57

Linda Moon Stumpff Protecting Restorative Relationships and Traditional Values:

American Indian Tribes, Wildlife, and Wild Lands ............................................................. 63

T. Damu Helping “Ecosystem People” Protect Wilderness and Their .................................................

Own Welfare 72

Sandra Hinchman Endangered Species, Endangered Culture: Native Resistance to

Industrializing the Arctic .................................................................................................... 77

Kelly Luck Contested Rights: Impacts of Game Farming on Farm Workers

Zweliyanyikima Vena in the Bushmans River Area ............................................................................................. 85

Chad E. Dear Understanding Wilderness and Subsistence in Gates of the Arctic

National Park and Preserve, Alaska.................................................................................. 90

Robert L. Arnberger Living Cultures—Living Parks in Alaska: Considering the

Reconnection of Native Peoples to Their Cultural Landscapes in

Parks and Protected Areas ............................................................................................... 94

3. Wilderness: Systems and Approaches to Protection ........................................................................................ 97

A. Schoon An NGO’s Contribution to Mountain Conservation in South Africa ................................... 99

M. Shroyer

F. Hunziker

vii
Paul J. Mitchell-Banks Protecting and Sustaining Wilderness Values in the

Muskwa-Kechika Management Area............................................................................... 104

Jeff Jarvis National Landscape Conservation System:

A New Approach to Conservation ................................................................................... 110

David M. Johns The Wildlands Project Outside North America ................................................................ 114

Perry Brown Personal and Societal Values, and Wilderness Stewardship .......................................... 121

4. Protection of Coastal/Marine and River/Lake Wilderness .............................................................................. 125

William R. Bainbridge Rationalization of the Commercial Afforestation Program on the

Western Shores of Lake St. Lucia for Nature and Wilderness

Conservation, KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa ..................................................... 127

John J. Daigle Factors Influencing Experience Quality: Comparing User Groups

Jamie Hannon and Place Attachment at the St. Croix International Waterway ...................................... 133

Cynthia Stacey

Laani Uunila Community Involvement in New Zealand Marine Reserve

Management: Examining Practice................................................................................... 142

Penny S. Bernard Ecological Implications of Water Spirit Beliefs in Southern Africa:

The Need to Protect Knowledge, Nature, and Resource Rights ..................................... 148

Sally Wynn Zambezi River: Wilderness and Tourism Research Into Visitor

Perceptions About Wilderness and Its Value .................................................................. 155

5. Spiritual Benefits, Religious Beliefs, and New Stories............................................................................ 163

Hafiz Nazeem Goolam Preserving Paradise Through Religious Values of Nature:

The Islamic Approach ..................................................................................................... 165

Baylor Johnson Sources of Spiritual Benefits of Wilderness:

A Philosopher’s Reflections ............................................................................................ 167

David M. Johns Our Real Challenge: Managing Ourselves Instead of Nature ......................................... 172

6. Personal and Societal Values of Wilderness............................................................................................ 177

Lisi Krall Value of Wilderness Revisited ........................................................................................ 179

John Organ

Florence R. Shepard

Peter B. Myles Contribution of Wilderness to Survival of the Adventure

Travel and Ecotourism Markets....................................................................................... 185

Laura M. Fredrickson Wilderness Ecotourism and Education as a Means of Promoting

an International Environmental Ethic .............................................................................. 188

Sophie Jakowska Wildlife in Growing Cities: Eco-Socio-Cultural Considerations ....................................... 194

Dyrce Lacombe

Les Wadzinski Management Actions to Protect Wilderness Experiences

and the Resource ............................................................................................................ 199

Patrick T. Maher Antarctica: Tourism, Wilderness, and “Ambassadorship” ............................................... 204

Gary Steel

Alison McIntosh

viii
7. The Role of Science, Education, and Collaborative Planning in Wilderness Protection

and Restoration .......................................................................................................................................................... 211

David N. Cole Ecological Research and Educational Programs to Support

Protected Area Management: Lessons From the

United States Experience ................................................................................. 213

Stephen F. McCool From Scholarship to Stewardship: Opportunities and Challenges

in Wilderness Research, Education, and Management .................................... 218

Jan W. van Wagtendonk Role of Science in Sustainable Management of Yosemite

Wilderness ........................................................................................................ 225

Crewenna Dymond Investigating the Environmental Cause of Global Wilderness

Steve Carver and Species Richness Distributions.................................................................. 231

Oliver Phillips

Till M. Meyer The Shack Revisited: Aldo Leopold’s Perceptions of Wilderness

From a Historic, Legal, and International Perspective ..................................... 238

Børge Dahle Norwegian “Friluftsliv”—“Environmental Education” as a Lifelong

Communal Process .......................................................................................... 247

Nicholas King Overcoming the Taxonomic Impediment to Sustainable

Development: BioNET-INTERNATIONAL, the Global Network

for Taxonomy—A Successful Networking Model for Capacity

Building in Developing Countries ...................................................................... 253

Teresa C. Magro Closure of Trails: A Restoration Strategy or Lack of Management? ................. 257

Teresa Cristina Magro Seedbank as a Tool for Choosing the Better Strategy for

José Leonardo de Moraes Gonçalves Trail Recovery ................................................................................................... 262

Charles Besancon Where in the World Wide Web Is Wilderness? ................................................. 268

Wayne A. Freimund

ix

1. State-of-Knowledge on Protected

Areas Issues in South Africa

2. Traditional and Ecological Values of

Nature

3. Wilderness: Systems and

Approaches to Protection

4. Protection of Coastal/Marine and

River/Lake Wilderness

5. Spiritual Benefits, Religious Beliefs,

and New Stories

6. Personal and Societal Values of

Wilderness

7. The Role of Science, Education, and

Collaborative Planning in Wilderness

Protection and Restoration

1. State-of-Knowledge on Protected

Areas Issues in South Africa

1

The Shamwari Game Reserve serves as

an outdoor classroom for a pre-Congress

training session (photo by Alan Watson).

USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 3

W. D. Densham, Wilderness Action Group of Southern Africa, 5 Davidson

Street, Howick, 3290, Republic of South Africa, E-mail: densham@sai.co.za.

A. J. Conway, Conservation Manager, Ezemvelo KwaZulu-Natal Nature

Conservation Service, P.O. Box 201, Mtubatuba, KwaZulu-Natal, 3935,

South Africa, E-mail: tonyc@kznwildlife.com

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—The Umfolozi Wilderness Area, one of the first wilderness areas in South Africa, was administratively set aside within

the southern half of the Umfolozi Game Reserve in 1958, by

resolution of the Natal Parks Board. Originally, it was 12,500 ha (48

miles2) in extent, and its management was not consistent with internationally accepted principles. Today, the wilderness area is 32,000 ha

(124 miles2) in extent, and management is aimed at preserving the

wilderness resource by employing wilderness-sensitive programs

detailed in a specific wilderness area management plan. The successes achieved in the wilderness planning and management approach used for the Umfolozi Wilderness Area over the last 6 years

is presented as a model that can be used to manage existing and

candidate wilderness areas in other parts of Africa. This model is

being used to draw up wilderness management plans for wilderness

areas in three formally protected areas in Southern Africa and a

private game reserve in the Eastern Cape.

Introduction ____________________

Wilderness conservation in Africa began with the Umfolozi

and St. Lucia Wilderness Areas being administratively

zoned within the Umfolozi and St. Lucia Game Reserves in

the mid-1950s by the Natal Parks Board, which legally

mandated for the conservation of wildlife (nature conservation) in the Province of Natal.

The Umfolozi Wilderness Area was originally 12,000 ha

(48 miles2

) in extent and located in the southern half of the

Umfolozi Game Reserve. The wilderness did not receive any

special management, which resulted in management practices that were inconsistent with accepted wilderness concepts and management philosophy. Today, the Umfolozi

Wilderness Area is 32,000 ha (124 miles2

) in extent, and

management is specifically directed at preserving the wilderness resource.

Planning and Management of the Umfolozi

Wilderness Area in KwaZulu-Natal, South

Africa: A Model for Managing African

Wilderness Areas

W. D. Densham

A. J. Conway

The Umfolozi Wilderness Area has never enjoyed legal

protection and as such has been at the mercy of the reserve

administrators and managers of the day. The first reserve

management plan produced in the mid-1970s had no special

management prescriptions for the wilderness area. It was

not until the mid-1980s, when a combined management plan

for the Hluhluwe and Umfolozi Game Reserves was developed, that some reference to the wilderness was made. The

section dealing with the wilderness zone was inadequate

and sketchy, with little concern for preservation of the

wilderness resource.

The Natal Parks Board adopted the first dedicated wilderness plan for the Umfolozi Wilderness Area on September

29, 1995. The plan outlined the management of the area

using internationally accepted management principles that

were adapted to suit the Umfolozi Wilderness Area conditions. This paper discusses the approach taken in the planning and management of the wilderness and proposes that

it is an excellent model to be followed for existing and

candidate wilderness areas in Africa.

Location and Historical

Perspectives ___________________

The Umfolozi Wilderness Area is situated in HluhluweUmfolozi Park in KwaZulu-Natal of the Republic of South

Africa (fig. 1). The park is 96,453 ha (372 miles2

) in extent,

of which the wilderness area is 32,000 ha (124 miles2) and

located in the south part of the protected area (fig. 2)

The Umfolozi Wilderness Area was administratively zoned

in 1958, and the Eleventh Annual Report of the Natal Parks

Board for the year April 1958 to March 1959 records the

following:

Some 12,150 ha were set aside by the Board as a wilderness

area, in which all forms of motor traffic are prohibited, and

only rangers, or visitors on foot accompanied by a ranger, are

permitted to enter.

However, the rhino capture team was allowed to continue its

operations using vehicles in the wilderness area.

Although several unsuccessful attempts were made, the

Umfolozi Wilderness Area was never officially proclaimed

wilderness, despite the fact that the Natal Nature Conservation Ordinance No. 11 of 1974 was amended in the 1980s to

allow for the designation of wilderness areas.

Compilation of management plans for the Reserves in

Natal began in the 1970s. The Umfolozi Wilderness Area
4 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Densham and Conway Planning and Management of the Umfolozi Wilderness Area in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa:...

received no special attention, and the management action

developed for the rest of the Reserve was also applied to the

wilderness area.

As a result of a general revision of management plans in

the 1980s, a Combined Management Plan for the Hluhluwe

and Umfolozi Game Reserves was prepared and approved by

the Natal Parks Board on May 24, 1985. The wilderness area

continued to be managed along with the rest of the Reserves

with very little reference to the special management actions

and uses to conserve the wilderness quality and resources of

solitude and naturalness. Management action was confined

to the following statements.

In Chapter 9, Zonation, the Wilderness zone was described as:

Area characterized by lack of access roads open to the

public. There are two sub zones recognized:

Class I: Pristine area

Area characterized by essentially unmodified natural environment. No facilities for comfort or convenience of their user

are provided. Spacing of groups informal and dispersed, no

marked paths permitted. Motorized use within the area not

permitted.

Class II: Wild area

Area characterized by a predominantly unmodified natural environment. Rustic facilities are provided but kept to a

minimum, such as, bush camp, toilet, and campsite. Spacing

of groups formalized by use of paths and designated overnight

sites. Motorized transport limited to service tracks, but may

be excluded in some areas.

Under the heading, “Implications of this visitor use

zonation for management and research,” the following was

recorded:

Wilderness Zone

There are no areas that could be classed as Pristine Areas,

and the category of Wilderness Class II: Wild Area applies...

...In this area, visitors will be able to enjoy a ‘wilderness type’

experience, and due to low visitor density that is essential for

this wilderness experience the ecosystem within this area

will receive minimum human disturbance.

These statements, by implication, allowed access to the

wilderness area by vehicles for management purposes. This

was a grave threat to the wilderness resource at the time.

The rhino and game capture teams were allowed to continue to use vehicles to remove surplus wildlife species from

the wilderness area. In the below-average rainfall years of

the late 1970s and early 1980s, the management team

graded roads into the wilderness area to facilitate easier

game capture and culling operations. It also allowed for

fairly sophisticated overnight trail camps in the wilderness

area to be developed, which remain to this day.

It wasn’t until September 1995 that a dedicated and

comprehensive wilderness management plan was approved

by the Natal Parks Board. The plan forms part of the overall

management and concept development plans for the

Hluhluwe-Umfolozi Park. The plan sets out the permissible

management action of the biophysical components and visitor uses, with set limits of acceptable change in the different

Figure 1—the Hluhluwe-Umfolozi Park shown in relation to

South Africa.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 5

Densham and Conway Planning and Management of the Umfolozi Wilderness Area in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa:...

wilderness zones. It is interesting to note that during this

exercise pristine areas were found to exist.

The Umfolozi Wilderness Area still does not have legal

protection. However, the new KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation Management Act (No. 9 of 1997) does provide for

the proclamation of wilderness areas within protected areas. It is hoped that as soon as the regulations have been

promulgated, all administratively zoned wilderness areas

will be proclaimed (Densham 1999).

General Approach to Wilderness

Area Management _______________

The tension between the wilderness concept (an absence

or minimum of human intervention) and the need for management (the control of nature) has been researched by a

number of authors (for example, Bainbridge 1984; Hendee

and others 1990). It is generally agreed that once wilderness

areas have been proclaimed or administratively designated,

Figure 2—The Hluhluwe-Umfolozi Park showing the Umfolozi

Wilderness Area.
6 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Densham and Conway Planning and Management of the Umfolozi Wilderness Area in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa:...

they need “formal professional management for their long

term conservation.” This will eliminate uncoordinated and

haphazard management action and will lead to long-term

direction, continuity, stability, and an adaptive management style. Protected area management plans reflect the

legal aspects (where this is applicable), the management

authority’s policies and procedures, and the specific protected area objectives and management actions in a systematic framework (Hendee and others 1990, Chapter 8). In

respect to wilderness area management plans, the same

approach is required, but the focus is on the minimal human

intervention to achieve the desired outcomes of management action and uses.

Generally, wilderness plans in developed countries focus

on recreational use, with little specific reference to the

biophysical components. In South Africa, wilderness areas

are often relatively small (less than 30,000 ha [116 miles2

])

and are usually part of a larger protected area. Generally,

they do not contain whole ecosystems and are biodiversity

islands in a landscape heavily impacted by monoculture

agriculture, peri-urban and rural community development,

and other forms of land uses. It is vitally important to

develop plans that address all biodiversity components (which

is the protected area’s primary objective) and recreational

uses if the wilderness resource is to be conserved.

In drawing up management plans, a multidisciplinary

team approach should be adopted involving planners, protected area management and community conservation staff,

and ecologists. The involvement of the public at an early

stage is an essential part of the development of the management plan in order to identify all the issues and concerns.

Management plans must have clear objectives and achievable goals that are measurable to evaluate the success or

failure of management actions. They ought to provide a

record of past and present management actions and results.

Wilderness management plans should provide the following

guiding principles:

• Ensure that human intervention is kept to the absolute

minimum.

• Allow natural processes to operate freely.

• Manage wilderness as a whole entity together with the

rest of the protected area.

• Only implement imperative management action while

preserving the wilderness experience of solitude, surprise, discovery, and spirituality.

• Ensure that the “minimum test” and minimum regulation are employed rather than the least expensive or

easiest actions.

• Ensure that where exceptions have to be catered for that

these do not reduce the wilderness experience significantly (Krumpe and others 1986).

In addition, the “minimum tool” and “leave-no-trace”

principles must also be applied to all intended programs.

Umfolozi Wilderness Area

Management Plan Model _________

The Umfolozi Wilderness Area Management Plan is a

separate document, which guides the area’s management

and use (Conway and others 2000) to protect the wilderness

resource. Management needs of the wilderness area are

served well by this model. It is also being used as a reference

document by planning and management teams in the drawing up of wilderness plans for the Greater St. Lucia Wetland

Park and the Ukhahlamba-Drakensberg Mountain Park

World Heritage Sites Wilderness Areas, the Waterberg

Plateau Park Wilderness Area in Namibia, and a wilderness

area in the Shamwari Private Game Reserve in the Eastern

Cape.

The location of the Umfolozi Wilderness Area in the

southern third of the park presents management challenges. The wilderness area boundary follows the park

boundary on the west, south, and east sides, with a narrow

buffer zone (Wilderness Support Zone) (fig. 3). External

influences are extremely difficult to control or mitigate

against, which impacts on the solitude. These influences are

the Vryheid-Richards Bay coal railway line, Eskom’s rural

electrification, and the rapid growth of rural homesteads.

More recently in South Africa, the volume of air traffic over

protected areas has become a major disturbance factor.

Management Plan Format

The format developed for the plan addresses management

needs for recreational use and biodiversity preservation of

the Umfolozi Wilderness Area (table 1).

Figure 3—The Umfolozi Game Reserve and Wilderness Area Zoning.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 7

Densham and Conway Planning and Management of the Umfolozi Wilderness Area in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa:...

Aims of the Wilderness Management Plan

Following are the aims of the management plan:

• To provide a comprehensive management plan for the

effective management and sustainable utilization of the

Umfolozi Wilderness Area.

• To refine a management philosophy that can be tested

and evaluated through dialogue with wilderness managers and other interested parties.

• To gain understanding, acceptance, and support of a

management philosophy by wilderness managers, users,

and outdoor organizations that, hopefully, will extend

beyond Umfolozi to other organizations that administer

wilderness areas.

• To direct pioneering into the development of alternative management methods for essential wilderness

operations.

• To secure, for all the people of South Africa, of the

present and future generations, the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness.

• To maintain the pristine character of the landscape and

the opportunities for solitude it provides.

Objectives of Wilderness Management

The management plan uses the 16 management principles developed by the United States Forest Service

(Krumpe and others 1986) as guidelines for the management of recreational uses.

Reserve and Wilderness Zonation

Zonation of the Umfolozi Wilderness Area and adjacent

areas of the park follows the U.S. Forest Service Recreational Opportunity Spectrum and Wilderness Opportunity

Spectrum approaches. It is in keeping with the Parks Concept Development Plan zonation of the whole protected area.

The Umfolozi Wilderness Area is zoned into three opportunity classes—semiprimitive, primitive, and pristine—with

a Wilderness Support Zone (fig. 3). It is recognized that

although external (and to a lesser extent internal) influences

impact on the wilderness resources of solitude and naturalness, the area does offer a valuable wilderness experience for

visitors. The pristine areas are confined to those portions of

the wilderness where the sounds and sights of man are

rarely noticed (for example, in valleys). There is a “Wilderness Support Zone” that buffers the Umfolozi Wilderness

Area and its resources from outside influences. It also allows

for the provision of basic management infrastructures such

as Ranger outposts and the park boundary fence line and

maintenance roads.

Definitions of these zones are reflected in table 2. The

descriptions give managers a clear statement of the intended characteristics for each zone so that management

actions and uses can be determined. All sensitive sites or

areas of biodiversity or cultural importance are taken into

consideration when delineating the zones to prevent possible

conflicts with proposed recreational activities. These zoned

areas are mapped so that they are protected.

In the planning process, the following aspects were taken

into consideration for each zone and the appropriate standards set for monitoring purposes. The intention was to

reduce the evidence of human intervention and control

visitor use impacts on each zone.

Scenery Setting

This determines the intended ambiance visitors can expect to experience in the area (table 3). It also places

constraints on management actions in each zone to ensure

that the wilderness experience is not impaired.

Table 1—Wilderness management plan format.

1. DEFINITIONS

2. VALUES

3. AIMS OF THE WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT PLAN

4. OBJECTIVES OF WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT

5. CLASS OF WILDERNESS

6. BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION

7. RESERVE AND WILDERNESS ZONATION

8. INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (IEM)

PROCEDURES

9. LIMITS OF ACCEPTABLE CHANGE (LAC)

10. RESTRICTIONS ON DEVELOPMENT OF ADJACENT AREAS

11. LIMITS OF SOPHISTICATION (LOS) FOR HIKING AND

CAMPING

12. VISITOR CARRYING CAPACITY

13. VISITOR UTILIZATION OF THE AREA

14. LITTER DISPOSAL

15. STRUCTURES WITHIN THE WILDERNESS AREA

16. ACCESS

17. INVENTORY OF ROADS

18. CASEVAC PROCEDURES

19. MANAGEMENT OF FAUNA AND FLORA

20. FAUNA

21. WILDLIFE POPULATION CONTROL

22. SUPPLY OF WILDLIFE WATER SUPPLIES

23. FLORA

24. CONSUMPTIVE UTILIZATION

25. EROSION RECLAMATION

26. LAW ENFORCEMENT

27. RESEARCH AND MONITORING

28. SEARCH AND RESCUE

29. AWARENESS PROGRAM

30. INFORMATION

31. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

APPENDICES

Map of Umfolozi wilderness area zonation

IEM policy

CASEVAC procedure

Lion call-up program

Air-lifting immobilized black rhino

IUCN categorization of threatened species

Inventory of roads in the wilderness area

IUCN classification of wilderness

Darting and marking black rhino on foot

KZN Wildlife - internal scoping report format

Memorandum of Understanding - Wilderness Leadership School

and KZN Wildlife Service

Wilderness law in South Africa

Umfolozi wilderness trails - questionnaire format.
8 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Densham and Conway Planning and Management of the Umfolozi Wilderness Area in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa:...

Table 2—Wilderness zone definitions (abbreviated).

Zone definitions

1 Pristine The purest form of wilderness possible is characterized by having absolutely no sight, as far as the eye can see, or

sound of man (except for passing aircraft and trains in the distance), or visual evidence of man having manipulated

the ecosystem and landscape in any way and at any time past or present.

2 Primitive Characterized by having no evidence of past or present human manipulation of the immediate ecosystem and

landscape although views of human habitation, etc., are visible in the distance (that is, more than 10 km [6.2 mi]

away).

3 Semiprimitive Intervention by man in terms of past

nonwilderness manipulation is present in forms such as old tracks and settlements. Present

evidence of wilderness recreation facilities and users that are nonpermanent and wilderness compatible.

4a Wilderness This, and the following zone, forms a

support zone transitional buffer between Semiprimitive

nonwilderness (nonmotorized) and Roaded Natural.

The influence of man’s activities is becoming evident. This is limited to the minimum requirements to effectively

administer and provide law enforcement to the wilderness area. Only such structures, infrastructure, and ecological

management activities as deemed essential are permitted.

Area is characterized by a

predominantly natural or naturalappearing environment.

Interaction between users is low,

but there is often evidence of

other users.

The area is managed in such a

way that minimum onsite controls

and restrictions may be present,

but are subtle.

Motorized use is not permitted.

The zone includes all the area

500 m (547 yd) from both banks

of the White Umfolozi River and

the southern bank of the Black

Umfolozi River. Evidence of

pollution from inhabitants

upstream is low to moderate.

Impact of adjacent land use is

moderate.

Table 3—Wilderness scenery settings (abbreviated).

Wilderness

Semiprimitive support zone

Pristine Primitive nonmotorized nonwilderness

Area is characterized by

essentially unmodified natural

environment of fairly large size.

Interaction between users is

very low, and evidence of other

users is minimal.

The area is managed to be

essentially free from evidence of

human-induced restrictions and

controls.

Motorized use is not permitted.

View of outside influence is

allowed.

Unmodified natural environment.

Interaction among users

nonexistent.

Evidence of other users is

minimal.

Managed to be free of evidence

of human control.

Motorized use not permitted.

Views of this area only of a

wilderness nature.

No view of outside development

within 10 km (6.2 miles).

Area is characterized by a

predominantly natural or naturalappearing environment.

Concentration of users is low to

moderate, and there is often

evidence of other users.

The area is managed in such a

way that minimum onsite controls

and restrictions may be present,

but are subtle.

Motorized use is permitted on

existing roads and tracks. In

addition, Game Capture is

allowed 500 m (547 yd) off any

roads or tracks but may not

damage any trees, plants, and so

forth.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 9

Densham and Conway Planning and Management of the Umfolozi Wilderness Area in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa:...

Permitted Activities

The limits on management and visitor-use activities are

set and described (table 4) for each of the wilderness opportunity zones to ensure that the quality of the wilderness

experience is maintained.

Wilderness Experience

Wilderness experiences are described and appropriate

management actions and visitor-use levels set for each zone.

This takes into consideration all wilderness-related activities and determines the zones into which each will be

allowed to occur (table 5). All management and visitor use

programs are subject to the following Ezemvelo KwaZuluNatal Wildlife’s integrated environmental management procedure and regular environmental audits:

• All proposed developments and any additions to infrastructure in and outside the park.

• All conservation management programs, such as game

capture and culling operations, alien plant eradication

programs, fire management, and resource harvesting.

• Improvements to existing flycamps in the wilderness

area or movement of these to new areas.

• New wilderness trail operations.

These programs are assessed as to their impact on the

wilderness resource and visitor experience. The Limits of

Acceptable Change process is used to set measurable standards for monitoring purposes.

Limits of Sophistication

Limits of sophistication on the type of facilities and equipment allowed in each of the wilderness zones are set so that

Land based

Viewing scenery.

Hiking and walking on

undemarcated routs is permitted.

Nature study.

No impact camping only

Water based

Canoeing is not permitted.

Swimming is permitted.

Administration

Horse patrols permitted but no

donkeys allowed.

Aircraft may only land in the

event of saving human life, or

due to black and white rhino

capture (for ecological reasons

only).

Aircraft (including helicopters)

are restricted to a minimum

altitude of 91 m (300 ft) for the

purpose of game census.

No chemical control of alien

plants.

Nonmanipulative research or

monitoring is permitted.

Controlled burning of vegetation

for ecological reasons is

permitted.

Viewing scenery.

Hiking and walking on

undemarcated routes is

permitted.

Tent camping is permitted at

nonpermanent sites and tents

must be backpacked in and out

Canoeing is not permitted.

Swimming is permitted.

Culling on foot (for ecological

reasons only). No live removal of

any indigenous fauna and flora

(except black rhino).

No impact monitoring. Horse

patrols are permitted.

Aircraft—as for Pristine zone.

No chemical control of alien

plants.

Nonmanipulative research or

monitoring is permitted.

Controlled burning of vegetation

for ecological reasons is

permitted.

Viewing scenery.

Hiking and walking.

Camping.

Canoeing is permitted.

Swimming is permitted.

Aircraft—as for Pristine zone.

Horse patrols are permitted.

Culling on foot (for ecological

reasons only). Law enforcement

must be affected on foot or

horseback.

No chemical control of alien

plants.

Nonmanipulative research or

monitoring is permitted.

Controlled burning of vegetation

for ecological reasons is

permitted.

Guided day walks from Rest

Camps and Bush Camps are

permitted.

Base camps for wildernessdependent recreation facilities

are permitted.

Camping at permanent and

regular tented camps is

permitted.

Canoeing is permitted.

Swimming is permitted.

Lion call-ups for research

purposes are permitted from any

of the four prescribed sites

(appendix 4).

Vehicle-based game capture and

culling only on existing roads and

tracks is permitted.

Law enforcement may be

affected on foot or horse back

with the use of vehicles on any

existing roads and tracks.

Chemical control of alien plants

allowed for specific species (see

Section 23.2)

Nonmanipulative research or

monitoring is permitted.

Controlled burning of vegetation

for ecological reasons is

permitted.

Table 4—Permitted activities (abbreviated).

Wilderness

Semiprimitive support zone

Pristine Primitive nonmotorized nonwilderness
10 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Densham and Conway Planning and Management of the Umfolozi Wilderness Area in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa:...

the quality of the wilderness experience is kept within

accepted norms. To preserve the qualities of the pristine zone,

no facilities are provided. In the semiprimitive zone, the type

of experience offered allows for some comfort (table 6).

Visitor Carrying Capacity

Visitor carrying capacity of the wilderness area is determined for each wilderness zone and trail operation sector.

This is to ensure that separate trail parties do not encounter

each other while in the wilderness, thus experiencing the

highest level of solitude possible.

Access Limitations

Points of entry into the wilderness area are determined by

management and are normally from the Ranger outposts,

the trails base camp, and the main camp at Mpila. However,

when the need arises, normally for law enforcement purposes, entry into the wilderness will be closest to the problem

area.

The flight paths for the KwaZulu-Wildlife’s fixed-wing

aircraft and the Game Capture team’s helicopter are set to

ensure that no unnecessary flights occur over the wilderness.

Table 5—Wilderness experience (abbreviated).

Wilderness

Semiprimitive support zone

Pristine Primitive nonmotorized nonwilderness

Total isolation from the sights

and sounds of humans,

independence, closeness to

nature, tranquillity, and selfreliance through the application of woodsman and outdoor

skills in an environment that

offers a high degree of

challenge and risk.

Extremely high probability of

experiencing isolation from the

sights and sounds of humans,

independence, closeness to

nature, tranquillity and selfreliance through the application of woodsman and outdoor

skills in an environment that

offers a high degree of challenge and risk.

High, but not extremely high,

probability of experiencing

isolation from the sights and

sounds of humans, independence, closeness to nature,

tranquillity, and self-reliance

through the application of

woodsman and outdoor skills

in an environment that offers

challenge and risk.

Low probability of

experiencing isolation from the

sights and sounds of humans,

independence, closeness to

nature, tranquillity, and selfreliance through the application of woodsman and outdoor

skills in an environment that

offers challenge and risk.

Opportunity to have a high

degree of interaction with the

natural environment.

Table 6—Limits of sophistication (abbreviated).

Wilderness

Semiprimitive support zone

Pristine Primitive nonmotorized nonwilderness

No sophisticated improvement

for the convenience of users

or managers that has short- or

long-term residual effect.

Fires are permitted.

No impact camping. Leave No

Trace ethics.

No pack animals are permitted

thoroughfare to semiprimitive

zone.

Accommodation—portable

tent.

Sleep—“bed roll.”

Toilet—trowel.

A self “pack it in—pack it out”

policy for all management and

recreational activities.

“No-trace” camping ethic will

be implemented to ensure that

every trace of human

presence is eliminated.

Users are to be self-reliant

and self-sufficient.

Accommodation—portable

tent.

Sleeping—“bed roll.”

Toilet—trowel.

Semipermanent movable

camps allowed (for example,

trail fly-camp).

Essential supplies and

equipment may be carried in

on pack animals.

Facilities provided for the

convenience and comfort of

users is restricted to the

minimum limit of

sophistication.

Accommodation—tent.

Sleeping—foam mattress.

Toilet—spade.

Permanent rustic camps, such

as trails base camps are

permissible, but must be

located within 1 km of the

boundary.

All visible building material

must be natural, for example,

reeds, thatch, timber, canvas.

Unnatural building materials,

for example, cement, must be

invisible.

Accommodation—portable

tents.

Sleeping—beds with

mattresses.

Toilet—water-borne sewerage

via conventional plumbing into

septic tank.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 11

Densham and Conway Planning and Management of the Umfolozi Wilderness Area in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa:...

No motorized vehicles are permitted to enter into the

wilderness except for emergency “casevac” operations, when

it is necessary to remove black or white rhino (fig. 4).

Helicopters are used to immobilize and airlift the animals

out of the wilderness area (fig. 5). This is considered to be the

“minimum tool” for this program, as the use of vehicles on

the ground can leave visible tracks for several years thus

detracting from the wilderness resource. While the capture

operations are being conducted, the trail operations are conducted in sectors well away from the capture areas (table 7).

Management of Fauna and Flora

Management of the park’s fauna and flora is naturalprocess based. These processes are allowed to operate with

minimum intervention. The impaired or absent processes

are simulated by appropriate management action and by

using the “minimum tool” principle.

The plan sets out how management of the important fauna

and flora components will be implemented. To illustrate

this, the methods of game censuring and removals, alien

plant eradication, fire management, and other conservation

related programs are described in detail. The results of all

these programs are evaluated at biannual wilderness management steering committee meetings. Should changes to

any of the programs be necessary, these are made to the

appropriate section soon after the meetings. In this way, the

plan is kept alive and relevant.

It is accepted that these actions will take longer to complete and be more expensive, and results from the monitoring programs will not have the desired confidence limits.

Since the inception of the wilderness management plan

these aspects have not resulted in any serious concerns.

Public Involvement

At the time when the plan was initially drawn up, it was

required to involve the public in the process. However, the

plan is now steered by a Wilderness Management Steering

Committee that meets biannually. The committee membership is comprised of the relevant regional and park management staff, as well as members from the public. With the

recent formation of a Local Board for the Park, a member of

this Board will also sit on the Committee.

The task of this committee is to ensure that management

and visitor use of the Umfolozi Wilderness Area is in accordance with the plan and that the wilderness experience for

the visitor is maintained.

Conclusions____________________

The Umfolozi Wilderness Management Plan is the first

dedicated document that clearly sets out management philosophy and procedures. Since its inception in September

1995, it has been successfully used to conserve the wilderness resource in the Umfolozi Wilderness Area. This model

is being used as a reference document in the drawing up of

wilderness management plans for the wilderness areas in

the Greater St. Lucia Wetland Park and the UkhahlambaDrakensberg Mountain Park World Heritage Sites, the

Namibian Waterberg Plateau Park, and the proposed wilderness area in the Shamwari Private Game Reserve. It will

also serve as a useful model for the preparation of similar

plans for other existing and candidate wilderness areas in

South Africa and other African States.

Figure 4—Preparing an immobilized white rhino for

airlift out of the Wilderness Area.

Figure 5—Airlifting rhino out of the Wilderness

Area.
12 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Densham and Conway Planning and Management of the Umfolozi Wilderness Area in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa:...

Table 7—Access limits (abbreviated).

Wilderness

Semiprimitive support zone

Type Pristine Primitive nonmotorized nonwilderness

Motorized

Helicopter and fixedwing (flights)

Helicopter landing

No

If for administrative

reasons involving game

population monitoring,

must be above 91 m

(300 ft).

If in transit, must be

above 610 m (2,000 ft).

For administrative

reasons involving the

capture of black and

white rhino.

For casevacs.

No

If for administrative

reasons involving game

population monitoring,

must be above 91 m

(300 ft).

If in transit, must be

above 610 m (2,000 ft)

including the Game

Capture helicopter.

For capture of game

only, no limit for

helicopter.

For administrative

reasons involving the

capture of black and

white rhino.

For casevacs.

No

If for administrative

reasons involving game

population monitoring,

must be above 91 m

(300 ft).

If in transit, must be

above 610 m (2,000 ft)

including the Game

Capture helicopter.

For capture of game

only, no limit for

helicopter.

For administrative

reasons involving the

capture of black and

white rhino.

For casevacs.

Casevac

Access to base camp

and administrative

structures, including

fence line for

management purposes

(except trig. beacons).

If for administrative

reasons involving game

population monitoring,

must be above 91 m

(300 ft).

If in transit, must be

above 610 m (2,000 ft)

including the Game

Capture helicopter.

For capture of game

only, no limit for

helicopter.

For administrative

reasons involving the

capture of black and

white rhino.

For casevacs.

References _____________________

Bainbridge, W. R. 1984. Management objectives and goals for wilderness areas: wilderness area as a conservation category. In: Martin,

Vance; Inglis, Mary, eds. Wilderness: the way ahead. Middleton,

WI: Lorian Press: 114–124.

Conway, A. J.; Anderson, A. G.; Maddock, A. H. 2000. HluhluweUmfolozi Park: the management plan for the Umfolozi Wilderness.

Unpublished Report of the KwaZulu-Natal Wildlife Service,

KwaZulu-Natal, Republic of South Africa. 75 p.

Densham, W. D. 1999. Wilderness management in KwaZulu-Natal.

In: Cooper, T. G., ed. Proceedings of the wilderness management

symposium; 1996 June; Waterberg Plateau Park, Namibia:

100–105.

Hendee, J. C.; Stankey, G. H.; Lucas, R. C. 1990. Wilderness management. International Wilderness Leadership Foundation. Golden,

CO: North American Press/Fulcrum Publishing. 546 p.

Krumpe, E.; Bloedel, Edmund, Jr.; Briggle, William J.; LaMoure,

Buster; Menning, Edgar P.; O’Donnell, James E.; Porter, David E.;

Stark, Nellie; Tuchmann, E. Thomas. 1986. Wilderness management. Report of the Society of American Foresters’ Wilderness

Management Task Force. Society of American Foresters Resource Policy Series: 89-07 & 018-117.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 13

N. Guy Palmer is a Control Nature Conservator, Scientific Services,

Western Cape Nature Conservation Board, Jonkershoek, Private Bag X5014,

Stellenbosch, 7599, South Africa. Fax: 021 8891523, E-mail: palmerg@cncjnk.

wcape.gov.za. Maretha E. Shroyer is an Independent Natural Resource

Researcher, 2 Chudleigh Court, Carstens Street, Tamboerskloof, Cape Town,

8001, South Africa. Fax: 27 21 4262746, E-mail: shroyer@iafrica.com. Nigel

Wessels is a Reserve Manager, Western Cape Nature Conservation Board,

Private Bag X6517, George, 6530, South Africa. Fax: 044 8707138, E-mail:

outenr@mweb.co.za

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—The Western Cape Province of South Africa has an

extraordinarily rich biodiversity. Besides containing the majority of

the Cape Floral Kingdom (CFK), it also includes significant portions

of the Karoo Succulent and the Thicket Biomes. The primary goal of

nature conservation is the maintenance of biodiversity. This can

only be achieved through collaborative holistic planning and cooperation. The Cape Action Plan for the Environment is in the process

of achieving this. This plan is supported by several other initiatives

including nomination for World Heritage Site status for the CFK.

Due to ever-increasing development pressures it is essential to

have the necessary planning principles and plans in place to prevent

unwise utilization of resources. The Western Cape Nature Conservation Board’s wilderness policy revision is part of the broad

planning initiative to balance wilderness and infrastructure. The

various aspects that relate to wilderness qualities are discussed and

placed in context with the overall objective to protect the core conservation areas by encouraging appropriate peripheral development.

Introduction ____________________

The Western Cape Province of South Africa is extremely

rich in terrestrial and marine biodiversity and contains the

greater part of the Cape Floral Kingdom (CFK), one of six

floral kingdoms in the world. Covering less than 0.04 percent

of the Earth’s land surface, the CFK, for its size, is unrivaled

in global terms for its extraordinary diversity of species.

Some 9,000 species of plants occur here. Of these, 6,000 are

endemic (Goldblatt and Manning 2000). The invertebrates,

although at this stage not as well studied, appear to rival the

plants when it comes to levels of endemism. The CFK has

been identified by Mittermeier and others (1998) as one of 25

global biodiversity hotspots. The adjacent Succulent Karoo

Wilderness Conservation in the Western

Cape Province, South Africa: Where We

Are Going

N. Guy Palmer

Maretha E. Shroyer

Nigel Wessels

is also identified by these authors as a biodiversity hotspot

of global importance.

The organisms inhabiting the oceans (Atlantic to the west

and Indian to the south and east) are as important from a

biological perspective as the terrestrial plants and animals.

The presence and interaction of cold and warm sea masses

have brought about a high degree of marine biological

diversity and endemism; for example, 11,000 marine animals have been recorded along the South African shores,

with 3,500 being endemic (Griffiths and Prochazka 2000).

Threats to the future of this unique area come from the

spread of invasive alien plants and fish, expanding agriculture and urbanization, pollution and overextraction of water, overexploitation of specific marine and terrestrial species, and soil erosion. As a consequence of these threats, over

1,400 Western Cape plant species are listed in the Red Data

Book, the highest known concentration of such species in the

world (Cowling and Hilton-Taylor 1994). Several heavily

exploited marine species, such as linefish and abalone, have

declined to dangerously low levels (Griffiths and Prochazka

2000). Of the 19 freshwater fish species indigenous to the

CFK, 14 are threatened, including 12 which are endangered.

As with the flora, there is high level of endemicity in the fish

fauna, 16 of the 19 species being reliant on effective conservation of the region for their survival (Impson and others

1999).

Protected Areas and Major

Conservation Planning

Initiatives ______________________

The Western Cape Nature Conservation Board (WCNCB)

manages an area of 677,000 hectares (1.6729e+06 acres),

comprising Å 100 properties/land “parcels,” forming the

provincial nature reserves, plus 38,000 ha (93,900 acres)

comprising marine reserves. This includes four Wilderness

Areas with a total area of 116,000 hectares (286,642 acres).

These are Cederberg, Groot Winterhoek, Boosmanbos, and

Doringrivier. In the Western Cape, there are also six national parks managed by South African National Parks

(SANParks), with a total area of 87,000 hectares (214,982

acres), plus 53,000 hectares (130,966 acres) represented by

marine reserves. There are nine marine reserves with a

combined area of 91,000 hectares (224,866 acres). The

Department of Water Affairs and Forestry is also responsible for nearly 40,000 hectares (98,842 acres) of Indigenous Forest Reserves in the Southern Cape. In addition to
14 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Palmer, Shroyer, and Wessels Wilderness Conservation in the Western Cape Province, South Africa: Where We Are Going

conservation-worthy land managed by national and provincial authorities, there are also private and local authority

nature reserves comprising 138,000 hectares (341,005 acres).

There are also several initiatives that enhance the conservation status of mainly private land. These are, among others,

two proclaimed biosphere reserves, and many conservancies, declared mountain catchment areas, and natural heritage sites. The area involved in these initiatives is over

1,074,000 hectares (2.65391e+06 acres), and is increasing

steadily. The combined total for formally and informally

protected areas, within the Western Cape, stands at the

moment at over two million hectares (4.94211e+06 acres),

approximately 15 percent of the land surface.

Cape Action Plan for the

Environment ___________________

During 1999, the Cape Action Plan for the Environment

(CAPE) was initiated with funding supplied by the Global

Environment Facility. Through a participatory process,

CAPE has produced a strategy and action plan. The overall

objective of the strategy is to secure the conservation of the

biodiversity of the Cape Floral Kingdom, and through this to

deliver economic benefits. The strategy comprises three

components: (1) conserving biodiversity, (2) promoting sustainable use, and (3) strengthening institutions.

Specific objectives include:

• The establishment of an effective reserve network, the

enhancement of offreserve conservation, and support

for bioregional planning.

• The development of methods to ensure sustainable

yields, the promotion of compliance with laws, the

integration of biodiversity concerns with catchment

management, and the promotion of sustainable naturebased tourism.

• The strengthening of institutions, policies, and laws;

the enhancement of cooperative governance and community participation; and the support of continued

research.

These components are integrated into a single, comprehensive, multifaceted action plan, with priorities clearly

identified. The CAPE strategy is aligned with the priorities

of the South African government, which has committed

significant counterpart funding to the program. The key

executing agencies that will be responsible for the implementation have drawn up an agreement to ensure effective

coordination of the program, and have identified the WCNCB

as the lead agency for CAPE (Younge and Ashwell 2000).

During the process, many projects were identified that are

essential to the realization of the aims of CAPE. One that is

central to the achievement of these objectives is the Conservation Planning Unit (CPU). This unit will develop an

accessible, current, and reliable decision-support system,

which will make inputs into bioregional planning and Integrated Development Planning. Using Pressey’s (1999) Conservation Plan, it will also have the ability to assist in the

decisionmaking process when evaluating options relating to

land use or acquisition. Some of the other projects identified

that will feed information into the CPU are those looking at

remnants of formerly extensive and diverse vegetation types.

There is also a program looking specifically at the rivers,

their functioning, and associated organisms.

A charismatic concept that was given an identity during

the CAPE process, when the term was coined, is the establishment of mega reserves. The process had already been

initiated several years previously; the original concept,

however, having been put forward by Burgers (1990) with

the objective being to create conservation areas large enough

to ensure that ecological, biological, and evolutionary processes can continue.

The three areas involved are (1) the Olifants River,

Cederberg, Tankwa Karoo region; (2) the Gouritz River; and

(3) in the Klein Karoo region, the greater Baviaanskloof

conservation area. The lead agent for the first two areas is

WCNCB, and the Eastern Cape Department of Economic

Affairs, Environment and Tourism (ECDEAET) is the lead

agent for the third.

The proposed Cederberg Tankwa Karoo mega reserve lies

primarily in the winter rainfall zone of the CFK, spans a

west-east gradient from coastal lowlands through moist

mountain fynbos to semidesert conditions, and is drained by

the Olifants River system. It also includes the northern

extremity of the CFK. The process whereby WCNCB has

facilitated the creation of a series of conservancies surrounding the wilderness area is well advanced. An additional

provincial nature reserve, the Matjies River Nature Reserve, has been created with the financial assistance of the

World Wildlife Fund of South Africa (WWFSA). Several

private nature reserves and a natural heritage site have

been declared, which has led to the proposal to create a

biosphere reserve, with the Cederberg Wilderness Area (WA)

forming the core. The planning for this is well advanced.

The proposed Gouritz mega reserve spans a long northsouth environmental gradient from the arid Nama Karoo

over the mountains to the moist coastal lowlands in the

south, including representative portions of 14 of the 120

Broad Habitat Units (Cowling and Heijnis 2000). Substantial portions of land, especially in the foothills and valley

basins of this area, are privately owned, and currently there

is a danger that inappropriate land use options could compromise both conservation and tourism. WCNCB initiatives

in this area include the extension of two of the provincial

nature reserves (Anysberg and Rooiberg Nature Reserves)—

again with the financial assistance of WWF SA, the creation

of conservancies, and the proclamation of private nature

reserves. The essential process of “selling” the idea to the

local communities is well underway.

The proposed Baviaanskloof mega reserve, with ECDEAET

as the lead agency, represents the eastern portion of the CFK

and includes important moisture, altitudinal, and longitudinal gradients. This area has of late received much attention

(Boshoff and others 2000) that mirrors the objectives of

CAPE. This has resulted in the drafting of a Memorandum

of Understanding to be entered into by the relevant national

and Eastern Cape provincial departments. The object of this

exercise is to facilitate cooperation to ensure wise development and utilization of this vast and relatively unspoiled

area.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 15

Wilderness Conservation in the Western Cape Province, South Africa: Where We Are Going Palmer, Shroyer, and Wessels

World Heritage Site Nomination

The WCNCB and SanParks are at present in the final

stages of the preparation of a nomination to be submitted to

the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural

Organization (UNESCO) for World Heritage Site status for

a series of sites representing the CFK. This process has been

divided into two phases. The first is the responsibility of

SanParks and deals with the Cape Peninsula National Park

nomination. The second phase is managed by WCNCB and

comprises seven nominated sites. Three of these sites are

formally proclaimed wilderness areas, namely, Cederberg

(64,000 ha or 158,147 acres), Grootwinterhoek (26,000 ha or

64,247 acres), and Boosmansbos (15,000 ha or 37,066 acres)

Wilderness Areas. De Hoop Nature Reserve (32,000 ha or

79,074 acres) and Swartberg (112,000 ha or 276,758 acres),

consisting of Gamkaskloof Nature Reserve, and Groot

Swartberg and Swartberg East State Forests, represent the

fourth and fifth sites. The sixth site is referred to as the

Hottentots Holland Complex (113,000 ha or 279,229 acres)

and is made up of four management areas, namely, Limietberg, Jonkershoek, Hottentots Holland, and Kogelberg Nature Reserves, mostly representing State Forests. The latter

forms the core of the Kogelberg Biosphere Reserve, the first

to be proclaimed in South Africa. These six sites are all

managed by WCNCB.

The seventh site is the Baviaanskloof, the majority of

which falls in the Eastern Cape, and is effectively the

responsibility of the ECDEAET. These sites were selected

and nominated because their attributes complied with two

of the four criteria laid down by UNESCO for natural sites,

namely:

• Outstanding example representing significant ongoing

ecological and biological processes and evolution.

• The most important and significant natural habitats for

the in situ conservation of biological diversity.

These nominations have several objectives, of which the

first is to secure an enhanced status and international

recognition for some of our prime conservation areas. This

enhanced status will assist the various current initiatives

taking place around these sites. These initiatives take many

forms, including the establishment of conservancies, private

nature reserves, and biosphere reserves, which act as buffers and corridors, or improve the conservation status of

altitudinal gradients and, in some cases, rectify impractical

or ecologically inappropriate reserve boundaries. It is believed that these efforts will lead to the increased awareness

and appreciation of the value of the biodiversity and the

benefits of being associated with core nature conservation

areas.

Current Position Regarding

WCNCB’s Management of

Wilderness _____________________

The Western Cape Nature Conservation Board (WCNCB)

manages the only four officially designated wilderness areas

in the Western Cape Province of South Africa. The wilderness areas were proclaimed under the Forest Act of 1971,

and the management policy for these areas has remained

unchanged since its formulation in 1972. Wilderness management, although not a key focus area, forms part of the

overall management strategy of WCNCB within the following parameters—namely the mission statement:

The conservation of the Western Cape’s unique natural

heritage in partnership with all its people, for the welfare,

advantage and enjoyment of present and future generations

and the so-called vision statement:

We strive to become a world leader in conservation. We aim

to instill in all our people a deep sense of ownership and pride

in our unique natural heritage and a realisation of its intrinsic and economic value.

Nature-based tourism has been identified as one of the key

economic activities that can be developed (Younge and

Ashwell 2000), and the WCNCB is constantly being pressured to provide recreational opportunities that correspond

with the goals of biodiversity conservation, while also generating economic returns and creating jobs. If not well planned,

managed, and monitored, a “push factor” for sustainable

development in conservation areas could have detrimental

effects for proclaimed and candidate wilderness areas. The

management challenges that the WCNCB faces include the

following needs:

• To undertake an audit of reserves and adjacent land

(where relevant) to identify and map areas with high

wilderness qualities that could be proclaimed as wilderness areas.

• To decide what recreational activities may be allowed in

proclaimed and candidate wilderness areas, both on

land and sea.

• To manage diverse types of adventure and ecotourism

activities over large geographical areas.

• To obtain adequate funding for the maintenance of

wilderness qualities in wilderness areas;.

• To involve communities in wilderness management

with tangible benefits to local people.

• To promote the wilderness concept among local landowners whose lands include protection-worthy wilderness, particularly where nonwilderness activities represent potentially higher financial returns.

• To promote the wilderness concept with the public,

drawing attention to, among others, the importance of

wilderness areas as primary water catchments.

Key Questions __________________

The WCNCB needs to evaluate, candidly, its present

contribution to the wilderness cause. In this respect, the

following questions are relevant:

Are our officially proclaimed wilderness areas (WAs)

offering genuine high quality wilderness experiences?

At present, the answer would generally be negative. This is

because our management has not been sufficiently dynamic

and because some of the wilderness areas, or portions

thereof, did not fully qualify as wilderness at the time of

proclamation. The vast majority of people visiting the wilderness areas come away still not understanding the difference

between wilderness areas and other conservation areas.

This is mainly because of a lack of effective marketing and
16 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Palmer, Shroyer, and Wessels Wilderness Conservation in the Western Cape Province, South Africa: Where We Are Going

education and very little difference between the management of WAs and other reserves. This should not be seen as

an entirely negative factor, since the levels of manipulative

management and development are generally low.

What are our moral obligations to the public with

regard to providing opportunities to enjoy wilderness experiences? The implication that our wilderness

areas should generate more income by marketing them as

normal hiking trails, where the overnight shelters are upgraded, where the routes are more regulated, and where

group sizes and numbers are increased, could mean that any

ability to offer wilderness experiences would effectively be

impinged upon. Although it can be argued that we may not

be doing the wilderness cause justice at present, we still

have an enormous moral responsibility to provide the people

with the opportunity to enjoy genuine wilderness experiences. At present, the public may be relatively “spoilt” in

respect of opportunities for wilderness recreation, but future

generations, in a progressively more sophisticated technological society, will probably not be as fortunate. One only

needs to consider the demand for wilderness and professionalism in wilderness management in North America to realize

how important wilderness areas have become in more developed countries.

How then are we, as a management organization,

going to do justice to the wilderness movement? A

more professional and dynamic approach to wilderness

management needs to be adopted.

The Way Forward for Wilderness in

the Western Cape _______________

We see the way forward as being a three-step process.

First, an inventory of the remaining wilderness resources in

the Western Cape, including those areas officially proclaimed and those having such potential, is needed. The

existing wilderness areas must be zoned according to the

Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) and the Wilderness

Opportunity Spectrum (WOS), and the candidate areas

should, where feasible, be given formal status. Secondly,

certain decisions that have yet to be taken after more than

two decades (with regard to, for example, the roads and huts)

must be taken and implemented. Thirdly, we need to educate the public and market the wilderness experience, not

only as a means of generating income, but as a means of

fostering support for the conservation of wilderness areas in

perpetuity.

Step 1: Inventory of Wilderness Quality in

the Western Cape

An inventory of the wilderness resource in the Western

Cape is the first step that needs to be taken in the process of

bringing the WCNCB’s wilderness management up to the

highest possible standard. This exercise could be similar to

the approach taken by the Australian Heritage Commission

(The National Wilderness Inventory Programme), and by the

U.S. Forest Service (Roadless Area Review and Evaluation)

(Roggenbuck and others 1990), where wilderness quality across

each of these countries was mapped using wilderness “indicators,” such as the following:

• Remoteness from settlements—how remote an area

is from the nearest house, hamlet, or town.

• Remoteness from access—how remote an area is

from established roads or tracks.

• Apparent naturalness—the degree to which an area

is free of all human modifications, including fences,

power lines, telephone lines, and radio towers. This

indicator must also include visual isolation from any

landscape that has been modified by humans.

• Biophysical naturalness—the degree to which an

area’s original plant and animal communities have

been disturbed by humans.

These inventories are used primarily to identify whether

areas should be given formal wilderness status, as well as to

predict the potential effects on the wilderness resource of

proposed peripheral developments. The benefits of a similar

inventory for WCNCB are obvious. All conservation areas

managed by the WCNCB, including private mountain catchment areas, should be evaluated and mapped using a Geographic Information System. The database must not only be

regional in nature, but must incorporate fine-scale mapping

of the potential zones (according to WOS) within each wilderness area and potential wilderness areas.

Many of the WCNCB existing conservation areas contain

potential wilderness areas. Most of these reserves have

wilderness zones that are clearly demarcated in their management plans. There have, however, been no efforts to

identify further candidate wilderness areas, and there is the

risk that they may be lost, due to inappropriate developments, before this exercise is undertaken. As an example,

Burgers (1990) pointed out that the De Hoop Nature Reserve

has probably the only coastal wilderness area in the southwestern Cape, but should tourist facilities be developed in

this area, then the wilderness character would be lost—a

prediction that has sadly come true.

Step 2: Addressing the Current Conflict

Points in Our Wilderness Areas

Several issues need to be addressed as a matter of urgency.

• Set limits of acceptable impacts through spatial

and temporal zonation—Prescriptions in respect to

recreational use in the wilderness areas managed by the

WCNCB, number of visitors per day, maximum group

size, and zonation were laid down at the time of the

proclamation of these wilderness areas. These prescriptions were based on the intuition of managers involved

in the management of these areas at that time. The

usage patterns and intensity have, however, increased,

and the appropriateness of these prescriptions with

regard to their impact on the wilderness resource urgently needs to be reassessed. While accepting that

recreational impacts are inevitable, we nevertheless

need to assess whether the wilderness experience is

being unacceptably detracted from. We therefore need

to incorporate elements of the LAC process into the

management of our wildernesses. This is particularly

relevant in the Cederberg Wilderness Area where there
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 17

Wilderness Conservation in the Western Cape Province, South Africa: Where We Are Going Palmer, Shroyer, and Wessels

are areas that experience excessive visitation by day

and weekend hikers. At present, 50 persons per block

per day are allowed, but this use is concentrated in

specific areas. Somehow we need to dissipate use, to

lessen intergroup contact, as well as to relieve pressures

on popular overnight areas. This obviously has to be

done without being too restrictive. The WOS zoning

concept should therefore be implemented. The objective

should be to rehabilitate degraded areas as well as to

preserve the remaining pristine zones.

• Closure and rehabilitation of management roads—

There are management roads in all four of the WCNCB

wilderness areas. Although these roads prove useful to

management for fighting wildfires, alien invasive control operations, footpath maintenance, and other management tasks, these tracks compromise the integrity of

our wilderness areas. The decision should be taken to

close them off and to rehabilitate if necessary and where

feasible.

• Overnight shelters—The old huts in the Cederberg,

Boosmansbos, and Groot Winterhoek Wilderness Areas

are not only a contradiction of the wilderness concept,

but it is their presence that has led to certain routes

being marketed as “weekend trails” in popular hiking

books. This has led to the concentration of users along

certain routes and at the sites of the huts, resulting in

excessive intergroup contact and to impacts such as

trampling of vegetation and much evidence of human

waste. The naturalness and solitude of the wilderness is

severely impinged upon, and the wilderness experience

subsequently lost. The argument that these huts are

useful for emergencies, such as during storms and

severe cold, is not compelling because personal risk and

challenge associated with adverse weather conditions

are appropriate features of the wilderness setting, and

it is neither practical nor desirable to eliminate such

risks.

• Footpaths—Four issues need to be discussed under

this subject: (1) existing, poorly planned, or constructed

footpaths; (2) footpaths that are seldom used; (3) the

existence of impromptu footpaths along strong desire

lines; and (4) the need for new paths. Surveys, in the

form of a mapping exercise, should therefore be conducted in each wilderness area to determine the status

of existing footpaths in terms of their ecological and

visual impacts, popularity of individual routes, presence of impromptu footpaths, and “unexplored” areas.

This exercise could be seen as part of the LAC process.

• Define permissible activities in wilderness areas—Wilderness Areas in the United States generally

only allow hiking, horseback riding, climbing, canoeing,

and overnight camping. However, “nonconforming uses”

are also allowed, such as mining, grazing of livestock,

hunting, and fishing. These activities, especially mining and grazing, from a South African viewpoint appear

to be a complete contradiction of the wilderness concept,

but the issue is unique to the United States (Hendee 1990).

Wilderness uses have been defined as ranging from:

– Wilderness-dependent uses—long distance backpacking, traditional rockclimbing, canoeing, primitive camping opportunities, scientific observation,

and some fishing and hunting.

– Wilderness-associated uses—short day hikes,

sport-climbing, picnicking, fishing; hunting; and

observation of nature and scenery.

– Wilderness-independent uses—mining, grazing

of livestock, competitive events, and fishing for

stocked fish.

The demands on the wilderness resource in the Western

Cape will undoubtedly intensify over time, and there

are likely to be requests for types of recreation that may

be incompatible with the wilderness concept. What

types of recreation must we then define as wilderness

dependent? What will our argument against horses,

hunting, and fishing be, for example, when these activities are allowed in American Wilderness Areas? An

example of such a request has been made from the sportclimbing fraternity that asked for the designation of a

sport-climbing area in the Rocklands area of the

Cederberg Wilderness Area. Potentially, this activity

could generate much income because the area is internationally renowned. How puristic can we afford to be

when the area in question is not visually isolated from

roads and agricultural landscapes?

• Toilets—There are valid arguments for and against the

provision of toilets in our wilderness areas, especially at

popular overnight sites. They have the advantage of

discouraging users from defecating over a wide area.

This is problematic because toilet paper is often not

properly covered and, consequently, because of the

large number of visitors, there is often much evidence of

previous visitation. There is also the risk of water

pollution, with the provision of water being one of the

more important social benefits frequently attributed to

Western Cape Wilderness Areas. Toilets, however, no

matter how primitive, are manmade structures and

therefore represent a civilizing influence. They are also

usually obtrusive and have a limited life span.

• Degraded areas—Here the minimum tool approach

must be used with respect to the equipment, material,

and techniques used in the rehabilitation process, as

well as the control of visitor use—by way of restricting

numbers or dissipating use, to the closure of routes and

campsites. Every proposed rehabilitation project must

first be scrutinized to determine its necessity before

implementation. The use of natural materials instead of

artificial products such as cement, net, and gabions,must

be preferred where practical. Degraded areas include

old quarries and sites of gully erosion along footpaths

and jeep tracks.

• Fire management—This is another complicating issue, but ideally a natural ignition fire management

strategy should be implemented in wilderness areas, or

at the very least, a strategy of adaptive interference.

The basic objective is to maintain the natural role of fire

in the wilderness ecosystem consistent with the safety

of persons, property, and other resources. The use of

firebelts and block burns in wilderness areas should be

avoided.

• Exotic trees—All exotic trees, even those deemed to

have sentimental value, should be removed, as they are

incompatible with the wilderness concept. In addition,

priority should be given to the control of alien, invasive
18 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Palmer, Shroyer, and Wessels Wilderness Conservation in the Western Cape Province, South Africa: Where We Are Going

trees in wilderness areas above those in areas of lesser

conservation status.

Step 3: Education and Communication

The Leave No Trace (LNT) concept revolves around educating wilderness visitors, prior to their entering wilderness

areas, in outdoor skills and ethics. The emphasis is on lowimpact or no-trace hiking and camping skills that reduce

trampling, multiple trailing, shortcutting across switchbacks,

littering, and other physical impacts. The principles of “pack

it in, pack it out” and “properly dispose of what you cannot

pack out” are central to the concept. It also addresses social

impacts related to trail etiquette and consideration of other

users seeking silence and solitude.

The motivation for the appointment of a wilderness officer

is to appoint a person who is dedicated to leading wilderness

trails, educating the public, monitoring ecological and social

conditions within wilderness areas, acting as a liaison with

other wilderness authorities and NGO’s, keeping abreast of

international wilderness management trends, and training

staff.

As a means of fostering and encouraging public support for

our wilderness areas, as well as generating income, trails

similar to those run by the Wilderness Leadership School,

the South African National Parks Board, and the KwaZuluNatal Nature Conservation Services should be organized in

our wilderness areas. It will be important to accommodate

political and community leaders as a means of lobbying for

the wilderness cause, while also targeting corporate leaders

for financial support. The wilderness officer will be responsible for organizing and leading these trails.

Our communications section could mount a “Wilderness

Appreciation” campaign, which would educate the public in

respect to what wilderness is; what its social benefits are; the

principles of the LNT concept; as well as marketing our

wilderness areas as places where personal risks and challenges

associated with remote, isolated landscapes, rough terrain, and

adverse weather conditions can still be experienced.

Proposed Policy for Managing

Wilderness Resources ___________

The Western Cape Nature Conservation Board, recognizing that:

• Wilderness is the most remote and pristine setting on

the continuum of landscape settings.

• The wilderness experience is a distinct psychological

resource, which offers incomparable opportunities

for character building, stress therapy, and spiritual

communion.

• Naturalness and solitude are the two key conditions of

true wilderness.

and realizing that:

• Freedom of movement and spontaneity, together with

personal risk and challenge associated with remote,

isolated landscapes, adverse weather conditions, and

physical features, are appropriate features of the wilderness setting.

• There is an enormous moral obligation to provide the

people of South Africa with the opportunity to benefit

from a true wilderness experience.

undertakes to:

• Actively seek to identify the de facto remaining wilderness areas in the Western Cape and pursue statutory

protection for them.

• Incorporate the fundamental principles of the wilderness concept into the management of all our wilderness

areas.

• Involve the public in the development and implementation of wilderness management plans.

• Base the management of our wilderness areas on the

Limits of Acceptable Change planning framework.

• Remove all infrastructure, where possible, from the

wilderness areas.

• Only permit wilderness-dependent recreation in the

wilderness areas.

• Use the minimum tool approach in respect to management activities and visitor control.

• Where practical, practice the natural ignition fire management system in the wilderness areas.

• Remove all exotic trees from wilderness areas.

• Educate the public in terms of the principles associated

with the “Leave No Trace” concept.

• Promote support for wilderness through the organization of trails for political and corporate leaders.

Conclusion_____________________

The primary objective of all these initiatives is the maintenance of the biodiversity in the Western Cape Province,

including the CFK, succulent Karoo, and thicket biomes.

There are, however, several other extremely important

reasons for these plans. Due to ever-increasing development

pressures, it is essential to have the necessary planning

principles and plans in place to prevent unwise utilization of

resources. For these plans to be effective, they have to be the

product of a collaborative process; CAPE is such a process,

where all interested and affected parties have participated

and political support has been obtained. The conservation

bodies are, however, under continual pressure to generate

funds, and the temptation to undertake inappropriate development, for the sake of fund generation, must be guarded

against. It is believed that the CAPE process, along with the

planning and legislation already in place, will go a long way

toward the achievement of these goals. It is felt, however,

that the revised wilderness policy will contribute significantly toward the maintenance and enhancement of not only

proclaimed wilderness areas, but all conservation areas for

the simple reason that the principles and guidelines set out

in the policy will be equally applicable to these areas.

These principles and guidelines must be used to ensure

that the wide diversity of nature-based opportunities are

recognized and wisely exploited. The objectives are numerous,

but possibly the most important would be to raise the level of

awareness of the diversity of the area, and its value, if wisely

managed, to the local communities. The underlying principle

guiding wilderness management should always be to protect

the core conservation areas by encouraging appropriate
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 19

Wilderness Conservation in the Western Cape Province, South Africa: Where We Are Going Palmer, Shroyer, and Wessels

peripheral development. The LAC process will be critical to

the achievement of the desired state of the environment.

Finally, the answer to the question on where we are going

is that the WCNCB supports wilderness. We are involved in

a range of projects, have formed various partnerships toward expanding conservation land, and have also revised

our wilderness policy. Hopefully, we will contribute to the

concept of “Keeping Wilderness Wild” in the Western Cape,

one of the most biodiverse places on earth.

Acknowledgments ______________

We would like to thank the Scientific Services staff of

WCNCB, in particular, Riki de Villiers, Therese Kollmann,

Ernst Baard, Sulet Gildenhuys, Peter Lloyd, and Chris

Burgers for much appreciated assistance. We would also like

to acknowledge the contributions of the Wilderness Policy

Working Group, Fanie Bekker, Jaco Rheeder, Pierre van den

Berg, Mark Johns, Charl du Plessis, and Marius Brand, to

the revision of the policy.

References _____________________

Boshoff, A. F.; Cowling, R. M.; Kerley, G. I. H. 2000. The Baviaanskloof

Conservation Area: a conservation and tourism development

priority. University of Port Elizabeth, Terrestrial Ecological

Research Unit. 51 p.

Burgers, C. J. 1990. ‘n Voorstel vir ‘n benadering tot die bepaling van

‘n optimale stelsel van bewaringsgebiede in die fynbos bioom [A

proposal for an approach to the determination of an optimal

system of conserved areas in the fynbos biome]. Unpublished

report to the working group for region A1 of the S.A. Plan for

Nature Conservation. Cape Town: CDNEC. 20 p.

Cowling, R. M.; Heijnis, C. J. 2000. Broad habitat units as biodiversity entities for conservation planning in the Cape Floristic

Region. South African Journal of Botany. 1: 31–52.

Cowling, R. M.; Hilton-Taylor, C. 1994. Patterns of plant diversity

and endemism in Southern Africa: an overview. In: Huntley, B. J.

Botanical diversity in Southern Africa. National Botanical Institute, Pretoria. Strelitzia. 1: 31–52.

Forest Act. 1971. Act no. 122 of 1984. Government Gazette No. 9380

of 29 August 1984: 21–22.

Goldblatt, P.; Manning, J. 2000. Cape plants: a conspectus of the

Cape Flora of South Africa. Strelitzia. 9: 16.

Griffiths, C.; Prochazka, K. 2000. Cape action plan for the environment. University of Cape Town, Zoology Department and Marine

Biology Research Institute. 12 p.

Hendee, J. C. 1990. Principles of wilderness management. In:

Hendee, J. C.; Stankey, G. H.; Lucas, R. C. Wilderness Management. Chapter seven. Golden, CO: Fulcrum Publishing: 181–192.

Impson, N. D.; Bills, I. R.; Cambray, J. A.; le Roux, A. 1999. The

primary freshwater fishes of the Cape Floristic Region: conservation needs for a unique and highly threatened fauna. Western

Cape Nature Conservation Board, Internal Report for CAPE

[Cape Action Plan for the Environment].

Mittermeier, R. A.; Myers, N.; Thomsen, J. B.; da Fonseca, G. A. B.;

Olivieri, S. 1998. Biodiversity hotspots and major tropical wildernesses: approaches to setting conservation priorities. Conservation Biology. 12: 516–520.

Pressey, R. L. 1999. Applications of irreplaceability analysis to

planning and management. Parks. 9: 42–51.

Roggenbuck, J. W.; Stankey, G. H.; Roth, D. M. 1990. The Wilderness classification process. In: Hendee, J. C., Stankey, G. H.;

Lucas. R. C., eds. Wilderness management. Chapter 5. Golden,

CO: Fulcrum Publishing: 123–156.

Younge, A.; Ashwell, A., eds. 2000. Cape action plan for the environment summary report. World Wildlife Fund/South Africa:

Stellenbosch: 38–43.
20 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

William R. Bainbridge is an Environmental Consultant and a Director of

the Wilderness Action Group, 314 Alexandra Road, Pietermaritzburg, 3201

South Africa. E-mail: wrbainbr@iafrica.com

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—The Ukhahlamba-Drakensberg Park is one of the most

important high altitude protected areas in Southern Africa. It

consists of four designated wilderness areas (including the first

wilderness area to be legally designated in the country), which make

up about 48 percent of the park’s total area. The park was recently

added to the World Heritage List, as both a Natural and a Cultural

Site. The KwaZulu-Natal Town and Regional Planning Commission

has implemented an investigation to determine whether there is a

need to protect the natural beauty and high scenic values in private

and communal land in the peripheries of the park, in view of its

value for present and potential future tourism development. A

planning project was undertaken that recommended a zoning system, based on the Seville Strategy of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which

makes provision for a gradation of intensity of development away

from the eastern boundary of the park. The system includes two

primary zones, including a Buffer Zone immediately adjacent to the

park. A further planning project has recently been undertaken to

more precisely define the extent and functions of the Buffer Zone.

This is the first such initiative to formally establish a zoning system,

which will be entrenched in legislation and regional plans. This

paper discusses the expected benefits that will be provided by the

proposed Buffer Zone for the protection of the integrity of the park

and its inner wilderness system, as well as benefits for landowners

and communities resident within or adjacent to the zone by the

provision of tourism development opportunities immediately adjacent to the park. Control measures will be put in place to limit the

scale and location of such development, promote retention of environmental quality, and limit negative impacts on the park and

wilderness system. Also discussed are measures to be implemented

to promote collaboration between park authorities and private and

communal landowners. The eventual outcome of this initiative

could be the formation of a system of Biosphere Reserves in the

entire peripheries of the park.

Establishment of Buffer Zone in the

Peripheries of Wilderness Areas in the

Ukhahlamba-Drakensberg Park World

Heritage Site, KwaZulu-Natal Province,

Republic of South Africa

William R. Bainbridge

Introduction ____________________

The Ukhahlamba-Drakensberg Park is one of the most

important high altitude protected areas in Southern Africa.

It is 242,813 ha (600,000 acres) in extent, and protects a significant proportion of the upper reaches of the Drakensberg

Mountains in KwaZulu-Natal Province, along the international border between Lesotho and South Africa. The border

lies along the watershed between the west-flowing Orange

or Senqu River system, and the east-flowing rivers of

KwaZulu-Natal (KZN). The park conserves important biodiversity resources in the most extensive portions within the

country in two of the seven floristic regions of Africa south of

the Sahara—the Afro-alpine and Afro-montane regions. The

park also protects the watersheds of the most important

rivers of the province, as well as valuable archaeological

heritage and natural resources. In addition, the Drakensberg

Mountains have an international reputation for their spectacular natural beauty, and the park preserves some of the

Drakensberg’s most scenic portions. The Drakensberg is

regarded as the most important inland tourism destination

in the province, and the park is the center of this attraction

(KwaZulu-Natal Town and Regional Planning Commission

2001a).

The park is in the custody of Enzemvelo KwaZulu-Natal

Wildlife, the organization responsible for protected area management in the province. It comprises four wilderness areas

proclaimed under national legislation: Mdedelelo, Mlambonja,

Mkhomazi, and Mzimkulu, as well as a number of nature

reserves proclaimed under a provincial statute. The four

wilderness areas include the first wilderness to be legally

proclaimed in South Africa. They have a total area of 117,765

ha (291,000 acres), or about 48.5 percent of the park (Bainbridge

2001).

The park (and its component wildernesses) was recently

accorded World Heritage status under both natural and

cultural criteria. The natural criteria of outstanding universal value recognized by the World Heritage Bureau of

UNESCO were:

• Superlative natural phenomena or natural beauty and

aesthetic importance.

• The presence of significant natural habitats for in situ

conservation of biological diversity and, in particular,

outstanding species richness—it is a recognized Centre of Plant Diversity and Endemism, and a globally important endemic bird area.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 21

Establishment of Buffer Zone in the Peripheries of Wilderness Areas... Bainbridge

The cultural criteria refer to the important San (Bushman) rock art and other archaeological deposits present in

the park.

Threats to the Park and Its

Wilderness Areas _______________

As indicated above, the park and its wilderness areas

enjoy secure protection in law. However, while the park is

relatively large in local terms, it is relatively narrow in

width, and thus is vulnerable to unsympathetic development in the immediate peripheries. The wilderness areas

are protected by an internal buffer area, but this, consequently, is also of relatively narrow proportions, and thus

the wildernesses are also vulnerable to disturbance and

nonconforming physical development in the peripheries. As

an example, lights in some of the settlements and small

villages in the approaches to the park, although distant from

the park boundary, may be seen at night even from the top

of the main escarpment, and are certainly visible from many

vantage points in the wilderness areas.

Specific policies were formulated over a decade ago by the

provincial government for the control of nonconforming

physical development such as large-scale tourism facilities

on private land immediately adjacent to the park (Martin

1990). However, these policies lacked legal sanction and did

not apply to a number of land uses, such as commercial

timber plantations of alien tree species, which have recently

been responsible for significant landscape transformation in

the area. It was for these reasons that the study described

below was commissioned (KwaZulu-Natal Town and Regional Planning Commission 2001a).

Initiative to Prepare a Special Case

Area Plan for the Drakensberg ____

Aim and Scope of the Study

The study was commissioned in 1999 by the KwaZuluNatal Town and Regional Planning Commission to consider

the desirability of designating the lower-lying portions of the

Drakensberg Mountains and agricultural lands of the province surrounding the park as a Special Case Area (SCA), and

to prepare a Special Case Area Plan (SCAP) for the mountains and influent surrounds. The need for the study arose

out of increasing pressure for various forms of development

in these mountains and peripheries, which had the potential

to negatively affect the integrity of the park and the unique

resources of the mountains, especially their biodiversity,

water production, and scenic values. Protection of the inner

wildernesses was seen as a key consideration. An SCA is

defined as an area with special or unique character, which

may require additional protection over and above normal

legislated development application procedures.

The study area forms an important component of a greater

study area (the Maloti-Drakensberg Conservation and Development Area) in the high altitude mountains shared

between Lesotho and South Africa, in which a parallel

feasibility study was undertaken by the two governments in

cooperation with the World Bank. The goals of these two

studies were broadly similar, with particular emphasis on

the promotion of sustainable land uses, conservation of the

unique natural resources, and economic upliftment of the

people resident in the area (KwaZulu-Natal Town and Regional Planning Commission 2001b).

Summary of Principal Findings and

Recommendations

The study showed that existing legislation makes provision for the protection of all the principal resources of the

study area except landscape quality. Landscape transformation by a number of land uses such as agriculture,

commercial afforestation, and rural settlement was found to

be a significant threat to scenic values and the natural

beauty of much of the area. Tourism (and ecotourism) are

primary land uses in significant portions of the study area

together with agriculture, and thus the potential for these

uses could also be threatened by such land uses. Furthermore, uncoordinated or nonsustainable development was

found to be a primary cause of landscape transformation

impairment of scenic values of other portions with unrealized potential for tourism, to the probable future detriment

of current landowners and communities.

The planning strategy adopted was to select a candidate

SCA strategically located to protect both the integrity of the

natural resources and scenic values in the approaches to the

park, and of the park itself. A zoning system for the proposed

SCA was developed, based on the Seville Strategy of

UNESCO. This system incorporates the park itself as a core

area and makes provision for a gradation of intensity of

development eastward away from its eastern boundary. The

objectives for the zoning system were to provide a reasonable

level of development opportunities within each zone, as well

as to decrease the potential negative effects of development

as the visitor approaches the mountains. The system includes two primary zones: a Buffer Zone immediately adjacent to the park, with development largely restricted to

extensive forms of agriculture and limited low-intensity

tourism development; and a Commercial Agriculture Zone

away from the park, in which intensive forms of agriculture

and tourism are considered to be appropriate.

The principal findings and recommendations of the report

of the study (KwaZulu-Natal Town and Regional Planning

Commission 2001a) include:

• The area shown in figure 1 should be declared an SCA

for conservation of its unique natural resources, in

particular its scenic values and landscape quality.

• A system of zones, and in particular a Buffer Zone,

should form the basis for the regulations for the

Drakensberg SCAP.

• The policy provisions for the SCAP (and its zoning

system) should be integrated into the relevant subregional plans.

• The primary objectives of the SCAP are to contribute to

conservation of the unique natural resources, the integrity of the park and the promotion of sustainable land

uses, economic stimulation, and job creation.

• Consideration should be given to designation of a part,

or the entire SCA, as one or more Biosphere Reserves in

terms of the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere Program.
22 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Bainbridge Establishment of Buffer Zone in the Peripheries of Wilderness Areas...

Figure 1—Buffer Zone, Drakensberg Special Case Area.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 23

Establishment of Buffer Zone in the Peripheries of Wilderness Areas... Bainbridge

• Areas of Resource Conservation Zone, identified in the

study, should be considered for formal designation as

protected areas.

• Tourism (and ecotourism) has the potential to become a

primary land use together with agriculture.

• Consultation with authorities and communities in the

study area should form a continuous component in the

implementation of the recommendations.

Project to Refine and Delineate the

Eastern (Outer) Boundary of the

Buffer Zone ____________________

Study Aim

One further recommendation of the SCAP study was that

there was a need for refinement of the eastern boundary of

the Buffer Zone, to ensure a rational basis for the implementation of regulations applied to the SCA, as well as to reflect

the underlying physiographic and environmental determinants. This second study was undertaken shortly after the

initial study (KwaZulu-Natal Town and Regional Planning

Commission 2001a,b).

Major issues that were addressed in this second stage

project were:

• Establish principles and criteria to be used for demarcation of the eastern boundary of the Buffer Zone.

• Relevant policies and legislation.

• World Heritage status and the need to protect the

important resources of the park.

• Consultation with interested and affected parties.

The approach employed for this study was based partially

on recently published guidelines for establishing policy and

best management practices for buffer zones in terrestrial

ecosystems in developing countries (Ebregt and De Greve

2000). These support the following definition of a buffer

zone, proposed by Wild and Mutebi, which was adopted for

this study:

Any area, often peripheral to a protected area, inside or

outside, in which activities are implemented, or the area

managed, with the aim of enhancing the positive, and reducing the negative impacts of (nature) conservation on neighboring communities, and of neighboring communities on

conservation (Ebregt and De Greve 2000: 7).

Ebregt and De Greve (2000) recommend a holistic approach for the establishment and management of buffer

zones. This implies that both conservation and development

considerations be employed as appropriate for the specific

conditions that pertain for each buffer zone, with social and

cultural settings considered at least as important as environmental factors, and that nature conservation and socioeconomic development are not only complementary, but also

strengthen each other’s effectiveness and positive impacts.

This summarizes the approach adopted for the present

study. Furthermore, the specific key needs identified for

delineation of the Buffer Zone included requirements for

protection of the integrity of the park and conservation of the

natural character of the Drakensberg foothills peripheral to

it, as well as to meet the needs of residents, tourists, and

visitors to the Drakensberg, bearing in mind its location as

a key component of the Maloti-Drakensberg Transfrontier

Conservation and Development Study Area.

Consultation

The consultation process involved a series of workshops

and consultative meetings with official agencies and stakeholder groups.

Summary of Principal Findings and

Recommendations of the Secondary

Study _________________________

This study confirmed the need for a buffer zone around the

entire eastern boundary of the Ukhahlamba-Drakensberg

Park, that is, that this zone should form part of the zoning

system of the Drakensberg SCAP. It was decided that the

zone should principally comprise land of low agricultural

potential, that is, areas where soils and other physical

conditions such as slope are not conducive to intensive

agriculture or other forms of development. As far as practicable, land of high agricultural potential, which is a natural

component of the adjacent Commercial Agricultural Zone,

should be excluded. This proved feasible by virtue of the hilly

nature of the Drakensberg foothills. These and other considerations (such as the inclusion in the buffer of sensitive sites

and natural communities) provided the basis for development of a series of principles and criteria, which led to the

delineation on maps and aerial photographs of the precise

location of the eastern boundary of the Buffer Zone; the

western boundary consists of the park boundary.

The study further indicated that agriculture (and in some

instances settlement) are current primary land uses in the

Buffer Zone, but the zone is also well suited for small-scale

ecotourism, a use which should be promoted in order to offer

landowners another economic incentive compatible with the

overall vision for the area. The forms of tourism facilities

considered to be appropriate include small-scale chalet complexes, small hotels, camping, cottage industries, and arts

and craft outlets. The zone is also particularly suited for

nature-based forms of outdoor recreation, which should be

facilitated by development of a system of trails for use by

foot, horseback, or mountain bicycle.

Based on the principles and criteria defined for the purpose, the zone was delineated both in a Geographic Information System (GIS) and physically on the ground by means of

Geographic Positioning System (GPS) points to an accuracy

of 20 m (65.6 ft). The Buffer Zone varies in average between

a minimum width of about 500 m (546.8 yards) and a

maximum of just over 2 km (1.2 miles).

It is believed that the proposed Buffer Zone has the

potential to achieve the principal objectives of the SCAP, in

particular to make significant contributions to protection of

the unspoiled natural character, and the resources of outstanding universal value of the World Heritage Site and its

component inner wildernesses. It should also contribute to

the protection of the present, largely unspoiled natural

character of the landscapes, to scenic values and natural
24 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Bainbridge Establishment of Buffer Zone in the Peripheries of Wilderness Areas...

communities in the immediate peripheries of the park, and

to the promotion of sustainable land uses.

The SCAP makes provision for the formulation of spatial

framework plans and land use schemes that should address

the following:

• Identification and conservation of natural resources in

the Buffer Zone that are of outstanding universal value.

• Promotion of sustainable development and conservation of the other natural resources of the Buffer Zone

and other zones of the SCAP.

The recommendations of the second phase study include:

• Development of partnerships between the park authority and stakeholders for development of a comprehensive strategic land use management system for the

Buffer Zone within the framework of objectives for the

Maloti-Drakensberg Transfrontier Conservation and

Development Project.

• Consideration given to the nomination of all or part of

the SCAP as a Biosphere Reserve, as recommended by

the World Heritage Bureau and the SCAP Report.

The plan includes the provision of incentives to landowners and communities with title to the land to accept and to

benefit from the provisions of the plan. These include the

following recommendations:

• Tourism should be recognized and promoted as a primary land use along with agriculture, not only throughout the SCAP area, but also in the Buffer Zone.

• The permissible density for low-scale tourism development in the Buffer Zone should be increased from

previous levels.

• Provision should be made for direct access into the park

for guests to tourism facilities in the Buffer Zone (instead of through distant public entry points).

A primary product of the SCAP is a recommended system

of land use guidelines and controls for achievement of the

objectives of both studies. A list of preferred and nonpreferred

land use activities is provided for each zone. Table 1 provides

the recommended activities for the Buffer Zone.

Summary and Conclusions _______

As far as is known, this is the first attempt in South Africa

to delineate a buffer zone on private and communal land

around the peripheries of a major protected area such as the

Ukhahlamba-Drakensberg Park. The proposed Buffer Zone

was designed to benefit both the park itself, as well as

landowners, visitors, and tourists, through the implementation of control measures to conserve the integrity and natural character of both the protected area and the buffer, and

by promotion of sustainable land uses, including tourism

and agriculture. These measures could create the opportunity for the creation of one or more Biosphere Reserves in the

proposed SCA. They should also promote protection of the

integrity of the wilderness areas within the park through the

preclusion of nonsympathetic development in the approaches

to the park.

Acknowledgments ______________

I wish to thank the KwaZulu-Natal Town and Regional

Planning Commission for permission to quote from its

published reports on these two projects. I also wish to

acknowledge, with thanks, the contributions made by my

colleagues J. van der Vegte, B. Martin, J. Alletson, C. Whyte,

and Professor J. McCarthy, who were coauthors of these two

reports.

Table 1—List of preferred and no-preferred land use activities for the buffer zonea.

Zone Preferred activities Nonpreferred activities

Buffer (overall) Amenity planting with noninvasive species Agri-industry

Extensive agriculture Commercial afforestation

Intensive agriculture Industrial development

Nature and resource conservation Intensive or semi-intensive human settlement

Nature and culture-based tourism Large-scale infrastructural projects

Small-scale tourism Large-scale tourism development

Small-scale agriculture Mines and quarries

Subsistance agriculture New roads

Trails Subdivision of land

Buffer (settlements) Amenity planting with noninvasive species Agri-industry

Extensive agriculture Commercial afforestation

Intensive agriculture Industrial development

Nature and resource conservation Large-scale infrastructural projects

Nature and culture-based tourism Large-scale tourism development

Small-scale tourism Mines and quarries

Small-scale agriculture New roads

Subsistence agriculture Subdivision of land

Trails

 aTown and Regional Planning Commission 2001b.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 25

Establishment of Buffer Zone in the Peripheries of Wilderness Areas... Bainbridge

References _____________________

Bainbridge, W. R. 2001. Mountain wilderness in South Africa.

International Journal of Wilderness. 7(2): 30–34.

Ebregt, A.; De Greve, P. 2000. Buffer zones and the management,

policy and best practices for terrestrial ecosystems in developing countries. Theme Studies Series 5; Forests, Forestry &

Biological Diversity Support Group, National Reference Centre

for Nature Management: Wageningen, the Netherlands: International Agricultural Centre. 63 p.

Martin, B. F. 1990. Drakensberg approaches policy. Natal Town &

Regional Planning Commission Report, volume 74. 70 p.

KwaZulu-Natal Town and Regional Planning Commission. 2001a.

A special case area plan for the Drakensberg. Pietermaritzburg,

South Africa. 116 p.

KwaZulu-Natal Town and Regional Planning Commission. 2001b.

Refinement of the outer (Eastern) boundary of the Buffer Zone in

the Drakensberg special case area plan. 68 p.
26 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

M. E. Shroyer is an Independent Natural Resource Researcher, 2 Chudleigh

Court, Carstens Street, Tamboerskloof, Cape Town, 8001, South Africa. Fax:

27-21 4262746, E-mail: shroyer@iafrica.com. P. Blignaut is a Mountain

Environment Consultant, Coordinator for Africa of IUCN Mountain Protected Areas Network, Southern Africa Mountain Environment Consultancy

(SAMEC), 14 Kreupelbosch Way, Constantia, 7806, South Africa, Fax 27-21

7944836, E-mail: blignaut@icon.co.za

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship to

protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress

symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc. RMRSP-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky

Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—South Africa comprises approximately 10 percent mountainous terrain and isolated mountains, based on the criterion of

450 m (1,476 feet) local relief. Distinctive hilly terrain and distinctive coastal and river relief make up approximately 13 percent of the

land surface. The highest mountains are located in the Drakensberg

with peaks reaching 3,400 m (11,155 feet) and local relief up to 2,100 m

(6,890 feet). The extensive Cape Fold Mountain Range (totaling

about 21,000 km2, or 8,108 miles2) also have several peaks with local

relief close to 2,000 m (6,562 feet). Many other less extensive

mountain ranges exist throughout South Africa.

Developments and poor management practices in mountain areas are increasing on private and government land, and mountain

wilderness is shrinking. The objective of this paper is to: provide an

overview of major mountain ranges, their conservation status, and

the type of communities that live in close proximity to these

mountains; highlight key threats to mountain wilderness; and

discuss and analyze policies, legislation, and other “social contracts”

that deal with mountain management in South Africa, focusing on

how key issues such as overexploitation, overburning, lack of finance,

law enforcement, lack of knowledge, bad environmental attitudes,water

pollution, inappropriate private and infrastructural developments,

and poorly planned access routes are being addressed.

A hypothetical case study, where suitable socioecological zoning

is used in the planning and development of a private mountain

reserve, is discussed. The rationale for using socioecological zoning

is to encourage the conservation of mountain wilderness by only

developing in areas where potentially negative effects on wilderness

qualities can be minimized, and to restrict nonwilderness-dependent activities in identified wilderness areas. Socioecological zoning

requires that a predetermined range of social needs and uses,

applicable to the characteristics of the mountain environment in the

country, is scientifically matched to the appropriate ecological and

physical characteristics of the mountain area.

Introduction ____________________

Based on the criterion that a mountain constitutes an area

elevated at least 450 m (1,476 feet) from the local relief (the

height difference measured from the lowest point within the

area being considered), South Africa comprises approxiMountain Conservation in South Africa

M. E. Shroyer

P. Blignaut

mately 10 percent mountainous terrain and isolated mountains. Distinctive hilly terrain and distinctive coastal and

river relief make up approximately 13 percent of the land

surface.

Mountains in South Africa either form part of the Great

Escarpment or are free standing. The Great Escarpment

extends from the mountainous regions of the Northern

Province, southward to the Drakensberg, past Lesotho and

the Eastern Cape into the Southern Cape. It then continues

north of the Cape Fold Mountains to Sutherland in the

Karoo, before turning northward toward Springbok in the

Northern Cape (DEAT 1997).

The highest mountains in South Africa are located in the

Drakensberg with peaks reaching 3,400 m (11,155 feet) with

local relief up to 2,100 m. The extensive Cape Fold sandstone

mountain ranges (totaling about 21,000 km2

, or 8,108

miles2

) also have several peaks with local relief close to

2,000 m (6,562 feet). Many other less extensive mountain

ranges exist throughout South Africa (Blignaut 2000a).

Mountain Wilderness ____________

Some mountainous areas are still wild and unspoiled as a

result of harsh living conditions for humans, rough topography, and remoteness. In these pristine wilderness areas,

there are few signs of human modification. Indigenous fauna

and flora are very dominant. These places provide a range of

opportunities to visitors for solitude and to interact with

nature on nature’s terms.

The wilderness qualities in mountains vary depending on

geomorphology, climate, surrounding land use, and fauna

and flora, for example:

• The Cape Fold Mountains form part of the extremely

biodiverse Cape Floral Kingdom ecosystem and offer

many undisturbed mountain peaks and kloofs. Visiting

these wilderness areas can be strenuous. Leopard and

signs of free-ranging wildlife are present in some areas,

but the wilderness character of these mountains is

linked to solitude; striking scenic beauty with steep

ascents and rough terrain; sandstone cliffs; pure mountain water; and multicolored, unsurpassed endemism

among flora.

• The KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg harbors one of the

world’s greatest rock art collections. There are an estimated 600 sites with more than 35,000 individual rock

art images. It contains high-altitude and unique Southern African alpine-tundra vegetation and associated

endemic paleoinvertebrates. It offers outstanding views

and a range of peaks to climb. Wildlife can be encountered at varying altitudes.

• The Lebombo Mountains are less than 800 m (2,625

feet) high, but are probably the richest wildlife moun-
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 27

Shroyer and Blignaut Mountain Conservation in South Africa

tain habitat south of the Zambezi Escarpment, mostly

by virtue of their length down the Kruger National Park

and the wilderness of Mozambique on the eastern side.

Elephant, lion, leopard, buffalo, rhino, and another 40

to 50 large mammals, mainly antelope, as well as enormously rich birdlife inhabit parts of it.

• The Richtersveld is a mountain desert with summer

daytime temperatures regularly higher than 40 ∞C

(104 ∞F), where both plants and animals have adapted

to the harsh desert conditions.

Although a mountain zonation policy (fig. 1) has been

proposed (Blignaut 1992), there is currently no formal policy

specifically aimed at mountain conservation. Many mountainous areas are not zoned, and there are no specific

management objectives or indicators to monitor compliance

to set targets on State or private land. In many cases the

diverse mountain wilderness landscapes are not managed.

There is currently no attempt to protect the remaining

mountain wilderness by restricting access and making inducements to go elsewhere through the provision of recreational facilities in more appropriate areas. As a result,

many of these wilderness areas are being targeted for

ecotourism. Even with a moderate increase in the use of

wilderness areas, their nature conservation status may be

totally unimpaired, while the wilderness experience may be

ruined.

Mountain Communities in South

Africa _________________________

True mountain communities, people who have traditionally lived in mountain areas, are a rare phenomenon in

South Africa. African communities are mostly located in

hilly terrain with few communities actually inhabiting the

mountains, unlike mountain communities in South America,

Asia, and Europe.

Diversity of Mountain Communities

The culture of people living in close proximity to mountains varies from mountain to mountain, depending on

agricultural potential, proximity to markets, climate, scenic

value, rock formation, biodiversity, presence of wildlife,

conservation status, recreational opportunities offered, socioeconomic factors, and so forth. The following loose categories attempt to describe different communities who live close

to mountains or who enjoy benefits provided by mountains:

• Traditional mountain communities, which are people

who live in the foothills or who live in the mountains on

a permanent basis, whose ancestors also lived in mountainous terrain, and who utilize resources provided by

mountains, mountain slopes, or mountain streams as

Figure 1—Socioecological zoning.

(I) (I) (X) (II)

(IV) (III) NEW NEW (VII) (VIII)

BIOSPHERE RESERVE (IX) Is a combination of a spectrum of the above zones

By catering for a continuum conflicts can be avoided and needs satisfied

EQUIVALENT IUCN ZONING CATEGORIES

ECOLOGICAL

ZONE

(Research)

WILDERNESS

ZONE

WORLD

HERITAGE

SITE

(Global Status)

NATIONAL

PARK

NATURE

RESERVE

HERITAGE

SITE

MOUNTAIN

FEATURE /

MONUMENT

(Spot Zone)

MOUNTAIN

RECREATION

ZONE

(Developed site)

MOUNTAIN

SPORT

ZONE

(Sport climbing,

skiing,

equipment used)

WISE USE OPTIMUM USE

SUSTAINABLE MOUNTAIN

DEVELOPMENT, BUT START

OF DEGRADATION OF

NATURAL SYSTEMS

ANTHROPOLOGICAL

ZONE

(Mountain

peoples)

MULTIPLE

USE

ZONE

OVER EXPLOITATION

Tourism opportunities

ECOCENTRIC CONTINUUM ANTHROPOCENTRIC

Minimal development

and human use

more intense development

and human use
28 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Shroyer and Blignaut Mountain Conservation in South Africa

their primary livelihood. This includes livestock farming (cattle, goat, and sheep), crop farming, and dagga

growing. Examples of mountain communities are:

Basotho people who live on the Great Escarpment

between South Africa and Lesotho; the Hananwa people

of Blouberg in the Northern Province; and the people of

the Richtersveld, the Namas, and the Bosluis Basters

(Van den Berg 2000).

• Subsistence communities such as at Wupperthal in the

Western Cape, Qudeni in Zululand, and Mnweni and

Singati in the KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg.

• Rural communities, which include commercial farmers,

small-scale commercial farmers, and farm laborers.

Farms can be managed by private individuals, companies,

or consortiums. Examples are flower farms in the Cape

Mountains, trout farms in the KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg, and cattle farms in the Waterberg.

• Communities living within or on the boundaries of

private or public mountain conservation areas, such as

in the Richtersveld and Drakensberg.

• Landowners of private nature reserves and those including their land in nature conservancies such as the

Cederberg, Voëlvlei, and Grootvadersbosch Conservancies in the Western Cape.

• Foresters and personnel working for mining or logging

companies.

• Urban communities living within or on the boundaries

of private or public mountain conservation areas, for

example, in Cape Town, Ceres, and Franschhoek. Two

groups can be identified: “Armchair mountain admirers,” the people who are fairly passionate about mountains but who seldom climb them; and “local mountain

users,” the people who utilize the mountains on a regular basis for exercise, recreation, spiritual renewal, and

to socialize or enjoy the scenic beauty.

• Business people running ecotourism operations who

use the mountains as the attractant.

• Mountain tourists, the visitors from other areas, nationally or internationally, who travel to mountainous

areas to enjoy stunning mountain landscapes or to hike.

In general, people living in mountainous areas have become ecoconscious and take a direct interest in the management of mountains as well as their resources. This has led to

the formation of Mountain Forums, Friends of the Mountain

group, and Hiking and Mountain Clubs.

Projects Involving Mountain Communities

Sustainable mountain development, as per Chapter 13 of

Agenda 21 (developed at the 1992 World Summit on Sustainable Development, Rio de Janeiro), requires the involvement of local mountain communities to ensure that both

community needs and conservation needs are met. Some

local projects involving mountain communities are:

• Mnweni Donga Erosion Reclamation Project. This

project in the KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg is coordinated by the Mnweni Community Trust. Trained groups

are now offering a commercial service to other communities along the slopes of the mountain range. This is

an excellent example where the community formed a

partnership to combat environmental degradation on

mountain slopes in their area.

• Working for Water Project. The Government’s Working for Water Program, spearheaded by the Department

of Water Affairs and Forestry, was launched in 1995 to

gain control of the growing problem of invasive alien

plants. The program currently runs over 200 projects in

all nine of South Africa’s Provinces. Special teams have

been trained to undertake high-altitude alien vegetation clearing in mountainous terrain. Through Working

For Water Projects, people living in mountainous terrain have been given opportunities to develop new skills

and to work as contract laborers.

• Zululand Trail Project (ZTP). This South African

Youth Exchange Project started in 1992. The objective

of the ZTP is to explore the remote and beautiful areas

of Zululand, very often scarcely populated, to identify

possible routes for hiking trails and incorporating local

villages as “stop-overs.” Visiting local villages provides

an interesting cultural experience to exchange students, and provides tangible financial benefits to the

locals.

Key Threats to Mountain

Wilderness _____________________

Threats to South African mountains are numerous and

can be categorized under two headings: unsustainable land

use practices and potentially threatening situations (Blignaut

2000b).

Unsustainable Land Use Practices

Unsustainable land use practices could include:

• Burning and overburning of indigenous mountain vegetation. Indigenous vegetation is adapted to the incidence of lightning and rock falls. These start the mountain fires that are necessary for the germination of some

plant species. However, deliberate and frequent

manmade fires have devastating and severe effects on

mountain vegetation, particularly at high altitudes and

on dry slopes where regeneration is slow. Mature vegetation in South African mountains is currently rare.

• Cultivation, even on moderately steep mountain slopes,

leads to erosion, particularly during fallow periods and

heavy rainfall. The loss of vegetation cover has multiple

consequences: landslides, siltation of dams, drying up of

perennial streams, flash floods downstream, and loss of

biotic diversity and genetic resources, including insect

and other faunal populations essential for pollination of

fruit and seed sources.

• Plantations and invasive alien vegetation. Plantations

of imported invasive tree species located in mountain

catchments cause a massive loss of runoff and

perenniality. The water yield from a mountain catchment covered by invasive vegetation, such as hakea,

pine, and wattle, is reduced by 50 percent compared to

a catchment covered by indigenous fynbos (Burgers

1993).
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 29

Shroyer and Blignaut Mountain Conservation in South Africa

• Grazing in fragile mountain areas and overgrazing. Bad

farming practices by owners of mountain land, and

demographic pressures in mountain communities coupled

with unsustainable cultural practices that do not match

current realities, result in overstocking. This leads to

loss of natural vegetation cover, with its serious consequences. It also increases pollution from animals and

humans within the catchment areas, resulting in ill

health, greater filtration costs, and negative effects on

tourism and recreation.

• Badly located and inappropriate infrastructure has an

accumulative adverse effect on mountain ecology and

landscapes, leading to loss of natural vegetation cover

and to pollution. For example: illegal impoundments

made by farmers diminish water supply to main dams

and degrade riverine ecology; illegal tourism developments, such as roads for offroad vehicles and mountain

cottages, cause erosion and pollution; masts and other

communication devices on mountain summits adversely

impact landscapes and ruin wilderness.

Potentially Threatening Situations

Potentially threatening situations include:

• Easy access. South African mountains are not high in

global terms, nor indeed extensive. Many of the mountain ranges are narrow. In the Cape Fold Mountains,

there is an average width of only 7 km (4.3 miles).

Similar to the Drakensberg, this permits reasonably

easy access for exploitation to core wilderness areas.

• Many largely unspoiled public mountain reserves are

being developed for ecotourism to provide funds for

management and other government agendas. This occurrence has at its source the general weakness in the

economy and the indifference of many politicians to

long-term conservation and most certainly to wilderness. Even protected areas are being opened up for

limited exploitation by adjacent communities and to

provide new livelihood opportunities. While in much of

the developed world conservation of protected areas is

becoming more strict, the reverse is occurring in Africa.

This augers badly for wilderness, which once destroyed

can seldom be restored.

• Economics is at the root of many land exploitation

problems. Some private landowners are now looking at

exploiting their mountain land to gain short-term benefits for economic survival. The withdrawal of farming

subsidies, low agricultural prices, steep increases in

fuel costs, and higher labor expenses all contribute to

this.

• Politics. Some commercial farmers are apprehensive

about their future in South Africa. This perception has

been exacerbated by local farm murders and the Zimbabwe land grabs and land claims. Insecurity of title

usually leads to exploitation of land in the short term,

which could have a noticeable impact on mountains.

• Lack of respect for the natural environment is often at

the root of exploitation of mountain land. This attitude

has its source in lack of knowledge and education,

coupled with indifference and greed for personal gain. If

we were healthy morally, we would not consider the

mountains as “waste land” to be exploited and ruined for

personal and public gain.

• Climate change. If carbon dioxide levels double by the

year 2050, some of the Cape fynbos biome will disappear, as it will be unable to adapt to climate/atmospheric changes. However, much of the species-rich

montane fynbos is likely to adapt because of the climatic

diversity found in mountain environments. Mountain

areas in South Africa are therefore likely to be significantly important repositories of biotic diversity in the

future.

Policies, Legislation, and Other

“Social Contracts” That Deal With

Mountain Management in South

Africa _________________________

Social contracts regarding mountain conservation involve

a range of government, private, and communal stakeholders. The instruments for mountain conservation range from

formal explicit contracts, such as national legislation, to

undocumented implicit private initiatives. There are also

various public-private partnerships that contribute to mountain conservation. These social contracts mainly relate to

land use, infrastructure developments, commercial opportunities, and access.

Ownership of Mountains

Mountains, hilly country, coastal buttresses, or cliffs in

South Africa can be owned or managed by: the State (national, provincial, regional, or municipal authorities); private individuals; communities; Nongovernment Organizations (NGOs), or partnerships between the above-mentioned

parties. The area of mountain catchments on State land

amounts to 1.7 million hectares (6,564 miles2

), about 15

percent of the total area of major catchments. Eighty-five

percent of mountain catchments, about 9.7 million hectares

(37,542 miles2

), is privately owned (Rabie and others 1992).

Of the privately owned areas, 5.5 percent are proclaimed

mountain catchment areas, while 79.5 percent are undeclared catchments (Rabie and others 1992). The result is

that many mountainous areas with high wilderness qualities are not proclaimed as such. It is thus essential that

public-private partnerships be promoted to conserve South

Africa’s mountain heritage.

Legislation Relating to Mountains

The only legal definition in South Africa related to “mountain” is that of “mountain catchment area” in terms of the

Mountain Catchment Areas Act (MCAA) (Act 63 of 1970).

Such an area is simply described as an area defined and

declared by the Minister of Environmental Affairs by notice

in the Gazette to be a mountain catchment area. This

definition fails to describe the characteristics of such an

area, although a good idea of what represents a mountain

catchment is obtained from the interdepartmental Ross

Report (1961), which culminated in the MCAA.
30 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Shroyer and Blignaut Mountain Conservation in South Africa

Legislation that pertains to mountain areas are (Price

2000):

• The MCAA applies to State-owned mountains and a

percentage of privately owned important mountain

catchment land. Its overall purpose is the production of

clear, pure water. The biotic diversity of these proclaimed mountain areas has been reasonably well conserved as unsilted, unpolluted water through the retention of a reasonably mature vegetation cover.

• National Forests Act (Act 84 of 1998). This Act

makes provision for the protection of indigenous forest,

as well as for the support of community forestry (http:/

/www.gov.za/ yearbook/water.htm). It provides for the

designation of wilderness areas on State forest land.

• National Veld and Forest Fire Act (Act 101 of

1998). In terms of this Act, Fire Protection Associations

(FPAs) need to be established. While it is compulsory to

establish FPAs on all State lands, FPAs on private lands

are voluntary. The purpose of the Act is to prevent and

combat veld, forest, and mountain fires throughout the

Republic.

• National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998). This Act provides for the protection of water resources (the definition includes streams) and the use of water, including

its abstraction from streams and other sources, and

regulates activities that result in the reduction of

streamflow. In some regions, steering committees have

been established to compile catchment reports that

provide input into the development of integrated Catchment Management Plans. Integrated Catchment Management is a focus of the new Water Act.

• National Environmental Management Act (NEMA)

(Act 107 of 1998). This Act is broadly aimed at the

decisionmaking processes and coordination of governmental functions relating to the environment. Of general interest is the Act’s adherence to principles of

Integrated Environmental Management and Environmental Management Plans.

• Environment Conservation Act (Act 73 of 1989).

This Act provides, among other things, for the declaration of Protected Natural Environments, the control of

pollution, the control of environmentally harmful activities, and the creation of regulations to govern procedures

to be followed in environmental impact assessments.

• The Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act

(CARA) (Act 43 of 1983). The new regulations under

CARA add substantial legal capacity to the quest to

control invasive alien plants, especially in mountain

catchments.

Government Initiatives Toward Mountain

Conservation

Government initiatives regarding mountain conservation

include:

• Wilderness Areas. Since 1971, 11 wilderness areas

have been designated in terms of the Forest Act. All but

one (Ntendeka W.A.) protect high altitude ecosystems

in the principal mountain systems of the country

(Bainbridge 2001).

• National Parks. National Parks are proclaimed in

terms of the National Parks Act (Act 57 of 1976). South

African National Parks (SANParks) manages four National Parks where mountains are the key attraction:

Cape Peninsula, Golden Gate, Tsitsikamma, and

Richtersveld. Other National Parks with mountainous

terrain are the Kruger, Karoo, Addo Elephant, Marakele,

and Mountain Zebra. Private, communal, or NGO land

can be incorporated into national parks on a contractual

basis.

• Provincial Nature Reserves. Some Provincial nature reserves are proclaimed in accordance with empowering provincial legislation by which the Provinces

manage State land. Many of these reserves contain

mountains, hilly country, coastal buttresses, or cliffs. A

breakdown of Provincial reserves per province is as

follows: Eastern Cape (47), Free State (17), Gauteng (6),

KwaZulu-Natal (87), Mpumalanga (14), Northern Cape

(6), Northern Province (52), North West (14), and Western Cape (51). Some of the mountainous nature reserves

do not have resident managers.

• Indigenous Forests. A National Forestry Action Program (NFAP) for South Africa was developed in 1997.

Indigenous high forest covers only about 300,000 hectares (1,158 miles2

) or 0.25 percent of the country’s

surface, mainly on the eastern and southern slopes of

mountain ranges from the Cape Peninsula in the Western Cape to the Soutpansberg in the Northern Province.

Forty-three percent of indigenous high forests are managed by the Department of Forestry according to certain

multiuse objectives.

• Protected Natural Environments. There are three

Protected Natural Environments in mountainous areas:

the Cape Peninsula Protected Natural Environment

(CPPNE) portions that are included in the CPNP, the

Magaliesberg Protected Natural Environment (MPNE),

and the Lourens River Protected Natural Environment.

• World Heritage Sites. On November 29, 2000, the

uKhahlamba-Drakensberg Park was inscribed as a

“mixed” natural and cultural World Heritage Site, in

terms of the Convention on the Protection of the World’s

Cultural and Natural Heritage. An application for World

Heritage Status for eight representative constellation

sites is currently being prepared for the Cape Floral

Kingdom and the Cape Fold mountains.

• Transfrontier Conservation Areas. A Memorandum of Understanding was signed between South Africa and Lesotho in June 2001 for the establishment of

the Maloti-Drakensberg Transfrontier Conservation

Area (TFCA). The uKhahlamba-Drakensberg Park

World Heritage Site is located within the MalutiDrakensberg TFCA. On August 17, 2001, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between South Africa and Namibia to put in place an environmental

collaboration program through the establishment of the

Ai-Ais/Richtersveld Transfrontier Conservation Park.

• Mega Reserves. The Cape Action Plan for the Environment (CAPE) project recommended that three megaconservation areas (400,000 to 600,000 ha, or 1,544 to
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 31

Shroyer and Blignaut Mountain Conservation in South Africa

2,317 miles2) be established in the Cederberg, Little

Karo, and Baviaanskloof areas (WWF-South Africa

2000). This important initiative will contribute respectively to an integrated approach to mountain conservation in the Western and Eastern Cape Provinces.

Public-Private Partnerships

Public-private partnership initiatives regarding mountain conservation include:

• Biosphere Reserves. Three biosphere reserves have

been registered with the United Nations Educational,

Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and

there are nine initiatives underway. Declared Biosphere

Reserves in mountainous terrain are Kogelberg (established in 1998) and Waterberg (established in 2000).

Biosphere Reserves in mountainous areas currently in

the planning phase are: Soutpansberg/Limpopo; Kruger

to Canyons, Drakensberg Special Case Area (included is

Pholela Biosphere Reserve), Thukela (Weenen), Cederberg,

Boland, and Royal Zulu.

• Conservancies. A conservancy is an association of

private landowners or tenants who voluntarily set aside

and consolidate the natural resources of their properties for the purpose of conservation and sustainable

utilization. Through cooperation between the farming

community and conservation authorities, this concept

has grown into a national conservation movement (Cape

Nature Conservation 1997).

Private Initiatives

Private initiatives regarding mountain conservation

include:

• Natural Heritage Sites. South African Natural Heritage Sites are designated where certain criteria are met

and where landowners commit themselves to the conservation management of the site. The number of natural heritage sites in mountainous areas is not available.

• Private Game Farms. Presently there are more than

9,000 game farms, from unregistered farms to those

officially recognized by nature conservation departments as “exempted game farms” that allow the capture, selling, and hunting of game. Many game farms

are located in mountainous areas.

• Private Reserves. There are approximately 160 private reserves in South Africa. Figures per vegetation

type are not available (SA State of Environment Report

2000).

• SA Natural Heritage Program. Private landowners

can apply to the Department of Environmental Affairs

and Tourism to have properties awarded Natural Heritage Program status.

Access to Mountain Areas, Rock Faces,

and Coastal Cliffs

Access to mountains in South Africa is dependent on the

ownership of the area, resulting in no legal right for access

to climb or mountaineer—therefore, “no right to ramble.”

Only a limited extent of mountain land meeting the criteria

for wilderness exists, and a fair percentage is privately

owned.

• Access on Private Land. Private landowners may

give permission to climb mountains in their ownership

or they may refuse. Mountain and hiking clubs undertake extensive measures, including the purchase of

mountains and rights of way, to obtain access. Some

landowners now require payment, at least for road

maintenance across farms and parking.

• Access on State Land. In mountain ranges located in

national or provincial parks, access is granted according

to permit conditions, and in a few areas there is no

access for mountaineering. In proclaimed wilderness

areas, access is also per permit and is restricted to

prevent overcrowding and a degradation of the wilderness experience.

• Access to Communal Land. Some mountainous areas fall within communal tribal ownership, and permission to climb must be obtained from the tribal authorities concerned. Payment for access to such areas is now

becoming common.

• Access to Coastal Cliffs. Land below the high water

mark belongs to the State in terms of the Sea Shore Act

(Act 21 of 1935) and is accessible to everyone. However,

coastal cliffs above the high water mark could be in

private ownership. Rocky coastlines may thus become

inaccessible without obtaining permission.

• Access in Conservation Areas. In certain areas,

access for mountaineering has been lost or restricted

due to the establishment of national parks or private

nature reserves. In particular, an emphasis on conservation of the “Big Five” (lion, elephant, leopard, rhino,

and buffalo), resulting in the creation of additional

national parks (for example, Marakele National Park),

has in some cases meant that climbers and hikers can

now only access such areas under guard, if at all. Trails

in some national parks have been closed due to the

introduction of buffalo (for example, Mountain Zebra

National Park). In other areas (for example, Baviaanskloof),

mountaineering is popular, even though buffalo have

been released.

User Fees and Financing

Provincial and national authorities have nearly always

charged a fee. An exception is the Cape Peninsula National

Park, which has partial free access. With the cut in conservation budgets in South Africa, fees are increasing, in some

instances dramatically. Although some private landowners

still allow free access, many are now charging fees to mountaineer and hike on their property.

Financial resources to cover the objectives of sustainable

mountain development are obtained from each national,

provincial, or municipal authorities’ budget. In certain instances, financial assistance is provided by donor organizations, such as the Global Environment Facility or Peace

Parks Foundation. On occasion, conservation-worthy mountainous land is purchased by NGOs such as the World

Wildlife Fund (WWF) for approved projects and The Mountain Club of South Africa for mountaineering.
32 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Shroyer and Blignaut Mountain Conservation in South Africa

Legal Liability

The situation regarding the legal liabilities of landowners

for mountain accidents on their land varies. Some national

and provincial authorities and some private landowners

require indemnity forms to be completed; in other instances,

there are no agreements. There is no legislation ruling on this,

and there has not been a court case in South Africa to test this

aspect. Rescue services are provided by provincial emergency services and on a volunteer basis by members of the

Mountain Club of South Africa. On land managed by

KwaZulu-Natal Wildlife, including some areas in the

KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg, a rescue services levy forms

part of entrance fees.

Case Study: Riviersonderend

Private Mountain Farm ___________

Background: Mr Smith bought a share in a beautiful

farm in the mountains as a weekend getaway. He is a keen

botanist and mountaineer and wanted to conserve the

mountain land in an appropriate, scientific way, while

making some money through ecotourism. He spoke to the

consortium of landowners, which he was part of, and they

decided to appoint a consultant to advise them on a mountain management strategy that combines ecotourism with

conservation.

Consultant’s Strategy: The first step was to undertake

a field trip to identify core wilderness areas that need to be

protected; to get an idea of wilderness qualities; to identify

features of outstanding scenic beauty; to gather information

on topography, fauna and flora; and to identify ecotourism

opportunities. The second step was to consult the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry regarding the catchment

management plan of the area. The third step was to zone the

area to inform future land use. The fourth step was to set

objectives and targets for the management of each zone, with

measurable indicators. Thereafter, a mountain management and monitoring plan was developed. Four zones were

identified:

1. Pristine mountain wilderness. The purest form of

wilderness with no signs of modern modification (no roads,

fences, dams, windmills, powerlines, fire breaks, solar panels, and so forth), only natural sound, no motorized access.

Recreational activities: backpacking, kloofing, rockclimbing,

swimming.

2. Remote mountain wilderness. As above but signs of

modern modification visible in the distance. Recreational

activities: backpacking, kloofing, rockclimbing, swimming.

3. Modified wilderness. Areas with easy access that

retain naturalness. The road to the farmhouse and the

footpath to the tented camp were included in this zone.

4. Developed area. The farmhouse and laborers’ cottages were included in this category.

Process: A meeting was held with the landowners to

discuss the mountain management and monitoring plan,

aimed at combining mountain conservation with low-impact

ecotourism.

Outcome:

• The landowners supported the idea of protecting the

wilderness qualities of the mountain reserve. They

agreed that infrastructure should be limited to the

existing footprint, which included an old farmhouse and

two laborers’ cottages. No new roads were to be constructed, thus limiting vehicular access to the existing

farmhouse. Where present, old boundary fences were to

be removed to improve the wilderness qualities.

• They decided to erect two tented camps and a “longdrop” to accommodate overnight visitors. Visitors would

have to walk to these camps. Local people were employed to manage the tented camps. This included cooking, cleaning, and “portarage” from the farmhouse to the

tented camps. Visitor opportunities included day walks,

kloofing, rockclimbing, bird viewing, and botanizing.

• All supported the removal of alien vegetation in a

phased approach, taking cognizance of the importance

of followup clearing. Local contractors were to be used.

• A meeting was organized with neighboring farmers to

join a Fire Protection Association.

• A decision was made to reintroduce wildlife to the area.

In this regard, a meeting was set up with the nature

conservation authority.

• A monitoring program was implemented to establish

whether management objectives were met.

Assumptions: The above-mentioned scenario assumes

that:

1. A socioecological, national mountain zoning policy is

not in place. If such a policy was operating, mountain ranges

would already have been socioecologically zoned by a panel

of experts in cooperation with all landowners concerned.

Thereafter, a Mountain Management Board comprising landowners, affected parties, and authorities would have ensured

that the landowners’ application met the criteria of the existing

zoning plans. (This is the policy advocated by Blignaut, via

oral and written submissions to the Council for the Environment and other institutions, since 1987. The principle aim

being to preserve remaining mountain wilderness.)

2. The landowner(s) cooperates with the concept of wilderness. This is usually not the case, as the landowners’

principle objective is to make money. Thus, 4-wheel-drive

tracks through the mountains and chalets deep into the

mountains, with concomitant access and communication

infrastructure, are likely pressures. Because there is no

national mountain policy and because what legislation there

is, is poorly enforced, massive wilderness degradation may

take place. When landowners view their land for benefits,

wilderness is nearly always the first casualty.

Conclusions____________________

Although South Africa does not have a formal wilderness

management or mountain management policy, various partnerships are being implemented toward achieving sustainable development in mountains. In some instances,

developments in mountainous areas are not sustainable,
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 33

Shroyer and Blignaut Mountain Conservation in South Africa

as short-term financial gains are perceived as more important than long-term sustainability.

The government is responsible for conserving mountains

in national parks, provincial and municipal reserves, and

wilderness and indigenous forest areas on State land, while

a range of mechanisms, for example Biosphere Reserves,

Natural Heritage Sites, and Conservancies are available for

mountain conservation on private land. In addition, private,

communal, or NGO land can be incorporated into national

parks on a contractual basis.

There is a need to include mountain communities in

decisionmaking regarding mountain management and to ensure that these people derive benefits from ecotourism. More

projects aimed at environmental education and the creation of

jobs for mountain communities need to be initiated.

As a way forward, the only remedy to save remaining

mountain wilderness is to undertake socioecological zoning

of South Africa’s mountain ranges, preferably as part of a

national mountain management policy, in order to identify

and protect these wilderness areas for posterity. The existence of unambiguous zoning plans covering South Africa’s

important mountain ranges would pre-empt development

pressures and inappropriate compromises with the resultant loss of wilderness.

References _____________________

Bainbridge, B. 2001. Mountain wilderness in South Africa. International Journal of Wilderness. 7(2): 30–34.

Blignaut, P. 1992. Towards a zoning policy for the conservation and

sustainable utilization of the mountain environments of South

Africa: working document. Cape Town, South Africa: University

of Cape Town. Thesis. 586 p.

Blignaut, P. 2000a. Status of mountain management in South

Africa. ISSN 1029-3760. Mountain Forum. 3(2): September. 2 p.

Blignaut, P. 2000b. A national policy and strategy for more effective

management of mountains in South Africa. Unpublished paper

presented at: African Mountain Association conference; 2000

October 16–20; Masero, Lesotho. On file at: SAMEC Office, P.O.

Box 334, Parow, 7499, RSA. 15 p.

Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT). 1997.

Environmental potential atlas for South Africa. Pretoria, South

Africa: J. L. van Schaik Publishers.

Price, T. 2000. Environmental legislation of relevance to the MCSA

as a landowner. Environment Subcommittee: MCSA (Cape Town

Section).

Rabie, M. A.; Blignaut, P. E.; Fatti, L. P. 1992. Mountains. In:

Environmental management in South Africa. Cape Town: Juta

& Co, Ltd.

Ross Report. 1961. Report of the interdepartmental committee on

the conservation of mountain catchments in South Africa. Pretoria,

South Africa: Department of Agricultural Technical Services.

SA State of Environment Report. 2000. (2002, August 10, last update)

[Online]. Available: http:// www.ngo.grida.no/soesa /nsoer/issues/

land/state.htm).

Van den Berg, Heinrich. 2000. Rock garden of the sun. South African

National Parks. Timbila. 3(1): 30–40.
34 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

W. D. Densham is Chairman of the Wilderness Action Group, 5 Davidson

Street, Howick, 3290, Republic of South Africa, E-mail: densham@sai.co.za.

R. J. Fincham is Director, Centre for Environment and Development, University of Natal, Private Bag X01, Scottsville, 3209, Pietermaritzburg, South

Africa, E-mail: fincham@nu.ac.za

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship to

protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress

symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc. RMRSP-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky

Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—The partnership formed between the Wilderness Action

Group (WAG), the Centre for Environment and Development

(CEAD)-University of Natal, and the partners of both organizations

promotes an exciting philosophy of training, research, and management in wilderness. It embraces ideas that highlight a sound

understanding of the African as well as the more global contexts in

which a pedagogical philosophy must be etched. It is a philosophy

that builds on the ideas and writings of key Africanists and also

takes cognizance of the ever-expanding conservation and wilderness literature found elsewhere. The aim of this paper is to examine

the value of bringing wilderness practitioners and more broadly

focused academics together to develop a program of wilderness

training and research that is intended to contribute to wilderness

management and protection. To achieve this aim, a brief outline of

the historical background of the alliance is presented. Thereafter,

the nature of the alliance is examined before its achievements are

considered. Key challenges are articulated as a basis for a prognosis

of future actions.

Introduction ____________________

Change and transformation are arguably two of the keywords that spring to mind if one becomes embroiled—

sometimes unwittingly and invariably reluctantly—in contemporary political, social, and economic debate in Southern

Africa. They are also key words behind principles and

practices in global contexts, where attempts are made to

address present development problems and envisage the

sustainable use of resources into the future.

The call for sustainable development is often heard and is

invariably defined as: ...development that meets the needs of

the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (Botchway and others 2001:

407).

In our opinion, that definition in itself is insufficient and

ineffective as a means to understand the challenges of

WAG-CEAD Alliance: Commitment to

Wilderness Training and Protection in

Southern Africa

W. D. Densham

R. J. Fincham

securing and perpetuating a tradition of innovative debate

around wilderness training, management, and protection.

McNeill (2000: 22) notes that the

...sustainable development debate has often been cast (by the

Bruntland Report and others) in terms of the rights of future

generations. ...it necessarily involves:

• Rights of the poor in the present generation, as against

those of the rich.

• Rights of non-humans as against humans.

• Rights of future generations as against present

generations.

His observations are crucial because they underline the

political, most often government- driven desire to uplift the

considerable populations of the continent, where poverty

fashions the life expectations of most people. There is serious

error in thinking that we can plan for the future by adopting

consensus-type definitions eschewed by Botchway (2001)

and the famous Bruntland Report (Bruntland 1987). We

must rather face the confrontation that exists in the heart of

the “sustainable development” debate, as made so abundantly clear when the other two dimensions as spelt out by

McNeill (2000) are added. The world of the “haves” and the

“have nots” have very different views on the value of conservation, for example, and they color the theory and practice of

conservation and wilderness actions we may wish to take.

Mary Seely, speaking at the 1996 Wilderness Management

Symposium in Namibia (Jankowitz and others 1999: 189),

sets out the issue succinctly:

...I would like to suggest, that if all of us are interested in

Wilderness, as we all profess to be, and why we are here, we

ought to be spending a lot more time looking outside of the

Wilderness in Namibia. That is where the poverty is taking

place. That is where the land degradation is taking place.

That is where the population is...and the situations...that are

going to impact upon what we consider Wilderness, what we

would like to see as Wilderness in the future. And we should

be spending more time there already.

It is our contention that the alliance formed between the

Wilderness Action Group (WAG), the Centre for Environment and Development (CEAD)-University of Natal, and

the partners of both organizations promotes an exciting

philosophy of education, training, and research in wilderness. It embraces ideas that highlight a sound understanding of the African, as well as the more global contexts in

which a pedagogical philosophy must be etched. It is a

philosophy that builds on the ideas of Africanists such as

Draper (1998), Mkhize (1999), Player (1999), Muir (1999),

Densham (1999), Bainbridge (1987), Van Rensburg (1995),

and Carruthers (2001). It also takes cognizance of the
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 35

Densham and Fincham WAG-CEAD Alliance: Commitment to Wilderness Training and Protection in Southern Africa

ever-expanding conservation and wilderness literature found

elsewhere (Beinart and Coates 1995; Martin 1999; Nicolson

1970; Weingart 1999; White 1967; and many others).

As such, the objective of this paper is to examine the value

of bringing wilderness practitioners and more broadly focused academics together to develop a program of wilderness

training that is intended to contribute to wilderness management and protection. To achieve this aim a brief outline

of the historical background to the alliance is presented.

Thereafter, the nature of the alliance is examined before its

achievements are considered. Key challenges are articulated as a basis for a prognosis of future actions.

Context and Perspectives ________

A major concern in fostering wilderness conservation in

this region has been that key organizations embrace wilderness as part of their mandate. As Densham (1999) points out,

wilderness conservation in Africa had its origins in KwaZuluNatal when the then Natal Parks Board, now the Ezimvelo

KwaZulu-Natal Wildlife (EKZNW), set aside the first wilderness area in Zululand in 1955, others being added in the

Province and elsewhere thereafter. By the 1990s, wilderness

as a separate category in the South African classification of

protected areas was in place. While these steps are laudable,

there has been little imprint of wilderness proclamation

more widely on the continent, although the symposium held

in the Waterberg Plateau Park in Namibia in 1996 highlighted its significance and what was being done in that

country (Cooper 1999).

Another issue highlighted by Densham was the lack of a

common approach to management of wilderness. Herein lay

the impetus to develop wilderness management training.

WAG became the driving force behind training after its

inception in 1979 as a voluntary nongovernment organization (NGO). Amongst others, its mission is to:

Promote the ethic of wilderness conservation in southern

Africa and elsewhere; and Promote the appropriate management and use of wilderness areas.

It has also been concerned with:

Submissions to governments, politicians, decision-makers

and international agencies on the value of wilderness; and

Education and training programs for wilderness managers,

administrators, users of wilderness areas and communities

living adjacent to wilderness areas.

By the 1990s, WAG was fully involved in a vigorous

training program to fill a clearly perceived void. It also

realized that it was not only formal organizations that

required such training but that other NGOs and communities with direct and indirect interests in wilderness needed

to be vitally involved.

It also became evident that its partnership with the United

States Forest Service was pivotal in developing training,

given the considerable experience from those parts. So, it

delivered courses from the early 1990s, training some 500 to

600 participants over an 8-year period—both in South Africa

and in Namibia, where similar concerns and a growing

wilderness expertise made for happy synergy.

In 1998, WAG and CEAD met to formally discuss the

evolution of a partnership to forward the training program

they had developed. Also attending was Dr. Wayne Freimund

from the Wilderness Institute, University of Montana, School

of Forestry. This tripartite alliance has been important in

the development of the management training that has

ensued, as indicated later in this paper.

The Centre for Environment and Development-University of Netal, established in 1995, has three key functions:

(1) teaching, (2) research, and (3) outreach activities. In its

inception years, the flagship activity has been a 1-year

interdisciplinary course work Masters Program in Environment and Development (MEnvDev). The program annually

attracts 25 or so students, from all over Africa in particular.

In more recent times, students and researchers from other

parts of the globe are joining the program, denoting a more

global appeal of the program and the work of CEAD. However, the African nature of the programs remains a key

strength.

From a potential focus on wilderness alone, the meeting

mentioned earlier also resulted in the establishment of an

entirely new program of postgraduate study in Protected

Area Management (PAM). The first intake of postgraduate

students will enter the program in July 2002. The PAM

program admirably complements the MEnvDev program.

Its purpose is to produce graduates who understand the

concepts and principles of Protected Area Management in

the local and Southern African context. These graduates will

provide the skills and expertise critical to institutions and

communities tasked with managing the sustainable use of

all categories of protected areas.

• It is useful to touch on one or two aspects of the PAM

program, since we see that as the context for future

wilderness teaching and management training.

• PAM opens up the possibility to train managers of

Wilderness through participation in the Masters program itself. This will enable graduates (exit qualifications include certificates, diploma, and degree options)

to have training in conservation management and principles from theory and practice that are directly relevant to wilderness.

• Professional short courses associated with PAM will

include the Wilderness Concepts and Practice course,

open to all who meet the necessary entrance requirements. This course has evolved out of the two courses

developed by WAG, the Basic and the Advanced management courses, offered before the alliance was set in

place.

• The offering of the Basic and the Advanced management courses to potential audiences as in the past.

• The offering of specially tailored courses based on those

above, for example, as in the Special Course given just

prior to the 7th World Wilderness Congress.

CEAD/WAG Partnership

TANSTAAFL is a wonderful acronym boldly making the

point that, “There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.” Any

partnership requires careful nurturing, and a hallmark of

this one has been the joint commitment of both parties. What

then makes for the successes that it has achieved? The

following issues spring to mind:
36 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Densham and Fincham WAG-CEAD Alliance: Commitment to Wilderness Training and Protection in Southern Africa

• Complementarity—Each partner has brought specific

skills to the marriage. WAG’s practical experience has

been invaluable. CEAD’s interdisciplinary expertise

and unique position within the academic community is

vitally important.

• Complexity—The very nature of wilderness begs a multifaceted examination. To progress in the training and

garnishing of management skills for wilderness means

that learners must, on the one hand, not embrace

wilderness concepts and practice via experiential learning from practitioners alone. That learning must be

packaged within a broader range of theoretical economic, environmental, social, political, and ethical considerations that work at different scales within a system

(fig. 1). WAG provides the former, and the university

provides the latter.

• Problem-based learning—This approach to training (fig. 2)

is well suited to the wilderness philosophy. Learning is

Teacher control

Learner control

Lectures

Project/case

study work

Problem

solving

Learner control

Figure 2—Opting for problem- and project-based

learning.

Boundaries set by symptoms of a “problem” (that is, an issue)

Key: N = Natural

S = Social

T = Technological

Macro-level emergent phenomena from T-N-S

interaction

aggregation from below

Meso-level

decision environment set by macro-level

emergent phenomena at meso-level

aggregation from below

Micro-level

decision environment set by macro-/meso-levels

emergent phenomena at micro-level

N S

T

N S

T

N S

T

Figure 1—Issues leading to emergent phenomena (Botchway and others: 398, fig 24.1). Emergence refers to the phenomena whereby causes

at one hierarchical level generate qualitatively

new characteristics at another level of greater

complexity. Translated into our terms, wilderness

problems mainly caused by the complex interactions between technological (T), natural (N), and

social (S) systems across space and time.

driven by the learner; the lecturing and wilderness

experts act as facilitators. The ability to link theory and

practice in a meaningful way is greatly enhanced.

• Accreditation—All courses taught are now fully accredited within a University System that has international

standing and demands quality assurance in the delivery of its programs.

• Skills Development Act of the Republic of South Africa—

In an effort to enhance the skill levels in all organizations, each one has to pay a 1-percent levy on all salaried

individuals within it. In turn, about 75 percent of that

levy is retrievable if staff are sent on accredited training

programs. The Concepts and Practice courses meet these

requirements, and so it means that future intakes are, in

principle, assured for organizations whose mainstream

activities include wilderness management.

• Evaluation and review process—I (the Coordinator of

the training program) have instituted a course evaluation and review system that obtains strong feedback

from learners and from those who teach on the course.

In this way the program remains relevant and meets

needs.

• Adaptability—Courses can be adapted and tailor made

to suit the requirements of clients.

• A virtual reality—CEAD and WAG have long held the

philosophy that “small is beautiful.” The courses developed through the partnership have not required huge

infrastructural requirements, but rather the development of course material and staff skills that are readily

transportable. As such, the courses can be taken to

different venues. Delivery in the Southern African Development Community region and further afield are

distinct possibilities.

Partnership Achievements ________

Following are some of the key achievements to date:

• Proven contribution to trained management capacity—

There is now a trained cadre of field workers who can

provide management capacity in wilderness designated

areas, specifically within an African context.

• Involvement of communities abutting and/or with a stake

in wilderness areas in capacity building—Communities

abutting on wilderness are developing capacity to appreciate and contribute to wilderness conservation.

• Professional training of postgraduate students—Students

are being trained at a postgraduate level in Wilderness

Concepts and Practice.

• Exposure for wilderness—The courses have provided

broad exposure for the need of wilderness conservation

in an underdeveloped or disadvantaged world context.

• Development of expertise in making management

plans—The ability of a broad group of learners to conduct management plans is in place.

• Assistance in the proclamation of new wilderness areas

and setting in place wilderness legislation—The setting

aside of new wilderness areas in Southern Africa has

taken place, and WAG in particular has made considerable contributions to the legislative process in South

Africa.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 37

Densham and Fincham WAG-CEAD Alliance: Commitment to Wilderness Training and Protection in Southern Africa

• Namibian Wilderness Training Initiative—The

Namibian Wilderness Association (NWA) has indicated

that they wish to, and are capable of, assuming the role

of a Wilderness training provider. The NWA has stated

that they wish to retain their association with WAG and

CEAD. However, they will be seeking a more direct

partnership with the Polytechnic of Namibia in respect

to accreditation.

Constraints ____________________

The following have been identified as limiting factors

in the sustained development of training in wilderness

management:

• Need for self-sufficiency—Becoming self-sufficient from

a funding perspective will be a necessity. Taking full

advantage of the Skills Development Act will be crucial

so that relevant courses become self-supporting and

donor funds are not necessary.

• Striving for formal support—The formal support from

conservation organizations will be crucial so that staff is

required to undertake relevant courses, including the

anchor Basic and Advanced courses specifically designed for managers and the Wilderness Concepts and

Practices fashioned for postgraduate student training.

• Executive and senior management training—At present,

there is no strong targeting of executive/senior management within the teaching schema. Invariably, this key

group of decisionmakers do not rate wilderness as a

priority within sustainable development and conservation contexts. They generally do not understand or

appreciate the need for wilderness and its special visitor

and management requirements.

• The training of facilitators—The facilitators of the training programs need to ensure that relevant individuals

and organizations master the wilderness material and

can, themselves, become facilitators. The inception of a

Train the Facilitators course in October of this year has

paved the way to ensure this capability into the future.

• The maintenance of standards is crucial—The University of Montana has, in principle, agreed to act as an

outside evaluator of all courses developed, and that role

must be ensured.

• Government support—Government support for wilderness is understandably limited. Here, the work of the

Wilderness Action Group, the Centre for Development,

the Wilderness Leadership School, and the Wilderness

Foundation provides a model so that this program of

training can be emulated.

• The need to spread the message—There remains a

limited number of key NGOs in the region that do not

know of the program. Strategies to involve them will be

essential.

• The need for a focused research initiative to underpin

the training—No teaching initiative can long remain

relevant and vibrant without reference to practitioners

who are at the cutting edge of discovery around their

area of expertise. As such, a vision for linking research

to the teaching program is necessary.

Looking to the Future ____________

The context in which protected areas are managed, whether

under private, State, or communal ownership, has changed

dramatically. Whereas, in the past, a professional approach

to species protection many have been appropriate, now it is

necessary to manage simultaneously for social, economic,

and biodiversity sustainability within and across sociopolitical and geographical boundaries. To bring about a

fresh approach to the job, a new generation of managers is

required.

The development of the Protected Area Management

(PAM) program at CEAD-University of Natal provides a

context within which wilderness concerns can be strategically integrated within a broader educational program.

Wilderness must be conceived literally and figuratively as

an integral part of conservation management. It must not be

viewed as an “add on” or a “nice to have” activity.

This is the strategy being adopted by the WAG-CEAD

partnership. It provides a model for furthering wilderness

teaching, research, and outreach, and it is one that can be

adopted more widely outside the confines of these two

organizations. Under their auspices, in association, or simply bearing the lessons learnt here, the promulgation of new

initiatives is entirely feasible and to be welcomed.

References _____________________

Bainbridge, W. R. 1987. Management objectives and goals for

wilderness areas: wilderness areas as a conservation category.

In: Martin, V.; Inglis, M. I., eds. Wilderness, the way ahead.

London: Findhorn Press: 114–124.

Beinart, W.; Coates, P. 1995. Environment and history: the taming

of nature in the USA and South Africa. ISBN: 0415114683.

London: Routledge.

Botchway, Q.; Noon, D.; Setshedi, T. T. 2001. Systems theory in

urban development. In: Coetzee and others, eds. Development

theory, policy and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press:

395–412.

Bruntland, G. H. 1987. Our common future: World Commission on

Environment and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Carruthers, J. 2001. Wildlife and warfare: the life of James StevensonHamilton. Pietermaritzburg, South Africa: University of Natal

Press. 244 p.

Cooper, T. G. 1999 The Waterberg Wilderness. In: Cooper, T. G., ed.

Proceedings of the wilderness management symposium; 1996

June 23–27; Waterberg Plateau Park, Namibia. Windhoek,

Namibia: John Meinert: 32–35.

Densham, W. D. 1999. Wilderness management in KwaZulu-Natal.

In: Cooper, T. G., ed. Proceedings of the wilderness management

symposium; 1996 June 23–27; Waterberg Plateau Park, Namibia.

Windhoek, Namibia: John Meinert: 100–105.

Draper, M. 1998. Zen and the art of garden province maintenance:

the soft intimacy of hard men in the wilderness of KwaZuluNatal, South Africa, 1952–1997. Journal of Southern African

Studies. 24(4): 25–52.

Jankowitz, W.; Seely, Mary; Loutit, Rudi; Berry, H.; Kojwang, H.;

Shilongo, G. 1999. Wilderness in Namibia: where to from here?

In: Cooper, T. G., ed. Proceedings of the wilderness management

symposium; 1996 June 23–27; Waterberg Plateau Park, Namibia.

Windhoek, Namibia: John Meinert: 188–196.

Martin, V. 1999. International status of wilderness. In: Cooper, T. G.,

ed. Proceedings of the wilderness management symposium; 1996
38 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Densham and Fincham WAG-CEAD Alliance: Commitment to Wilderness Training and Protection in Southern Africa

June 23–27; Waterberg Plateau Park, Namibia. Windhoek,

Namibia: John Meinert: 22–26.

McNeill, D. 2000. The concept of sustainable development. In: Lee, K.;

[and others], eds. Global sustainable development in the 21st

Century. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press: 10–30.

Mkhize, K. 1999. Wilderness: a South African perspective. In:

Cooper, T. G., ed. Proceedings of the wilderness management

symposium; 1996 June 23–27; Waterberg Plateau Park, Namibia.

Windhoek, Namibia: John Meinert: 27–29.

Muir, A. 1999. The Wilderness Leadership School. In: Cooper, T. G.,

ed. Proceedings of the wilderness management symposium; 1996

June 23–27; Waterberg Plateau Park, Namibia. Windhoek,

Namibia: John Meinert: 119–120.

Nicolson, M.1970. The environmental revolution: a guide for the

new masters of the world. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Player, I. 1999. Wilderness: Africa as an international resource. In:

Cooper, T. G., ed. Proceedings of the wilderness management

symposium; 1996 June 23–27; Waterberg Plateau Park, Namibia.

Windhoek, Namibia: John Meinert: 18–21.

Van Rensburg, E. J. 1995. Environmental education and research in

Southern Africa: a landscape of shifting priorities. Grahamstown:

Rhodes University. 249 p. Thesis.

Weingart, P. 1999. An historical perspective of wilderness in the

USA. In: Cooper, T. G., ed. Proceedings of the wilderness management symposium; 1996 June 23–27; Waterberg Plateau Park,

Namibia. Windhoek, Namibia: John Meinert: 36–39.

White, L. 1967. The historical roots of our ecologic crisis. Science.

155(3767): 1203–1207.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 39

Stefanie Freitag-Ronaldson is Specialist Scientist, Environmental Management, and Freek J. Venter is Specialist Scientist, Riparian Systems,

Kruger National Park, Private Bag X402, Skukuza 1350, South Africa, FAX:

++49 13 735-6518, E-mails: stefanief@parks-sa.co.za, freekv@parks-sa.co.za.

Ralf H. Kalwa was for many years Ranger and then Manager, Integrated

Environmental Management in Kruger National Park, and is now in private

practice with Rhengu Environmental Services, P.O. Box 1046, Malelane,

South Africa, FAX: ++49 13 790-0429, E-mail: rhengu@mweb.co.za. Jaco C.

Badenhorst and Jan P. Erasmus are Wilderness Trails Rangers in Kruger

National Park, Private Bag X402, Skukuza 1350, South Africa, FAX: ++49 13

790-1075, E-mails: jobadies@mweb.co.za, jan.erasmus@mweb.co.za. Flip J.

Nel was Ranger and Regional Ranger in Kruger National Park for 30 years

and is now based in Nelspruit, Telephone: ++ 13 741-4423.

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Kruger National Park (KNP) embodies a range of intrinsic “wilderness qualities,” varying from wilderness areas to developed rest camps. In 1997, the Recreational Opportunities Zoning

(ROZ) Plan was developed to meet the needs and expectations of

widely different levels of visitors, by presenting as broad a range of

wilderness qualities as possible, based on the premise that no facets

of biodiversity conservation are significantly affected by existing

ecotourism activities within KNP. As pressure to generate revenue

mounts, there is an increasing squeeze on wilderness areas and the

sense of place within KNP. The boundaries and development limitations of the ROZ Plan, the very policy that was designed to allow

a graded range of wilderness experiences, is being challenged.

The KNP zoning policy and philosophy is presented, as well as a

nonquantified assessment of the environmental impacts of

ecotourism within the Park, to challenge the premise that biodiversity

conservation is not affected by tourism developments. A simple

investigation into the ecological basis for zoning within KNP has

been included, as well as a list of shortcomings that should be

addressed in the upcoming revision of this policy.

Introduction ____________________

One of the fundamental drawing cards for visitors to

Kruger National Park (KNP) is its wide range of intrinsic

and often intangible “wilderness qualities.” These vary in

Wilderness, Wilderness Quality Management,

and Recreational Opportunities Zoning

Within Kruger National Park, South Africa

Stefanie Freitag-Ronaldson

Ralf H. Kalwa

Jaco C. Badenhorst

Jan P. Erasmus

Freek J. Venter

Flip J. Nel

degree from pristine wilderness trails and areas to large,

well-developed, and modernized rest camps. The attributes,

which are perceived, sought, and experienced, include remoteness, serenity, peace, wildness, solitude, harmony, reflection opportunities, and inspiration. The intensity with

which the environment is experienced is a direct function of

the ambience and spirit of a place that combines both

physical characteristics and atmosphere, also termed the

“sense of place” (fig. 1).

History of Zoning in Kruger National Park

Zoning in KNP has been a source of debate for many years

and is an ongoing challenge in terms of the geographic extent

and size of different zones, their desired quality of pristineness, and the development and management thereof. Generally, criticisms and conflicts arise over the varying range of

perception, expectation, and interpretation of what wilderness is and how it should be treated.

The KNP 1975 Masterplan (Joubert 1975) resulted in 32

zones being identified within five main categories: (1) botanic

priority areas, (2) wilderness areas of minimal human influence, (3) rare antelope priority areas, (4) elephant priority

areas, and (5) general wildlife areas. These were delimited

primarily on the basis of vegetation and animal communities, with no attempt made to categorize the intensity of

tourism development.

The subsequent delineation of 35 landscape types, based

on extensive phytosociological surveys, geomorphological

features, soil types and vegetation composition and structure (Coetzee 1983; Gertenbach 1978, 1983; Van Rooyen

1978) and their associated faunal communities were considered more appropriate units for the zoning of KNP. The

reasoning was based on the fact that composition of landscapes reflects the natural diversity of species and structure

of the area and thus represents the primary priorities for the

Park’s management. Thus, in 1986, the KNP Masterplan

included a zonation plan based entirely on the 35 landscapes, with all landscapes including wilderness zones, natural zones, and development/general tourism zones (Joubert

1986). This formed the basis of the revised zonation policy

developed from the 1997 review of the KNP Master Plan.
40 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Freitag-Ronaldson, Kalwa, Badenhorst, Erasmus, Venter, and Nel Wilderness, Wilderness Quality Management, and Recreational Opportunities...

PHYSICAL

ATTRIBUTES

Setting,

topography, form,

scale, colours, textures,

aesthetics, vegetation, weather,

climate, remoteness, roughness, wildness,

desolateness, locality, salutary, tranquilty, aura

grandness, uniqueness

Backpack,

hike, walk,

camp, swim,

game viewing,

botanizing,

birding, animal

identification,

listen, look, feel, smell,

taste, socialize, cook, 

drink, eat, photography, 

watch, wait, plan, sleep,

rest, relax, take a nap,

doze off, wash,

sanitize

Happiness,

joy, peace,

contentment,

excitement, awe,

challenge, 

camaraderie,

stimulus, curiosity,

concern, cheerfulness,

fear, disappointment,

respect, weariness,

fatigue, thirst, hunger,

heat, cold, pain,

grief, adventure,

interest,

pleasantness

ACTIVITIES EXPERIENCES

The

AMBIENCE

(ATMOSPHERE)

and

SPIRIT

of a place

The intensity with which

the environment is

experienced is

related to the

AMBIENCE

and

SPIRIT

of a specific place,

the “sense of place”

The SPIRIT of a place

is a combination

of characteristics which

give a place its special

atmosphere

The AMBIENCE of a place

is an experience created by a

combination of the physical

characteristics of the place

and those characteristics of

the person himself

(interests, intentions, etc.)

which bring him to the place

Figure 1—Graphic representation of the relationship between people and conservation areas and determination of “sense of place” (Venter and others 1997).
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 41

Freitag-Ronaldson, Kalwa, Badenhorst, Erasmus, Venter, and Nel Wilderness, Wilderness Quality Management, and Recreational Opportunities...

Wilderness Within the Kruger National

Park Management Framework

As part of the 1997 Master Plan review and contribution

to the management of KNP, an objectives hierarchy (Volume

VII) (Braack 1997a) and revised policy recommendations

(Volume VIII) (Braack 1997b) were developed as supplements to the 1986 Master Plan. This places the wilderness

theme, as one of the four cornerstone objectives under the

KNP Mission Statement, into context within the overall

KNP management framework (fig. 2). The zonation

subobjective has received the most attention and resulted in

the development of the Recreational Opportunities Zoning

policy in 1997 (Venter and others 1997).

Recreational Opportunity Zoning

Plan for Kruger National Park _____

Zonation in the 1997 revision of the Master Plan for the

management of KNP aims to meet the needs and expectations of widely different levels of “wilderness” visitors and,

therefore, presents as broad a range of wilderness qualities

as possible. This zonation exercise was termed the Recreational Opportunities Zoning Plan (ROZ, figure 3, table 1;

Venter and others 1997) and has been a useful guide to the

further infrastructure and ecotourism developments in the

Park.

It was argued at the time of formulation of the ROZ policy,

that the conservation of wilderness for its own sake was not

a driving issue. This premise was based on the fact that the

conservation of all facets of biodiversity, namely structure,

function, and composition, were not significantly affected by

existing ecotourism activities anywhere within KNP. The

proper management of ecotourism use was considered to

pose no threat to the Park’s primary conservation objective,

namely ecosystem maintenance. Biodiversity maintenance

was thus no longer the driving principle behind the zoning

of KNP, but it was recognized that visitors to conservation

areas seek intangible attributes of “wilderness qualities”

such as solitude, remoteness, and peace, in addition to

simply viewing wildlife. This led to a philosophy of maximizing wilderness experience and opportunities for visitors in

the ROZ Plan.

Figure 2—Position of wilderness and zoning objectives within the overall Kruger National Park

management framework (compiled from Volume VII of the KNP Master Plan; Braack 1997a).

ROZ Plan

KNP MISSION STATEMENT

To maintain biodiversity in all its natural facets and fluxes, and to provide human benefits in keeping with the mission of the

South African National Parks in a manner which detracts as little as possible from the wilderness qualities of the KNP

WILDERNESS QUALITIES

OBJECTIVE

BALANCING

OBJECTIVE

HUMAN BENEFITS

OBJECTIVE

BIODIVERSITY

OBJECTIVE

TO MAINTAIN WITHIN ALL AREAS OF THE KNP THOSE SPIRITUAL AND EXPERIENTIAL QUALITIES1 ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONCEPT OF

WILDERNESS 2

, ACHIEVED THROUGH DEFINED MANAGEMENT OF ZONES AIMED AT PRESERVING DIFFERING DEGREES OF WILDERNESS

EXPERIENCE. (1 By “spiritual and experiential qualities” is meant, amongst others, solitude, remoteness, wildness, serenity, harmony and other attributes; 2

where

the attributes of a naturally-functioning ecosystem and its associated ambience remain unimpaired by humans)

AWARENESS OBJECTIVE

To promote an appreciation of

the intrinsic inspirational and

recreational values of

wilderness qualities as

manifested at different levels.

ZONATION OBJECTIVE

To plan, develop and implement

a zonation system providing a

range of differing degrees of

wilderness experience in a manner

which strives to maximise

throughout the KNP those attributes

which make up wilderness qualities.

To recommend upper and lower limits for the proportion and composition of areas

allocated to the different wilderness quality zones

MONITORING &

MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVE

To develop appropriate monitoring

mechanisms to verify whether

those qualities and experiences

for which zones have been

allocated are being maintained, and

target attributes which may require

restoration so as to achieve

specifications of individual zones.

COLLABORATION &

NETWORK OBJECTIVE

To develop, implement and maintain

a collaborative network between the

KNP and other conservation or

wilderness-associated institutions

(regional, national, international)

so as to promote wilderness

qualities and associated values.

AUDIT OBJECTIVE

To establish a regular external

auditing capacity to ensure

that wilderness qualities are

not being eroded within the KNP.

POLICY & LEGAL OBJECTIVE

To ensure that legislation exists to

adequately protect the maintenance

of zones of wilderness qualities

(as specified under Recreational

Opportunities Zonation) and their

designated borders within

National Parks.
42 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Freitag-Ronaldson, Kalwa, Badenhorst, Erasmus, Venter, and Nel Wilderness, Wilderness Quality Management, and Recreational Opportunities...

Figure 3—Recreational Opportunity Zoning

Plan within Kruger National Park.

Nevertheless, pristine minimum impact zones were retained in substantial tracts in the ROZ Plan on the basis of

(1) keeping options open for future generations, (2) providing

for the increasing need of a sector of society seeking remoteness and a back-to-basics approach in truly pristine and

unaffected wilderness, and (3) satisfying the ethical and

moral justification for at least some such areas remaining.

Many of these wilderness areas (pristine and primitive

categories) are located in blocks historically unaffected by

development, but often peripheral to the Park or fragmented

by linear management and other infrastructure developments.

The ROZ system was thus devised within the wilderness

objective

...to maintain within all areas of KNP those spiritual and

experiential qualities associated with the concept of wilderness, achieved through defined management zones aimed at

preserving differing degrees of wilderness experience (figs. 2

and 3; table 1).

Zone delineation took into account the following:

1. Due consideration for the distribution of existing wilderness areas and wilderness trail operations (= zonation by

default).

2. Designation of the most appropriate and sustainable

environmental zonation for an area.

3. The extent of possible alteration by future human

actions.

4. Distribution of impacts in time and space that affected

existing zonation at the time of ROZ development (such as,

management actions and existing infrastructure and

development).

5. Cognizance of uncertainty or sensitivity to specific zone

designation for an area.

Challenges to the ROZ Policy

One of the fundamental reasons for continuous challenges

to the ROZ policy by development proposals is the perception

that zone definition is not made explicit enough and that the

ecological basis for setting aside these areas is not emphasized. This is coupled, to some degree, with the notion that

wilderness areas do not generate comparative incomes to

other developed zones. This has resulted in some “bending of

the rules,” as the intrinsic need for and right of pristine and

primitive wilderness areas and associated wilderness qualities are not viewed equally by all parties. Similarly, the

impacts of tourism have not been quantitatively assessed

and thus no impact value is put to these, and they are

considered insignificant or absent.

Ecological Basis of Zoning in Kruger National Park

Assessed—The zoning proposed by Joubert in 1986, and

based on the 35 landscapes described by Gertenbach (1983),

form the basis of the zoning policy described in the ROZ Plan.

However, these ecological principles underlying zone delineation are not explicitly stated, which has led to some

challenges to the underlying philosophy of ROZ in KNP.

Over the years, there have been a number of different

ecological systems of land classification used in KNP (for a

comparative summary see Solomon and others 1999). Here,

we use (1) the Venter-based land classification hierarchy

(Venter 1990), which is mainly focussed on the decisive role

of soil characteristics in shaping plant communities of the

Lowveld region, and (2) the Gertenbach landscape classification (Gertenbach 1983), based on geomorphology, climate,

soil, vegetation pattern, and associated fauna. A simple

Geographical Information System (GIS) based analysis of

geographical overlays of ROZ zones and Gertenbach’s landscapes (n = 35), as well as Venter’s land systems (n = 11) and

land types (n = 56), was used to evaluate the ecological basis

for zoning within KNP. The results are provided in figures 4

and 5, where bar graphs indicate the extent of coverage by

ROZ zones, as well as wilderness zones only (categories A

and B) afforded each land unit (be it land system, landscape,

or land type). Figure 4a graphically illustrates the spread of

land units across ROZ zones in KNP, indicating complete

representation of all three land classification units in the

pristine and primitive wilderness zones (zones A and B). The

majority of land units are also represented by more than 40

percent of their areas in wilderness zones (fig. 4b).

If Venter’s land type is used as the mesoscale most desirable and adequately detailed unit of land definition, eight

land types stand out as being potentially underrepresented

(<35 percent of their areas) in the wilderness zones of KNP

as currently defined geographically: Lwakahle, Marithenga,
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 43

Freitag-Ronaldson, Kalwa, Badenhorst, Erasmus, Venter, and Nel Wilderness, Wilderness Quality Management, and Recreational Opportunities... Definition Recreational opportunity Levels of sophistication provided Interaction with other users Evidence of other users Access

• Unmodified natural

environment

• Purest form of

wilderness possible in

KNP

• No evidence of

modern man having

manipulated the

ecosystem in any way,

past or present

• No sight as far as the

eye can see, or sound

of modern man—own

noise only

• No roads or other

infrastructure in or

peripheral to the area

• Hiking

• Backpacking

• Walking

• None

• Nonexistent

• Minimal or absent

• On foot only

• Guided

• Restricted access

• Portable tents or open

near edge of zone

• No-trace camping

ethic

• Slightly modified

natural environment

• Limited evidence of

modern man having

manipulated the

ecosystem

• Views of outside

development or Park

infrastructure possible

but infrequent

• Roads (mainly

ungraveled) or other

infrastructure present

but limited to the

minimum required for

management and

tourism activities

• Hiking

• Backpacking

• Walking

• Canoeing

• Limited motorized

• Camping

• Low

• Low

• Often

• Only 4x4 or other

suitable vehicles

(official or private)

allowed

• Guided or unguided

• Restricted access

• Access mainly on

ungraveled dirt roads

• Slightly or moderately

modified natural

environment

• Limited evidence of

modern man having

manipulated the

ecosystem

• Views of outside

development or Park

infrastructure possible

but infrequent

• Gravelled roads or

other infrastructure

present but limited to

minimum required for

management and

tourism activities

• Hiking

• Backpacking

• Walking

• Canoeing

• Limited motorized

• Moderate

• Moderate

• Generally visible

• Sedan cars and other

suitable vehicles

(official or private)

allowed

• Guided or unguided

• Restricted access only

on official roads

• Traditional game

viewing routes with

associated road

infrastructure such as

picnic sites, viewpoints, bridges, selfguided trails

• Occur as corridors in

Zones A to D

• Moderately modified

natural environment

• Evidence of modern

man having manipulated the ecosystem

• Motorized activities

• Moderate to high

• Moderate, sometimes

high

• Generally visible

• Sedan cars and other

suitable vehicles

(including buses and

approved open

vehicles)

• Mainly unguided, but

guided possible

• Highly modified natural

environment (such as

rest camps, staff

villages, administration

buildings, rangers

posts) developed for

visitors and administration

• Modern amenities very

much in evidence

• Facilities to spend

money and to buy

goods are available

• Many other nongame

reserve-dependant

facilities are provided

• Motorized

• Variety of recreational

opportunities, often

associated with

infrastructure

• High

• High

• Highly visible

• Sedan cars and other

suitable vehicles

(including buses and

approved open

vehicles)

• Mainly unguided, but

guided possible

(con.)

• Essentially unmodified

natural environment

• No evidence of

modern man having

manipulated the

ecosystem in recent

past

• Views of outside

development or Park

infrastructure may be

visible in the distance

from certain vantage

points. Sounds of

vehicles and trains

sometimes audible in

the distance

• No roads or other

infrastructure. Area

buffered from roads by

Zone C

• Potential for rehabilitation to Zone A

• Hiking

• Backpacking

• Walking

• Canoeing

• None

• Very low to minimal

• Minimal

• On foot or canoe

• Guided

• Restricted access

• Access to perimeter

mainly on ungraveled

dirt roads

• Portable tents or in

open

Table 1—Recreational Opportunity Zoning Plan for Kruger National park—zone definitions and limits of sophistication.

ABCDEF

High-density

Zone Pristine Primitive Semiprimitive Limited motorized Motorized development
44 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Freitag-Ronaldson, Kalwa, Badenhorst, Erasmus, Venter, and Nel Wilderness, Wilderness Quality Management, and Recreational Opportunities...

Mavumbye, Pafuri, Phalaborwa, Rabelais, Shivhulani, and

Tsotsi (fig. 5c). Interesting to note is that there are also eight

land types that are almost completely located within wilderness areas (fig. 5c). At the slightly courser Gertenbach

landscape scale, landscape 8 is severely underrepresented

in wilderness zones (fig. 5b). This constitutes the moderately

undulating granitic plains with C. mopane tree savanna,

namely, the Phalaborwa sandveld. At the macroscale of land

systems, the least represented land system in wilderness

areas is the Bulweni system (BU, fig. 5a), a very narrow and

sensitive north-south land system.

Environmental Impacts of Wildlife Tourism—A

nonquantified assessment of the environmental impacts of

ecotourism within KNP is presented here to challenge the

premise that biodiversity conservation is not affected by

tourism developments within the Park (table 2). Many of

these impacts have been observed by rangers and others,

and have been grouped and summarized here.

The conclusion can be drawn that, although only <3 percent

of KNP is directly disturbed by human infrastructure, there

is evidence that certain components of biodiversity (structure, function, composition) may be affected, and the overall

Table 1—Con.

ABCDEF

High-density

Zone Pristine Primitive Semiprimitive Limited motorized Motorized development

Access (con.) • No-trace camping

ethic

• Semipermanent rustic

camps allowed on

edge of zone

• Permanent rustic

camps allowed within

1 km (0.6 miles) of

boundary

• Accommodation—tent

or rustic hut

• Camping with own tent

• Access mainly on

graveled roads

• Permanent luxury (low

density) camps

• Permanent rustic

camps

• Camping with own tent

or caravan

• Unrestricted access

but limited to official

roads

• Access mainly on

tarred and graveled

roads

• Unrestricted access

but limited to official

roads

• Access on tarred and

graveled roads

• Permanent (highdensity) camps with

modern amenities

• Permanent rustic

camps

• Camping with own tent

or caravan possible

Figure 4—Extent of representation of different land type classifications (land systems,

landscapes, land types) in ROZ zones in

Kruger National Park: (a) number of land units

per classification type within zones A to D;

(b) percent of land units represented within

wilderness zones A and B.

10

(a)

land systems

landscapes

land types

53 56

49

31 33 35

32

24

11 11 11

7 0

20

30

40

50

60

Number represented

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Number of land units

0 1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100

Percent in wilderness areas (zones A and B)

land systems

land types

landscapes

(b)

A

ROZ zone

B C D
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 45

Freitag-Ronaldson, Kalwa, Badenhorst, Erasmus, Venter, and Nel Wilderness, Wilderness Quality Management, and Recreational Opportunities...

Figure 5—Percentage representation of each individual land unit for the three land classification

systems in wilderness areas (zones A and B) in Kruger National Park: (a) land systems; (b) landscapes;

(c) land types.

1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Land types

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0

10

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

BU KL LE MA NW PA PH SA SK SP VU

Land systems

Landscapes

(a)

(c)

(b)

Percentage in wilderness areas

20

Percentage in wilderness areas

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

Percentage in wilderness areas

Balule

Bangu

Baobab Hill

Bububu

Bulweni

Dothole

Gorge

Houtboschrand

Klipkoppies

Lanner Gorge

Letaba

Lwakahle

Madzaringwe

Mahlangeni

Makhuthwanini

Malelane

Malonga

Malopeni

Manyeleti

Marithengo

Mashikiri

Masokosa

Mavumbye

Maaiplaas

Mphongolo

Muzandzeni

Nalatsi

Napi

Nhlanguleni

Nwambiya

Nwanetsi

Olifants

Orpen

Pafuri

Phalaborwa

Pretoriuskop

Pumbe

Punda

Rabelais

Randspruit

Renosterkoppies

Rietpan

Sabiepoort

Salitje

Satara

Shidyanamani

Shilawuri

Shingwedzi

Shivhulani

Shukuza

Timbavati

Tsende

Tsheri

Tsotsi

Vutome

Stolsnek
46 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Freitag-Ronaldson, Kalwa, Badenhorst, Erasmus, Venter, and Nel Wilderness, Wilderness Quality Management, and Recreational Opportunities...

• Ground hornbills beg for food along most tarred roads.

• Baboons and vervet monkeys have become problems at picnic sites and rest camps, although they are

still completely wild in wilderness areas and avoid trails and camps in these areas.

• Terrapins at water points along general tourist roads feed on tidbits thrown to them and may even

“beg.”

• Bushbuck in Letaba Camp often feed on pasta, bread, and a variety of other dishes offered to them by

tourists.

• Honey badgers, various mongooses, and spotted hyenas often raid dustbins and are fed around rest

camps, particularly along fencelines.

• Diurnal birds, such as fork-tailed drongos, have been known to become nocturnal because of permanent spotlights at camps.

• Artificial lights and lighting attract insects, which attract frogs, which in turn attract snakes, which are

often killed.

• Yellow-billed kites and other birds become problematic at picnic sites and camps where they are fed

and/or become thieves in their own right.

• Vultures have been known to follow helicopters during culling operations.

• Tortoises picked up and removed from the field.

• Fish trapped in wire gabions during flood conditions and sometimes exploited by staff and visitors,

primarily as a food source.

• Mutilation and theft of plants for private use or gardens.

• Collection of medicinal plants or plant parts.

• Predation efforts are disturbed, for example, along tarred roads with high volumes of traffic.

• Conversely, predators may capitalize on the distraction caused to prey by vehicles.

• Certain KNP lion prides have become experts at catching giraffe by causing them to slip on tarred

roads or up road embankments.

• Predators may kill antelope by chasing them into camp fences.

• Scrub hares, kudu, and so forth, often congregate within fenced-off camp areas and attract predators,

such as leopard regularly found inside Berg-en-Dal Camp fence.

• Numerous reports and suspected cases of cross-breeding of domestic cats and African wild cats in

peripheral areas of KNP.

• Occurrence of exotic Nile tilapia and silver carp in KNP rivers, and the probability of hybridizing with

indigenous fish species.

• The introduction of alien plant seeds into the KNP system, and further spread thereof on vehicle tires,

and so forth, (for example, the suspected spread of red water fern (Azolla filiculoides) along the eastern

boundary rivers and tributaries by vehicles on the Lebombo Overland Ecotrail).

• Inadvertent introductions of locally foreign animal species into areas of KNP from neighboring farms

and reserves, such as gemsbok from the Timbavati area and nyala from Mthethomusha and Sabie

Park Reserves.

• Snakes and scorpions are readily killed in rest camps, as they are viewed as undesirable.

• Poisons and other means are used to remove or kill ants, bees, wasps, and so forth.

• Monkeys and baboons are regularly killed in and around rest camps and picnic spots as problem

animals.

• Kori bustards in the Lower Sabie area have been killed against powerlines when flushed during night

drives.

• Powerlines can potentially kill many large birds, and there have been reports of giraffe electrocuted by

sagging powerlines (when supporting poles are pushed over by elephants).

• Grey louries and other birds have been recorded as drowning in reservoirs.

• Road kills by speeding tourists and staff are ongoing and include wild dog pups, lion cub, honey

badger, impala lambs, and many nocturnal and other birds.

• Numerous night-jar and scrub-hare road kills, especially on tarred roads at night when there is late

driving.

• There have been reported incidents of antelope poaching from vehicles.

• Animals have drowned in water troughs.

• Reeds, bush, and riparian trees are cut for better game-viewing opportunities.

• Waterholes created as game-viewing points cause unnatural game concentrations and vegetation

damage. In some cases, erosion also results due to bad placement on sensitive soils.

• Sewage systems/French drains/artificial wetlands create new unnatural habitats, sometimes in

naturally dry areas.

(con.)

Disturbance of animal feeding

pattern and behavior

Increased collection of wildlife

products from the field by visitors

Increased vulnerability to competition and predators

Genetic introgression and

introductions

Death of individuals

Habitat modification

Table 2—A nonquantified list of tourism impacts on wildlife and biodiversity as observed in Kruger National Park.

Observed impact Examples to support this
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 47

Freitag-Ronaldson, Kalwa, Badenhorst, Erasmus, Venter, and Nel Wilderness, Wilderness Quality Management, and Recreational Opportunities...

impact of tourism activities on biodiversity is poorly understood.

The Way Forward _______________

As pressure to develop and generate much needed revenue

mounts, there is an increasing squeeze on wilderness areas,

as well as the greater sense of place within KNP. This is

exerted directly on the boundaries and development limitations of the existing ROZ Plan, resulting in challenges to the

very policy that was designed to allow a graded range of

wilderness experiences. A revision of the ROZ Plan is scheduled for the upcoming months, and a number of issues that

need to be addressed during this process are listed in table 3.

In addition, pressures around the borders of KNP are mounting as developments impinge on the conservation area,

effectively reducing the nonimpacted core area and shrinking the distribution of “pure” wilderness attributes.

It is accepted that a system of zoning alone will not provide

a holistic approach to the protection of wilderness qualities

or wilderness areas, but that an integrated environmental

management approach is needed. Park managers must

solidify the basis upon which to consolidate the maintenance

of a graded wilderness system that combines societal values,

biodiversity conservation, precautionary principles, and

sustainable development into a balanced plan guiding the

further development and expansion of Kruger National

Park.

• Tarred roads lead to increased runoff stimulating tree growth and encroachment—this is particularly

noticeable with mopani in the northern KNP and sickle-bush in the south.

• Litter degrades the natural scene and is a danger to wildlife. An extreme example is the dump sites.

• Weirs, dam walls, and gabions have a barrier effect to fish migrations and may lead to deaths and

disturbance of migrations and spawning.

• Certain activities may result in introduction or spreading of alien biota (for example, the spread of

Azolla on the Lebombo Ecotrail route).

• Floods cause damage to infrastructure that requires significant reconstruction and the use of gravel

and sand from natural sources, as well as resulting in unsightly concrete and other debris being

deposited in river systems.

• Dust from gravel roads affects plants and their palatability.

• Widespread harvesting and subsequent transport of thatching grass on open vehicles has increased

the distribution of this species along roadsides.

• Building materials (for example, the use and transport of river sand) spread alien seeds and plants.

• Artificial dams and other water surfaces increase the distribution and breeding habitats of mosquitoes

and associated malaria epidemics.

• During summer months, tarred roads may be hot barriers to movements of snakes, reptiles, and so

forth, and may be a death trap for insects, snails, millipedes, and so forth, that are killed by vehicles.

• Road construction has resulted in many instances of unnatural damming of water flows.

• Vehicle or other tourist activity disrupts animal group cohesion by separating groups of animals on

either side of a road.

• Similarly, traffic and tourist interest may result in separation of parents from their offspring when

crossing roads.

Table 2—Con.

Observed impact Examples to support this

Habitat modification (con.)

Disruption of group cohesion

Acknowledgments ______________

We thank Dave Woods, Don Ntsala, and Sandra

MacFadyen for GIS analyses and mapmaking, and Jacques

Venter for assistance with figures and tables.

References _____________________

Braack, L. E. O. 1997a. A revision of parts of the management plan

for the Kruger National Park, Volume VII: an objectives hierarchy for the management of the Kruger National Park. Unpublished report on file at: Kruger National Park, Skukuza, South

Africa. 105 p.

Braack, L. E. O. 1997b. A revision of parts of the management plan

for the Kruger National Park, Volume VIII: policy proposals

regarding issues relating to biodiversity maintenance, maintenance of wilderness qualities and provision of human benefits.

Internal report, Skukuza, Kruger National Park. 152 p.

Coetzee, B. J. 1983. Phytosociology, vegetation structure and landscapes of the Central District, Kruger National Park, South

Africa. Dissertationes Botanicae. 456 p.

Gertenbach, W. P. D. 1978. Plantgemeenskappe van die Gabbrokompleks in die noordweste van die Sentrale Distrik van die

Nasionale Krugerwildtuin [Plant communities of the gabbro

complex in the north-western Central District of the Kruger

National Park]. Potchefstroom, South Africa: Potchefstroom

University. 146 p. Master’s Thesis.

Gertenbach, W. P. D. 1983. Landscapes of the Kruger National

Park. Koedoe. 26: 9–121.

Joubert, S. C. J. 1975. Research objectives, Kruger National Park

(revised 1981, 1983). Unpublished report on file at: Kruger

National Park, Skukuza, South Africa: 1–21.
48 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Freitag-Ronaldson, Kalwa, Badenhorst, Erasmus, Venter, and Nel Wilderness, Wilderness Quality Management, and Recreational Opportunities...

Table 3—A preliminary list of issues to be addressed during the upcoming ROZ Plan revision.

Main issue Description of subcomponents to be further considered

Ensure ecological basis of zoning

and make this explicit

Rehabilitation requirements per

ROZ block, especially wilderness

areas

Buffering of wilderness zones

Classification and management

plan for roads

Matching zones with Trans-frontier

Conservation Area developments

in Mocambique

Zoning of areas adjoining KNP

Wilderness monitoring, auditing,

and thresholds of potential concern

(TPCs)

Legal protection status

• Description of management blocks within ROZ zones according to biodiversity status, disturbance,

suitability for use.

• Where possible, move toward catchment-based wilderness zonation (within KNP subcatchments

where possible), for example, Sweni, Mbyamiti.

• Compile a comprehensive list of manmade disturbances, with special reference to type, extent, and

impact base of disturbance.

• Must be GIS linked—a database and map are necessary for every block, providing GPS locations of

all impacts and structures.

• In principle, there should be no structures in wilderness areas, with the exception of possible water

points. Gravel pits, old structures, and so forth, must be rehabilitated. Rubbish, stockpiled gravel, and

so forth, to be removed.

• Where a motorized zone directly borders a pristine wilderness zone, no cascading of zones is practical

or necessary—the core area can be managed as pristine.

• Propose a Wilderness Buffer Quality Zone—this should enable a ranking of proposed activities on the

edge of wilderness zones according to size, scale, and persistence of impacts (for example, a vehicle

has a short-term impact while driving by, while a structure on the edge of a wilderness zone is

permanent and will always lower the quality of the wilderness experience).

• Roads within a cluster of wilderness blocks should be downgraded and, where possible, completely

rehabilitated.

• Impacts must be managed in all instances—this should be made explicit in a management plan for all

zones.

• Use the minimum-tool principle to maintain roads in wilderness areas where these are essential for

specific management actions.

• Cement drifts must be maintained on the “best practice principle” —avoid building cement drifts in

wilderness areas where possible. If a drift is necessary, it must be built with the least impact and as

unobtrusively as possible.

• An operational management and action plan for roads will be necessary and must be part of the Limits

of Sophistication (LOS).

• The road classification document should provide guidelines in terms of maintenance, gravel pits,

documentation, and so forth.

• Use KNP wilderness areas as a starting point.

• Encourage wilderness zoning according to landscapes. Motivate for 20 km (12.4 miles) of the

Shingwedzi River to stay wilderness on both banks.

• Apply concentric zoning—cascading out from pristine areas where possible.

• Consider research possibilities through wilderness study areas—these are untouched in Mocambique

versus more impacted areas in Kruger.

• A strategy is essential—the KNP must get involved in land use planning exercises in adjacent areas.

• Neighbors must be influenced as far as possible.

• Neighbors must be made aware of KNP zones, their importance, and what they stand for.

• Produce a map of the adjoining areas to identify land uses and land use change to assist with the

strategy to influence adjacent actions to achieve regional harmony.

• Interactively design a land use plan for zones next to KNP, taking into account softer issues such as

noise, lights, and skyline intrusions (audio and visual impacts).

• Formalize the monitoring and auditing indices and end-points for KNP wilderness qualities.

• Integrate research and management activities.

• Establish acceptable noise levels for wilderness (24 decibels?).

• How do we monitor and evaluate visual impacts to wilderness areas (lights, masts, and so forth )?

• Similarly, how do we address issues of pollution, for example, litter, black snow (smoke from sugar

cane burning outside the KNP), and smells?

• Footprints in wilderness areas—when is it too much, and should there be a resting/recovery/reset

phase?

• How do we provide formal legal protection status to KNP wilderness areas?

• Investigate World Heritage site status.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 49

Freitag-Ronaldson, Kalwa, Badenhorst, Erasmus, Venter, and Nel Wilderness, Wilderness Quality Management, and Recreational Opportunities...

Joubert, S. C. J. 1986. Masterplan for the management of the

Kruger National Park. Unpublished document comprising six

volumes on file at: Kruger National Park, Skukuza, South Africa.

983 p.

Solomon, M.; Zambatis, N.; Biggs, H. C.; Maré, N. 1999. Comparisons of classifications commonly used as templates for management, scientific and GIS work in the Kruger National Park.

Koedoe. 42(2): 131–142.

Van Rooyen, N. 1978. ‘n Ekologiese studie van die plantgemeenskappe van die Punda Maria, Pafuri-, Wambiyagebied in

die Nasionale Krugerwildtuin [An ecological study of the plant

communities of the Punda Maria, Pafuri and Wambiya areas of

the Kruger National Park]. Pretoria, South Africa: University of

Pretoria. 400 p. Master’s Thesis.

Venter, F. J. 1990. A classification of land for management planning

in the Kruger National Park. Pretoria, South Africa: University

of Pretoria. 394 p. Doctorate Thesis.

Venter, F. J.; Braack, L. E. O.; Nel, P. J.; Jordaan, W.; Gerber, F.;

Biggs, H. C. 1997. Recreational opportunity zoning within the

Kruger National Park. In: A revision of parts of the management

plan for the Kruger National Park, Volume VIII: policy proposals

regarding issues relating to biodiversity maintenance, maintenance of wilderness qualities, and provision of human benefits.

Unpublished report on file at: Kruger National Park, Skukuza,

South Africa. 20 p.
50 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Ralf H. Kalwa was for many years Ranger and then Manager, Integrated

Environmental Management in Kruger National Park, and is now in private

practice with Rhengu Environmental Services, P.O. Box 1046, Malelane,

South Africa. E-mail: rhengu@mweb.co.za

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—This paper illustrates threats facing Kruger National

Park in South Africa. It discusses the value of Recreational Opportunity Zoning within the boundaries of the Park, as well as the

impacts of boundary intrusions on its wilderness characteristics.

The need for an Integrated Management Approach near Park

boundaries is highlighted, and the concept of a “brick wall syndrome” is discussed in detail. Possible solutions are suggested, and

it is concluded that the answer may lie within adopting an Integrated Development Zone approach for the Park’s border areas.

Introduction ____________________

Game Rangers in Kruger National Park have the mandate to protect and manage the integrity of this unique

system. They are faced with many challenges in this regard,

and have managed the Park’s 22 sections, protecting its

components of biodiversity, for over 100 years.

Some 200 field rangers assist the section rangers in daily

counter poaching exercises and patrols. The gradual growth

of the white rhinoceros population over the past three

decades, together with an increase in elephant numbers,

bear testimony to their achievements.

This success is also reflected in the following figures: only

five elephant and 15 white rhinoceros deaths related to

poaching incidents were recorded during the past 3 years.

The size of Kruger National Park (more than 2 million ha, or

7,722 miles2

), the diversity in topography, and the extreme

changes in climatic conditions make this an achievement of

note.

In addition to many other challenges facing the rangers in

the year 2000, the increase in alien plant infestations have

impacted on available manpower and budgetary requirements. Rangers have responded to this exotic threat, and

more than 100,000 foreign plants have been eradicated or

removed over the past 18 months in southern Kruger Park

alone. It is, however, suggested that there are other threats

to the integrity of Kruger National Park, and many may

argue that these are more significant and have a greater

impact on the future of this natural heritage.

Cross-Boundary Impacts in the Crocodile

River Valley: A National Parks Perspective

Ralf H. Kalwa

Recreational Opportunity

Zone Plan ______________________

During the late 1990s, Kruger National Park embarked

upon an ambitious exercise to reevaluate its Management

Plan. Scientists, rangers and other interested and affected

parties became party to a plethora of workshops and public

debates. Various aspects of the management plan were

scrutinized and reassessed. The Fire Policy, the Elephant

Management Plan, the Water Provision Policy, and the

Recreational Opportunity Zone (ROZ) Plan, were some of

the management tools that faced revision and that were

accepted by the South African National Parks Board

(SANParks) for implementation.

The ROZ Plan was regarded as a useful tool in the

management decisionmaking process. Although it has been

criticized for delineating Kruger National Park into zones

based on the wildlife experiences that could be expected, it

did carve the route for the establishment of Wilderness

Areas.

Many will argue that these wilderness zones are far from

perfect. This may be so; however, the challenge faced by

rangers in the year 2000 is to ensure that these areas are

conserved in all their facets and fluxes, and that rehabilitation programs are implemented with the same vigor and

enthusiasm afforded to counter poaching programs and

alien plant control.

The ROZ Plan recognized the recreational value of the

various zones and landscapes in Kruger National Park

(fig.1). Based on this approach, 49 percent of the surface

area was allocated to a wilderness land use. The challenge

faced by rangers was to manage the pristine value awarded

to these areas and to maintain the particular characteristics associated with this type of land use. Essentially, these

areas are untrammeled by man, have little or no man-made

influences or infrastructure present within their boundaries, and are open for public use for hiking and sleeping

close to nature, with its limitations and splendors.

Primitive and pristine hiking areas within Kruger National Park are also targeted for rehabilitation and corrective management programs to rectify mistakes and improve

their “wilderness” characteristics.

Southern Boundary:

A Grey Area ____________________

The Crocodile River, flowing from west to east, represents

the southern boundary of Kruger National Park. The National Parks Act, backed by the outcome of several court
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 51

Cross Boundary Impacts in the Crocodile River Valley: A National Parks Perspective Kalwa

Figure 1—Kruger National Park Recreational Opportunity Zones.
52 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Kalwa Cross Boundary Impacts in the Crocodile River Valley: A National Parks Perspective

cases, describes the annual, average high water mark on the

southern portion of the river (the right bank) as the southern

boundary of Kruger National Park.

A Veterinary Fence, demarcating the veterinary boundary of the Foot and Mouth line, fences off the upper bank. The

zone between the fence and the water’s edge has become a

management nightmare. Law enforcement and conservation management in this zone is particularly difficult, and

various government departments and associations are at

loggerheads as to who should carry the responsibility for this

“gray area.”

Boundary Intrusions _____________

Developers adjacent to this “no mans land” have capitalized on this confusion and are building closer and closer to the

water’s edge, infringing upon the Park’s boundary. In many

cases, these developments do not follow the Integrated Environmental Management approach, with tragic results. Crossboundary intrusions include light and visual pollution from

spotlights that are seen by our tourists during night drives-up

to 13 km (8 miles) into Kruger National Park.

The millennium floods of February 2000 comfortably

pressed the reset button, and many structures were damaged and washed away. Kruger National Park and its rivers

are now inundated with broken pieces of building rubble,

decks, pump houses, entertainment lapas, and other structures that were built in and around the Park’s boundary,

below the 1:50 year flood line.

The industrial boom associated with the advent of the

Maputo Corridor has increased noise levels, which can be

heard by the hikers in the primitive wilderness zone 25

km (15.5 miles) into the Malelane Mountains. An increase

in rail and road traffic compounds this “annoyance” factor

even further.

Pump stations, loyally drawing on the water resources

from the Crocodile River to quench the ever-thirsty cane

fields, add to this constant hum in the air. This is regularly

interrupted by the aerobatics and thunderous roar of the

crop sprayer leaping from field to field in its endeavor to

boost agricultural yield.

Wilderness trail rangers have been forced to seek refuge

on the rare occasion a pilot has “transgressed” the Kruger

Park airspace and “spooked” an elephant or buffalo herd into

a short stampede. One may be excused to ask whether these

clients should continue supporting this hiking area under

these conditions. Prevailing intrusions and pollution threatening the integrity of these unique areas have become

difficult to mitigate.

“Brick Wall Syndrome” ___________

In the late 1990s, the ranger corps in this area realized

that the threats to our unique National Park had shifted

from the impacts of poaching, toward the negative, longterm impacts of indiscriminate developments and associated wilderness and habitat degradation. It soon became

evident that the Park (the ROZ Plan), its boundary, and the

neighbors on the southern bank of the Crocodile River were

interconnected, like the bricks in a wall.

Removing one or two bricks at a time would not necessarily cause the wall to topple; however, at some unknown point

in the future, the removal of one brick too many may cause

the system to collapse. The future of the wall lay in Integrated Environmental Management.

Lower Crocodile River

Environmental Group:

A Fresh Initiative ________________

Discussions initiated by the local ranger and backed by

management saw the establishment of the Lower Crocodile

River Environmental Group (LCREG). More than 100 interested and affected parties workshopped towards the following vision statement:

To balance all interests in the Crocodile River Region

towards sustainability.

Participants agreed to support the following objectives:

Whilst ensuring environmental integrity the LCREG should:

• optimize economic growth for the region,

• optimize economic opportunities in the region,

• optimize sustainable resource utilisation and management in the region, and

• establish communication highways.

From this early beginning, the local ranger involved all

the role players in the area to participate in the decisionmaking process, especially pertaining to the development initiatives in the area. The LCREG initiative managed the process

based on the principles of Integrated Management, and all

developments were drawn into an Environmental Assessment process. Decisions were not based on an ad hoc assumption. A process of informed decisionmaking replaced

the old approach, and mitigation became a management tool

used by developer and neighbor alike.

The Nkomazi Toll Plaza was shifted to a new site farther

down the road, the TSB Pump Station near Malelane Gate

was given a “sound proofing” facelift, and participation on

behalf of the LCREG saved many trees in the riparian zone

from being bulldozed into oblivion.

Involvement further afield has brought the plight of our

wilderness areas to the attention of an international consortium of airport developers. Noise and flyover tests within

Kruger National Park will ensure that the new Kruger

Mpumalanga International Airport is built at the right site

and within an acceptable environmental framework. Air

traffic control (the crop sprayer?) will now be managed, and

transgressions will become a management issue. The use of

aircraft that satisfy European Standards are supported, and

the integrity of the ROZ Plan may now be guaranteed.

Integrated Development Zone:

A Pie in the Sky? ________________

Where to from here? The LCREG has been operational for

3 years. At a recent plenary, its members voted to continue

with this initiative and unanimously supported the objectives set for the group in 1996.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 53

Cross Boundary Impacts in the Crocodile River Valley: A National Parks Perspective Kalwa

Government legislation makes it possible for an area of

special significance to be declared a Limited Development

Area (LDA). This would need the support of all the role

players in the zone to ascribe to the same objectives and

limitations dictated by the declaration. Is this a possibility

for the Crocodile River Valley adjacent to Kruger National

Park? The LCREG Plenary has asked its steering committee to investigate the implications of declaring the Lower

Crocodile River Area an LDA. This gives the rangers of

Kruger National Park hope—a hope based on Integrated

Environmental Management and a recognition that this

valley suffers from a bad case of the “Brick Wall Syndrome.”

55

2. Traditional and Ecological

Values of Nature

The Wilderness Summit at the Feather Market in downtown Port Elizabeth preceded

the symposium (photo by Alan Watson).

USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 57

Malcolm Draper is a Sociologist and Environmental Historian, School of

Human and Social Studies, University of Natal, Private Bag X01,

Pietermaritzburg, 3209, South Africa. E-mail: draperm@nu.ac.za

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Within the emerging field of scholarship exploring the

interaction between nature and culture in Africa, the idea of wilderness has provided a convenient “straw” target for critical researchers. Primarily this is derived from the association between wilderness

and the colonial preservationist mindset seeking to alienate indigenous people from nature, both intellectually and materially.

This essay is written from the straddling standpoint of one who

has learned much from both wilderness thought and writing antagonistic to it. The objective is to probe for truths, thereby opening

paths toward reconciliation. A more positive inclusion of wilderness

in the promising research agenda exploring African landscapes is

beginning to emerge and needs further encouragement. It is conventional wisdom that wilderness arrived on the South African conservation scene, and thus to Africa, in Zululand during the 1950s,

through American literature eagerly grasped by rangers such as Ian

Player. Another reading of the past has been made by Carruthers

(1995, 2001) who found wilderness-oriented management in the

policy and practice of the first warden of Kruger National Park,

James Stevenson-Hamilton, which paralleled that of Aldo Leopold

in the North American context. This paper considers a telling aspect

of park management not considered by Carruthers—the burning

regimes of the Kruger—to confirm that distinctively wildernessoriented policy and practice emerged endogenously and needs to be

acknowledged and celebrated. The intention of the exercise is to

demonstrate the insight of environmental history into the shifting

relationship between culture and nature. However, for critical

scholars to assist in the quest for African wilderness, some dangerous excesses of storytelling and mythmaking have to be looked back

upon and disowned. In the same gesture, others need to be brought

forward and embraced since they offer wilderness a redeeming

resource of hope.

Wilderness and War _____________

When I wrote the above title, the 7th World Wilderness

Congress was far off on a hazy horizon. My intention was to

square a wilderness tradition up with scholarly onslaught

while playing referee, commentator, and judge in the ensuing pages of exchange. As the title indicates, I favored

wilderness as the contender most in need of encouraging

commentary and aimed to improve its bad press in academic

work on Africa. I never imagined how difficult this task

would be. What turned things around was a book hitting the

market with unfortunate pre-Congress timing. Storyteller is

In Quest of African Wilderness

Malcolm Draper

Jones’ (2001) biography of Laurens van der Post, who was,

and still is, a hugely important figure for wilderness generally, but for African wilderness in particular. Many key

speakers at the Congress were clearly haunted by the dark

side of this wilderness legacy and, through dismissive remarks, unsuccessfully sought to exorcise the Congress of the

shadow thrown by the book. Clearly, they were saddened by

the book, but so was the author:

This has also been a sad experience for me. Soon after I took

on the commission I discovered, to my astonishment, that Sir

Laurens was—to use the (extremely) polite word—a fantasist.

In fact, I discovered that scarcely a word he spoke or wrote

could necessarily be believed. To use Martha Gellhorn’s

phrase about Hemingway, he was a mythomaniac. I was

concerned not to deny that Laurens, in his long life, achieved

much good. But most readers have concluded from my book

that, behind the glossy career, Laurens van der Post can best

be described as a charlatan (Jones 2002).

Like the events of September 11, 2001, the ramifications

are still yet to be fully appreciated. But among the rubble of

both demolition sites there is something to be learned.

Perhaps the publication of an unflattering profile of such an

important figure in the history of this Congress provided an

opportunity to reflect on and repair some of the damage to

the wilderness ideal.

Studies taking into account the interaction between culture and the environment, together with a stance critical of

colonial and scientific approaches to conservation in Africa,

have gathered momentum in the last few decades. Anderson

and Grove (1987: 5,6) pulled together a wide-ranging variety

of work in a landmark volume for the environmental history

of the continent. A point of departure for them is van der

Post’s statement at the 2nd World Wilderness Congress:

We must come to grips with the need for the survival of life

on this planet and one of the most essential of these needs is

the preservation of large areas of wilderness...it is a war in

which we are engaged...it is a subject which is not political,

but beyond politics, sociology, and material ideals.

Anderson and Grove (1987: 5, 6) maintain that this view

is “naive and idealized” and that their book sets out to

“explode the myth” and “assert the importance of sociological factors and material ideals.” The recent revelations

about van der Post unfortunately vindicate their argument.

He wielded his considerable influence and used it in an

attempt to prevent the first democratic elections in South

Africa. He fanned the flames of political violence, taking its

toll on thousands of lives in the run up to 1994, and encouraged Zulu and Afrikaner leaders to pull out of national

politics. He was desperate for a confederate constitution for

South Africa rather than a government of national unity as

we now have. He dreamt of “a model of a new world, a model

of a Zulu—and ultimately Afrikaner—renaissance into the

spirit of a new South Africa.” In 1992, van der Post was

introduced by Ian Player to the late John Aspinall and
58 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Draper In Quest of African Wilderness

Jimmy Goldsmith who had thrown their maverick rightwing

ideas and considerable capital behind Mangosuthu Buthelezi

of the Zulu nationalist Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP). Fortunately, Buthelezi got swept up by the spirit of forgiveness

and compromise personified by Nelson Mandela. Nonetheless, van der Post never felt touched by “Madiba magic.”

After meeting Thabo Mbeki in 1989, van der Post said that

he and his ilk had no vision of a new and greater South Africa

and that it would be wrong to build up their self-importance

(Jones 2001). Like Aspinall, van der Post died deeply pessimistic about the future of South Africa without some form of

balkanized homeland system along the lines of that designed by apartheid’s architects.

Both Aspinall and van der Post’s vision of South Africa

derived from the romantic tradition that shaped their

understanding of wilderness and politics alike. Africa for

them was an Eden where humanity could make a fresh

start. Both were pulled along by Rousseau’s historical

slipstream of belief. “Noble savages” whose culture was

shaped by the serendipity of wilderness provided the model

for the world to follow. Granted, their ideas have to be seen

in the context of their time, but both bowed out very

recently and their ideas live on. Even the critical Richard

Grove observed van der Post’s spectre over an academic

conference on African environments, at Oxford in 1999. At

the same conference, I presented a paper in which we

sought to come to terms with Aspinall (Draper and Maré,

in press). William Beinart, the Rhodes Chair of Race

Relations, who convened and hosted the conference, said in

opening that environmental history had successfully challenged and inverted the colonial elevation of western culture and stereotypes of Africans as incompetent

environmental managers, but perhaps this has been all too

neat (Beinart 2000). Nevertheless, activists are more likely

than academics to have led the way to this change of heart.

This Congress was one such forum that has been hugely

influential in this regard. So, too, has been the Ecologist

magazine that preceded it by 7 years. Thus, the fallout

among the Ecologist editors in the late 1990s provides an

instructive warning to this Congress.

The Ecologist was launched by Edward (Teddy) Goldsmith with the support of both Sir James (Jimmy) Goldsmith and Aspinall. In 1972, Nicholas Hildyard joined and

grew to be the most influential figure next to Teddy. By

1997, a deepening ideological rift grew into an unbridgeable chasm. Hildyard claimed that differences with the

magazine’s founder over ethnicity and gender issues led

him and the rest of the editorial team to leave and to set up

The CornerHouse. The conflict spread waves of dissent

among environmentalist circles in Britain. Hildyard (1998,

1999) maintained that in the last decade the authoritarian

New Right in Europe had consciously reframed its politics

of exclusion in the progressive language of cultural difference: a language that permits the racist to project racism as

a socially acceptable act of loyalty to people of one’s own

kind or as legitimate cultural self-defense. This is precisely

what Aspinall came to address the IFP about in 1992, when

he was made an honorary Zulu in recognition of his unstinting patronage. He encouraged Zulus to not only proudly

wield their cultural weapons, but sharpen their spears and

fall on their traditional enemies—the Xhosa led by Nelson

Mandela (Draper and Maré, in press; Jones 2001). Hildyard

argued that such thinking becomes a politics of cultural

apartheid. Within the Greens, for example, a preoccupation with “authentic cultures” and “ancient traditions”

naturally lends itself to a politics of authoritarian cultural

essentialism (Hildyard 1998, 1999). His warning that there

is a grave danger in such ideology, could not be better

illustrated than by the killing that took place as the IFP,

with the support of the apartheid regime, attempted to

ensure its hegemony in the face of growing support among

isiZulu-speaking South Africans for a more inclusive vision

of a Rainbow Nation.

Romantic feeding of ethnic conflict stems from a view,

childlike in its simplicity, that “natives” can be divided into

two categories: good and bad. According to Neumann (2000),

African local communities are still divided into “good” and

“bad” natives, depending on how close they are to nature—

in the perception of conservation agencies dominated by

western capital. The closer they are to nature the “better”

they are, and the more they have the right to stay in the area

and taste the financial privileges of western donor attention.

The more “modern” they are, the more they pose a threat to

the success of nature conservation and the farther away they

should be held from these conservation areas; that is, they

should be removed.

The writing of Rider Haggard best illustrates the romantic view of Africa and Africans. A close friend of his was

Theophilus Shepstone, the 19th century Native Affairs

colonialist in Natal associated with designing indirect rule.

Both men construed the order of things in a fashion quite out

of step with their Victorian contemporaries. Most significantly, they did not associate the Zulu kingdom as “other” or

wilderness, but inverted the opposites of their day, associating colonial Natal with barbarism and chaos. Zulu patriarchal order provided an inspiring model for these Victorian

men nostalgic for older forms of authority becoming steadily

undermined by modern industrialism. So, too, it did for

Aspinall whose boyhood reading of Haggard’s Nada the Lily

was life changing. According to Hamilton (1998), however,

the novel explored the way the Shepstone system sought to

reach into a Zulu world to discover the principles by which

it might best establish its authority. Such mythical fiction

inspired Aspinall to patronize both Zulu politics and Zululand

wilderness conservation. Similarly, van der Post’s life story

is about the blurring between fiction and fact.

An Indiscriminately Burning

Romance ______________________

One of the tasks of social scientists, philosophers, historians, and the like is to demythologize, and the “received”

American idea of wilderness has drawn a good deal of such

critical flak in recent years (Callicot and Nelson 1998;

Soulé and Lease 1995). I do not want to rehearse these

debates here. Rather, what I want to argue is that South

Africa has been largely absent from this story. This is

surprising given that the wilderness history of Africa

began here, as did the World Wilderness Congress. Although this was in the Zululand reserves with Jim Feely,

Ian Player, and others reading the received American ideas

of Leopold and Tripensee, it took a very distinctive character that sets the African wilderness history apart from the
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 59

In Quest of African Wilderness Draper

American. Similarly, academic histories of Africa have

tended to gloss over wilderness, usually conflating it with

national parks and game reserves or invoking it as an

extremely conservative policy. For instance, Cock and

Koch (1991: 1) introduce a volume that sought to interpret

the local progressive environmentalist agenda as follows:

Until very recently the dominant understanding of environmental issues in South Africa was an authoritarian conservation perspective. This focused exclusively on the

preservation of wilderness areas and particular species of

plants and animals.

Jane Carruthers (1995, 2001) has provided insightful

accounts of James Stevenson-Hamilton’s conservation career, which began in 1902 and continued through the

creation and management of Kruger National Park. She

suggests that his was a nascent romantic wilderness philosophy and that he was suspicious of the national park

concept as well as interventionist science. While he was

grudgingly sympathetic of poachers and viewed the

bushman’s genocide as “brutal injustice,” he was not romantic about Africans. All the same, when the National

Parks Board decided to replace all African skilled labor

with whites, he was appalled, believing that “‘good natives’

were far better workers than ‘poor whites.’” While he was

an advocate of a restrained hand in management of the

Park, he did not have any doubt about the importance of

anthropogenic fire:

Controlled burning of old grass...is I believe essential to

the welfare of the animals in a sanctuary....It has been proved

by experiment in the Park that failure to burn grass at the

right time of the year [between March and May] not only

drives away all game from the unburnt portions, but is the

cause of devastating fires at a later period of the year. The

natives on the Portuguese side of the border, invariably

burned their grass in early winter, with the result that the

game used to flock over to that side, and the same was the case

with the shooting-farms over to the west (Stevenson-Hamilton

1947: 14, 15).

The common-sense fire regime instituted by StevensonHamilton, which ruled until 1948 when the Nationalist

apartheid regime took power, is righteously looked back

upon by today’s managers as “indiscriminate” burning. The

absence of firebreaks and the accumulation of high fuel loads

led to occasional wildfires raging through the park in the

early years (Kennedy 1999). Such lack of control was the

nemesis of successive management regimes that sought to

have flame flickering benignly on the alter of science in

accordance with the laws of nature, not culture. As the

recent inferno claiming several human lives in the Kruger

testifies, however, wildness is recalcitrant. Uncoincidentally

perhaps, half of Magqubu Ntombela’s speech at the first

World Wilderness Congress was occupied by an eco-poetic

description of May:

Nhlangula the month of May, the month when winter starts,

when the leaves fall and we feel the first pinch of cold. The

days grow shorter and a great stillness falls upon the land.

Nhlangula is the time when my people begin burning grass

on the hills and pastures... (Ntombela 1979: 81).

Carruthers’ (1995) chapter exploring the tension between

“wilderness and science” in Kruger National Park is entitled

“Playing God” after Chase’s book about the devastating

Yellowstone Park fire in the United States, yet her social

history does not include fire. Andrew Kennedy has filled this

gap and sees management of the Kruger turning full circle

back to the laissez-faire philosophy of its first warden,

Stevenson-Hamilton, whose motto was “keep it simple, keep

it wild.” Kennedy’s (1999) conclusion is derived in part from

the Kruger’s management, adopting a lightning-fire regime

that assumes that humans played little or no role in burning

early African savannas. Rather than returning to StevensonHamilton’s view, this approach would appear to have rejected it, and embraced an American policy—only

lightning-induced fires are legitimate in large wilderness

areas like Yellowstone. Pyne (1997: 451) has shown how fire

is the key to understanding the separation of nature from

culture that is the hallmark of American wilderness ideology

until relatively recently. For Europeans and others who

have a less stringent idea of natural purity, the necessity of

human burning was obvious:

To a new generation of critics it appeared that the only

alternative to bulimic binges of fire-feast and fire-famine was

to replicate something like the indigenous fire practices. But

that was tantamount to stating that the reserve had been

fashioned by people, that it was not truly and purely wild, and

that wilderness was more a state of mind than a state of

nature.

A recent issue of the U.S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service journal Fire Management Today, containing

articles by historians of fire, shows that the critics are being

heeded (Pyne 2000; Williams 2000a,b). The dangerous

buildup of dry matter in the chasm between nature and

culture is going up in flames, and fresh growth will no doubt

emerge.

Stevenson-Hamilton’s approach to wilderness “management” flew in the face of the conservation wisdom of his time.

He saw the need for fire to inhibit tree and bush growth on

the African savannah, thereby cultivating range for grazing

animals. At the beginning of the last century and before,

desiccation and soil erosion were perceived as the harbingers of an environmental apocalypse in South Africa. In the

mid-nineteenth century, a Scottish missionary in Cape Town,

Croumbie-Brown, advocated a halt to deforestation and

advocated the planting of “trees of righteousness” (Grove

1997).

Although not Scottish, continuing in this tradition was

Father Bernard Huss, the social apostle of Marrianhill

Mission near Durban, whose career was parallel to StevensonHamilton. He was the teacher of and guru to hugely important African intellectuals such as H. I. E. Dhlomo and B. W.

Vilikazi. He also taught Robert Mazibuko agriculture.

Mazibuko, fondly remembered as the “tree man,” became a

leading light of environmentalism through his advocacy of

organic horticulture, tree planting, and the like. Mazibuko

won many accolades such as the Audi Terra Nova award

shared by Ian Player and Credo Mutwa. Huss’s Textbook on

Agriculture was first published in 1921 and continued to be

printed over two decades. It was translated into several

African languages and widely used in “native” education.

Father Huss broke new ground with what probably was the

first significant environmental education initiative in Southern Africa, carrying as it does a strident conservation message. I am currently trying to disentangle his message from

that of Mazibuko whose prophetic words, such as “soil
60 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Draper In Quest of African Wilderness

erosion leads to soul erosion and visa versa,” are still alive in

our minds after his death in 1997, but this cannot be done

here. Yet, like those who went before him, Huss advocated

afforestation by exotic species as an imperative to bring rain

and shore up soil erosion. Today of course, we know that it

can cause desiccation and erosion. Huss also advocated the

“conservation” of native bush and forests that are destroyed

by “indiscriminate” cutting and burning, “especially by natives and Indians...by contemptuous disregard for the laws

of nature, we bring down curses upon the land” (Huss 1936:

60).

The use of the term “‘indiscriminate,” to describe indigenous burning practices and settler emulation thereof, by

both contemporary science and early missionary environmentalism, is not coincidental. By claiming privileged access to the laws of nature, science seeks to elevate itself as

the high priesthood, dictating the terms on which culture

should relate to nature. The new fire suppression regime in

the Kruger coincided with the ascendancy to power of the

apartheid regime in 1948 and also marked a separation, but

between nature and culture, with a downturn for wilderness

thinking. The social and ecological consequences of both

ideas were moribund and dangerous. As had Gifford Pinchot

in the U.S. Forest Service before them, this new generation

of resource conservationists were confident of their mastery

over nature and sought to eliminate burning that seemed

wasteful. This presumption of control marked a shift that

Stevenson-Hamilton would have contested given his loathing of scientists (Carruthers 1995, 2001). Such an attitude

had continuity after the Second World War in the Zululand

reserves, where the white rhino was saved and where the

first formal African wilderness areas were established by

Ian Player and others in tension with bureaucrats and

scientists, but with a pragmatically negotiated relationship

with others (Draper 1998).

To use Ian Player’s Jungian vocabulary, the romantic

wilderness idea has a soul troubled by the shadow cast by

people who once lived in African wilderness. Congress debates and the “however” clause of the Port Elizabeth Accord

make this patently obvious (Martin and Muir 2002: 7).

Player, who had a role in moving “wilderness people” from

Ndumu Game Reserve, observed this dark side of himself

and wondered if, perhaps, at least some of them should have

been left to live there:

These were wilderness people who had existed in a tough

environment of malaria, searing heat and extreme material

poverty, but spiritually they had a richness we could not

imagine. They were being removed from the game reserve,

and their situation would come back to haunt us. They had

been part of the landscape, and although it was true that they

had killed most of the antelope, it was their slash and burn

practices that later enabled the game to increase dramatically when the last person left (Player 1997: 47).

Player, in turn, was moved by such wilderness people, but

spiritually since they “blunted our Western mindset and

subconsciously led us on new paths” (1997: 47). While the

American and Australian idea of wilderness has been roundly

criticized for the sublime being associated with “virgin” or

“empty” land, the same could not be said of Africa where, in

its formal birthplace in Zululand, the architects of wilderness recognized that the land had been occupied for millennia. Piety did not derive from an imaginary depopulation of

the land, but from its indigenous inhabitants, as well as the

environment from which they had been banished by the

irresistible serpent of modernity. This could derive in part

from the fact that South Africa was not, by Alfred Crosby’s

definition, a “land of demographic takeover” by western

Europeans (Crosby 1988). Cultural factors were more important than biological phenomena and thus have distinguished our idea of wilderness from the received American

idea. According to Bill Bainbridge, whose career is central to

our mountain wilderness story, from their designation as

such in the 1970s there was never any question about the

role of anthropogenic fire. Management sought to emulate

the burning practices of the San or bushmen. Since they

were long gone and their remaining artifacts left little clue

about their burning habits, a combination of guesswork and

science had to suffice (Bainbridge 2001).

Critics, such as Cronon, argue that the sublime tendency

of wilderness tends to converge around the worship of the

mountain as cathedral (in Callicot and Nelson 1998). Yes, we

do have our awesome Cathedral Peak in our world-heritage

mountain range, but among the first areas declared wilderness were Zulu names such as Mdedelelo (the one who

cannot be conquered), which contrasts sharply with a name

such as Kruger, or Bob Marshall for that matter. The range

itself is now called Ukhahlamba-Drakensberg, an evocative

amalgam of Zulu (the barrier of spears) and Afrikaans

(Dragon Mountain). The relatively peopled landscape in this

region meant that we have a rich legacy of indigenous names

such as those of the oldest game reserves in Africa: HluhluweUmfolozi, proclaimed more than a century ago where our

(official) wilderness story began.

Wilderness and the African

Mind? _________________________

While much has been written of the psychological function

of wilderness for the American and European mind, apart

from the assertion of the economic benefits thereof circulating more equitably, the same cannot be said of the African

mind. The problem is that today it is probably impossible to

speak of such a thing as the African mind, so what we are left

with are landscapes with multiple layers of perception. The

task of sifting through the sediment of cultural deposit in

Southern Africa has been taken up by a small and loose

interdisciplinary constellation. Apart from publications and

a research agenda (Ranger 2000), such meetings have resulted in pilgrimages to holy mountains, from those of the

Valley of a Thousand Hills in KwaZulu Natal, to the Motopos

in Zimbabwe. At every conference a serpent raises its head.

This mythical creature appears to inhabit rivers and lakes

throughout Southern Africa. When angered, inkanyamba,

as she or he is known in isiZulu, can vengefully visit people

in a devastating storm or flood. In Lesotho, the monster is

powerful enough to cause seismic tremors damaging foundations of houses in retribution for the recent damming of

rivers, which reverses their flow and sends the water to

Johannesburg. “We went to look on top of our ‘Table Mountain’ (Mkhambathini) near where I live. There the snake is

said to have opened the earth and engulfed people who try to

settle as well as their houses, but the creature eluded us”

(Peden 2000). Nevertheless, the absence of development and
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 61

In Quest of African Wilderness Draper

cultivation on a readily accessible and arable stretch of

plateau surrounded by poor homesteads proves the existence of the mountains guardian in real, material terms.

From the top, one can see Nhlangakasi in the east where the

faithful make an annual transcendental ascent as their

prophet Isaiah Shembe bade them. Magqubu Ntombela was

one of his devoted followers. In Harare, Zimbabwe, the

popular Wilderness Church worship outdoors.

If, as critics point out, wilderness is rooted in sublime

myths, and conservative ones at that, then it has some

untapped allies in Africa. Wilderness is surely not only the

“other” of modern western society. As Haila (1997) has

shown, in early Finland, wilderness was defined from the

ethnocentric standpoint of the dominant culture and imposed as a category upon relatively powerless inhabitants

of the area. Such processes seem to be universal. So, too,

does the association of myth with wilderness. Whether

ancient or modern, they make that which is changeable

appear fixed and primordial: mythologizing “transforms

the reality of the world into an image of the world, History

into Nature. And this image has a remarkable feature: it is

upside down....In passing from history to nature, myth acts

economically: it abolishes the complexity of human acts, it

gives them the simplicity of essences” (Barthes 1973: 141,

143). Mythologies, therefore, make that which is cultural

and politically contestable seem natural. But myths depend on storytellers to evolve and do this. As Hope (2001)

noted in his damning review of Jones’ Storyteller, van der

Post gave a face and a story to a discarded people before

anyone else thought to do so. So, too, did this Congress to

many other marginalized people and environments. In so

doing, however, it verged on the flip side of the racist

imperial coin. Perhaps this might explain why, in its

inaugural year of 1977, the Congress was opened and

blessed by apartheid minister Piet Koorhof, “who during

the 1980s, was responsible for the forced removal of thousands of black people in order to conform to the dictates of

‘separate development,’ and who has earned a well deserved notoriety in the roll call of apartheid politicians.”

Such associations have made local progressive environmentalists treat the idea of wilderness with caution (Khan

2000). Van der Post found that his ready endorsement of

environmentalist causes could lead to the absurd when he

found his name associated with a group called “Planet in

Change” which had among its speakers a hypnotherapist

whose mentor was the Archangel Gabriel, and a woman in

touch with a group of aliens from the Pleiades (Jones 2002).

Recognizing that water spirits are important and overlooked factors of wilderness protection and landscape appreciation in Africa (see Bernard, this proceedings ), we

turn to the Sanusi (African spiritual leader of the highest

order) Credo Mutwa. He opened, blessed, and along with

Ian Player, told many stories at this Congress. Following

him we experience a similar slippage from the sublime:

Now, sir, this story has got many versions in it. Throughout South Africa, amongst many tribes, you’ll find stories of

these amazing creatures who are capable of changing from

reptile to human being, and from reptile to any other animal

of their choice. And these creatures, sir, do really exist. No

matter where you go throughout Southern, Eastern, Western, and Central Africa, you’ll find that the description of

these creatures is the same. Even amongst tribes which

never, throughout their long history, had contact with each

other at all.

So, there are such creatures. Where they come from, I will

never claim to know, sir. But they are associated with certain

stars in the sky, and one of these stars is a large group of stars

which is part of the Milky Way, which our people call Ingiyab,

which means ‘The Great Serpent.’ And there is a red star, a

reddish star, near the tip of this huge rim of stars which our

people call IsoneNkanyamba....It is the star called Alpha

Centauri, in English. Now, this, sir, is something that is

worth investigating. Why is it that well over 500 tribes in

parts of Africa which I’ve visited in the last 40 or 50 years or

so, all of them describe similar creatures (Mutwa 1999)?

While Mutwa provides astonishingly valuable insight into

this African cultural universal, he pushes the limits of

credibility and leaves this scholar somewhat incredulous.

His prophet status at the Congress was challenged by the

WILD Foundation President, Vance Martin, when Mutwa,

in the context of a call for his people to have their land and

wild animals returned to them, held that conferences such

as the Congress achieve nothing. This is not to say that all

Western minds are alike. Mutwa’s ideas converged with

those of fringe conspiracy theorist, David Icke (1999, 2001),

who has made an industry of disseminating Mutwa’s ideas

as authentically African confirmation of his own (Icke and

Mutwa 2001). Icke combines New Age mysticism (voices,

intuition, astral projection, “energies” and “densities” or

“domains”) with environmental activism; he was spokesman

for the Green Party in Britain during the 1980s (Poole 2001).

If this Congress can make a difference by laying the

foundations on which the New Partnership for Africa (Nepad)

recovery program can be built, as its founder Ian Player

hopes (Player 2001), then we have to re-examine our myths

and reject those that are dangerously divisive. At the same

time, we need to seek out and nurture other stories and their

tellers for they are the keepers of hope. After the Congress,

however, having followed an important line of storytelling to

the stars, I wonder.

References _____________________

Anderson, D.; Grove, R., eds. 1987. Conservation in Africa: people,

policies and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

355 p.

Bainbridge, W. 2001. Mountain wilderness in South Africa. International Journal of Wilderness. 7(2): 30–34.

Barthes, R. 1973. Mythologies. London: Paladin. 159 p.

Beinart, W. 2000. African history and environmental history. African Affairs. 99: 269–302.

Callicot, J. B.; Nelson, M. P., eds. 1998. The great new wilderness

debate. Athens: University of Georgia Press. 697 p.

Carruthers, J. 1995. The Kruger National Park: a social and

political history. Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press.

170 p.

Carruthers, J. 2001. Wildlife and warfare: the life of James StevensonHamilton. Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press. 244 p.

Cock, J.; Koch, E., eds. 1991. Going green: people, politics and the

environment in South Africa. Cape Town: University of Oxford

Press. 262 p.

Crosby, A. 1988. Ecological imperialism: the overseas migration of

western Europeans as a biological phenomenon. In: Worster, D.,

ed. The ends of the Earth: perspectives on modern environmental

history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 103–117.

Draper, M. 1998. Zen and the art of Garden Province maintenance:

the soft intimacy of hard men in the wilderness of KwaZuluNatal (1952–1997). Journal of Southern African Studies. 24(4):

801–828.
62 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Draper In Quest of African Wilderness

Draper, M.; Maré, G. [In press]. Going in: the garden of England’s

gaming zookeeper and Zululand. Journal of Southern African

Studies.

Grove, R. 1997. Scotland in South Africa: John Croumbie Brown and

the roots of settler environmentalism. In: Griffiths, T.; Robin, L.,

eds. Ecology and empire: the environmental history of settler

societies. Pietermartitzburg: University of Natal Press: 139–153.

Haila, Y. 1997. ‘Wilderness’ and the multiple layers of environmental thought. Environment and History. 3: 129–147.

Hamilton, C. 1998. Terrific majesty: the powers of Shaka Zulu and

the limits of historical invention. Cape Town: David Philip. 278 p.

Hildyard, N. 1998. Blood, babies and the social root of conflict. In:

Suliman, M., ed. Ecology, politics and violent conflict. Part I.

London: Zed: 3–24.

Hildyard, N. 1999. Blood and culture: ethnic conflict and the

authoritarian right. The Cornerhouse. Briefing 11. [Online].

Available: http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk/briefing/11blood.

html

Hope, C. 2001. Review of J. D. F. Jones “Storyteller.” The Guardian.

October 6.

Huss, B. 1936 (1921). A textbook on agriculture. London: Longman.

168 p.

Icke, David. 1999. The biggest secret. Ryde, Isle of Wight, UK:

Bridge of Love Publications. 534 p.

Icke, David. 2001. Children of the matrix. Ryde, Isle of Wight, UK:

Bridge of Love Publications. 458 p.

Icke, David; Mutwa, C. 2001. The reptilian agenda. Two-part video.

[Online]. Summary available: http://bridgelove.www.50megs.com/

credotape.html

Jones, J. D. F. 2001. Storyteller: the many lives of Laurens van der

Post. London: John Murray. 505 p.

Jones, J. D. F. 2002. The authorized version. The Guardian. August

31.

Kennedy, A. D. 1999. Treading lightly: science and environmental

change in the Kruger National Park. Unpublished paper presented at: African environments past and present; 1999 July 5–8;

St Antony’s College, Oxford. On file with author, Department of

Earth Sciences, Bristol University, E-mail: andrew.kennedy@

bristol.ac.uk. 14 p.

Khan, F. 2000. Wilderness and South Africa. [Online]. Available:

h-environment@h-net.msu.edu [2000 May 8]. E-mail: khan@

enviro.uct.ac.za

Martin, V.; Muir, A. 2002. The 7th World Wilderness Congress:

wilderness and human communities. International Journal of

Wilderness. 8(1): 4–8.

Mutwa, C. 1999. Great Zulu Shaman and Elder Credo Mutwa on

alien abduction and reptilians. A rare, astonishing conversation

with Rick Martin. The Spectrum. Front page: September 30.

Neumann, R. P. 2000. Primitive ideas: protected area buffer zones

and the politics of land in Africa. In: Broch-Due, V.; Schroeder,

R. A., eds. Producing nature and poverty in Africa. Stockholm:

Nordisk Afrikainstitute.

Ntombela, M. 1979. Wildlore of Zululand (interpreted by Maurice

Mackenzie). In: Player, I., ed. Voices of the wilderness: proceedings of the First World Wilderness Congress. Johannesburg:

Jonathan Ball: 81–82.

Peden, M. 2000. To our magic mountain. Natal Witness. September 8.

Player, I. 1997. Zululand wilderness: shadow and soul. Cape Town:

David Phillip. 265 p.

Player, I. 2001. Wilderness Congress returns to its roots on African

Soil. 7th World Wilderness Congress News. First Ed.: November 2.

Front page.

Poole, S. 2001. Whacko watch. [Online]. Available: http:/www.

jediknight.com/~smpoole/icke.html [2001 October 20].

Pyne, S. J. 1997. Vestal fire: an environmental history, told through

fire, of Europe and Europe’s encounter with the world. Seattle:

University of Washington Press. 659 p.

Pyne, S. 2000. Where have all the fires gone? Fire Management

Today. 60(3): 4–8.

Ranger, T. 2000. African landscape: a research agenda. Transformation 44 (a journal of “critical perspectives of South Africa.”).

Durban: University of Natal: 53–62.

Soulé, M. E.; Lease, G., eds. 1995. Reinventing nature? Responses

to postmodern deconstruction. Washington, DC: Island Press.

186 p.

Stevenson-Hamilton, J. 1947. Wildlife in Southern Africa. London:

Cassell. 364 p.

Williams. G. 2000a. Introduction to aboriginal fire use in North

America. Fire Management Today. 60(3): 8–12.

Williams. G. 2000b. Reintroducing Indian-type fire: implications for

land managers. Fire Management Today. 60(3): 40–48.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 63

Linda Moon Stumpff is Director of the Graduate Program in Public

Administration, The Evergreen State College, Olympia, WA 98505, U.S.A.

Phone: 360-867-6845, E-mail: stumpffl@evergreen.edu

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—More than 560 Federally recognized American Indian

Tribal Nations exist within the United States. This paper explores the

high value these indigenous nations place on protecting wildlife

species that are deeply rooted in indigenous tradition. Tribes have

taken a leadership role in conserving species on tribal trust lands, and

they also influence Federally managed areas. Of particular importance are Federal lands with wilderness status, critical to assuring

the continuance of key species of significant cultural and ecological

value. Tribal treaty and religious rights create a Federal nexus on

public lands. Large predators and fish important to these indigenous

nations are particularly threatened by poorly planned development

on public and private land. Also threatened are fish whose existence

may depend on clean, free-flowing waters that emanate from headwaters protected by wilderness and wild river status.

This paper explores how Tribes are leading the way in restoring

three species and the ecosystems on which they depend; these

efforts include restoration of wild salmon, buffalo, and the wolf. It

draws on native voices and tribal projects and policies. Although no

policy is a perfect match for tribal values, the phrase “all my

relations” has significant meaning for threatened species who may

depend on the preservation of their wild land habitats. A future in

which tribes and the Federal government develop adaptive, collaborative policies for public land is one that keeps a place for brother

wolf, salmon, and buffalo in active, restorative relationships. Through

such collaboration, health is shared with all who pass through the

wild lands.

Introduction ____________________

The high value American Indian Tribes place on protecting wildlife and their habitat is deeply rooted in indigenous

traditions. These internal, indigenous nations within the

United States are leading a number of wildlife restoration

efforts. This paper describes the role these Tribes play in

three major wildlife restoration projects, the interconnections with wildlife restoration and wilderness, and their

efforts to protect wild rivers and native fish. About 560

Federally recognized tribal nations hold trust lands amounting to somewhere between 3 and 5 percent of the landmass

of the United States. They exert influence on other Federal

lands through treaties and executive orders of the President

of the United States, and the Secretary of the Interior who

acts as the fiduciary agent for the President in these matters. Tribal lands, Federal public lands, and waterways,

particularly those with wilderness status, are critical to key

species of significant cultural and ecological value to the

Tribes.

The threat of loss of key species in North America, such as

salmon, buffalo, wolf, and eagle, is itself a measure of the

magnitude of threats to cultures, human health, and wild

lands. Conversely, restoration of these species and their

ecosystems restores the health of human communities with

the health of their surroundings. A tribal vision of the

essence of the wild embeds ideas of how particular tribes

came to be part of the Earth, part of creation, and part of

what the future holds. Various species play important roles

in the creation and migration narratives of native peoples:

they remain tied to the people in the past, present, and

future. They remain present in prayers, in visions, and in

healthy diets. Certain animals in particular indicate the

health of the ecosystem. Spiritual values related to the

natural system are dependent upon restoring health to

species and humans in this combined cultural and natural

context.

Issues for Native Americans on Federal

Wilderness Lands

There are three major wilderness issues of significant

concern for American Indian Tribes. First, the idea of a

natural ecosystem without human intervention runs against

many tribal traditions. Although many tribes traditionally

control use to some areas for both spiritual and practical

reasons, complete exclusion was unusual. Recognition of

the human role in the ecosystem is widely recognized. Even

though legal wilderness designation under the Wilderness

Act of 1964 is intended to protect cultural values, these

provisions can be forgotten in practice. Second, Federal

land agencies have often tended to target resources for high

use recreation areas, not toward species and the habitats

upon which they depend, creating a management dilemma

(Cole 2001). Third, heavy-use public recreation trails may

be juxtaposed against areas traditionally restricted as

shrines or the combined spiritual and actual homes of

animals. In the past, policy gaps all too frequently led to

regulations that excluded native peoples from traditional

activities, while inadvertently excluding indigenous knowledge of the ecosystem.

Significant improvements have occurred in these areas

in recent years, especially after the issuance of Presidential Orders on consultation with tribes through government-to-government relations and on sacred lands, and a

Protecting Restorative Relationships and

Traditional Values: American Indian Tribes,

Wildlife, and Wild Lands

Linda Moon Stumpff
64 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Stumpff Protecting Restorative Relationships and Traditional Values: American Indian Tribes, Wildlife, and Wild Lands

Joint Secretarial Order in 1996 on cooperation with tribes

in implementing the Endangered Species Act. These orders, combined with treaty provisions and other agreements, constitute a Federal nexus within which American

Indian Tribes work with land policy on Federal lands,

including wilderness and wild river designations, to assure the continuity of wild species and their cultural

traditions. Some tough challenges remain. Despite significant changes, major policy areas outlined in laws and

executive orders have not received the needed attention

that creates administrative mechanisms and guidelines to

assure their broad implementation. Much is left to the

discretion of line managers who must work under strong

local political pressure; they frequently lack sufficient

administrative guidance, training, and support from higher

levels to make decisions that fully implement the intent of

laws and executive orders regarding American Indian

rights. Another major challenge comes from the political

boundaries that mark differences in practices and facilities between wilderness areas, other public lands, tribal

lands, and other forms of public and private property, and

result in negative impacts to species (Landres and others

1998).

Two Principles Emerging From

Indigenous Relationships With Wildlife

The guiding wisdom that governs indigenous relationships with species is respect. It is a respect that flows from

a deep understanding of the life force in every particle of

living beings. Respect is incorporated in action through

restorative practices for humans and “all our relations.”

This reciprocal, restorative principle is applied in planning

and practice. These values, intended to guide action, are

reflected in the statement of a tribal vision for the rebirth

of a great river, which was made by the Columbia River

Intertribal Fish Commission:

The tribal vision is the rebirth of the spiritual values of the

Basins’ land, water, air, plants, fish and wildlife and the

importance of those values expressed in love, purity, respect

and worship that sustained life for native peoples before the

time of...the worlds’ great religions. This strength should not

be lost (CRITFC Biennial Report 2000: inner cover).

This vision leads to the first principle guiding restorative

relationships within the ecosystem. It derives from an indigenous concept of evolution—the idea that peoples, species,

and processes evolved together over time in the most useful

and efficient ways. The value that emerges from this principle is diversity over monoculture. The actions that flow

from this principle are represented in connective relationships to ecosystem processes. Knowledge acquired over the

long term is applied to restorative actions.

The second principle comes from the idea that the bounty

of species and natural resources represents a gift that

entails human responsibility. Thus, the greater the damage

to the species and the ecosystems on which they depend, the

greater the responsibility to sustain them through the governance of human use or restorative practices. Restorative

actions are invoked only by high risks to species; they are

limited by respect for the bounded and incomplete nature of

all human knowledge. The loss of wildness and wild species

stems from the reversal of these two principles and results

in the concurrent loss of knowledge and in unleashing

human irresponsibility without limit. Knowledge of the

basis of the interconnected, adaptive restorative relationships constitutes the substance of wildness, as far as we

know it. Responsible action to preserve ecosystem relationships based on long-term knowledge, constantly renewed

and reborn with changing conditions, is the only sustainable

solution.

Restoration of the Wild Buffalo,

Salmon, and Wolf as Examples of

Federal-Tribal Comanagement_____

Tribes continue to influence the Federal Government in

placing lands and water in appropriate kinds of protected

status to benefit fish and wildlife. Tribal initiatives take

place within the context of a Federal nexus, which gives

tribes leverage to apply pressure through negotiation and

legal action. In the Northwest, and in other areas, they work

for the protection of pristine waterways and clean water

supplies to benefit fish, wildlife, and humans. In some areas,

they are taking over management of reintroduced species

such as the wolf, or taking actions to protect species before

they become endangered, such as the Apache trout.

Recently, a number of significant relationships and agreements led to numerous instances of comanagement between American Indian Tribes and the Federal Government on Federal and State lands. The Grande Rhonde

Tribe in Oregon exemplifies a relationship in which tribes

influence Federal policy. The Tribe has currently taken

over the land use planning function on National Forest and

Bureau of Land Management lands. Concern for the care of

the land and biodiversity was the primary motivating

factor for the Tribe. Leadership for the wolf reintroduction

program in the State of Idaho by the Nez Perce Tribe

represents another outstanding example. Actions initiated

by the Northwest Indian Fish Commission for restoring

salmon to Puget Sound and the greater Seattle region of the

State of Washington represent the long-term commitment

of Northwest Tribes. Protection of traditional values and

re-establishment of traditional ecological relationships with

the buffalo through educational programs are special actions created by tribal colleges and many Tribal Nations.

The three case studies included in this paper demonstrate

how tribes initiated actions to restore wildlife and the land

and water on which they depend, implementing their

programs based on the two principles of respect for evolutionary processes and remembrance of the original gift and

attendant responsibilities to restore and protect. In researching the cases, I found that the three programs are

implemented with modern science, but guided by traditional knowledge with cultural objectives.

Traditional Knowledge

Tribes have accumulated knowledge over long periods of

time as they interacted with various species on the North

American Continent. This knowledge, originally drawn from

empirical experience and validated by spiritual values,
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 65

Protecting Restorative Relationships and Traditional Values: American Indian Tribes, Wildlife, and Wild Lands Stumpff

became encapsulated in cultural narratives. The traditional

knowledge base is adaptable and verifiable in the continuous expression and implementation of relationships with

other species and the ecosystem to which all belong. It is the

center of long-term knowledge of the continent, while science can only infer a picture of the North American ecosystem through tree-ring analysis and other limited methodologies. As such, this knowledge is critical to the sustainability

of wildlife and the ecosystems upon which they depend.

Significant challenges exist for creating a useful dialogue

between modern science and the knowledge base of traditional science held by tribes. Resolution of differences will

mean finding common ground and working to understand

disparate objectives and methodologies. It will also mean

releasing the stereotypes of the “noble Indian” and the

“noble scientist.” Actual integration of such diverse ways of

knowing may be neither possible nor desirable. At the same

time, great benefits may be obtained from recognizing parallel ways of knowing that inform each other and connect the

past with the present and future. As a starting point, some

characteristics of the development and use of traditional

knowledge and science need to be recognized. One characteristic of traditional knowledge focuses on continued cycles of

use and restoration to assure the health of humans and “all

our relations.” This is different than a science that explores

for all that is knowable or all that is of economic value, or

even all that serves the most humans best. A second major

choice in science is the decision of where and how it is to be

applied. Applications of traditional science to land-use systems connect humans to the living elements through care of

the ecosystem. Actions based on changing factors harmonize

adaptive decisions. Finally, “best use” as it applies to traditional science is to use knowledge to evaluate the quality of

human interactions and their impacts on other species.

Visions of the land are often connected with ideas of use, as

Elizabeth Woody (1999: 14) reminds us:

What has happened to Celilo Falls illustrates a story of

inadequacy and ignorance of this land. The story begins, of

course, long before the submergence of the falls, with the seed

of ambition to make an Eden where Eden was not needed. One

needs to learn from the land how to live upon it.

The conceptual framework behind traditional knowledge and science goes back to the first principle of respect

for the love that flows from understanding the life force in

every grain of evolution. Thus, to fish, and to take life, while

respecting that the fish lives in ways we can relate to,

constitutes the basis for a defined respect expressed in

behavior and in ceremony. The next step in expressing this

love of the life force affects immediate behavior that leads

to sustainable relations. This is reminiscent of the kind of

experience Aldo Leopold had when he recollected the sight

of that kind of love extinguished in a dying green fire deep

in the eyes of a wolf. That experience led him to an inspired

set of actions that initiated the wilderness system.

A scientific emphasis on restoration takes place in the

narrow gorge of time between the past and future. It moves

Tribes and governments away from endlessly deconstructing

colonialism and making promises. It shifts energy to restorative actions that benefit communities. In order to take

restorative action, the knowledge base itself needs restoration. Experience from the past is drawn from tradition and

worked into guidance that leads to a vision of the future.

Actions are informed by experiential knowledge in the cycle

of adaptation. In this context, restoration is a form of rebirth

and the recognition of the sovereign nature of all species.

Restoring Salmon Nations

Rebirth and retention of spiritual values contained in the

natural system and in the people are components of salmon

restoration. Healthy relationships are reborn in natural

cycles that depend on wild rivers that in turn depend on the

human responsibility to assure the continuity of the wild.

Restoration, then, carries express human responsibilities.

In the case of the Nisqually Tribe, the fact that the headwaters of the Nisqually River fall within the protection of the

National Parks, and its delta now is included in a National

Wildlife Refuge, greatly widens the opportunities for restoration. Billy Frank, Jr., of the Nisqually Tribe, clearly

restates the main idea of the second principle that connects

restoration and responsibility for the salmon:

Some of the scientists say that our river’s spring chinook

went extinct back in the 40’s. I don’t believe that. That any

salmon is extinct. The salmon was here when we got here.

Nature put the salmon here. For us. And nature will take care

of that salmon. That life is still here, in the streams, out in the

ocean. I can’t believe all that life, from the Nisqually headwaters all the way up to Alaska, is gone. I’ll never say extinct.

With a flicker of the right action, that life will revive itself

(Wilkerson 2000: 104).

Salmon live as part of a complex cyclical system, migrating out from their natal streams to the ocean and returning

years later to the streams to spawn—a journey of thousands

of miles. Tribal wisdom and knowledge guide scientific and

technical aptitude to restore salmon in action. Tribal fish

commissions in the Northwest assemble hydrologists, geneticists, biometricians, and other scientists to do research

that benefits the salmon. At the same time, they bolster the

Tribal position in the realm of public opinion and public

policy. What works and what does not work is the bottom line

of applied restoration. Failure is obvious to all. The score

from destroying wild river habitat is salmon few, humans

zero. The lesson is not that the fish will be gone, it is that the

people will be gone. Success is based on a many-sided vision.

Supaneeqx, a Walla Walla word, has no easy translation.

However, its general meaning makes sense when circumscribing appropriate human actions in the Columbia River

Basin—actions like looking at something, whether an issue,

a problem, or an organization, from many different angles

and directions.

This many-sided vision is applied in practice through the

implementation of the tribal-based “Spirit of the Salmon

Restoration Plan,” or the “Wy-Kan-Ush-Mi-Wa-Kish.” This

tribal plan for salmon restoration makes recommendations

even to areas outside of the Tribes’ control, such as changes

in hydroelectric operations and changes in ocean fishing

regulations. Despite the bounded nature of the Tribes’ political control, the plan places them in a leadership role for

restoration of harvestable and healthy runs of salmon in the

Columbia Basin. The way is known, but partnerships are

required. Tribes employ their extensive abilities for collaboration, while they persist in bringing multiple public and
66 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Stumpff Protecting Restorative Relationships and Traditional Values: American Indian Tribes, Wildlife, and Wild Lands

private entities together. At home, they build tribal capacity

to assume greater responsibility. After years of persuasion,

tribal pressure resulted in abundance-based regulations for

ocean fishing of Chinook salmon, and even the great hydroelectric dams now make some seasonal releases of water for

the salmon.

Restoring Relationships From the Heart—During

their thousands of years of history on the Columbia River,

indigenous people knew about experimenting with dams as

a means of containing fish for individual villages. From

these experiences, a traditional understanding emerged

that outlined how dams disrupted the natural allocation

patterns of wild rivers, for fish do not go above the dams. A

traditional story from the Nez Perce Tribe illustrates the

human problems that create dams and result in allocative

dilemmas. It is a story of point and counterpoint, a perversion of the first stories of creation that contain a lesson about

the consequences.

Coyote was walking up the river on a hot day and decided

to cool himself in the water. He swam down the swift river

until he came to the waterfall where the Wasco people lived.

Five Maidens had dwelt there from ancient times. This was

the place where the great dam kept the fish from going up the

river.

While he was looking at the great waterfall, Coyote saw a

Maiden. Quickly he went back upstream a ways and said, “I

am going to look like a little baby, floating down the river on

a raft in a cradle board, all laced up.” As Coyote was drifting

down the river, he cried, “Awaa, awaaa.” The Maidens,

hearing this, quickly swam over, thinking that a baby might

be drowning.

The Maidens took the baby home and cared for it and fed it.

He grew very fast. When he was crawling around one day, he

spilled some water on purpose.

“Oh Mothers,” he said. “Will you get me some more water?”

The youngest sister said, “Why don’t you make him go and

get it himself? The river is nearby.”

He began to crawl toward the river, but when he was out of

sight, he jumped up and began to run. The oldest sister turned

around and said, “He is out of sight already. He certainly can

move fast.”

“That is because he is Coyote,” the youngest said.

When Coyote reached the river, he swam to the fish dam

and tore it down, pulling out the stones so that all the water

rushed free. Then he crawled up on the rocks and shouted

gleefully, “Mothers, your fish dam has been broken.”

The sisters ran down and saw that it was true. The

youngest Maiden just said, “I told you he was Coyote.”

Coyote said, “You have kept all the people from having

salmon for a long time by stopping them from going upstream.

Now the people will be happy because they will get salmon.

The salmon will now be able to go upriver and spawn.”

This is how Celilo Falls came to be where the Wasco people

are today. As a result of Coyote tearing down the fish dam,

salmon are now able to come up river to spawn on the upper

reaches of the Great Columbia River and its tributaries

(Landeen and Pinkham 1998: 83).

This story is in direct contradiction to the philosophy of

Manifest Destiny—the belief that resources were put here to

belong to the individual user, to maximize profit, who then

gained the right to rule over the land. It points out its own

philosophical flaw by which use becomes the right itself,

rather than just one type of relationship between living

things governed by a system of rights based on the workings

of natural systems. American Indian Tribes need to use the

resources, but use occurs within the workings of natural

systems. If the newcomers to North America thought that

the resources looked unused and the fisheries plentiful—

wasn’t this good? Wasn’t this the real definition of success,

of a job well done? Everything was put back in its place, used

so skillfully and understood in its underlying design that it

appeared almost unused. The plants, the animals, and fish

and birds returned in good numbers. The underlying maxim

of “control the people, not Nature,” even in its wildest

manifestations, applied. Some areas were restricted from

use, others used only for certain purposes. No one hunted or

fished who was not properly trained to understand the web

of relations and interconnecting parts. Save all the parts,

save the many relations, save ourselves.

The Federal Nexus—Six species of salmon swim the

rivers of the Northwest: they are Chinook, they are Pink,

they are the Silver or Coho, they are Chum, and they are

Sockeye and Steelhead. The number of salmon stocks in the

United States is now 335, and of these, 100 are threatened

and 12 are extinct. N’ch-iwana, the main stem of the Columbia River, choked by 19 Federal hydroelectric dams, blocks

the salmon from returning home to spawn. Dams were built

all over the West for a variety of purposes. Some of the dams

are no longer even functional, but they still create salmon

barriers on numerous streams and rivers in the Northwest.

The lack of Wild River designation on the Columbia River

system and throughout the Northwest led to continuing the

activities that obliterated a once rich King salmon fishery.

The State of Washington, with its vast network of rivers,

remains almost without Wild River designations. Federal

wilderness designation and other protective regulations,

such as National Parks and National Forests, however,

protect headwaters essential to clean water for the fish.

Designations that protect the watersheds downstream to

assure the flow of cool, clean water for feeding areas and

other habitat conditions essential to the fish, are lacking.

Hatcheries, History, and Histrionics—The wild

salmon lives to produce bounty. It hatches from a tiny egg

high in forested streams, and the 1-ounce fish swims to the

ocean where it grows to 15, 20, or even 60 pounds. Salmon

that return to spawn afterwards die and rot to feed the

mountains, providing 16 percent of the nutrients needed by

young salmon and 17 percent of the nutrients for streamside vegetation. In the Columbia River alone, nearly two

hundred million pounds of fish return each year. If they

were cows, a rancher could turn loose a 200-pound calf that

would disappear and come back to his gate on a predetermined date in a few years weighing about 50,000 pounds:

that would be equivalent to what the wild salmon do

(Manning 1999).

Fish hatcheries, first implemented by State and Federal

agencies to maintain harvestable runs, are controversial.

Improperly managed, they release fish that compete with

wild fish. And regulatory science sometimes leaves logic

wanting. In runs with 80-percent hatchery fish and 20-

percent wild fish, harvest limits are set that allow for

harvesting 66 percent of hatchery fish and 33 percent of

wild fish. Thought to protect the wild fish, simple extrapolation of the math suggests that such limited regulatory

policies will assure the eventual demise of the wild fish. In
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 67

Protecting Restorative Relationships and Traditional Values: American Indian Tribes, Wildlife, and Wild Lands Stumpff

other cases, hatchery bred fish, that come from original

broodstock from native streams that are on the brink of

extinction, may offer the only possibility of restoring those

runs of Steelhead and salmon.

In response to the loss of salmon, the Federal Government

and the States began an active program of fish hatchery

production in an attempt to replace the wild salmon. Many

aspects of this restoration effort are fraught with problems.

Each hatchery fish costs $62.50 (Manning 1999). Fish hatcheries consume energy in order to dump biomass into the

system, while the wild salmon return biomass to the system

in a natural cycle. The average hatchery spends the capital,

not the interest, by feeding the hatchery fish other fish. This

reverses the allocation system implemented by a natural

salmon run in a wild river. Not only do wild salmon living in

wild rivers bring back protein from the ocean without cost,

they also provide point-to-point delivery by returning to

their stream of origin.

Despite the difficulties involved with hatcheries, they are

key to the restoration efforts developed by the Tribes in the

Columbia River Basin. Most Tribal fish hatcheries adapted

their programs to the principle of compatibility with native

wild fish and naturally spawning populations. The production of fish of native origins to specific watersheds was

prioritized. Faced with extinction of an increasing number of

salmon species, hatcheries become a way of “saving all the

parts,” while persisting in efforts to mount pressure. Federal

and State hatcheries tended to manage for nonnative fish

that crowded out the wild salmon. At some places, like

Redfish Lake, Idaho Game and Fish projects killed and

poisoned native salmon in order to replace them with hatchery-raised “sport fish.” Many problems occurred even when

the State and Federal hatcheries were developed for native

fish species. The State of Oregon produced so many Steelhead, they deemed them “surplus to their hatchery program.” In 1988, with support from the Yakima Tribe, the Nez

Perce Tribe, and the Confederated Tribes of the Warm

Springs Reservation, the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla

Indian Reservation sued the State of Oregon (United States

versus Oregon). They obtained an injunction to prevent

Oregon from destroying Imnaha River hatchery Steelhead.

These Steelhead, developed from native broodstock of the

region, are being used by the Tribes to rebuild runs in the

Imnaha Basin from which their ancestors came.

Tribal Perspectives on Linked Actions to Sustain

Wild Salmon—In the practice of restoration, traditional

knowledge and science have never been separated. Attempts to restore fish runs through hatcheries are at best a

short-term solution. This links to longer term solutions for

preserving the wild character of waterways. Because the

Nez Perce, Umatilla, and other Tribes revere water and the

fish that live in it, there is great concern for the Columbia

River. In 1997, the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians

and the Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission nominated the Columbia for designation under the American

Heritage River program, as a step in getting Federal support

to recover plants, animals, fish, and people. Wild and Scenic

River Designation for the Hanford Reach, the last freeflowing section of the Columbia, was sought. In many similar actions, Tribes repeatedly used their Federal relationship to create restoration actions that preserve key

components of the ecosystem.

Great dam building projects significantly impacted the

ecosystem and prevented salmon migration, plunging some

runs of fish into near extinction. Fish hatcheries were often

the only mitigation. Hatcheries have been among the most

complicated issue. Thirty-eight hatcheries were constructed

below the Bonneville Dam, however, the Dam prevented the

fish from swimming upriver where the Tribes might catch

them. Hatcheries caused a loss of biological diversity in

spawning fish that were not adapted to their environment,

and that may lack survival skills. At the same time, Tribes

have established some hatcheries under a different rubric,

using eggs from native fish and working to mimic natural

conditions. In cases where the salmon are virtually gone,

such hatcheries are critical to the continuance of the culture

of the people, who so firmly believe their fate is linked to the

salmon. Tribes continue to pressure the Federal Government to increase water releases from dams in attempts to

mimic wild conditions on the Columbia that benefit salmon.

The Northwest Tribes have a clear understanding that

salmon restoration will require multiple connected actions

occurring in cycles over a period of many years. From the

basis of their long-term perspective, they recognize the need

to:

• Understand all sides, including traditional, political,

and scientific aspects of restoration.

• Anticipate all consequences by completing an analysis

from all perspectives.

• Retain traditional knowledge as the guiding wisdom,

while making use of the best technical information

available.

• Understand the effects of decisions on people, groups,

and organizations.

• Make necessary recommendations, including those outside of tribal control, with persistence and dedication to

collaborative action (CRITC 2000).

What works and what does not work is the bottom line of

applied restoration science and policy. Failure is obvious to

all. Success is based on a many-sided vision. Supaneeqx—

that Walla Walla word that has no easy translation—still

carries comprehensive meaning for planning efforts by

describing the action of looking at something, whether an

issue, a problem, or an organization, from many different

angles and directions. Their Salmon Plan is accompanied

by demands for restoring sections of wild river. Tribes must

now use their extensive abilities for collaboration and their

persistence to bring multiple public and private entities

together, while working at home to build tribal capacity to

assume greater responsibility. The Boldt Decision, a Federal Court decision affecting Washington State, assured

the Tribes of a harvestable catch of salmon, and fortified

their rights to gather shellfish and materials for traditional

use on public and private lands. Tribal Nations, through

their Federal standing, may sue States, individual, and

corporations to protect salmon. And they continue to do so.

Restoring the Buffalo Nations

Tribes maintain an ancient relationship to the American

Bison, called “buffalo” in common parlance. The buffalo is

considered a spiritual being who can be called by those who

listen and offer respect. The buffalo lived on the Great Plains
68 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Stumpff Protecting Restorative Relationships and Traditional Values: American Indian Tribes, Wildlife, and Wild Lands

in vast prairie grasslands. Estimates of the number of

buffalo at the time of European contact range from 30 to 70

million animals. These great herds were called “the greatest

animal congregations that ever existed” (Matthiesen 1987:

151). By the end of the Indian Wars in the Northwest in the

1870s, less than 100 buffalo remained in the wild.

Buffalo bulls are larger than females, weighing about

2,000 pounds. They have heavy horns and a large hump of

muscle that supports their huge heads and thick skull, yet

they can run as fast as a horse. They become especially illtempered during rut. The roars and posturing of their

battles certainly justify the expression of “buffaloing” someone. Buffaloes raise their droopy tail straight up when they

are ready to charge. Cows have narrower, curved horns and

they weigh about half as much as bulls. They are protective

of the calves and may be even more dangerous.

American Indian Tribes played a critical role in preserving the American bison. The Cape buffalo of Africa and the

water buffalo of Asia are true buffalo, but the American

bison has been called “buffalo” for so long now that the terms

are used interchangeably in popular literature. According to

a peculiar characteristic of the buffalo, the calves followed

the horses of the hunters who had slain or separated them

from their mothers on a hunting expedition. The buffalo

herds, the lifeblood of the Indian Nations of the Plains, were

victims of wasteful overhunting by the newly arrived “frontiersmen.” The systematic slaughter of the bison was the

military, political, and economic expression of colonialism

and oppression. The Southern herds were the first to go.

Between 1872 and 1874, a million animals a year were shot,

leaving a solitary survivor to meet its end in Buffalo Springs,

Texas, on the trail to Santa Fe (Matthiesen 1987). Massive

slaughters accompanied the Northern Pacific Railroad construction that cut directly across Sioux treaty lands. The

slaughters coincided with the height of the Indian Wars in

the 1870s and 1880s.

Walking Coyote, a Pend d’Oreille Indian, brought in several calves that followed him to St. Ignatius, Montana. He

kept a small herd of buffalo that grew from those orphaned

calves. He later sold them to Charles Allard, Sr., and Michael

Pablo, who were ranching on the Flathead Indian Reservation. From this small herd came many of the animals later

used in restoration, including the larger number of them in

Yellowstone National Park. In 1893, they bought Buffalo

Jones’ remnant herd at Omaha, adding 26 purebred animals

that they kept until purchased by the Canadian Government. This herd, so oral history says, originally came from

Canada. The hybrids, or cattalo, were never allowed to mix

with the thoroughbred bison, but were sequestered on Wild

Horse Island, at Flathead Lake.

When the Federal Government implemented the allotment policy that opened the reservations for white homesteaders in 1910, Michael Pablo was forced to sell the buffalo

to the Canadian Government. In the 23 years under Indian

management, the herd of 36 bison increased to over 30 times

their original number (Jones 1909). The roundups were

extremely difficult. He notes, “The buffalo, when they found

themselves being urged from their native pastures, would

turn on the riders and in the wildest fury charge the line,”

scattering all over the country (Jones 1909: 7). Finally, a

specially constructed fence running 26 miles (42 km) in

length, gave them a line to drive the buffalo down to the 24-

inch (61-cm) timber corrals before being shipped by special

trains to Alberta. Much of this narrative of the restoration of

the buffalo relies on traditional knowledge of the buffalo

retained on the Flathead Reservation. It is an unusual

example of how restoration efforts following traditional

management practices may accomplish significant and

amazing objectives.

When the Federal Government interfered with the management of Indian trust lands by American Indian Tribal

Governments by passing laws that broke up traditional wild

range lands, the result was the loss of wild animal range and

the animals that used it. At the time when the Flathead

Reservation was fragmented by the Allotment Act, Allard

realized that their wild bison herd would not be welcome. He

sold his bison to Charles Conrad in Kalispell. This herd was

later important as the nucleus of the National Bison Range

stock. The sale to Canada drew strong public response, and

the American Bison Society was formed. President Theodore

Roosevelt and William Hornaday of the Smithsonian worked

to persuade Congress to set aside national range land for the

American bison. Three reserves were established between

1907 and 1909. Again, the Salish Kootenai Nations of the

Flathead Indian Reservation responded, extending a longterm lease of their trust lands to establish the 18,500-acre

(7,487-ha) National Bison Range. Its reserve is primarily

made up of native Palouse prairie grasslands, but also

includes forest, wetland, and river bottom woodlands. This

wildlife refuge is intensively managed for species diversity.

The extreme damage done to natural processes through

farming, cattle ranching, and the resulting introduction of

noxious plants and exotic animals requires significant conservation work by humans to begin emulating natural conditions. The bison are vaccinated today due to largely unproven, but politically troubling, claims that they might act

as transmitters of disease to cattle. In fact, brucellosis, the

disease attributed to the buffalo, is really a cattle disease

that was transmitted to bison in some areas. Bison are

strong and hardy beasts, much better adapted to the American Plains than European varieties of cattle. The restoration

of the buffalo is intimately connected to their central place in

the living ecosystem. Understanding and respecting the

bison is considered integral to bringing them back. In oral

history, recorded by the culture committee of the Blackfeet

Nation of Montana, Mary Ground tells the story of Iniskim,

the Buffalo Rocks, that illustrates how the buffalo is regarded as a spiritual entity who can be called back:

It was the middle of winter in the days before the Pikuni

(Blackfeet Tribe) had horses. They were camped down by a

creek for the winter and the people were starving. The buffalo

had moved out somewhere. The men would go out and hunt

but there were no buffalo any place. In camp, they cleaned out

everything they could think of to eat. Finally, they even

started to cook those little calf skins they used to dry berries

in...They boiled some of their rawhide ropes for food. There

weren’t even any birds or rabbits left.

The youngest wife of the Chief took her rope down to the

creek to get wood. She was looking for some of those dried-up

rosebuds, too. She was gathering up her wood and looking for

those dried-up rosebuds when all at once she heard someone

singing.

“Woman over there, you woman, take me, I am holy. I want

a gift. May I have kidney to eat?”
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 69

Protecting Restorative Relationships and Traditional Values: American Indian Tribes, Wildlife, and Wild Lands Stumpff

There was no one there but her. She stood there but she

couldn’t see anything. Finally, she saw the gravel and rocks

rolling down on the side of the cliff on the bank. She went over

there and found this Iniskim, a buffalo rock. It’s a petrified

rock shaped like a buffalo. The woman picked it up and kissed

it and said, “You must be the one who’s singing. Sure I’ll take

you. I’ll take you home with me.” She put it in her dress and

got her wood all ready and went home.

When she got to her teepee, she told her husband, “I want

you folks to straighten up the teepee...invite all the elder men,

the Medicine Men and the young men. We’re going to make

Medicine. She showed him the Iniskim and said, “I feel sorry

for the little ones and the older people. They’re starving. We’ll

see if we have the good luck to get our buffalo back again.” In

those days they had buffalo jumps. They were nearly always

ready in case the buffalo would come near the camp” (Ground

1978: 37–38). In the story, the buffalo return and the woman

is honored for her work in calling back the buffalo.

The Federal Nexus—The Federal Government was slow

to react to the loss of the buffalo. Tribal members secured

buffalo here and there. Tribes took the initiative for introducing buffalo on many reservations. The sale of the major

remaining herd of buffalo to Canada finally resulted in

political pressure. The National Bison Range, the reintroduction of buffalo into Yellowstone National Park, and other

actions resulted.

In the Southwest and other areas, a number of tribes keep

small herds of buffalo today. They are regarded as important

animals to the spiritual health and welfare of the communities. The Buffalo is part of the sacred Mountain Way ceremonies of the Navajo, and the Pueblos celebrate their connection to these animals with Buffalo Dances. Before European

contact, many of the Southwest tribes traveled eastward to

the southern plains to hunt buffalo.

The restoration of the buffalo is intimately connected to

their place as the centerpiece of a lifeway, especially for the

northern tribes. Understanding and respecting the bison is

considered integral to bringing them back. The Inter-Tribal

Buffalo Commission has worked to encourage building up

herds through the application of traditional methods and

some marketing. They now coordinate the efforts of a number of tribes. Tribes continue educational efforts to teach

people that the buffalo must be respected and that it is

integral to sustained living on the Great Plains. Tribal

colleges develop curriculum on buffalo, and Winona La Duke

writes extensively about the vision for returning the prairies

to the buffalo and the buffalo to the prairies in a major effort

to restore native ecosystems.

Restoring Brother Wolf

The relationship of many tribes to the wolf reflects the

kinship between first peoples and the wild. John Marshall,

Lakota Sioux, noted, “This kinship between first peoples and

the wolf took us down the same road nearly to the end”

(Marshall 1995: 6). In a time before people became arrogant,

it is said that people learned from the wolf. The wolf uses

what he has within to hunt. The wolf is emulated because he

is so successful in living within the web of relationships. The

wolf’s powerful knowledge and skill as a hunter further

encouraged that emulation. Many tribes learned the practice of the wolf. The Apache tribe, locked in a 300-year battle

with the Spanish, Mexican, and later the United States

Governments, learned to copy the howls. They copied them

so exactly that they could communicate across great distances and not be recognized.

Northern Wolf-Sungmanitu or Timber Wolf—John

Marshall, in his book, On Behalf of Wolf and First Peoples,

reveals a dream of a wolf he had as a small boy. From this

dream, in which a wolf asks him to sing his song, he

interprets his role as an equal of the wolf with a responsibility to tell the wolf’s story. He says, “It was then that I began

to learn that the wolf and I are brothers. That I am more like

him than I ever imagined. Born into the same land of the

same Mother. We are kindred spirits and fellow travelers in

a common existence, bound together by respect, adversity,

and challenge” (Marshall 1995: 5). The wolf’s vigilance in

defending his family, regardless of the strength of the enemy

or the odds of the struggle, was observed. Finally, people

learned that they could emulate the wolf and, in turn, came

to exist to serve the environment and participate in the

mutuality of life (Marshal 1995). By accepting the premise

that the wolf is a model, the different levels of relationship

and meaning between wolves and first peoples can be understood. This means recognizing boundaries and parameters

of mutual respect on the Earth. It also recognizes the

physical relationships of living in the same place together.

Finally, it recognizes the being of the Earth itself, the ecology

of being.

The emulation of the wolf was not the same as being the

wolf, for it was understood that each species had its own

place and its own characteristics or strengths that were its

key to survival. Although humans held great powers of

understanding, those powers were not held to dominate, but

to survive. Sometimes, emulation led to the formation of

special societies in tribes. For example, the Pawnee tribe

was known on the plains as the “Wolf People,” and the sign

language for the wolf was the hand with two fingers held in

a v-shape on the right side of the head.

Marshall (1995) gives the name of the wolf in Lakota,

“sungmanitu tanka,” great dog of the wilderness. He notes

that this is a new name, because it includes the concept of

wilderness, which is European in origin. Previous to European contact, the Lakota did not compartmentalize the

world with anthropomorphic terms like “wilderness.” Rather,

culture and society were joined as a concept, not a place. And

the more correct interpretation of manitu was not wilderness, as place, as legal entity, but wilderness “place away

from where humans are.” Marshall also notes an older word

for wolf, “mayaca,” a term that may more closely relate to the

wolf’s characteristic of denning in a step face or riverbank.

He tells a story, similar to stories from other tribes, this

one learned from his grandfather, about the understanding

between people and wolves:

A woman leaves her village and home in heartbreak and

anger because her husband has brought home a second,

younger wife. It is late autumn and she travels toward the

village of some of her relatives. She becomes lost, her food

supply is gone, and she faces the prospect of having to totally

fend for herself. Eventually, she is found by a family of

wolves, which leads her to shelter and occasionally brings

her fresh meat. Over the winter, she learns the nuances of

their communication. Finally, a wolf tells her that some of

her people are moving close. After that, she leaves her wolf

family and finally reaches the villages of her relatives, who
70 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Stumpff Protecting Restorative Relationships and Traditional Values: American Indian Tribes, Wildlife, and Wild Lands

had received word that she was probably dead. Her relatives

were overjoyed to see her, and they give her the name of

Woman Who Lived With the Wolves (Marshall 1995: 12–13).

The story records the closeness of the relationship between humans and wolves and their mutual interdependence. In fact, the near extinction of the wolf and of first

peoples ran parallel after European contact. Both wolf and

Indian got in the way of Manifest Destiny. Pressed to

extinction, the timber wolf of the North, the lobo wolf of the

Southwest, the red wolf, and other subspecies reached the

brink.

Marshall develops the idea that the wolf is a hunter who

is the equal of his prey—he uses what he has within him to

hunt. There is no question of superiority to the prey. This is

why the wolf is emulated, because he is successful in living

within his own place, unimpaired by ideas of progress and

superiority over another. A political economy of wolves is

different than that of ranching and markets. Both northern

and southern wolves were pushed over the borders, the

northern wolf retreating to Canada, the lobo retreating into

Mexico. Today, the wolf is a bio-political pawn in the wider

battle that will determine who owns the future of the North

American West (Mitchell 1994).

The Federal Nexus—The Federal Government, under

the Endangered Species Act, launched a plan to restore the

wolf to the North in the early 1990s. Wolves were moving

across the Canadian border and frequenting Glacier National Park. The new plan was to release wolves into the

Rocky Mountain area, Yellowstone National Park, and National Forests and wilderness areas of central Idaho. Fifteen

wolves were released each year to reach about 100 wolves in

each of the areas. The State of Idaho refused to participate,

so the Nez Perce Tribe was chosen as the Governmental

authority to release the wolves in that State. Their diligence

was rewarded; the wolves prospered under the management

of the Tribe. Through the wolf, the Tribe took a greater role

in land management off reservation. The wolf’s reintroduction range roughly resembled the five million or so acres

(20,234 km2

) of territory once under the stewardship of the

Nez Perce Tribe. Now they are on this land again, monitoring the wolf and the conditions he lives in. The restorer is the

restored.

The Lobo—The Mexican Wolf of the South

The movements of the southern wolf, or lobo, called the

Mexican wolf (canis lupus baileyi), crossed my own lifepath

on several occasions. I saw the last known pair in Arizona

shortly before their capture in the 1960s, outlined against

the dusk on the Nantac Rim. When I moved up to Olympia,

Washington, in 1997, I found that captive lobo wolves were

living near me at the Wolfhaven facility. The breeding

program at Wolfhaven, a nonprofit organization, produced

some of the packs later to be released in the Southwest. In

1998, I visited the Turner Ranch for the annual Native

American Fish and Wildlife Association meeting, and was

allowed to view the same wolves at a distance shortly before

their release into the wild.

After the virtual elimination of the elk in the Southwest,

the wolves thrived on livestock. This introduction of cattle

was paramount in changing the native diet, as well as

impacting the ties between native peoples and the animals

that filled their landscape. The extermination of Mexican

wolves occurred before they were extensively studied through

the methods of Western science. Much remains to be learned,

making traditional knowledge about the wolf even more

important. Mexican wolves have the most consistent coloration of all of the gray wolves—a richly colored mix of buff,

gray, rust, and black. The wolves may weigh from 50 to 85

pounds, with male wolves weighing more than the females.

An adult wolf is about the size of an adult German shepherd.

The southwestern subspecies of the gray wolf, often called

the lobo or Mexican wolf, shares long-held and important

ties to the cultural and spiritual world of the Apache people.

Missing from the native landscape they shared with the

Apache people from time immemorial, a landscape that

included Arizona and New Mexico in the United States and

ranged down into the Sonoran Desert in Mexico, the Mexican wolf is again heard in the mountains and grasslands of

the Southwest. The Mexican wolf is the most genetically

distinct of all of the gray wolves and is one of the rarest of all

mammals.

The Apache belief that all life is sacred meant that action

must be considered to benefit the wolf, an animal that

carries special powers. In a practical way, it is understood

that wolves play a critical role in the ecosystem that cannot

be filled by other predators. Wolves live in family groups, or

packs, and practice complex social behaviors. Wolf families

usually consist of a set of parents (alpha pair), their offspring, and other nonbreeding adults. They usually live

within a specific territory, which may range in size from 50

to more than 1,000 square miles (129 km2 to more than

2,590 km2

). Their social structure is maintained by their

communication systems: through vocalizations, body postures, and scent marking. Wolves are noted for their distinctive howls, a sound that has become attached to various

traditional songs and to the idea of wild lands. A tightly

organized structure, enhanced by communication such as

howling, enables them to work together and, conversely, to

stake out their own territory. Wolves hunt as a group,

coursing or chasing their prey. It is believed that the

characteristic of killing weak or old animals helps to keep

their prey populations of white tail deer, mule deer, and elk

healthy.

The virtual disappearance of the lobo from its range in the

Southwest was due to a program of continuous and unbridled killing encouraged by government policy. Wolves

were extensively poisoned, shot, and trapped by government

agents and private individuals. In the Southwest United

States and in Mexico, both the Apache people and these

wolves carried a government bounty on their heads in the

1800s. By the early 1900s, high cattle-stocking rates coupled

with overhunting of deer and elk resulted in many wolves

preying on livestock. The Arizona, or Merriam’s elk, a large

antlered elk that ranged from the Wichita Mountains of

Oklahoma to the Mogollons in New Mexico, west to the

Chiricauhuas of Arizona and south into Sonora in Mexico,

once ran in herds of as many as 2,000. By the close of the 19th

century, they became hard to find. After the virtual elimination of the elk, wolves thrived on livestock.

The Federal Nexus—In 1970, it was decided that the

only chance for ensuring the survival of the Mexican wolf
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 71

Protecting Restorative Relationships and Traditional Values: American Indian Tribes, Wildlife, and Wild Lands Stumpff

was to begin a captive breeding program. The last wolves

were captured around the San Carlos Apache Reservation in

the 1960s for breeding in zoos. The last time I saw them, only

a year before their capture, they seemed to cling to the top of

a ridgeline, so much a part of the land itself. At that time, I

did not know they would be the key to the restoration

program, but perhaps they did, for coming down so close as

to be in our range of vision was unusual. In 1973, the United

States passed the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Although

it did not apply specifically to tribal lands, tribes again

became partners in the return of the wolf to the Southwest

through cooperatively working on the implementation of

that Act.

The Mexican wolf was listed as endangered under ESA in

1976. By 1992, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)

established the Recovery Goal for the Mexican Wolf under

the ESA, “to conserve and ensure the survival of Canis lupus

baileyi by maintaining a captive breeding program and reestablishing a viable, self-sustaining population of at least

100 Mexican wolves within the wolf’s historic range.” In

1998, a wolf release program was initiated to relocate wolves

into the Apache National Forest of Arizona. They began

releasing captive-reared wolves into the area in March 1998.

The release area chosen by Federal authorities was directly adjacent to the White Mountain Apache Reservation.

Because of the ranging behavior of wolves, it was obvious

that the wolves would move outside the boundaries onto

tribal lands. Without the existence of the 4.4 million acres

(17,806 km2

) of National Forest land, including primitive

areas and lands designated under the Wilderness Act of

1964, and the cooperation of the White Mountain Apache

Tribe and San Carlos Apache Tribe, whose adjacent lands

provide a buffer, the future of the wolf would have loomed

uncertain. Although a Federal rule exists to allow the

release of the wolf on Federal lands in the State of New

Mexico, the effort has stalled as a Federal agency has bowed

to the perceived private interests of cattle ranchers who

exert their influence over Federal wilderness lands. We will

all have to wait longer to hear the howl of the wolf in Aldo

Leopold’s Gila Wilderness.

Under a joint agreement between the United States and

Mexico, five wolves were captured near Durango and Chihuahua, Mexico. The USFWS completed a captive wolf

management facility and began providing an environment

that minimized human contact and encouraged wild behaviors for wolves that were potential candidates for release.

The reintroduction plan allows for the wolves to be removed or relocated when conflicts with humans occur, such

as livestock depredation. This has been done to increase the

success of wolf recovery by encouraging a wolf population

with behaviors that focus on native prey and maintains a

tolerance level for coexistence among livestock producers.

The increasingly healthy elk herds in these Forest Service

and Apache tribal lands further encourage a natural balance. In addition, the replacement of cattle ranching with

American bison on the nearby Ted Turner ranch may provide an alternative buffalo range model that proves more

compatible with range lands and wetlands than extensive

cattle ranching. In addition, Defenders of Wildlife, a private

conservation group, established a fund to compensate ranchers at market value for any documented losses of cattle to

wolves. (Mitchell 1994). In the end, the political economy of

wolves differs from that of ranching and markets. The wolf

populations that escaped to Mexico and Canada, pushed

back over the boundaries by trapping, shooting, poisoning,

and the destruction of their prey, retreated from the United

States. A few of the southern subspecies of wolf survived in

Mexico, and a pair lived on the San Carlos Indian Reservation. From all of these retreating animals, the wolf has been

restored.

Summary ______________________

American Indian Tribal Nations continue to extend leadership activities in restoration efforts on tribal and Federal

lands, and waterways to which their traditional rights and

treaties extend. Increasingly, they work collaboratively to

transcend political boundaries. Many key species play key

roles in the cultural narratives, political institutions, and

health of these Tribes. These ways of life are expressed

through the rebirth of the ecosystem.

Wilderness areas and wild rivers are an integral part of

the success of strategies to assure the continuance of cyclic

celebration of rebirth and restoration. As reintroduced species become re-established and expand their populations, comanagement of land that affects species and tribal rights

and lifeways is vital. A better understanding of indigenous

knowledge will be an integral part of successful restoration

efforts that contribute to the health of communities of

humans and the species who inhabit the same ecosystems.

The nature of knowledge and the spiritual values expressed

within it, contain the substance and the guiding wisdom for

restoring health to species and humans.

References _____________________

Cole, David N. 2001. Management dilemmas that will shape wilderness in the 21st century. Journal of Forestry. 99(1): 4–8.

Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission. 2000. Columbia

River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission 1999–2000 biennial report.

On file at the Commission Office, 729 NE Oregon, Suite #200,

Portland, OR 97232. 104 p.

Ground, Mary. 1978. Grass Woman stories. Browning, MT: Blackfeet

Heritage Program. 59 p.

Jones, Tom. 1909. The last of the buffalo: a history of the buffalo herd

of the Flathead Indian Reservation and an account of the great

round up. Cincinnati, OH: Tom Jones. 32 p.

Landeen, D.; Pinkham, A. 1998. Salmon and his people: fish and

fishing in Nez Perce culture. Lewiston, ID: Confluence Press.

235 p.

Landres, Peter B.; Knight, Richard L.; Pickett, T. A.; Cadenasso,

M. L. 1998. Ecological effects of administrative boundaries. In:

Knight, Richard L.; Landres, Peter B., eds. Stewardship across

boundaries. Covelo, CA: Island Press: 39–64.

Manning, Richard. 1999. Ghost town. In: Wolf, Edward C.;

Zuckerman, Seth, eds. Salmon Nation: people and fish at the

edge. Portland, OR: Ecotrust: 33–43.

Marshall, John, III. 1995. On behalf of Wolf and the First Peoples.

Santa Fe, NM: Red Crane Press. 192 p.

Mattheison, Peter. 1987. Wildlife in America. New York: Elisabeth

Sifton Books, Viking. 332 p.

Mitchell, John C. 1994. Uncle Sam’s undeclared war against wildlife. Wildlife Conservation. 97(5): 20–31.

Woody, Elizabeth. 1999. Recalling Celilo. In: Wolf, Edward C.;

Zuckerman, Seth, eds. Salmon Nation: people and fish at the

edge. Portland, OR: Ecotrust: 9–15.

Wilkerson, Charles. 2000. Messages from Franks Landing: a story

of salmon treaties and the Indian way. Seattle: University of

Washington Press. 128 p.
72 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

T. Damu is Special Advisor to Tata Tea Limited and also Vice PresidentCorporate Affairs (South), Indian Hotels Company Limited, Phone: 91-484-

2384301, Fax: 91-484-2384302, E-mail: t.damu@tajhotels.com

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—This paper deals with the historic details of the tribes

named Muthuvans of the High Ranges of Kerala in India’s southwestern mountain ranges. Their origin, their migration into the

hills, their culture, their occupation, their demographic profile, and

so forth, are delineated. A comparison of their past and present

lifestyle is presented.

The question of why they are called the “ecosystem people” is

analyzed. The details of how they helped the pioneering planters from

the United Kingdom to trace the area and establish tea plantations

in the hills are provided. They are portrayed as excellent guides for

scientific game preservation in the early days.

The birth and growth of the nature preservation movement in

this part of the world, namely the High Range Wildlife and Environment Preservation Association, is detailed in this paper. The good

working relationship between the Association and the Muthuvans,

which has been preserved for nearly a century, is highlighted. The

projects undertaken by the Association for the welfare and betterment of the Muthuvans are enumerated.

This paper shows how a corporation can be proactive in promoting

the spirit of protecting wilderness by enlisting the support of a

human community, which is more close to natural wilderness than

the rest of us living in the cosmopolitan wilderness of today’s cities.

And it concludes with suggestions for newer systems and approaches that could be emulated in developing countries.

Introduction ____________________

The Muthuvans are “the superior tribesmen” of the splendid High Ranges of the Western mountains of Kerala in

Southern India. They, with their incredible knowledge of

this rugged terrain, which varies from 3,000 to 6,000 ft (914

to 1,829 m) above sea level, rendered tremendous assistance

to the pioneering British planters on their onward march to

turn these hills into teeming tea plantations.

The Muthuvans were of immense help in preparing the

land for cultivation, constructing sheds for plantation workers, building tea nursery sheds, cutting boundaries for tea

fields, and so on. Even as the plantations changed hands,

these hill men were not left in the lurch. As a mark of

gratitude, even after a century and a quarter, the present

day tea company (Tata Tea Limited) maintains an indivisible and sustainable relationship with the Muthuvans by

Helping “Ecosystem People” Protect

Wilderness and Their Own Welfare

T. Damu

implementing various welfare schemes for them to help

improve their living standards, promote their health status,

and protect their identity.

The High Range is one of the few environmental hotspots

in the world, having rich biodiversity, and the Muthuvans

live in areas that are amidst thick jungles of the High

Range. Most of their hamlets are situated far away from

motorable roads; hence one has to trek more than 6.2 miles

(10 km) through thickets infested with wild animals and

poisonous snakes, in some cases, to reach their abodes.

These nonindigenous hill tribes of the High Range are

distributed in small, scattered hamlets, numbering nearly

90, each with about 30 households. These hamlets are

spread out in four Taluks (revenue subdivisions in a District)

in Kerala. In total, the Muthuvan population is about 4,000.

Surprisingly, males exceed females by about 22 percent. The

Muthuvans are a closely guarded community. Their cultural

practices, beliefs, and mores are not much known to the

outside world.

Anthropo-Genesis _______________

Mystery and controversy surround the ancestry, history,

immigration, and consequent settlements of Muthuvans.

The anthropologists, who have studied the morphology and

ethnographic details of the tribes, say that the Muthuvans

are a mixture of Proto-Australoids (the pre-Dravidians) and

Negritos (the pygmies of Malayalam origin with Negroid

features).

Edgar Thurston (1906), in his Ethnographic Notes in

Southern India, says:

Judging from the two distinct types of countenance, their

language and their curious mixture of customs, I hazard the

conjecture that when they arrived in the hills they found a

small tribe in possession with whom they subsequently intermarried, this tribe having affinities with the West coast,

while the new arrivals were connected with the east...

The idea opens up a very interesting field of study. In the

1960s, Mr. W. S. S. Mackay, a pioneer planter and an ardent

environmentalist, observed that their variable appearance

seemed to be accounted for by union with a small, darkskinned tribe that they found in the mountains at the time

of their arrival, possibly the remnants of some prehistoric

migration from the African Continent, isolated at the toe of

India, following some great global eruption.

These are not just speculations but studied observations,

which have their basis in the scientific fact about the

prehistoric tectonic movements of Mother Earth that tore

apart the Indian subcontinent from the African mainland,

resulting in traces of the Negroid race forming part of the

people of India, especially in Southern India.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 73

Helping the “Ecosystem People” Protect Wilderness and Their Own Welfare Damu

Historically speaking, the Muthuvans are believed to have

fled from the Madurai district of Tamil Nadu, one of the States

of India, situated at the southeastern end. There are many

theories and hypotheses about the arrival of the Muthuvans.

All sound probable, since it is said that trials and tribulations

due to battles and wars and political cataclysm characterized

the history of Southern India, from the start of the first

millennium after Christ until the mid-second millennium.

This resulted in the exodus of people belonging to a fleeing

community fearing the wrath of some invaders, and thus

escaped to the hills to form the present tribes.

Etymology _____________________

Muthuvan—the name’s origin itself has drawn various

interpretations. It is said that during their emigration from

Madurai they carried their dethroned King in turn on their

back (Muthuvu, or Muthugu, in the Tamil language refers

to the upper thoracic region of the back) while crossing

rivers and climbing hills. The King, pleased with their

affection and loyalty, and surprised by their enduring

capacity, named them Muthuvans. It is also stated that

during their flight to the hills they carried their children

and belongings on their backs, and after settling in the hills

they called themselves Muthuvans. Today, one can still see

the Muthuvassis (female Muthuvans) carry their little

children on their backs (fig. 1); no cradle or mat is used to

lay the baby. The Muthuvans carry their belongings on

their backs, not on their heads.

Whatever the historical facts and pseudo-historical popular beliefs, the traditions, folklore, language, religious customs, certain cultural patterns, rituals, kinship structure,

rules of inheritance, village organization, economy, and so

forth, of the Muthuvan community are a potential subject for

research.

Socio-Economic Profile __________

Muthuvans live in hamlets called kudi(fig. 2). A kudi is an

economically self-sufficient unit and has important political

Figure 1—The “Muthuvassi”—a typical Muthuvan

woman with her child clinging to her back in a cloth

sack.

Figure 2—The “Kudi”—Muthuvan hamlets are

usually situated amidst the thick forest and high

locales of the High Range far away from the

mainland.

and judicial functions. It used to be a mobile unit both in

respect of membership and territoriality. All kudies are

invariably known by the name of the place or have some local

association.

The kudi represents the Muthuvan society, each of which

consists of 30 or more families. Almost all members of a kudi

are related. The kudi’s headman is called a Kani (fig. 3),

which in the vernacular means supervisor or protector. The

Kani or Kanikkar is chosen to the position by common

consent of the adult male members of the kudi, and he

generally retains the title until death, unless deposed for his

inefficiency, infirmity, or insolence.

The Muthuvans follow the matrilineal system. Formerly,

they were very strict about marriages, marrying only

Muthuvans belonging to other subclans of equal social

status. A marriage between members of two subclans of

the same clan in those days would amount to incest and

Figure 3—The “Kani”—the Muthuvan Headman

whose authoritarian influence over the clan is

being eroded by the changing attitudes and

lifestyles among Muthuvans.
74 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Damu Helping the “Ecosystem People” Protect Wilderness and Their Own Welfare

was severely dealt with. Until the1970s, the Eastern Muthuvans never used to mingle or intermarry with the Western

Muthuvans or other community members, although things

are changing. Marriages are duly registered, and intra,

inter, and outside clan marriages are taking place at present.

In the past, a Muthuvan man would marry only after the

age of 25, and a woman never was given to marriage before

18 or even 20 in a Muthuvan kudi, whereas today one finds

marriages taking place at an early age for both sexes. Widow

marriage is permitted. This is to ensure the safety and

subsistence of the widow and her children.

The Muthuvans always emphasize the need for group

living. They very much appreciate the advantage of communal life and mutual assistance. The kudi also provides a

certain measure of economic security against widowhood,

old age, sickness, and incapacity to work, by enabling persons to live through these contingencies. Mutual aid is a

predominant characteristic of Muthuvan kudies.

The Muthuvans in general do not seem to have material

aspirations, and they prefer to stay in their respective

kudies cultivating lemon grass, and so on, even though there

is scope for employment in nearby tea estates of big companies and others.

Statistics based on the recent Economic Survey conducted

by the officials of Tata Tea Limited, at the behest of the High

Range Wildlife & Environment Preservation Association,

reveal that the average annual income per Muthuvan family

ranges from 2,000 to 18,000 Rupees (U.S. $41.30 to $371.75).

It is below 4,000 Rupees (U.S. $82.60) in 42 kudies and about

12,000 Rupees (U.S. $247.85) in about 48 kudies. The main

source of income is from agriculture/farming. Muthuvans

with a lower income are found to depend on lemon grass

cultivation and ragi farming. The Muthuvan families with

higher incomes are seen dependent on pepper, coffee, or

cardamom cultivation. Moreover, young Muthuvans in these

families find employment in small estates as casual labor,

which is reflected in higher earnings.

They also rear cattle and poultry, but they don’t sell the

produce. They give eggs, ragi, honey, and so forth, to guests

as a token of their love. Ward and Conner (1860) in their

Memoir of the Survey of the Travancore and Cochin States,

state:

They are somewhat more civilized than the other hill

tribes, at least the comparative regard they show to their

women would induce such a belief.

Ecosystem People ______________

The Muthuvans are the best stewards of the natural

resources. They are well acquainted with hill tracts and trace

by instinct the devious paths and decide with unerring certainty on the number and variety of animals that have lately

traversed them. Their senses are, from constant use, keenly

developed, and they can hear sounds and see objects that

other people would not notice. They are expert trackers with

great knowledge of the country. Their endurance and the

dexterity with which they use their bill hooks in clearing

paths make them invaluable as guides to anyone traveling in

the forests.

The author himself, once while returning from the plains

to the High Range, happened to witness the Muthuvans’

oneness with nature and understanding of wildlife. When

the author’s chauffeur tried to negotiate a turn on the forest

road, the car had to be brought to an abrupt halt because

there were some wild elephants blocking the road ahead. A

couple of other vehicles were also stuck there with the

passengers looking terrified. We couldn’t move forward as

the elephants never bothered to budge. Half an hour passed

without any progress. Then to our rescue came some

Muthuvans, who seeing our plight, slowly walked toward

the elephants, all the while talking to them in a strange

language. As if they understood the meaning of what the

Muthuvans were saying, the elephants looked at them and

walked away into the forest without any sign of resistance or

agitation! It seemed to the author that the wild beasts

considered the Muthuvans not as a threat but a friendly lot.

Shifting cultivation was the popular and customary method

followed by Muthuvans in the distant past for raising crops.

The lay of the land, the nature of trees and undergrowth, the

accessibility to waterways, and the suitability of the land for

setting up hamlets, were the chief considerations for the

Muthuvans in selecting a site for cultivation. Clearing operations, which were a communal undertaking, used to start

on an auspicious day in January determined by divination

by the religious headman of the Muthuvan hamlet. The

Muthuvans used to camp on the site for a year, cultivating

rice, ragi, and other millets, following a standard pattern of

sowing and harvesting, which would all be over by November only to celebrate the festival Karthikai with pomp and

pleasure. Then they would pack up after the Oracle by the

religious guru and move to another hill or valley. With the

beginning of Thai (mid-January, representing the lunar

month of the Tamils), the whole process would repeat. The

idea of shift cultivation was to preserve the soil fertility of a

particular area and protect its natural resources from pollution or depletion.

The practice of shifting cultivation is no longer in vogue

because, as the tea plantations expanded, the British planters demarcated vast areas for these hill men where they

established their kudies and agricultural lands for a more

settled mode of cultivation.

Wildlife and Environmental

Preservation ___________________

The pioneer British planters sought the help of the

Muthuvans’ knowledge of the forests and wild animals in

more ways than one. As the Muthuvans were good game

watchers, their advice was sought by the planters on the

presence and movement of game, the game to be culled, the

wounded “wild” that needed assistance, and so forth.

The High Range Game Preservation Association was

started in 1928 by the pioneer British tea planters with the

main objective of controlling the indiscriminate killing of

animals to preserve the varied fauna of the area. To actualize this objective, the following activities were accomplished:

appointing the Muthuvans as game watchers, checking the

culling of animals during the nonbreeding season, and

preventing people from entering the game reserve during

the breeding season.

With the formation of the High Range Game Preservation

Association, the relationship with the Muthuvans was much
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 75

Helping the “Ecosystem People” Protect Wilderness and Their Own Welfare Damu

Figure 4—Community Medical Outreach—Tata

Tea Limited’s medical officers and welfare officers

seen in a remote kudi at one of the regular medical

camps organized by the Company.

more strengthened. The Muthuvans, who were until then

living in caves and natural rock shelters, were encouraged

by the Kanan Devan Hill Produce Company, a subsidiary of

the famous Finlays of Great Britain, to construct huts to live

in and helped them financially.

Since Tata Tea Limited’s business takeover in the district,

more constructive philanthropic activities have been undertaken for the welfare of the Muthuvans. The High Range

Game Preservation Association was rechristened as the

High Range Wildlife and Environment Preservation Association, with its primary aim to conserve flora and fauna of

the High Ranges. This organization is a registered body,

which in the case of the Muthuvans, provides financial

assistance in procuring teaching aids for the schools in the

kudies and also learning aids for the students.

Yet another area in which the High Range Wildlife and

Environment Preservation Association helps Muthuvans is

social assistance. The Association coordinates with the tribal

welfare schemes of the Tata Tea Company and the Government. The Association organizes periodic liaison meetings

by inviting the Muthuvan representatives and the Government Officials concerned, such as the District Collector and

Officers of the Forest and Wildlife Departments.

The Association activities are financed by Tata Tea Ltd.

through annual grants. In addition to this, the management

staff of the Company are actively involved in wildlife preservation and helping Muthuvans in many other ways. The

Association’s other important activities include forming nature clubs and organizing nature camps, competitions and

classes for students in the region to create nature awareness,

rejuvenating the degraded sholas (the deciduous rain forests)

with native species, assisting the Wildlife Officer of Eravikulam

National Park in taking wildlife census, and managing the

park by employing Muthuvan watchers.

Muthuvan watchers have been employed over the past

decades, and at present there are 12 of them on the payrolls

of Tata Tea Ltd. The duties of the Muthuvan watchers

include keeping a vigil on divisional boundaries, fuel areas,

and other places; keeping a watch on the flora and fauna;

reporting to the estate Manager the movements and presence of wild animals; reporting on any poaching, illegal

felling, or cutting of trees; fire prevention; theft prevention;

and reporting on stray cattle. The Muthuvan watchers have

been instructed to write down their weekly observations of

both flora and fauna. This record is studied by the Department concerned in the Company, and necessary conservation and promotional activities are undertaken. Muthuvan

watchers also assist the management staff in boundary

checking and act as guides to the researchers, environmentalists, and nature lovers who trek to Eravikulam National

Park, one of the finest wildlife sanctuaries in India, situated

at an elevation of 6,000 ft (1,829 m) above sea level in the

High Ranges.

The famous Eravikulam National Park occupies an area

of 25,946 acres (10,500 ha), and is an integral part of the vast

stretch of forests extending from Anamallais to the Palani

Hills of Tamil Nadu. The park is unique with the shoal

grassland ecosystem at an average elevation of 6,562 ft

(2,000 m). The climate here is of tropical, cool montane type.

The diurnal temperature variation is high compared to

typical temperate climate. The rolling grasslands hold the

thin topsoil. And the area has remained undisturbed by

human agency from time immemorial. Considering the

ecological, floral, faunal, and geomorphological significance

of this area, it is listed as one of the environmental “hotspots” in Asia. The Nilgiri Tahr (Hermitragus hylocorius), an

endangered and extremely rare type of mountain goat, is

protected in this park. More than half of the total world

population of these goats, numbering nearly 1,000, are here.

Indian Gaur, Malabar squirrel, and a wide range of wild

animals, including the lion-tailed macaque, Nilgiri Langur,

barking deer, wild dogs, leopard cats, and tigers are the

pride of the High Range.

Tribal Outreach Programs ________

The Muthuvans have always looked to Tata Tea Ltd. for

help, encouragement, and guidance in solving their problems. And the company, owing allegiance to the Muthuvan

community, has always treated it as its moral and social

obligation to do the best to alleviate their suffering and

ameliorate their welfare. Since the inception of the Community Development and Social Welfare Department in Tata

Tea in 1984, regular tribal medical camps (fig. 4) have been

held in the kudies adjoining the tea estates and located even

far away in this region.

After Independence, the British left, and the Indian inheritors of this tea planting company have kept up the legacy

of medical care. Medical camps are being held in most kudies

two to four times a year. These are conducted whenever the

Muthuvans report outbreaks of disease, and there are no

restrictions on the number of camps conducted and hamlets

covered. Thus, it is more a need-based type of response than

a regular system of medical care. However, these literal

forays into the leech-infested jungles helped boost the confidence of the Muthuvan in modern medical methods, and has

built rapport. Word about compassion and care has spread.

It has led to emergency cases from these remote tribal areas,

located in jungles spread out in a radius of 12.4 to18.6 miles

(20 to 30 km), being referred to Tata Tea’s General Hospital,
76 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Damu Helping the “Ecosystem People” Protect Wilderness and Their Own Welfare

Munnar. In all these places, the Tea Garden Hospitals

continue to provide free medical aid. There is no going back

on this trend, and often one can see a Muthuvan family

among the outpatient crowd or snuggled in bed at Tata Tea’s

General Hospital.

The free medical aid camps are also utilized for conducting

health surveys including nutritional status of the children.

Even though exact statistical details have not been maintained, the medical team has seldom come across any case of

marasmus or kwashiorkor (conditions arising from severe

malnutrition) among the Muthuvan children.

Two decades ago, the State Government built a Primary

Health Center in Society Kudi, a hub of tribal activity

because of its proximity to a nearby school, Forest Guard’s

hut, and a Tribal Cooperative that procured tribal produce

and promoted trade. Because of refusal by Government

doctors to trek to these far interior regions, the Primary

Health Center was not utilized for a long time.

The high point of medical care has been the construction

of its own dispensary 3 years ago by Tata Tea at Edaliparai.

The medical officers of the Company trek to this small

hospital once a quarter, stay there a few days, and conduct

medical camps there and in nearby hamlets. After discussions with the Health Secretary during his visit to Munnar

last year, governmental supply of medicines has started to

this dispensary. Government health care workers also accompany the medical officers of Tata Tea Hospitals.

A singular point of note is the selection of willing young

men from among the tribal community to work as Tribal

Barefoot Doctors. At least one young man from each kudi has

been selected and training imparted on the basic health care

and preventive measures, so that after a 10-day residential

workshop at Tata Tea General Hospital, they can return to

their community and function confidently in their new role

as Tribal Barefoot Doctors.

The Interventions for Sexual Health Project of the Indian

Medical Association, Munnar Branch, which is an HIV/AIDS

prevention project supported by Tata Tea, has conducted

many focus group discussions and case studies among the

various tribal hamlets. Findings indicated that though

Muthuvans generally had some knowledge about sexually

transmitted diseases (STDs), the majority of them did not

know that condoms could be used to prevent STDs. They

believe that indigenous medicines made of ground leaves of

jungle plants and shrubs promote contraception. Surprisingly, there are very few Muthuvan families that have more

than three children!

Conclusions____________________

The Muthuvan who was a guide and friend to the British

planter had an unwritten agreement that the Planting

Company would look after the welfare and medical needs of

his community. Thus started a unique bond that has remained intact through two centuries. This relationship not

only benefited the community but also the High Range

environment through the nature preservation efforts jointly

undertaken by Tata Tea Ltd., the High Range Wildlife and

Environment Preservation Association, and the government departments concerned with helping the Muthuvans.

This model of corporate citizenship and corporate environmental responsibility put into force by Tata Tea in this part

of the Indian subcontinent has been appreciated by many

ecologists in India. It is an example to be emulated by many

corporations around the world, wherever there is opportunity for joint effort in nature conservation and tribal welfare.

No nature conservation effort would be a complete success

without enlisting the support of the tribes or the local

inhabitants in that region. There are lots of ways we can

learn from these tribes in understanding nature and devising ways to conserve her riches. It is the social and moral

responsibility of the corporate world to educate and rehabilitate tribes in the neighborhood, which in turn motivates

them to come forward willingly to cooperate in efforts for

nature and wildlife conservation.

References _____________________

Aiya, V. Nagam. 1906. Travancore State Manual. Trivandrum:

Travancore Government Press.

Mateer, Samuel. 1883. Native life in Tranvancore. London: W. H.

Allen and Company. 450 p.

Pillai, T. K. Velu. 1996. The Travancore State Manual. Vol. 1.

Trivandrum: Government of Kerala, Kerala Gazetteers Department.

Ratnam, L. K. Bala. 1995. Man in Kerala—Twelve anthropological

essays selected from writings of Padmabhushan L. A. Krishna

Iyer. Trivandrum: Central Publication.

Thomas, P. T. 1958. A study of a Travancore Tribe and its problems.

Maharaja Sayaji Rao University of Baroda, Faculty of Arts. Ph.D.

thesis.

Thurston, Edgar. 1906. Ethnographic notes in Southern India.

Madras, India: The Government Press. 580 p.

Ward, B. S.; Conner, P. E. 1860. Memoir of the survey of the

Tranvancore and Cochin States, geographical and statistical

(1816–1820). In: Heber, Drury, ed. Selections from the records of

Travancore. Trivandrum: His Highness the Rajah’s Press.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 77

Sandra Hinchman is Professor of Government at St. Lawrence University,

Canton, NY, 13617, U.S.A. FAX: 315-229-5819, E-mail: shinchman@

stlawu.edu. In the summer of 2001, she participated in the National Endowment for the Humanities Summer Institute on Environmental Ethics and

Issues: Alaska as a Case Study, which was held at the University of AlaskaAnchorage.

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium;2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—This paper examines the responses of two indigenous

groups to the potential opening of the coastal plain of Alaska’s Arctic

National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil and gas exploration. Gwich’in

Indians, whose culture revolves both materially and spiritually

around the caribou, oppose all such development for fear that it will

jeopardize that species’ optimum calving grounds. Inupiat Eskimos,

who stand to gain economically from petrodevelopment, favor oil

and gas exploration on the coastal plain while opposing it offshore,

where it might threaten the bowhead whale, the species at the

center of their own culture. After reviewing the history of the conflict

and weighing the respective claims of these two peoples, the paper

concludes with a discussion of the threats posed to ANWR by

international terrorism and by global warming.

Introduction ____________________

When Alaska entered the Union, President Eisenhower

designated several million acres of tundra between the

Brooks Range and the Beaufort Sea as a refuge for wildlife.

A decade later, in 1969, oil was discovered 60 miles (96.5 km)

west of the refuge at Prudhoe Bay. Although the oilfield itself was on State-owned land, transporting the oil to the Port

of Valdez would require the construction of a pipeline. Over

its proposed 800-mile (1,287-km) route, the pipeline would

have to pass through Federal lands tied up in litigation

between the State of Alaska and its indigenous peoples.

Eager to expedite development, the State agreed to a deal

intended to eliminate all such obstacles. The 1971 Alaska

Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) awarded aboriginal

groups 44 million acres (178,062 km2

) of land and a billion

dollars in cash, establishing 12 regional and over 200 village

corporations to manage that settlement. It also authorized

the Secretary of the Interior to set aside lands he or she

deemed scenic or ecologically significant. Intense conflict

spawned by the latter directive ended only after Jimmy

Carter’s failed bid for re-election, when Congress, over the

protest of the State delegation, passed the Alaska National

Interest Land Conservation Act (ANILCA). Carter himself

Endangered Species, Endangered Culture:

Native Resistance to Industrializing the

Arctic

Sandra Hinchman

would later call ANILCA the most important environmental

legislation of the twentieth century, as it dramatically increased the amount of Federally protected land, adding 104

million acres (420,873 km2

), including 56 million acres

(226,624 km2

) of wilderness, to the system. The size of the

original Arctic National Wildlife Range (renamed a Refuge)

was itself doubled, and 17.5 million (70,820 km2

) of its 19

million acres (76,890 km2

) were declared permanently off

limits to industrial development. However, to win passage of

the 1980 bill, the administration agreed to a fateful compromise: Congress reserved the right to open Alaska’s Arctic

National Wildlife Refuge’s (ANWR) 1.5-million-acre (6,070-

km2

) coastal plain to oil and gas exploration in the future.

The status of that coastal study area—commonly called

the 1002 land, after the pertinent section of the Act—has

galvanized the petroleum industry and its critics like no

other issue. It has also called forth some unusual alliances.

On the one side stand interests seeking to open up the area

for development: the four transnational corporations (British Petroleum, Exxon-Mobil, Phillips Petroleum, and Chevron) competing for drilling rights; American labor unions,

anticipating the creation of up to735,000 jobs around the

country; the vast majority of Alaskans, hoping to continue

receiving dividends and tax relief from oil leasing; and the

Inupiat people, who reside on the North Slope. Attempting

to exclude the coastal plain permanently from development

are the Government of Canada, the Gwich’in Nation, whose

members dwell on either side of the Alaskan/Yukon border,

and the environmental community. Opinion polls taken

prior to September 11, 2001, indicated that 66 percent of

Americans oppose drilling in ANWR (Defenders of Wildlife

2001a).

Virtually no fact about ANWR is uncontested. Estimates

of how many billion barrels of technically and economically

recoverable oil lies beneath the coastal plain, what percentage of American energy demand it would satisfy, how long it

would take to erect the necessary infrastructure, and how

extensive, permanent, and damaging that industrial “footprint” would be, all vary widely. Disagreements have arisen

over the likelihood that oil would be sold abroad, whether it

would significantly reduce United States dependence on

foreign sources, and whether it would result in lower prices

for consumers or merely in more profits for corporations.

Finally, and inevitably, there are disputes regarding the

aesthetic and ecological qualities of the coastal plain itself.

As Barry Lopez (1986: 278) has remarked, “it is precisely

what is invisible in the land...that makes what is merely

empty space to one person a place to another.” Supporters of

development depict the study area as a flat, boggy, treeless,

almost featureless wasteland that is virtually uninhabitable by animals most of the year. They emphasize the
78 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Hinchman Endangered Species, Endangered Culture: Native Resistance to Industrializing the Arctic

ruggedness, resilience, and near invulnerability of both the

land itself and the 200 bird and animal species that summer

there. This image is difficult to reconcile with what some of

their opponents (such as, the Wilderness Society, the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Resources Defense Council) see: America’s Serengeti; the premier birthing

and nursing ground for Arctic wildlife; one of the most

complete, pristine, and undisturbed ecosystems in the world;

and ANWR’s biological heart. In their view, the ANILCA

Section 1002 area is inherently fragile, and its fauna can be

extremely sensitive to disturbance. Bruce Babbitt, Interior

Secretary during the Clinton administration, predicted that

if oil companies were allowed in, it would be ANWR’s death

knell as a wildlife refuge.

Porcupine Caribou ______________

Debate regarding the status of wildlife in the Refuge has

centered around the Porcupine caribou herd. Section 1002 of

ANILCA had directed the Interior Secretary, in consultation

with his/her Canadian counterpart, to assess the likely

impact of coastal plain development on this particular group

of ungulates. Seven years after the passage of ANILCA, the

United States and Canadian Governments signed a bilateral agreement affirming their commitment to conserve the

herd (Canadian Embassy Web site 2001a). Indeed, the

Canadian Government, which established two National

Parks for its protection, continues to press its southern

neighbor to follow suit. Similar concerns about the herd’s

welfare led over 500 American and Canadian scientists to

sign a petition in March 2001, calling for a ban on oil

exploration in ANWR (Defenders of Wildlife 2001b).

Proponents of development, however, bristle at the suggestion that the caribou might be threatened by it in any

way. The Porcupine herd is extensive, numbering between

130,000 and 170,000 animals (according to environmentalist and oil company estimates, respectively). Like all other

herds, its numbers fluctuate in natural cycles (Lopez 1986).

If it is currently in temporary decline, that is offset by increases in the Western and Central Arctic herds. In fact,

when the members of these other herds are factored in, it

turns out that there are actually more caribou in Alaska

than people.

Why, then, has the status of the Porcupine herd generated so much concern and controversy? Of three subspecies

of caribou residing in North America, Barren-ground caribou, to which the Porcupine, Western Arctic, and Central

Arctic herds belong, migrate the farthest distance (Lopez

1986). All these herds reside seasonally on Alaska’s North

Slope. Wintering in the Canadian taiga near the Porcupine

River, a tributary of the Yukon, the Porcupine group treks

hundreds of miles every spring to the ANWR coastal plain,

where the Brooks Range pinches down to between 15 and

40 miles (24 and 64 km) of the sea (Dunkel 2001). Pregnant

cows lead the exodus toward this optimum calving and

postcalving habitat. After the cows have given birth, bulls

and juveniles join them to browse on tundral grass and

lichens (Canadian Embassy Web site 2001b). Aside from

the superior foraging opportunities it provides, the area is

favored by the herd because it affords relative protection

from predators and relief from insect pests. When the cows

fail to reach the plain before they drop their calves, as has

happened at least 5 out of the last 19 years, the newborn

mortality rate skyrockets.

Environmentalists fear a substantial population crash

among the Porcupine caribou if the infrastructure associated with development alters the herd’s migration routes.

They point out that pregnant and nursing females are so

sensitive to “disturbances such as the presence of humans,

vehicles, and noise” that they might “abandon their main

calving ground” if the proposed development goes forward

(McManus 2000: 42). Ample evidence exists to support this

view. One study has concluded that caribou around development facilities tend to spend less time feeding and to run

more (Murphy and Griffiths 1999). More ominously, a

Canadian Government report alleges that calving by the

Central Arctic herd near Prudhoe Bay has “nearly ceased,”

and that “starving and dead caribou have been documented” in the area (Davidson 1993: 30). Petroleum industry analysts counter that the Central Arctic herd, far from

being harmed by industrial development, is actually thriving in the midst of it. But whatever the status of the Central

Arctic caribou, the Porcupine herd’s situation may be

unique: “Other herds may survive but this one won’t,

because there is not enough land to the east” of the zone

where drilling would occur. With mountains to the south,

the sea to the north, and the already occupied habitat near

Prudhoe Bay to the west, the herd has literally “nowhere

else to go” (Gemmil, personal communication). Indeed,

Canada’s Interior Department estimates that the herd’s

birth rate may fall by up to 40 percent if drilling commences

in ANWR (Linklater and Gemmil 2001).

Caribou People _________________

Should harm befall the Porcupine herd, no group would

shoulder the consequences more than the Gwich’in (Kutchin)

Nation. Of all Indians in the hemisphere, the Gwich’in are

the most northerly, residing in 15 isolated villages above the

Arctic Circle in Alaska and Canada. For over 20,000 years

the Gwich’in were nomadic, following the caribou and other

game in their seasonal migrations. Once 100,000 strong,

these Athabascan hunters now number fewer than 8,000,

having been decimated by exposure to Old World diseases.

Much has changed in their culture since the time of first

contact with Caucasians: they exchanged their shamanism

for the Episcopalian faith, established permanent settlements in order to remain near their children’s schools,

adopted the English language, and embraced certain technological innovations, from rifles and snowmobiles to electricity and satellite TV. But what has not changed, despite

their (limited) participation in the cash economy, is a commitment to subsistence living. Materially, socially, and

spiritually, their culture continues to revolve, as it has since

time immemorial, around their relationship to the caribou.

Comparisons are sometimes made to the dependence of

traditional Lakota culture on the buffalo (Bartholet 2001;

Davidson 1993). “The caribou is everything to us,” as Gwich’in

spokesperson Faith Gemmil (personal communication) put

it. “It is our life.”

The centrality of the Porcupine herd to the Gwich’in culture

is apparent in their creation legend. Originally, so the story

goes, humans and animals were one species. When the hour
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 79

Endangered Species, Endangered Culture: Native Resistance to Industrializing the Arctic Hinchman

of separation arrived, the Gwich’in were split off from the

caribou. Yet the brothers forged a pact of eternal kinship, by

which each would always retain a piece of the other’s heart.

Thus, “what befalls the caribou befalls the Gwich’in and vice

versa” (International Indian Treaty Council 1992: 2).

The Gwich’in bond with the Porcupine herd is hardly metaphorical. Caribou meat accounts for about 80 percent of the

tribal diet. In a typical year, the tribe will harvest about 3,000

caribou, utilizing virtually every part of the animal for food,

tools, or clothing. It is their belief that hunting can succeed only

when animals voluntarily surrender their lives. The sense that

reciprocal obligations exist between the caribou and the Gwich’in

has given rise to strict norms regulating when, where, and

under what conditions hunting may occur (Callaway, personal

communication). The Gwich’in maintain seasonal hunting

camps for about 2 months of the year, after the caribou have left

the coastal plain on their long return migration. The plain

itself, as “the sacred place where life begins,” may never be

disturbed (International Indian Treaty Council 1992: 2), even

in times of famine and starvation (Linklater and Gemmil

2001). “We don’t go there,” says Gemmil (personal communication). “No one should go there. The caribou need time to

themselves.” Aside from not entering the birthing ground,

hunting parties must spare the first band of caribou that passes

by, kill no more animals than they need, and give thanks for

what they take. Animals are butchered on the spot, great care

is taken not to defile the ground with blood, and although some

meat is consumed right away most is dried on racks and

preserved for later use. This meat is shared throughout the

village community, for as one elder said, “we have always done

things as a group and thought in terms of the tribe and the

family” (Davidson 1993: 28, 25).

Although it is true that the Gwich’in would have few

alternate sources of food if the caribou herd diminished or its

migration routes were altered, the importance of the caribou

harvest to their culture goes well beyond the economic.

Subsistence is more than just nutrition; it is the basis for

ethical relations among people, and between people and

nature (Callaway, personal communication). To preserve

their way of life, the Gwich’in believe they must preserve the

Porcupine herd, which in turn demands preserving its birthing

ground. “If there were no caribou we wouldn’t have lived here

for thousands of years,” says one Gwich’in man. “That’s who

we are and where we came from” (Bartholet 2001: 23). The

depth of these attachments is evidenced by the fact that out

of 211 native villages that qualified for benefits under ANCSA,

two of the seven that refused to participate were Gwich’in

(Anders 1994). Recognizing that all cultures require an economic base, Gemmil (personal communication) comments,

“We were offered money and jobs, first pick. But we said, no!

No amount of money can replace our heritage. Our land must

always be here for us to survive on.” “We are the caribou

people,” adds another Gwich’in woman. “Without the land we

are nobody” (Davidson 1993: 31).

Gwich’in Environmentalist

Alliance _______________________

The Gwich’in did not always oppose industrial development in the high Arctic. From the 1970s through the mid1980s, they entered into lease agreements allowing Exxon,

British Petroleum, and Rougeot of Tulsa to explore for oil

on lands through which the Porcupine caribou migrate,

making no provision to protect the herd in the process.

Critics contend that only when these efforts came to naught

did the Gwich’in decide to reverse course. Tribal spokespersons respond that the leases pertained only to the southern

part of their reserve, outside the herd’s range. They emphasize the environmental lessons they learned from the experience: when elders noticed a dieoff of smaller creatures

near where seismic tests were being conducted, they advised the tribal council to terminate all leases (Davidson

1993). The Nation’s resolve to oppose drilling in ANWR

crystallized in 1988, after the Exxon-Valdez oil spill, when

representatives from all 15 of their settlements in Alaska

and Canada convened in Arctic Village, 125 miles (201 km)

south of the coastal plain. Perceiving a threat to their

culture’s survival, they unanimously passed a resolution

against development and created a Steering Committee as

their political arm, instructing it to “go out and tell the

world why we take this position. Do it in a good way and we

will succeed” (Gwich’in Steering Committee 2001).

The eight-member Steering Committee has attempted to

influence the political process in far-off Washington and

Ottawa, primarily through lobbying efforts, attracting media attention, and establishing alliances with other indigenous peoples and international environmental groups.

Their efforts enjoy a “solid base of support among native

peoples,” including the Alaska Intertribal Council, the

National Congress of American Indians, to which 500

tribes belong, and the worldwide Indigenous Environmental Network, backed financially by Greenpeace and similar

organizations (Taylor 1995: 32). Church groups—depicting

theirs as a human rights struggle—have rallied behind

them (Carpenter 2001), as have all major American environmental organizations, most notably the Sierra Club,

Audubon Society, Friends of the Earth, The Nature Conservancy, Defenders of Wildlife, and the National Wildlife

Federation (Faith Gemmil from the Gwich’in Steering

Committee sits on their Board of Directors; Dinero, personal communication). These groups are concerned not

only about the integrity of the Arctic ecosystem and its

species but also about the bad precedent that would be set

if drilling were allowed in a wildlife refuge. For this reason,

among others, “If ever there were a Stalingrad for the

environmental movement in Alaska, it’s ANWR” (Jans

2001: 11A).

Detractors of the Gwich’in Nation allege that they are

fronting for environmental groups that are using them for

their own ends. They depict the Steering Committee as a

“white-dominated organization” based in far-off Anchorage

and “funded by environmental foundations” (Arctic Power

2001a). Gwich’in spokesmen deny all that, insisting: “We

aren’t manipulated by anybody. Our position was homegrown” (Gemmil, personal communication). And indeed, the

alliance between the Gwich’in and environmentalists does

seem in some ways a marriage of convenience. The Gwich’in

don’t think of themselves as anti-oil; like most other Americans, they use many petroleum products in their daily lives

(Davidson 1993). An observer at a recent meeting in Arctic

Village remarked that “when the environmentalists made

speeches, [Gwich’in] eyes glazed over... Their cause has

been fought in the U.S. by the environmental community
80 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Hinchman Endangered Species, Endangered Culture: Native Resistance to Industrializing the Arctic

above all others. They know this. But when the issue dissolves, the marriage will too” (Dinero, personal communication). Still, although “not environmentalists by any

stretch,” the Gwich’in in small ways “are moving in that

direction,” for instance by banning the use of styrofoam and

using solar power to run the communal freezer that stores

caribou meat during the summer months (Dinero, personal

communication).

Environmental organizations, for their part, have sometimes taken positions antithetical to the perceived self-interest of indigenous peoples, particularly when the welfare of

endangered species seemed to be at stake. As Dryzek and

Young (1985) point out, policies that environmentalists have

supported in the past have actually heightened the problems

of remote communities in the North. On this issue, however,

there is a shared conviction uniting environmentalists and

the Gwich’in: both believe—in the words of the National

Wildlife Federation President—that it is impossible to “partially change the coastal plain without altering the whole

ecosystem” (Lurie 2001: 24).

Inupiats and Petrodevelopment____

Like their Gwich’in neighbors, the 6,500 Inupiat (Inupiaq)

Eskimos of Alaska’s North Slope traditionally were nomadic

hunters and gatherers. Generally speaking, fish and marine

mammals like the seal, walrus, and especially the bowhead

whale were their mainstay, supplemented by caribou, bear,

moose, sheep, waterfowl, and other wild game. Famine and

starvation in bad years were not uncommon (Anders 1994).

However, the economic situations of Inupiat bands varied

considerably, depending on whether they resided primarily

in the Brooks Range or along the Arctic coast. The coastal

Inupiat, from the early 20th century on, could supplement

their subsistence harvest with commercial whaling, trapping, and herding, as distant markets began to penetrate

their remote land. Although each of these commercial ventures ultimately failed, their collective impact was indelible,

tying the coastal Inupiat to the cash economy and introducing new technologies into their traditional subsistence harvest (Chance 1990).

Few sources of income remained for the Inupiat until

Washington, in the Cold War era, began to appreciate the

high Arctic’s strategic value. During this period, the Inupiat

repeatedly were treated as pawns in the geopolitical arena.

The construction of the Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line

radar installation near the coastal village of Kaktovik provided jobs for some local people, but led to the displacement

and forced relocation of many others (Chance 1990). More

sinister was Project Chariot, in which the Atomic Energy

Commission (AEC), with the blessing of the State of Alaska,

planned to conduct atomic weapons tests under the pretext of

blasting out a deep-water harbor near an Inupiat village in

the northwestern part of the State (Chance 1990). When the

economic value of the proposed harbor proved negligible, the

AEC’s rationale shifted: they now billed Project Chariot as an

experiment “in ‘geographical engineering’ [designed to] determine the effects of a nuclear explosion on the environment—

its rock substrata, soils, atmosphere, and biota, including

man” (Chance 1990: 144). Not until the Inupiat, the environmental community, and the larger public learned of this

wantonly destructive and arguably genocidal scheme was it

unceremoniously shelved. It is noteworthy that, in the campaign against Project Chariot, the Inupiat Paitot (“People’s

Heritage”) was formed as the first association of its kind to

protect Native interests in the far north.

A decade after the defeat of Project Chariot, the 1969

discovery of oil at Prudhoe Bay resulted in an economic

windfall that substantially altered the Inupiat way of life.

Tax revenues generated by the oil boom financed infrastructural improvements and the provision of expanded

public services. The Inupiat, already partially integrated

into the cash economy, quickly embraced the “accoutrements of a modern lifestyle once limited to communities far

to the south” (Buege 1997: 99; Chance 1990: 4, 197). “Living

conditions were difficult, pre-oil,” says an Inupiat spokesman. “But thanks to the industrial tax base created by the oil

fields, ...we have opportunities we couldn’t have dreamed of”

(Arctic Power 2001b). Indeed, the mayor of Kaktovik, the

only community within ANWR’s geographic boundaries,

bluntly warns: “If you take away the oil money, you’ve got a

subsistence way of life. All of a sudden you’d be trying to find

food, stay warm, keep out of the wind” (Bartholet 2001: 31).

These material advantages, however, have come at the

expense of traditional values, institutions, and relationships (Dryzek and Young 1985). The Inupiat norm of selfsufficiency erodes with the influx of consumer goods from

afar (Chance 1990). Subsistence activities have become less

necessary for survival, and their nature has changed as a

function of “capital intensification” (Dryzek and Young 1985:

126); for example, the snowmobiles now used to facilitate

subsistence hunting are costly to purchase, operate, and

maintain (Anders 1994). Then, too, social cohesion is threatened by the growth of new cleavages and forms of political

and economic inequality. Ideologies of individualism and

personal achievement undermine norms of sharing, “kinkin cooperation,” and collective responsibility (Chance 1990).

And the rise of village and regional corporations has challenged, and in many places disempowered, traditional structures of authority. Thus, while the Inupiat historically were

no strangers to economic booms and busts, the weakened

condition of their cultural “support and distribution systems” renders the prospect of a decline in oil revenues

extremely daunting (Chance 1990). “It is difficult,” as Dryzek

and Young (1985: 127, 135) say, “to hold the cash economy in

a partial embrace... The social transformation has gone too

far in most of the villages of the North to permit a [simple]

return to older ways” of life. When the oil runs out, as it

inevitably must, Inupiat society is likely to confront even

more wrenching dilemmas and challenges.

Tensions have also erupted between coastal and mountain Inupiat, with the latter believing their interests have

been shortchanged by the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, one of the 12 regional corporations established as part

of the settlement of Native land claims. The Corporation

acquired subsurface rights to over 90,000 acres (364 km2

) in

ANWR in a 1983 land swap with the Department of the

Interior (Chance 1990). The swap, brokered by a public

interest environmental law firm, added 100,000 acres (405

km2

) to Gates of the Arctic National Park. But this was land

on which the mountain Inupiat historically had conducted

their subsistence harvest. Thereafter, they needed permits

to enter the land and were not allowed to use all-terrain

vehicles (their preferred, if untraditional, mode of transport)
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 81

Endangered Species, Endangered Culture: Native Resistance to Industrializing the Arctic Hinchman

to reach the hunting grounds. For its part, the Arctic Slope

Regional Corporation cannot lease out the land acquired in

the transfer unless Congress approves opening up the coastal

plain to oil and gas exploration. Thus, the hopes of the North

Slope Inupiat when the swap was made have not yet been

realized.

Cleavages and tensions aside, most Inupiat—belonging

to one of the wealthiest Native groups in the United

States—do seem strongly to favor development in ANWR

(Buege 1997). A former mayor of Kaktovik contended that

the oil beneath the surface of ANWR could provide jobs,

schools, and a thriving economy for residents. In a recent

opinion survey of Kaktovik villagers, 78 percent of respondents said they either “agree” or “strongly agree” that the

1002 area should be opened to oil and gas exploration

(Arctic Power 2001c). The oil companies have helped to

promote these sentiments by ingratiating themselves with

the Inupiat and co-opting their leaders (Chance 1990). A

representative of Arctic Power, a pro-development lobbying organization financed by the State of Alaska, stresses

the convergence between the Inupiat right to use North

Slope land “to provide for their culture” and the right of “all

Americans... to benefit from the national treasure lying

beneath the coastal plain” (Easley, personal communication). Supporting the ambition of the oil companies and the

Inupiat is the 90,000 member Alaska Federation of Natives, a political organization led by an educated, urbanized elite for whom petrodevelopment is the “key to a

brighter future” (Chance 1990: 149–150, 163).

Bowhead People ________________

Although most Inupiat apparently support drilling in

ANWR, they simultaneously oppose offshore oil exploration,

fearing potential harm to the bowhead whale, which traditionally was as central to their culture as the caribou is to the

Gwich’in. Even with the benefit of modern technology, whaling remains a dangerous occupation in which hunters’ lives

are regularly lost. Accordingly, Inupiat men pride themselves on their whaling prowess. Like the Porcupine caribou

herd, bowhead whales are threatened by development, but

unlike the caribou, bowhead whales are officially endangered. In the late 1970s, an international moratorium on

hunting the marine mammals, supported by certain environmental groups, was briefly in effect; it was lifted only in

the wake of a sophisticated media campaign orchestrated by

the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation. As part of the compromise rescinding the ban, the Inupiat agreed to limit the

size of their annual bowhead harvest (Chance 1990).

The Western Arctic subgroup of bowhead whales, numbering about 7,800 animals, comprises the majority of the

species’ global population. Each spring, passing through

narrow channels in the ice as it breaks up, the Western

Arctic bowheads migrate en masse to the Beaufort Sea,

where they consume the bulk of their annual calories during

a 4- or 5-month stay. Because oil spills would likely concentrate in the ice-free channels, the species seems highly

vulnerable. The risk of accidents is increased by the severe

storms that occasionally blow into the area. Understandably, many Inupiat worry about British Petroleum-Amoco’s

upcoming Northstar Project, which incorporates a 6-mile

(10-km) long offshore pipeline. They are also concerned

about continuing offshore exploration in the Beaufort Sea,

sponsored by the Government of Canada.

Despite their apparent support for oil exploration and

their participation in the global economic system, the

Inupiat of the North Slope continue to regard the hunting

of creatures like bowhead whales and caribou (which, in

contrast to the Gwich’in, they do hunt on the coastal plain

[Chance 1990]) as a vital component of their identity. For

them, as for the Gwich’in, subsistence hunting reaffirms a

deep cultural connection to their environment. It provides

them with a link to their past and to their spirituality.

Indeed, employers complain that these activities too often

distract Inupiat workers from their job responsibilities.

“It’s just that they always want time off to hunt. That’s the

big problem” (Chance 1990: 83). Many prefer to work

intermittently, combining wage labor with more traditional economic activities.

Economic Ethics and International

Law ___________________________

To some extent, the rights of indigenous groups are a

matter of international law. The United Nations’ Covenant

of Civil and Political Rights guarantees ethnic minorities

the right to “enjoy their own culture” (Kymlicka 2001: 123).

Because Indians and Eskimos are not just minorities but

peoples, they have a more robust right to self-determination

as well (Anaya 1996). Natural resource rights, enabling

peoples to freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources for their own ends, are also widely recognized in

international law (Crawford 1988), as is an “inalienable

human right” to economic development (Anaya 1996). The

Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,

currently making its way through channels at the United

Nations, promises additional rights, including “cultural

integrity” (Anaya 1996), “the right to maintain their distinctive and profound relationships with their lands, territories

and resources,” and “the right to be secure in the enjoyment

of their own traditional means of subsistence” (Crawford

1988: 63; Wilmer 1993: 223–224).

Unfortunately, international covenants can offer little

guidance in a case like this, which pits the rights of one

First Nation against another. The Inupiat right to economic development collides with the Gwich’in right to

preserve their way of life. It is unclear whether the latter

guarantees a right not to develop, or only to receive compensation for development’s unwelcome effects (Kymlicka

2001). But no after-the-fact remedy could adequately compensate the Gwich’in if disaster were to befall the Porcupine caribou, the essence of their culture. Some scholars

have argued that indigenous groups wishing to maintain

premodern ways of life may deserve special protections

over and above those granted to peoples with “pervasive

links to the global economy” (Anaya 1996; Kymlicka 2001).

In that view, international law requires an “endangered

cultures” convention to parallel agreements regarding endangered species (Kymlicka 1989). Yet the analogy in some

ways seems false, if not pernicious. Unlike the course of

biological evolution, that of cultural evolution is determined at least partly by conscious choices that people
82 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Hinchman Endangered Species, Endangered Culture: Native Resistance to Industrializing the Arctic

make. It is one thing to want to shelter a culture from

choices made by outside forces beyond its control, but quite

another to freeze it into the amber of traditional patterns

and relationships. Doing so would “prevent aboriginal

peoples from adapting to new circumstances, from having

a living culture” (Kymlicka 2001: 203). Should the Inupiat,

opting to join the mainstream, have rights inferior to those

of the Gwich’in simply because the latter prefer not to? At

what point in any movement away from traditionalism

does a group forfeit its rights?

The political theorist Van Dyke (1985), a long-time advocate of group rights, has advanced eight guidelines for rank

ordering the claims of groups and adjudicating conflicts

between them. In his scheme, the claims of a group should

take priority to the extent that it: (1) is a self-conscious entity

seeking its own preservation; (2) has a reasonable chance to

succeed in that endeavor; (3) is effectively organized to act in

its own interest; (4) has members who pin their identities on

it; (5) has been perceived traditionally as a group by others;

(6) is divided from other groups by deep cleavages; (7) is not

costly or burdensome to others in pursuing its interests; and

(8) is able to grant to similar groups the same rights and

statuses it claims for itself. In the current case, both the

Inupiat and the Gwich’in meet the first six tests. The

Inupiat, precisely because they seek further integration into

the world economy, seem to have the edge on criterion #2,

though to the extent to which they succeed in that ambition,

they may be less able to satisfy criterion #4. In regard to

criterion #7, substantial costs would accrue to each of these

groups if the claims of the other were to win out. The Inupiat

potentially stand to gain billions of dollars in revenues. But

because they are already wealthy, it does seem fair to say

that “they will be fine even without development in ANWR.

They won’t suffer poverty. They have alternatives” (Gemmil,

personal communication). For the Gwich’in, the stakes are

far higher. The cost could be cultural as well as economic,

their effective death—or murder—as a nation. Not unreasonably, they “view any threat to the calving grounds as an

act of genocide” (Lurie 2001: 20). A member of the Gwich’in

Steering Committee has declared: “[The Inupiat] are not our

enemy. This is not an Indian versus Eskimo issue. This is

about our right to self-determination and to continue to live

in our culture” (Lurie 2001: 21).

The eighth criterion may be decisive. It has a Kantian

aspect, for it asks, what would happen if the claim of each of

these groups were universalized, or made applicable to all?

The Inupiat claim cannot meet this test. It would allow

drilling for oil on ANWR’s coastal plain, which might imperil

the caribou, but would disallow offshore drilling, which

might imperil the bowhead whale. Since the species play

equivalent roles in these cultures, such a policy would

violate criterion #8. Gemmil (personal communication) sums

this up as follows: “We respect [the Inupiat] position... We

support their opposition to offshore development, and we are

disappointed that they don’t reciprocate.”

In short, the two groups have claims that are irreconcilable and for all practical purposes mutually exclusive.

There are asymmetries of wealth and power between them,

and also asymmetries in regard to what it will cost each to

lose its battle. Financial compensation to the Gwich’in for

drilling on the coastal plain would do nothing to assuage

their loss, which could be both intangible and incalculable.

By contrast, since the Inupiat loss would be financial,

monetary compensation to them for not allowing drilling on

the coastal plain seems to be an appropriate remedy. It has

been estimated that Americans might be willing to pay

between $300 million and $40 billion per year in taxes and

higher energy costs in order to keep Alaskan wild lands

pristine (Manning 2001). Assuming that this was an accurate assessment at the time it was made, one wonders

whether it remains true post-September 11.

Two Threats ____________________

Prior to the terrorist bombings in Washington, DC, and

New York City, drilling on the ANWR coastal plain seemed

unlikely to win Congressional approval. Although the BushCheney administration had identified opening up the 1002

study area as a priority, and although the House of Representatives had voted in its favor, the Senate, controlled by

a slim Democratic majority, held firm in opposition. But the

political situation has changed radically, and champions of

development in ANWR are using the threat of future

terrorist attacks to press their advantage. More than ever,

exploring potential domestic oilfields is presented as a

national security/patriotism issue. In the words of Alaska’s

Senator Murkowski, “Mideast oil funds terrorism. The

need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil is a legitimate

need.” A poll taken before the attacks showed that 74

percent of Americans favor exploring for new domestic oil

sources rather than continuing to import oil from abroad

(Henry 2001).

And if boosters of exploration are correct, ANWR’s coastal

plain may well turn out to be the biggest potential field in the

country. Pro-development forces estimate that there is enough

subsurface petroleum in the 1002 area to replace 30 years’

worth of Saudi oil, or to meet the needs of the entire United

States military for at least 6 months. Already there has been

an attempt in Congress to attach the opening of the 1002

area as a rider to the $40 billion response package passed in

the wake of the bombings. If anything, the political atmosphere now is even more charged than it was during the

OPEC oil crisis of the mid-1970s, when suits filed by environmental groups wishing to stop construction of the transAlaskan pipeline were quashed by swift Congressional action (Haycox, personal communication). There were previous

Congressional attempts to open the coastal plain to drilling

during the mid-1980s (until the Exxon-Valdez accident

rendered that effort impolitic) as well as a few years later,

during the Gulf War. Nothing is easier to imagine than a

repeat of those efforts. Indeed, at this writing, the momentum for opening up the 1002 area seems practically irresistible, even though terrorism itself is already driving up the

costs of North Slope oil: the vulnerability of both the pipeline

itself and the massive holding tanks in Valdez has necessitated heightened surveillance and security. From an ethical

standpoint, the pro-development position rests on “resource

egalitarianism,” according to which resources on public

lands should be used to benefit the greatest number within

the national community (Kymlicka 2001), with no group

enjoying a special status or claim. Unless Americans were to

see wilderness and biodiversity as “resources” more valuable than oil, the national need for energy independence in
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 83

Endangered Species, Endangered Culture: Native Resistance to Industrializing the Arctic Hinchman

a time of political crisis would trump the Gwich’in desire to

maintain their culture.

But if the politics of countering terrorism poses the main

immediate threat to the ANWR ecosystem, the Porcupine

caribou, and the Gwich’in people, there is also the long-term

threat of ozone depletion and global warming. In fact, anthropogenic climate change caused by fossil fuel use might

threaten the Inupiat, especially those residing in low-lying

coastal areas, at least as much as their Athabascan counterparts. For complex reasons, the greenhouse effect is especially pronounced in the circumpolar regions of the world

(Steiner 2001). Accordingly, no State is more affected by

climatic change than Alaska, where average temperatures

have risen 5 ∞F in the past 50 years (Bartholet 2001). The

form of atmospheric pollution known as Arctic haze absorbs

light from the sun and thereby increases the temperature of

Arctic air (Chance 1990). Higher air temperatures promote

melting. Glaciers have receded dramatically, permafrost

has thawed, sea levels have risen, and about 11,500 square

miles (29,785 km2

) of Arctic ice (the combined size of Maryland and Delaware) have disappeared annually over the last

decade. Some climatologists predict that by the end of the

century, the Arctic Ocean during summer months could be

entirely ice free (Stolzenburg 2001). Locals already have

noticed changes in seasonal patterns (Lurie 2001). Summers

are hotter. Snow arrives later and, although there is now

more of it, it melts faster. River and stream levels are in flux.

Each year, spills of toxic materials at the Prudhoe Bay

complex release tens of thousands of tons of the potent

greenhouse gas nitrous oxide into the atmosphere (Davidson

1993).

These changes, in turn, inevitably affect the subsistence

harvest in particular, and economic activity in general.

Rougher seas, more severe storms, and more frequent storm

surges have made hunting bowhead whales and other marine mammals—always a dangerous occupation for the

Inupiat—even more so (Callaway, personal communication). Salmon runs have declined; caribou numbers will

probably fall as well. Research has shown that the caribou

are harassed by insects more during warmer summer months

and therefore spend more time standing around and less

time feeding. It is also harder for them to get at their winter

food when the snow is deep. This uses more energy and takes

time away from eating. In fact, one study concluded that

abiotic phenomena, especially snow cover, seem to be the

best predictors of the size and well-being of large herds

(Arctic Borderlands Ecological Knowledge Society 2001).

Likewise, the early breakup of river ice during the calving

season can spell disaster for caribou. In 2000, when pregnant caribou were unable to cross the ice-choked Porcupine

River before giving birth, an estimated 15,000 newborn

calves drowned, being too small and weak to swim (Gemmil,

personal communication). In essence, the Porcupine caribou

herd may serve as the “canary in the coal mine” for the health

of the Arctic ecosystem.

Finally, and ironically, global warming is likely to cause

problems even for the oil companies themselves. The thawing

of permafrost adds to the cost of road, bridge, and pipeline

construction and maintenance (Steiner 2001). More volatile

and unpredictable weather at sea will jeopardize offshore

drilling installations and possibly lead to more spills and

accidents. Inevitably, these costs will be passed on to consumers, even while their use of petrochemicals—regardless of

where these originate—worsens global warming in a vicious

cycle. As Gemmil has observed, global climate change itself is

a symptom of the bigger problem that people are depleting the

Earth’s resources too fast (Lurie 2001: 16).

In the last analysis, the path to both national security and

a healthy environment leads away from fossil fuel dependency and toward reliance on energy sources that are renewable, decentralized, and less vulnerable to political and

economic vicissitudes or terrorist attack. By contrast, if

national security concerns lead Americans to aggravate

global warming by despoiling the environment, “the tragedy

of September 11”—as one ecologist has argued—“may be

amplified many times over” (Ahl 2001).

References _____________________

Ahl, Jonathon. (2001, October 4, North Country Public Radio

broadcast). Will September 11th hurt environmentalist cause?

[Online]. Available: www.ncpr.org/news/archive0110.php [2001,

October 4].

Anaya, James, S. 1996. Indigenous peoples in international law.

New York: Oxford University Press. 253 p.

Anders, Gary. 1994. Social and economic consequences of Federal

Indian policy: a case study of Alaska. In: Wells, Robert N., ed.

Native American resurgence and renewal. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press: 47–71.

Arctic Borderlands Ecological Knowledge Society. 2001. (2002 November 11—last update). [Online]. Available: http://www.

taiga.net/top/borderlands.html [2001, August 15].

Arctic Power. 2001a. (2002, September 20—last update). [Online].

Available: www.anwr.org/players.htm [2001, September 5].

Arctic Power. 2001b. (2002, September 20—last update). Alaskans

on Development. [Online]. Available: www.anwr,org/features/

pdfs/native-facts.pdf [2001, August 15].

Arctic Power. 2001c. (2002, September 20—last update). City of

Kaktovik ANWR survey. [Online]. Available: www.anwr.org/

features/kaktovik.htm [2001, August 15].

Bartholet, Jeffrey. 2001. Alaska: oil’s ground zero. Newsweek.

August 13: 18–23.

Buege, Douglas. 1997. Epistemic responsibility and the Inuit of

Canada’s eastern arctic. In: Wareen, Karen; Nisvan, Erkal, eds.

Ecofeminism: women, culture, nature. Indianapolis: Indiana

University Press: 99–111.

Callaway, Don. 2001. [Presentation to National Endowment for the

Humanities summer institute on environmental ethics and issues: Alaska as a case study. Anchorage, AK]. May 30.

Canadian Embassy Web Site. 2001a. (2002 September 30—last

update). [Online]. Available: http://www.dfait_maeci.gc.ca/

can_am/menu_en.asp?act=v&mid=1&cat=11&did=484 [2001,

August 15].

Canadian Embassy Web Site 2001b. (2002 September 30—last

update). [Online]. Available: http://arcticcircle.uconn.edu/ANWR/

anwrcaribou.html [2001, August 15].

Carpenter, Murray. 2001. The Gwich’in and Arctic Alaska. The

Witness. January/February: 12–15.

Chance, Norman. 1990. The Inupiat and Arctic Alaska. Fort Worth,

TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 241 p.

Crawford, James, ed. 1988. The rights of peoples. Oxford: Clarendon

Press. 236 p.

Davidson, Art. 1993. Endangered peoples. San Francisco: Sierra

Club Books. 176 p.

Defenders of Wildlife. 2001a. Voters overwhelmingly oppose oil

drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. [Online]. Available: www.defenders.org/wildlife/arctic/news/arcticpoll.pdf [2001,

August 15].

Defenders of Wildlife. 2001b. (2002 September—last update). Letter to President Bush from scientists and land managers. [Online].

Available: http://www.defenders.org/releases/pr2001/sciletter.pdf

[2001, August 15].
84 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Hinchman Endangered Species, Endangered Culture: Native Resistance to Industrializing the Arctic

Dinero, Steven. 2001. [Presentation to National Endowment for the

Humanities summer institute on environmental ethics and issues: Alaska as a case study. Anchorage, AK]. June 26.

Dryzek, John; Young, Oran.1985. Internal colonialism in the circumpolar north: the case of Alaska. Development and Change. 16:

123–145.

Dunkel, Tom. 2001. Counting caribou. Mother Jones. May/June: 21.

Easley, Paula. 2001. [Presentation to National Endowment for the

Humanities summer institute on environmental ethics and issues: Alaska as a case study. Anchorage, AK]. June 21.

Gemmil, Faith. 2001. [Presentation to National Endowment for the

Humanities summer institute on environmental ethics and issues: Alaska as a case study. Anchorage, AK]. June 21.

Gwich’in Steering Committee. 2001. (2001, October 1—last updated). Gwich’in background. [Online]. Available: www.alaska.net/

~gwichin/background.html [2001, August 15 and October 10].

Haycox, Steve. 2001. [Presentation to National Endowment for the

Humanities summer institute on environmental ethics and issues: Alaska as a case study. Anchorage, AK]. May 31.

Henry, Natalie M. 2001. (2002, September 20—last update). Attacks heighten call for reduced dependence on foreign oil. Arctic

Power Web Site. [Online]. Available: http://www.anwr.org/features/attack.htm [2001, September 30].

International Indian Treaty Council. 1992. Report to United Nations Commission of Human Rights. Economic, social, and cultural Rights: indigenous issues; 1992 March 28: New York:

UNESCO. 4 p.

Jans, Nick. 2001. Refuge’s fate rests with Americans outside Alaska.

U.S.A. Today. January 24: 11A.

Kymlicka, Will. 1989. Liberalism, community, and culture. Oxford:

Oxford University Press. 280 p.

Kymlicka, Will. 2001. Politics in the vernacular. Oxford: Oxford

University Press. 383 p.

Linklater, Joe; Gemmil, Faith. 2001. Save this sacred place. Washington Post: January 17: 17.

Lopez, Barry. 1986. Arctic dreams. New York: Charles Scribner’s

Sons. 496 p.

Lurie, Jon. 2001. AN-War. Anchorage Press: June 7–12: 20–24.

Manning, Elizabeth. 2001. A price tag on the environment. Anchorage Daily News. February 20: B1, B3.

McManus, Reed. 2000. Where the caribou roam. Sierra. July/

August: 39–49.

Murphy, Steve; Griffiths, Brad. 1999. (1999, September—last update). Modeling the effects of oil development on female caribou

during summer. [Online]. Available: www.taiga.net/sustain/lib/

reports/energeticsppt/sld.htm004 [2001, August 15].

Steiner, Rick. 2001. Alaska’s warming calls for action. Anchorage

Daily News. June 6: op- ed page.

Stolzenburg, William. 2001. Nature feels the heat. Nature Conservancy. September/October: 10–18.

Taylor, Bron. 1995. Ecological resistance movements. Albany: State

University of New York Press. 422 p.

Van Dyke, Vernon. 1985. Human rights, ethnicity, and discrimination. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. 259 p.

Wilmer, Franke. 1993. The indigenous voice in world politics.

London: Sage. 249 p.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 85

Kelly Luck is an Anthropology masters student in the Anthropology

Department at Rhodes University, P.O. Box 94, Grahamstown, 6140, South

Africa. Fax: +27 (0) 46-622-3948, E-mail: g9730887@campus.ru.ac.za.

Zweliyanyikima Vena is the User Services Librarian in the Cory Library at

Rhodes University. He is also training as an Indigenous Healer. Fax: +27 (0)

46-622-2264, E-mail: z.vena@ru.ac.za

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—This paper discusses the effects of the change to game

farming, most notably trophy hunting, on farm workers in the

Bushmans River area of South Africa’s Eastern Cape Province.

Game farming is viewed by government and tourism stakeholders

as a much needed source of foreign investment in the impoverished

Province. What is often unrealized and unreported however, is the

effect of the transition to game farming on farm workers who still

reside on the affected land. This paper traces the tensions that exist

between white landowners and/or managers, and black farm workers. It questions the applicability of current legal statutes aimed at

providing security of tenure for farm workers. It examines potential

solutions to the impasse reached between landowners and farm

workers. It stresses the need, due to the politically sensitive issue of

land and land restitution in South Africa, for an equitable solution

that provides security of tenure for farm workers, along with access

to the various sacred sites within the game farming landscape,

while allowing a compromise to be reached that is acceptable to the

landowners.

Introduction ____________________

The goal of the ongoing research initiative from which this

paper is drawn is to investigate the impact that changes in

private farming strategies are having on farm workers in the

Bushmans River area of the Eastern Cape. Although commercial farming has decreased considerably in the area

since the early 1990s, current changes in the region revolve

primarily around the development of commercial game

farming, most notably for trophy hunting. The potential of

game farming for ecotourism and the associated benefits of

employment, capital generation, and infrastructure development have seen the creation of a large number of private

game farms between Grahamstown and Port Elizabeth.

What is often unreported and unrealized, however, is the

effect that this transition to commercial game farming is

having on former Xhosa farm workers who still reside on the

affected land.

Contested Rights: Impacts of Game Farming

on Farm Workers in the Bushmans River

Area

Kelly Luck

Zweliyanyikima Vena

The tensions that exist between landowners and/or managers and farm workers have been identified as revolving

around a number of key issues: security of tenure and

residency rights, access to water and grazing land, stock

restrictions, housing provision, and access to grave sites and

other sites of cultural significance (chief here being certain

water pools and riparian zones considered to be inhabited by

ancestors and that are essential components in both traditional and Christian oriented family rituals).

Through a discussion of the current legal position of farm

workers in South Africa, an examination of the economic

situation of farm workers, an explanation of the security

concerns of farmers, as well as through the use of empirical

case studies, this paper analyzes the tensions that exist

between farm workers and landowners and/or managers. It

discusses attempts at tacit eviction of farm workers by

landowners. It addresses the question of the need for access

to the landscape by farm workers to ensure their social and

spiritual well being, and finally examines a possible solution

to the situation of farm workers and game farms.

Economic Concerns of Farm

Workers _______________________

The economic implications of game farming for farm

workers revolves around their inability to secure a livelihood

due to unemployment and certain residential and livestock

restrictions. Game farming demands a different kind of

labor force than that associated with crop and livestock

farming. This has resulted in a large number of retrenchments. Following this, most farm workers rely on seasonal

jobs and members of the family who draw pensions and

disability grants. Seasonal work on chicory farms yields an

average of 10 Rand (approximately $1) per day. Farm workers are therefore severely economically disadvantaged. For

those farm workers with rights to remain on the land, the

loss of income and rations makes the possession of stock a

vital necessity for survival. The keeping of stock and the

access to sacred sites within the game farm allow for continued practice of various traditional and religious rites. These

serve to ensure the spiritual and social well-being of the

affected people.

Security Concerns of Farmers _____

Farm killings are a national problem. Accounts of farm

killings in the Eastern Cape are common in the media. These

attacks on both farmers and farm workers have generated a
86 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Luck and Vena Contested Rights: Impacts of Game Farming on Farm Workers in the Bushmans River Area

feeling of apprehension amongst the Province’s farming

community. A number of farmhouses in the Bushmans River

area have been burgled in recent months. It is therefore

understandable that farmers would seek to secure themselves through restricting access to their property. The

Government has allowed farmers to erect boom gates as a

means of ensuring their safety.

What must ultimately be understood is that it is often not

the farm workers on the property who are responsible for the

growing number of farm attacks. It is usually other people in

the area, or those from further afield. It is therefore in the

interests of landowners to ensure that they are on good

terms with the farm workers on their land. These people will

then have a vested interest in protecting the land and

ensuring that it is free from outside interference.

Existing Legal Protection for Farm

Workers _______________________

Farm workers in the Eastern Cape have a long documented history of inconsistent working conditions and a lack

of adequately protected legal rights. Influx control and the

absence of trade union organization has resulted in low

wages and limited means of legal protection from human

rights violations and work related abuses (Antrobus 1984;

Cocks and Kingwell 1998; Manona 1988). The current government has attempted to improve the situation of farm

workers through the implementation of the Extension of

Security of Tenure Act 62 of 1997 (ESTA). ESTA provides for

stringent procedures when a landowner, or person in charge

of the land, intends to evict residents. The would-be evictor

has to make an application in writing to a magistrate stating

his reason for eviction. While a farm worker’s right of

residence may be terminated on any lawful ground, the

process must be equitable, fair, and in accordance with the

various provisions, as laid out in the Act. Furthermore, the

Act extends additional protection to those “long-term occupiers” who have resided on the land for a period of 10 years

and have reached the age of 60. Despite this, the National

Land Committee (NLC) acknowledges

...that although offering limited rights, [ESTA] has been

demonstrated to be woefully inadequate in securing real

tenure rights for farm dwellers (NLC Annual Report 1999-

2000:23).

The ineffectiveness of the Act results from its inability to

protect the tenancy rights of the dependents of household

heads once they die (dependents may be legally evicted 12

months after the death of the household head), as well as its

inability to ensure the residential security of short-term

occupiers.

Beyond the above, farm workers are often uninformed

about the existence of the Act, something which has led to

attempts at tacit eviction because once people leave the land

they lose all associated rights to it. Such evictions and

retrenchments have reached alarming proportions in recent

years. Downsizing in existing farming operations, and game

farming, has led to landlessness, unemployment, growing

shack settlements in neighboring towns, and livestock overpopulation on urban commonages.

Legal protection as it currently stands extends to securing

residency rights for long-term occupiers, but does not provide for the protection of those aspects of the landscape that

are identified by farm workers as sacred and therefore

essential for the continued practice of religious rites. Although there is a strong international call through organizations such as the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD-UNCED),

the United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP), and the Working Group on Traditional Resource Rights (WGTRR), for the recognition of indigenous

knowledge and the need for its preservation and protection

(Gray 1997), the preservation of and access to sacred sites is

not something that is legally enforceable in South Africa.

Farm workers have a strong affiliation with the surrounding

landscape, due in many cases to long-term residency and the

existence of family graves. There is also a strong identification with various sacred sites within the landscape and the

articulation of a need for their protection.

The two case studies discussed in this paper are taken

from one research site along the Bushmans River. Mr.

Engelbrecht (names of individual farmers, landowners, and

farm workers have been changed) is the South African

director and a 20-percent shareholder of a newly established

game farm. Mr. Engelbrecht is in partnership with a number

of Americans with a long established history of game farming and trophy hunting in America. The partnership has

bought six adjacent farms along the river, which are being

consolidated to form a game farm. There are 19 farm worker

families in residence on three of the purchased farms

Case 1: Attempts at Tacit Eviction

Tacit evictions, through such measures as the imposition

of severe water restrictions, lack of access to farms for farm

workers, and stock restrictions, are a common reality as

certain landowners attempt to force their workers to leave

voluntarily, thereby rendering null and void their responsibilities as laid out in ESTA. These responsibilities include

the stipulation that if farm workers are evicted or retrenched, a settlement offer must be secured that will allow

for the construction of housing in a new locality that is of

equal standard to that occupied in the place of former

employment. In many cases, the advent of game farming and

trophy hunting, which heightens the danger for resident

farm workers, has served as justification by certain landowners to limit farm worker access to the landscape.

Mr. Stewart bought his farm from the Landbank in 1999

after the previous farmer had gone bankrupt. The farm was

later purchased in November 2000, along with five other

properties in the area, by an American investment group for

the purpose of establishing a game farm for trophy hunting.

Mr. Stewart negotiated a usufruct right, which allowed him

to remain in residence and run his cattle in a specified area

of the farm.

When Mr. Stewart took over management of the farm in

1999, he imposed cattle restrictions of two animals per

family. Although cattle restrictions are often placed on farm

workers (Cocks and Kingwell 1998), the previous owner had

not imposed any restrictions. The lack of livestock restrictions being replaced by these new stringent restrictions

could set a precedent that could be detrimental to farm
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 87

Luck and Vena Contested Rights: Impacts of Game Farming on Farm Workers in the Bushmans River Area

workers. Only three of the six resident families have stock,

but of these, all have animals in excess of the limit imposed

by Mr. Stewart. The farm workers informed Mr. Stewart

that they could not abide by the restrictions, as they needed

the stock to ensure their economic well-being. Mr. Stewart

then implemented a system in which stockowners had to pay

20 Rand (approximately $2) a month per full-grown animal

for grazing, vetting, and dipping. Sometime later, he is

reported to have informed the farm workers of his intention

to personally sell all of their animals and hire a truck to

collect them. Such actions and threats can be seen as

attempts to force farm workers to leave the land and settle

elsewhere.

More seriously, Mr. Stewart imposed severe water restrictions on the farm workers living on his property. The farm

contains two dams: one for human consumption and one for

livestock use. There is also a borehole in close proximity to

the main farmhouse. He has consistently denied access to

the dam with water fit for human consumption. In July 2001,

during a public meeting between Mr. Engelbrecht, the South

African Manager of the game farm; Mr. Stewart’s son, who

acted as interpreter; Mr. Bonda, a representative of an

agricultural NGO; and the farm workers, Mr. Stewart’s son

defended the blocking off of the dam by saying it was in

response to the farm workers, who had left certain farm

gates open and let their own cattle move freely through these

gates. The situation has yet to be resolved. Meanwhile, the

farm workers approached a neighboring farmer and requested permission to draw water from his dam. The request

was granted.

The farmhouse that Mr. Stewart occupies is situated just

off the main driveway leading to his farm and one of the other

farms within the game farm. The gate leading to Mr. Stewart’s

home is also used to access the remaining driveway to the

second farm. Mr. Stewart frequently locks this gate, complaining of too much traffic through the farms. The farm

workers are not informed about the locking of the gate and

are left without a key, something that severely restricts both

their and their visitors’ access to the property. While locking

the gate is understandable, given the incidents of farm

attacks discussed earlier in the paper, Mr. Stewart should

inform the farm workers and possibly negotiate a situation

in which they keep their own key or have access to one.

The above case illustrates an active attempt on the part of

the landowner, or in this case occupier, to make life difficult

for the resident farm workers. Although many of the discussed actions took place prior to the onset of the game farm,

such attempts have escalated now that the game farm is

being constructed. Both Mr. Stewart and his son have given

assistance to Mr. Engelbrecht, and frequently oversee the

still fledgling operation while he is away with clients at other

more established hunting sites. These actions constitute an

attempt on the part of Mr. Stewart to tacitly evict those

people resident on his land, all of whom were resident before

his arrival.

Case 2: Sacred Sites Within the Game

Farming Landscape

Sacred sites refer to specific areas considered by the local

people to be places within the landscape where their ancestors reside (Hirsch 1995). The Xhosa farm workers and

members of the larger community identify three such localities: the water, the grassland, and the forest. Each locality

is believed to contain ancestral spirits, the most powerful

being the river people (abantu bomlambo) who reside in

certain identifiable pools (De Jager and Gitywa 1963;

Hammond-Tooke 1975; Hirst 1990, 1997; Ngubane 1977;

Soga 1931). Access to these sites is considered vital for the

continued well-being of the community. Family rituals are

often conducted at the various river and forest sites to ensure

agricultural success, health, fertility, and good fortune. Diviners and their apprentices also make use of certain pools,

revealed to them in their dreams, for training purposes.

Alongside the traditional, indigenous-oriented use of the

various sacred sites within the landscape, local African

Zionist Christian, farm-based congregations make use of the

sacred pools for full submersion baptisms. This ritual is a

definitive step for adult churchgoers, as it marks their full

entry and acceptance into the congregation. The strong

influence of indigenous African beliefs within the African

independent/indigenous churches (Maboea 1994; Oosthuizen

and others 1996), which view the healing energy of the

church as converted ancestral/traditional energy, has cultivated a respect for the landscape which parallels that felt by

traditionalists.

It is pertinent to point out at this stage that a respect for

the landscape arises out of an awareness of the need to show

the “proper” respect to the ancestors. As stressed in Bernard

(this proceedings), this involves an ecological ethos of protection and preservation of sacred sites, as environmental

degradation or disturbance of any sort will result in the

ancestors abandoning the sacred site.

Mr. Menzi and his brother, Mr. Sol Menzi, are both former

farm workers. Mr. Menzi is a resident of Mr. Stewarts farm,

and Mr. Sol Menzi lives on a nearby farm that has been

turned over to the people through the government purchasing the land from the previous owner.

Mr. Sol Menzi’s wife developed a rash on her arms and

back. Initially she approached the local herbalist and Zionist

priest, Mr. Zenani, for advice. Mr. Zenani prescribed a

course of treatment. When this failed to bring relief, Mr.

Zenani suggested she be taken to the local clinic. The

medication offered by the clinic did not bring any relief

either. Mr. Zenani then suggested she be taken to a healer,

Mr. Zenani’s niece, who was in the area performing a ritual

for clients. During the divination session, she revealed that

the rash was in fact caused by the ancestors, and was an

outward sign that the family needed to purify itself. The

healer advocated the performance of a river ritual. This

would involve the seclusion of the family, with the imposition of certain food taboos, and the offering of gifts, by a

chosen representative to the ancestors at a sacred pool.

It is pertinent to point out at this juncture that these rites

of passage were conducted in the past on an annual basis.

Rituals involve not only the religious ceremony itself, but the

provision of food and beer for ritual participants and guests,

and the payment of the healer for his or her services. The

significant cost of performing such rituals has resulted in a

situation where they are often neglected. It is believed that

the neglecting of such rituals may result in ancestral displeasure, as is evident by Mrs. Sol Menzi’s rash. It is also

important amongst the Xhosa that river rituals be performed

at sites associated with the family, as it is believed that the
88 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Luck and Vena Contested Rights: Impacts of Game Farming on Farm Workers in the Bushmans River Area

family ancestors reside in certain pools near where they

lived in their earthly lives. Familial association with a particular site is usually dependent on long-term occupancy in an

area. In the past, this has resulted in farm workers approaching their employers, or adjacent landowner, depending

on the location of the nearest sacred pool. Increasingly, however, it is game farm managers who need to be approached in

respect to the performance of ritual.

A detailed discussion of the ritual, and the symbolism of

rebirth and renewal involved, is beyond the scope and theme

of this paper. What is important to stress is the need for

access to these sites within the landscape to ensure both the

spiritual and social well-being of the people involved.

South Africa, unlike Australia, has no sacred site protection laws to ensure access to and use of the various water,

forest, and grassland sites. Many farmers are sensitive to

the need of the people to access the various identified sites on

their land. If timely requests are made, permission is usually granted. In some cases, farm workers report setting

aside a piece of the slaughtered animal (when ritual sacrifice

was involved) for the farmer and his family to secure good

relations between the two parties. It has been suggested by

some local African National Congress (current ruling governmental party) counselors that this system be encouraged

to establish rapport between farm workers and game farm

owners. Sharing the meat of a sacrificial animal is a strong

symbolic gesture of social affiliation and respect.

The ecological ethic of many traditional cosmologies, as

mentioned above, ensures respect for the site and thereby

preservation of the landscape. The presence of the ancestors

is in fact indicated by the presence of various animals and

birds associated with the water (otters, fish, birds), the

forest (monkeys, mongoose), and the grassland (mongoose,

hare) (Hirst 1990). By supporting these attitudes of respect

for the landscape, pollution and degradation of such sites

may be avoided. Access to such sites is vital for the spiritual

well-being of farm workers and therefore cannot be avoided.

Although landowners hold legitimate concerns of pollution

of sites, the promotion of and empathy for traditional ideologies may well prevent this.

Potential Solutions

to the Problem __________________

The Extension of Security of Tenure Act is aimed at farm

workers on farms still under production or those left fallow.

It could subsequently be argued that game farming and the

land on which it is conducted require additional legislation.

Because of the restrictive nature of game farming in relation

to stock numbers, residential security, and access to sacred

sites, current government initiatives to protect the rights of

farm workers are inadequate.

A possible solution to the problem of a restriction to

individual livelihoods, viewed as favorable by a number of

farm workers, is the allocation of land adjacent to or on the

periphery of game and hunting zones. The purchasing of this

land, if not already held by the game farm, is potentially

facilitated through settlement offers made by the landowners to the farm workers, and by ESTA grants afforded by the

Department of Land Affairs. Some landowners are exploring

this option and are seeking ways in which the farm workers

may benefit through their engagement in cultural and

ecotourism or agri-villages. Such endeavors should be commended and supported by all who are seeking a satisfactory

resolution of the problem and a means whereby the benefits of

game and ecotourism can be shared with affected communities.

An initiative, which involves the farm workers from the

first two case studies, is far from finalized. Mr. Engelbrecht,

the Director of the game farm under discussion, has identified a potential site outside of the game farm. The process is,

however, hampered by a number of factors, including the

fact that the transfer of ownership from the previous farmer

to Mr. Engelbrecht has yet to be successfully finalized.

Although access to the various sacred water and forest sites

within the game farm and burial rights have been successfully secured, the size of the allocated land is still under

discussion. Mr. Engelbrecht has agreed to give ownership of

the land to the farm workers by giving individual title deeds

to household heads for their residential plot and establishing communal grazing land for the stock. This will provide

residential security for farm workers and their dependents,

as well as a certain amount of security for Mr. Engelbrecht,

as it ensures the proximity of people with a vested interest

in the protection of his land. A number of the farm workers

have expressed their desire to leave the confines of the game

farm due to the restrictions and dangers (the eventual

introduction of predators and hunting) it imposes. Still

others have articulated their plans for the land in question

(grazing land for stock, as well as arable land for potato and

mealie [corn] production). What remains to be investigated

and finalized is the role of the government in terms of

housing and agricultural assistance.

Conclusions____________________

The situation faced by farm workers resident on land set

aside for game farming and trophy hunting is complex.

Attempted farm worker evictions and the need for the

performance of ritual, as well as the economic implications

of the move to game farming for farm workers, have shown

the need for reconciliation between farm workers and landowners, not least because of the security this would provide

landowners, considering the potentially volatile nature of

land restitution issues in Southern Africa.

Values attached to the landscape by farm workers are due

in part to their long residence in the area, as well as their

cosmological orientation that promotes ecologically sound

practices. The ineffectiveness of current legislation governing farm workers in South Africa demonstrates the need for

additional legislation as well as the need for landowners to

act in such a way as to secure the tenure of farm workers and

to assist in providing generally poor, uneducated, and unemployed people with sustainable livelihoods.

References _____________________

Antrobus, G. G. 1984. South African farm wages and working conditions with special reference to the Albany District 1957–1977.

Grahamstown, South Africa: Rhodes University. 320 p. Dissertation.

Cocks, M.; Kingwell, R. A. 1998. Land and agrarian reform: transition and continuity on former white-owned farmland in an Eastern

Cape locality. Grahamstown, South Africa: Rhodes University,

Institute for Social and Economic Research Archives: 61–73.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 89

Luck and Vena Contested Rights: Impacts of Game Farming on Farm Workers in the Bushmans River Area

De Jager, E. J.; Gitywa, V. Z. 1963. A Xhosa Umhly‹yelelo ceremony

in the Ciskei. Journal of African Studies. 22: 109–116.

Gray, A. 1997. Indigenous rights and development: self-determination

in an Amazonian community. Providence: Berghahn Books. 343 p.

Hammond-Tooke, W. A. 1975. The structure of Cape Nguni cosmology. In: Whisson, M.G.; West, M., eds. Religion and social change

in Southern Africa. Cape Town/London: David Philip/Rex Collings:

15–33.

Hirsch, E. 1995. Introduction. In: Hirsch, E.; O’Hanlon, M., eds. The

anthropology of landscape: perspectives on place and space.

Oxford: Claredon Press: 1–30.

Hirst, M. 1990. The Healers art: Cape Nguni diviners in the

Townships of Grahamstown. Grahamstown, South Africa: Rhodes

University. 455 p. Dissertation.

Hirst, M. 1997. A river of metaphors. Interpreting the Xhosa

diviners myth. In: McAllister, P., ed. Culture and the commonplace:

anthropological essays in honour of David Hammond-Tooke.

Johannesburg: University of Witwatersrand Press: 217–250.

Maboea, S. I. 1994. Causes for the proliferation of the African

independent churches. In: Oosthuizen, G.; Kitshoff, M.; Dube, S.,

eds. Afro-Christianity at the grassroots: its dynamica and strategies. Leiden: E. J. Brill: 121–136.

Manona, C. W. 1988. The drift from farms to town: a case study of

migration from white owned farms in the Eastern Cape to

Grahamstown. Grahamstown, South Africa: Rhodes University.

Dissertation.

National Land Committee (NLC) Annual Report. 1999–2000.

Pretoria, South Africa: Department of Land Affairs. 40 p.

Ngubane, H. 1977. Body and mind in Zulu Medicine. London:

Academic Press. 184 p.

Oosthuizen, G. 1996. African independent/indigenous churches in

the social environment: an empirical analysis.Africa Insight.

26(4): 308–324.

Soga, J. H. 1931. The Ama-Xhosa: life and customs. Lovedale, South

Africa: Lovedale Press. 431 p.
90 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Chad E. Dear received his master’s degree in geography from Western

Washington University, Bellingham, WA 98225, U.S.A. He is currently a

Fulbright Fellow in Swaziland, Southern Africa. E-mail: chaddear@

hotmail.com

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Recreationists’ understanding of subsistence in Gates

of the Arctic National Park (GAAR) was examined using Structural

Developmental Theory. This perspective contends that people universally differentiate three major domains of social issues—moral,

conventional, and personal—by how they reason about them. Seventy-five percent of respondents understood subsistence use of

GAAR as a moral issue. Further, respondents maintained conflicting moral judgments when justice, welfare, and naturalism values

associated with subsistence were juxtaposed with human and

nonhuman welfare values associated with wilderness. The high

incidence of conflicting judgments suggests the existence of conflict,

or cognitive disequilibrium, between values associated with subsistence and values associated with wilderness. Respondents attempted

to coordinate their judgments in ways that can be described as

overriding, contradictory, and contextual. No respondents had hierarchical integrated understandings of subsistence and wilderness

values. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Introduction ____________________

Gates of the Arctic National Park & Preserve (GAAR), one

of the 10 park units created by the Alaskan National Interest

Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) of 1980, was established

with a management mandate to preserve wilderness values

that is unparalleled in any other U.S. National Park (USDI/

NPS 1986). This mandate, however, must be understood in

the context of the other purposes for which the park was

established, allowed uses, and prior existing rights. GAAR

and other National Parks created by ANILCA, unlike parks

in the lower forty-eight United States, allow for the continuation of “customary and traditional” subsistence uses by

rural Alaskan residents of wild, renewable resources for

direct personal or family consumption (Willis 1985).

Although the allowance of subsistence in GAAR diverges

from previous legislative definitions of wilderness, the human presence and subsistence culture in the park was

initially thought to complement the wilderness purposes of

the park (USDI/NPS 1986). Such a complimentary relationship would successfully harmonize the GAAR management

mandates to allow for the continuation of subsistence and to

Understanding Wilderness and Subsistence

in Gates of the Arctic National Park

and Preserve, Alaska

Chad E. Dear

“provide for the enjoyment” of the wilderness qualities of the

park. The actual relationship between the subsistence culture and the wilderness purposes of GAAR, however, has not

been adequately studied and is, therefore, not yet well

understood. Understanding recreationists’ perspectives regarding subsistence in GAAR is important for two primary

reasons: (1) to determine if the aforementioned GAAR management mandates conflict, and (2) to empirically examine

the influence interactions with subsistence may have on

psychological developmental aspects of recreationists’ understanding of nature, indigenous people, the human role in

wilderness, and the human-nature relationship. The purpose of this study, therefore, is to identify, classify and

analyze recreationists’ understanding of subsistence in the

context of their experience in GAAR.

Theoretical Framework ___________

Such an analysis requires an approach that accounts for

the complexities inherent in the coordination of the socialpsychological constructions of wilderness and subsistence.

In other words, recreationists’ behaviors and reactions to

subsistence can not be taken at face value because such

behaviors and reactions are underlain by complex patterns

of understanding and active efforts to balance personal

judgments about the issues the situation in GAAR provokes.

Structural Developmental Theory, the perspective employed in this study, explains human understanding through

the nature and functions of psychological structures

(Ginsburg and Opper 1969). These structures are comprised

of the various ideas people develop and maintain regarding

social issues. Structures also include patterns of thinking, or

schemas, that situate ideas within more or less well-organized wholes. Ideas are organized within these schemas

through the process of reasoning about social issues. Ideas

and schemas regarding social issues can be differentiated

depending on the perceived moral, conventional, or personal

nature of issues (Turiel 1998). In other words, if a person

thinks morally about an issue, they will employ different

ideas and reason about the issue differently than a person

who thinks about the same issue as governed by conventional

or personal considerations. Specific qualities of individuals’

judgments and supporting justifications are the criteria for

determining into which “social domain” the individual conceptualizes an issue.

Identification, classification, and analysis of ideas and

schemas within moral, conventional, and personal social

domains provide a basis for understanding the interrelations between thought, action, and cultural context (Kahn

1999). The premise here is that forms of reasoning make a

difference in how different possibilities are weighed and
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 91

Dear Understanding Wilderness and Subsistence in Gates of the Arctic...

calculated by an individual. The link between thought,

action, and cultural context is complicated, however, by the

psychological fact that people develop and simultaneously

maintain multiple and, at times, conflicting judgments regarding the same issue (Turiel and others 1991). Such cases

may result in judgment/action inconsistencies.

Turiel and others (1991) note that judgment/action inconsistencies require explanations that take judgment coordination into account. Judgment coordination occurs when an

individual’s experience simultaneously activates psychological structures supporting conflicting judgments. These

structures, which were not brought into relation before, are

forced into a psychological relationship. The relationship

established through judgment coordination generally involves a compromising of structures. Identifying, classifying, and analyzing ideas and schemas related to an issue

within moral, conventional, and personal domains aid in

understanding an individual’s or group’s progress through

the process of judgment coordination.

Finally, hierarchical integration, or structural development, happens when previously held psychological structures are, through interaction with the social and physical

world, transformed into more comprehensive and adequate

ways of understanding the world and acting upon it. This

process involves the development of a new understanding of

conflicting values that preserves the integrity of both values,

but transforms their relationship from one of conflict to one

of integration under some superordinate concept. This process is distinct from judgment coordination in that it does

not involve a compromising of judgments, but instead

involves an integration of judgments at a hierarchically

elevated level.

Methods _______________________

Semistructured interviews including hypothetical scenarios describing interactions between recreational and

subsistence use of GAAR were posed to GAAR recreationists.

Qualitative methods were employed to (1) identify recreationists’ initial and secondary judgments and justifications of

the issue; (2) classify respondents’ initial judgments within

moral, conventional, or personal social domains; and (3) analyze the coordination efforts between recreationists’ multiple and conflicting judgments and justifications.

The respondent group was composed of 24 males and 6

females ranging from 19 to 66 years of age with an average

age of 42. Seventy-six percent had received or were working

on four-year college degrees. Forty-six percent had attained

or were working on graduate or professional degrees. Fortyeight percent of respondents identified their homes as being

in urban areas, 30 percent in suburban areas, and 22 percent

in rural areas. Thirty-three percent of respondents were

from the contiguous United States east of the Rocky Mountains, 26 percent west of the Rocky Mountains, 22 percent

were from Alaska, and 18 percent from Europe. Ninetythree percent of respondents identified themselves as being

Caucasian. Respondents had been planning their trips to

GAAR for an average of 7.5 months.

Findings _______________________

Sixty-one percent of respondents were accepting of subsistence in GAAR and conceptualized the issue as moral.

Fourteen percent were not accepting of subsistence in GAAR

and also conceptualized the issue as moral. Justifications of

both positive and negative moral judgments referred to

concepts of justice (rights and fairness), welfare (of humans

and/or nature), and naturalism (perceived harmonious and

respectful relationship between subsistence user and nature). Twenty-five percent of respondents were accepting of

subsistence in GAAR and conceptualized the issue as

conventional.

A broad finding of this study is that respondents’ psychological structures associated with wilderness generally developed exclusively of psychological structures associated

with subsistence, and vice versa. In other words, there was

a lack of coordination between wilderness and subsistence

structures. These structures may have developed separately

because they were never before forced together through

experience.

While previous experience may have rarely done so, the

scenarios presented to respondents in interviews did simultaneously activate recreationists’ psychological structures

regarding wilderness and subsistence. Questions in the

interview forced respondents to reason about the issue of

subsistence use of GAAR Wilderness in a way that connects

these previously disconnected structures. Respondents’ attempts to reason about the hypothetical scenario resulted in

respondents maintaining multiple and conflicting judgments

in the interview. The high percentage of individual respondents who maintained conflicting judgments suggests the

existence of conflict, or cognitive disequilibrium, between

values associated with subsistence and values associated

with wilderness.

The psychological discomfort associated with states of

disequilibrium led respondents to attempt to resolve or coordinate their conflicting judgments. Respondents were identified as coordinating their judgments in ways that can be

described as overriding, contradictory, and contextual. Each

major coordination type and subtype, as well as their implications, are described below. In many cases, individuals

coordinated their conflicting judgments in multiple ways.

Judgment Coordinations

Overriding—In overriding coordinations, a moral judgment supporting subsistence trumped conflicting secondary

judgments supporting wilderness values. The 37 percent of

respondents classified in this category lacked a developed

moral understanding of wilderness values. This allowed the

well-established moral content and structure of respondents’ judgments supporting subsistence to override emerging, still tentative, and not as widely shared judgments

supporting wilderness values. For example, Doug, a 55-

year-old from New Jersey, stated that an interaction with

subsistence in GAAR would make his experience “less of a

wilderness experience, but in the kind of situations we are
92 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Dear Understanding Wilderness and Subsistence in Gates of the Arctic...

talking about its okay...that is part of the balancing of

interests that I’m prepared to accept and that I believe is

just.” The moral value Doug associates with subsistence,

what he “believes is just,” overrode values he associated

with wilderness experience. Doug’s judgment coordination,

as well as others in this category, may be explained by the

general acknowledgment that social justice moral schemas

are much stronger in society than wilderness/biocentric

ones. The lack of strength of wilderness values also may have

to do with the tendency of these subjects to frame wilderness

values as mostly grounded in self-interested references

relating to “wilderness experience”—an argument perceived

as much weaker than social justice as grounds for moral

justification.

The implication of this finding is that the subsistence

community, as well as land managers, can rely on a significant amount of support for subsistence use of GAAR. Overriding coordinations, however, foreclose any attempts at

integration between wilderness and subsistence values.

Recreationists’ support of subsistence, therefore, is at the

expense of wilderness values.

Contradictory—In contradictory coordinations, two contradictory judgments were simultaneously upheld. The 25

percent of respondents classified in this category conceptualized the issue of subsistence in wilderness as being conventional rather than moral. Psychologically structuring the

issue as conventional allowed these respondents to maintain

contradictory judgments because their final judgment ultimately depended upon the social norms of the area established by custom, laws, and regulations. This group of

recreationists does not need to be persuaded to accept

subsistence for any reason besides the fact that there is a law

allowing subsistence use of GAAR.

Contextual—In contextual coordinations, respondents’

judgments depended on the specific context, as specified by

them. Four major types were identified: ecological impact,

naturalism, race, and frequency of interaction. Each contextual coordination subtype, as well as its implications, is

detailed below.

Eighty-three percent of respondents’ support for subsistence use of GAAR was contingent upon subsistence users’

impact on what was perceived as the more important moral

value of ecological health. If subsistence was determined to

degrade the ecological health of the environment, then

subsistence would not be acceptable. For example, Eric, a 19-

year-old from England, claimed that he would support

subsistence “as long as the other concerns for the ecology of

the area...are being met.” If this category of respondents is

added to the 14 percent of respondents who were initially not

accepting of subsistence for reasons including ecological

impact, then nearly all (97 percent) respondents can be

understood to value ecological welfare when set in competition with justice, welfare, and naturalism values associated

with subsistence. The implication of this finding is that if

recreational and subsistence activities occur in the same

geographic area, and psychological conflict is to be kept at a

minimum, perceived environmental impact must be kept

low. The greater the perceived environmental impact, the

greater the difficulty of eventually integrating wilderness

and subsistence values.

Seventy percent of respondents made contextual coordinations referring to naturalism, or a perceived harmonious

and respectful relationship with nature. In such cases,

respondents supported subsistence; however, this support

was contingent upon subsistence users’ ability to exemplify

a harmonious and respectful relationship with nature.

Recreationists required that subsistence users conduct their

activities according to an environmental ethic that, in most

cases, was assumed to be part of the subsistence culture.

Recreationists’ support for subsistence was withdrawn if

this ethic was not perceived.

This pattern of support—and withdrawal of support—for

subsistence, depending on respondents’ perceptions of local

peoples’ relationships with nature, is characteristic of the

stereotype of the “ecologically noble savage” (Buege 1996).

This requirement of “authenticity,” Buege claims, is oppressive in that it forces Natives to conform to non-Native

conceptions of how they should live and relate to nature.

Very few respondents overtly acknowledged that the right to

self-determination—a prominent justification supporting

subsistence in the park—contradicts and could possibly

override the naturalistic reasoning pattern described above.

Respondents’ support of subsistence was also dependent

on race. Thirty-three percent of respondents were less likely

or unwilling to judge subsistence acceptable if the subsistence user was a non-Native. For example, Dave, a 47-yearold Hispanic from California, claimed that “if a non-Native

person...had the right to [subsist in the park] through...a

government permit or something like that then I would be

more adverse to that than if it was a person who through

family generations acquired that right.”

The ANILCA mandate “to provide the opportunity for

rural resident people engaged in a subsistence way of life to

continue to do so” (emphasis added) is a colorblind mandate

(Willis 1985). A significant portion of subsistence activities

in and around GAAR is undertaken by non-Native rural

residents. The condition of race described by this group of

respondents reveals a potential for increased conflict between recreational users and non-Native subsistence users

of GAAR.

Frequency of interaction was the final major type of

contextual coordination identified. Thirty percent of respondents claimed that their support for subsistence would

deteriorate with increased encounters with subsistence or

signs of subsistence activities. The implication of this finding is that conflict between recreation and subsistence users

of GAAR could be avoided by regulating recreational visitation to keep frequency of contact with subsistence low. If

high frequency of contact is unavoidable, stronger justifications supporting subsistence may be needed to minimize

conflict.

A less prominent, but interesting, contextual coordination

referred to a distinction between subsistence being acceptable in the park and subsistence being acceptable in respondents’ experience in the park. In other words, subsistence is

acceptable, but “Not In My Wilderness Experience” (NIMWE).

The enormous size of GAAR, coupled with the fact that

recreational and subsistence activities generally occur in

separate areas of the park, suggests that a large majority of

visitors to GAAR never see subsistence activity or signs of it.

These physical realities currently allow for the continuation
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 93

Dear Understanding Wilderness and Subsistence in Gates of the Arctic...

of NIMWE thinking. The finding that NIMWE thinking

was apparent in at least 17 percent of respondents suggests

that a partitioning of the park through a zoning scheme,

where recreationists would know that they have a lesser

chance of encountering subsistence, would be accepted and

appreciated by this segment of recreationists. The separation of users or perpetuation of NIMWE thinking would not,

however, contribute to a more adequate understanding of

the unresolved conflicts in recreationists’ understanding of

subsistence in GAAR. In other words, this practice would

avoid psychological and social conflict rather than attempting to resolve conflict.

Toward an Integrated

Understanding of Wilderness and

Subsistence Values______________

Respondents generally lacked the ability to coherently

reason about or understand subsistence use of GAAR.

Through the interview process, many respondents showed

signs that they were becoming aware of the inadequacy of

their understanding of the issue. This awareness of their

inadequacy of understanding, or state of disequilibrium, led

in this case to judgment coordination efforts. Such efforts

involved certain values being maintained at the expense of

other values. Disequilibrium may also instigate the development of new and more adequate psychological structures

that preserve the integrity of both values, but transform

their relationship from one of conflict to one of integration

under some superordinate concept (that is, hierarchical

integration).

The presence of disequilibrium, and the subsequent potential for hierarchical integration, represents an opportunity to move closer to the goal of reducing conflict between

wilderness and subsistence values in GAAR and other parks

and protected areas around the world. Left unmanaged,

recreationists’ personal experiences, such as actually encountering subsistence in GAAR or other parks, might

activate developmental processes or it might not; existing

biases and contradictions might prevail. Without presentation of balanced views regarding this issue, such as was

presented in interviews, exposure to subsistence in GAAR or

other “wild” areas may only reinforce and elaborate existing

conflicting understandings of wilderness and subsistence.

The opportunity for the National Park Service, or other

parties with a vested interest in the continued preservation

of the physical and cultural values inherent in GAAR, is to

facilitate the developmental process of creating new understandings of wilderness, subsistence, and their relationship

in the park. Recognizing that the active mental life of

visitors is critical in their experience is a first step in this

process.

Recreationists are not passive receptors easily molded by

pamphlet-style educational efforts. Recreationists’ response

to these or any other informational medium is determined

in large part by their existing ideas and schemas regarding

an issue. Their existing understanding is not idiosyncratically structured, but generally follows the various patterns

revealed in this study. Specifically, recreationists are inclined to identify and reason about conflicting moral ideas

involved in interactions between recreational and subsistence use of the park. In this sense, wilderness recreationists

are moral philosophers potentially seeking advanced forms of

reasoning.

Effective efforts to influence recreationists’ judgments

and actions regarding subsistence use of GAAR and other

parks and protected areas involves understanding and accounting for the deliberate, systematic, and philosophical

nature of recreationists’ thought. To the extent that managers can understand, work with, and employ methods that

more directly engage peoples’ psychological structures, the

more precise and sure they can be about the effects of

particular managerial interventions.

Understanding recreationists’ thought content and processes relating to subsistence are also relevant beyond

immediate management concerns. Such understanding can

add clarity to the current contentious discourse regarding

the idea of wilderness and its ability to appropriately address issues of past and present indigenous human cultures

on wild lands. In this regard, a structural developmental

approach to what has been termed by some, “The Great New

Wilderness Debate” (Callicott and Nelson 1998), may illustrate the disequilibrium many in the conservation philosophy community are experiencing. Such an approach may

also trace our psychological progress toward a more adequate and integrated understanding of wilderness, subsistence, and the human role in nature.

References _____________________

Buege, Douglas J. 1996. The ecologically noble savage revisited.

Environmental Ethics. 18(1): 71–88.

Callicott, J. Baird; Nelson, Michael P. 1998. The great new wilderness debate. Athens: University of Georgia Press. 712 p.

Ginsburg, Herbert; Opper, Sylvia. 1969. Piaget’s theory of intellectual development: an introduction. New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs.

272 p.

Kahn, Peter H., Jr. 1999. The human relationship with nature:

development and culture. Cambridge: The MIT Press. 295 p.

Turiel, Elliot. 1998. The development of morality. In: Damon, W., ed.

Handbook of child psychology. 5th ed., volume 3. New York: John

Wiley & Sons, Inc.: 863–932.

Turiel, Elliot; Hildebrandt, Carolyn; Wainryb, Cecilia. 1991. Judging social issues: difficulties, inconsistencies, and consistencies.

Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development.

56(2): 1–15.

U.S. Department of the Interior/National Park Service. 1986. Gates

of the Arctic National Park: general management plan, land

protection plan, and wilderness suitability review. Washington,

DC: USDI/NPS.

Willis, Frank. 1985. Doing things right the first time: the National

Park Service and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980. Washington, DC: USDI/NPS.
94 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Robert L. Arnberger is the Regional Director, Alaska Region, U.S. National

Park Service, 2525 Gambell Street, Room 107, Anchorage, AK 99503, U.S.A.

E-mail: rob_arnberger@nps.gov

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship to

protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress

symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc. RMRSP-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky

Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—With passage of the Alaska National Interest Lands

Conservation Act in 1980, a new vision of management of traditional

park values, of wildness and wilderness, was legislated where man

was viewed not as apart from nature, but rather a part of it. A new

challenge emerged for the National Park Service in Alaska and may

serve as a model for “reconnecting” indigenous people with park

lands and other wild lands of America. While not an agreed upon

national priority or right, “reconnection” efforts may be stimulated

through the observation of the successes in Alaska and equip the

next generation of administrators, legislators, and leaders with new

tools to engage the international debate over where man fits into the

landscape and how we are part of parks and wild places.

The Organic Act of 1916, which established the U.S.

National Park Service (NPS) to manage a national system of

parks and monuments, provided an early conceptual foundation of resource preservation coupled with visitor use. The

Antiquities Act of 1906 had already established an important set of mission values for national monuments defined as

“objects of historic and scientific interest,” but never mentioned use of the areas. Over the years, the “system of parks”

and the “national service” mandated to manage it has evolved,

matching society’s interest and emphasis on the continuing

evolution of protection of our national heritage.

Society’s view of what “wildness” is relative to “wilderness,” and what Homeland is relative to Wilderness, is also

evolving. More frequent than not, native cultures within the

“system of parks” were not seen by society as part of the

parks. Certainly, native cultures within our wilderness

units, which were to be “untrammeled by man,” were never

considered to be part of the landscape or had long been

displaced through military, legal, or economic actions. In

short, the preponderance of the body of law establishing

protected landscapes in America excluded native cultures

from these landscapes, viewing them, in most cases, as some

sort of “interesting artifact” of the land, necessitating removal or continued exclusion in order to avoid marring the

scenery. To quote the 1964 Wilderness Act, man now became

Living Cultures—Living Parks in Alaska:

Considering the Reconnection of Native

Peoples to Their Cultural Landscapes in

Parks and Protected Areas

Robert L. Arnberger

relegated to the status of a “visitor who does not remain,”

rather than a harmonious occupant of the land.

It was not until passage of the Alaska National Interest

Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) in 1980 that an alternative management model for protected landscapes was prescribed. The new Alaska park lands created by this environmental legislative milestone are clearly an experiment on a

grand scale. The 10 new National Parks, preserves, and

monuments, including additions to three prior existing park

areas, are the largest, most diverse, and most outstanding

park lands yet put into the American park system. Congress

also mandated that traditional uses would be coupled with

resource preservation and traditional National Park values.

A new vision of management of traditional park values, of

wildness and wilderness, was legislated where man was

viewed not as apart from nature, but rather a part of it. It

was a view that did not separate man from the land, but

rather, joined man’s traditional activities with the land. The

law also made it clear that park and preserve protection was

not meant exclusively for natural and cultural resources—

it was extended to people, their lifestyles, and intangible

associations with the land.

A new challenge emerged for the NPS in Alaska: preserve

the land and its resources while allowing for the subsistence

harvest of wild resources, which will in turn help to preserve

the cultural values of the people using the land. Title VIII of

the Act makes it clear that the opportunity for those who

traditionally have used these areas for subsistence purposes

will continue to do so and that such use will be the priority

consumptive use whenever restrictions on use are necessary. The opportunity for those who live in rural Alaska and

depend on the land to maintain their subsistence lifestyle

was recognized as a major value of these new park areas.

While traditional park values were not to be compromised,

for the first time a congressional mandate for managing

National Park areas recognized the continuum that exists

where people and their uses of the landscape are concerned.

Congress recognized that to artificially disrupt this continuum would, in fact, critically alter the very values most

worth preserving in these areas. Congress also recognized

the importance of maintaining unimpaired ecosystems and

natural and healthy populations of fish and wildlife as a

primary requirement to assure the opportunity for continued

traditional uses. Consumptive uses, including traditional

means of access for subsistence purposes and travel between

villages, may continue. It was a view that consumptive

resource use by humans could harmonize with the landscape as long as ecosystems continued in a natural and

healthy state.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2002 95

Arnberger Living Cultures—Living Parks in Alaska: Considering the Reconnection of Native Peoples...

Importantly, the Act did not distinguish between native

indigenous peoples and other rural peoples. However, rural

demographics in many areas are almost exclusively native

Alaskan peoples. How does this “great experiment” in Alaska

serve as a model for “reconnecting” indigenous people with

park lands and other wild lands of America? While most

Alaska Natives, by luck or an accident of history, were never

forcibly evicted as they were elsewhere, indigenous peoples,

by most measures, are not afforded this connection to most

park landscapes in the rest of the country. Their “reconnection”

is certainly not an agreed upon national priority or right.

The historical record is generally one of eviction and culture

devaluation, rather than one of connection and valuation.

The public debate can be polarized and intense, promising

no easy answers. This is an issue fraught with political,

economic, social, and legal challenges. The NPS finds itself

placed squarely in the middle of a complex social debate. It

will present land managers with some of the most important

emerging land management issues of the future.

Is the collection of eaglets in Wupatki National Monument

by the Hopi Indians for religious purposes problematic?

When the Mickosuki Indians create and improve a settlement in Everglades National Park, are there contentious

issues? When the Timbisha in Death Valley National Park

demanded the return of a homeland within the park, did

they threaten traditional park values? When the Hualapai

of the Grand Canyon asserted jurisdiction over NPS lands

within Grand Canyon National Park, did it challenge administrators? Did each of these examples create complex

legal and policy challenges? Yes, of course they did, including challenging the capacity of NPS administrators to find

constructive resolution approaches because of an extremely

limited “toolbox” of law and policy alternatives. Because of

these challenges, do we refuse to engage potential solutions

and deny cultural connections to homelands that existed

before parks were established, or cultural practices that

predate modern man? Do we relegate “living cultures” to the

junk pile of “extinct cultures” because we choose not to

engage the issue and look for possible resolutions? No, of

course not—nor is anyone proposing that. Do we exercise

care and deliberation, understanding each case, each people,

each issue, and understanding that each resolution (if there

is one) may be similar but always different? The affirmative

answers are self-evident because these peoples already

stand upon our doorstep, knocking on the door of many of our

National Parks across the nation, demanding back something they have lost.

While the record is still evolving, it is clear that the

Alaskan experiment establishes a precedent for study and

comparison. Alaskans are assured of continued legal, cultural, and subsistence connections to the landscape. Our

national conversation about man in wilderness and native

homeland versus untrammeled Wilderness has been broadened and deepened. That is why ANILCA holds so much

promise. Alaska is serving as a laboratory of how indigenous

peoples and their cultures remain and are joined with the

landscape—inseparable from it. They are a deeply held and

important component of what parks and wild places are.

They are not just a collateral value. In fact, the culture joined

with the land is one and the same value. This model will be

needed as the NPS struggles throughout our park system,

engaging native peoples and their “reconnection” to the

landscapes protected in these units, but frequently lost as

traditional cultural landscapes.

Just as America presented the world with the first Wilderness Act in 1964, perhaps ANILCA can help redefine all

peoples’ relationship with the land throughout America and

perhaps the rest of the world. It may be that the Alaska

model equips the next generation of administrators, legislators, and leaders with new tools to engage the international

debate over where man fits into the landscape and how they

are part of parks and wild places. It may be that the wisdom

legislated in Alaska, and the generational struggle to make

the law work, will mature a society to honor the fact that man

has always been part of the land. Because we evolved from

the land, the land has always been with man. He has carried

it with him during the long march through time. The land is

not only in his DNA, but also in his heart and his spirit. If

man is to succeed in this endeavor of living on the land, then

he cannot be separated from it.

Additional Sources ______________

Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act. 1980. PL 96-487.

16 USC: 3101–3233.

American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA). 42 USC 1996-

1996a. PL 95-341, 103-344.

Antiquities Act. 1906. 16 USC 431–433. June 8, 1906, ch. 3060, 34

Stat. 225.

Arnberger, Robert. 2001. Living cultures: living parks. Issue paper

presented to the National Park System Advisory Board, March

2001.

Brown, Bill. 2001. Overview of subsistence in Alaska. Issue paper

presented to the George Wright Society, April 19, 2001.

National Park Service Organic Act. 16 USC 1-4; August 25, 1916, ch.

408,39 Stat. 535.

National Park System General Authorities Act. 16 USC 1a-1 et seq,

PL 91-383, 94-458, 95-250.

National Park System Advisory Board Report 2001. Rethinking the

National Parks for the 21st century. July 2001.

Shaver, C. Mack. [n.d.]. Traditional National Park values and living

cultural parks: seemingly conflicting management demands coexisting in Alaska’s new National Parkland. George Wright

Society Journal.

Wilderness Act 1964. 16 USC 1131-1136. PL 88-577.

97

3. Wilderness: Systems and

Approaches to Protection

Viewing wildlife in the Shamwari

Game Reserve (photo by Alan

Watson).

USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 99

A. Schoon is the National President of the Mountain Club of South Africa,

97 Hatfield Street, Cape Town, South Africa 8001, phone: 27-21-465 3412,

FAX: 27-21-461 8456, E-mail: andre@liebstan.co.za. M. Shroyer is MCSA

Convenor of the National Environment Subcommittee, E-mail:

shroyer@iafrica.com. F. Hunziker is the MCSA National Honorary Secretary,

E-mail: hunziker@mweb.co.za

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship to

protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress

symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc. RMRSP-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky

Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—The Mountain Club of South Africa (MCSA) is a nongovernment organization (NGO) with objectives relating to the

enjoyment and conservation of local mountain areas. It is a

national federal body comprising 13 autonomous sections distributed throughout South Africa, with a national central committee

coordinating the Club’s national operation. Key activities include

mountaineering and rock climbing, search and rescue, securing

access to mountains, conservation, and outreach. The MCSA has

good linkages with national bodies such as the International

Mountaineering and Climbing Federation (UIAA) Access and Conservation and Mountain Protection Commissions. The MCSA’s

involvement in conservation of the mountain environment includes

the following initiatives:

• Watchdog function in terms of development proposals and

land-use changes in mountain areas in South Africa.

• Environmental Management Plans for Club properties to protect the wilderness qualities of properties and to educate

members regarding environmentally friendly behavior in

mountains.

• Environmental Management Systems (according to ISO 14001

EMS guidelines) for sport climbing and mountaineering in the

Cape Peninsula National Park, and ongoing conservation

efforts to clear invasive alien vegetation and protea atlassing.

• Public participation regarding local, regional, and national

environmental issues potentially affecting mountains and related communities.

The MCSA strongly supports initiatives to preserve mountain

wilderness areas.

Introduction ____________________

The Western Cape Province of South Africa is blessed with

great natural beauty. The rugged Cape Fold Mountains are

attractive and impressive by any standards. It is perhaps

not surprising, therefore, that shortly before the turn of the

20th century, some of the region’s like-minded inhabitants,

who displayed a natural desire to explore this mountain

An NGO’s Contribution to Mountain

Conservation in South Africa

A. Schoon

M. Shroyer

F. Hunziker

environment, decided to vest their activities with some

degree of formality, and formed the Mountain Club of South

Africa (MCSA). This occurred in 1891, and it is interesting

to note that the formation of the MCSA took place at much

the same time as other European mountaineering clubs, as

the same needs were being experienced elsewhere. The

MCSA is in fact one of the oldest mountaineering clubs in the

world.

Today the MCSA’s membership has grown to over 4,000

members in 13 autonomous sections countrywide, with the

largest concentration of members in the Western Cape. The

Club operates as a federal body with a central organization

looking after its national and international interests. Due to

its modest size, the Club makes use of only very limited

professional help and relies largely on voluntary input from

its members for its operation.

A fine distinction is drawn insofar as the MCSA is a

“mountain club” rather than purely a “mountaineering club.”

This broadens the perspective, allowing the Club to participate in most things to do with mountains. While mountaineering and climbing are, and always have been, the Club’s

core interests, it also participates in many other mountainrelated activities.

The objective of this paper is to briefly summarize the

MCSA’s range of activities, to describe its involvement in

activities concerning conservation of the mountain environments in South Africa in greater detail, and to highlight

some typical issues that are relevant to them.

International Involvement_________

Like many other sporting bodies, the MCSA experienced

a degree of isolation during the apartheid era, manifested in

the difficulties experienced when climbing overseas, particularly in the greater ranges such as the Himalaya and

Karakoram. There was also very limited contact with other

mountaineering federations, and the MCSA “missed out” on

very significant steps in the development of mountaineering

and climbing that occurred at the time.

That changed quite dramatically in the early 1990s when

the Royal Dutch Alpine Club and the British Mountaineering Council put the MCSA forward for membership in the

World Mountaineering and Climbing Federation (UIAA)

and the MCSA was elected to that body.

With its UIAA membership and the changes that took

place in South Africa’s political fortunes, the international

mountaineering community has gone out of its way to welcome the MCSA back into its ranks. In terms of mountaineering and climbing, this has been of immense benefit to the

MCSA due to the opportunities that have been made
100 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Schoon, Shroyer, and Hunziker An NGO’s Contribution to Mountain Conservation in South Africa

available to its members. But a further benefit, which was

perhaps not at first evident, has been the benefit derived in

terms of the contact, information, and advice available

through working with the UIAA’s Commissions, which address specialized fields such as expeditions, training, medical matters, youth, and safety, among others. The MCSA is

presently one of only two mountaineering federations on the

African Continent that are members of the UIAA.

Activities of the MCSA ___________

To give an overview of the full spectrum of activities in

which the MCSA is involved, all its key activities are described here. These are expanded only where relevant to the

objective of this paper.

Mountaineering and Climbing

The MCSA has a proud record of mountaineering achievements from expeditions made to mountain ranges outside

South Africa’s borders. These include many important ascents of mountains in ranges on the African, North and

South American, and Asian Continents and elsewhere.

Mountain Club of South Africa members have also extensively explored the mountains of the many ranges inside

South Africa, where Club members have made most first

ascents of the mountains considered to be of major importance. Individual MCSA sections organize frequent Club

meets that vary in nature and difficulty from simple hikes to

scrambling and kloofing (canyoning). The MCSA’s KwaZuluNatal Section has organized an annual July (winter) Camp

at various locations in the Drakensberg for the past 80 years.

Other MCSA national meets also provide opportunities for

members from sections around the country to climb and hike

together. Besides all these organized meets, members organize many more of their own private excursions.

South Africa offers some of the best rock-climbing opportunities to be found anywhere in the world, and both traditional and sport climbing are major activities of MCSA

sections. In traditional rock climbing (generally on longer

multipitch routes), the leader and other members of the

climbing party are protected by clipping the climbing rope

into temporary protection (in the form of slings, chocks, and

camming devices called “friends”) placed over rock projections and in suitable cracks as the climbers proceed, with all

of this equipment being removed when no longer required.

In sport climbing, the routes are generally shorter and

steeper, and protection is afforded by clipping the climbing

rope into permanent preplaced anchors drilled into the rock.

Unique access and environmental issues relating to sport

climbing are addressed elsewhere in this paper.

Whereas mountaineering and climbing are essentially

noncompetitive recreational activities, one of the more recent responsibilities that has evolved from the MCSA’s

membership of the UIAA is the promotion of competition

climbing in South Africa. Climbing competitions are held on

artificial (often indoor) climbing walls, and results are judged

according to the difficulty of the preset routes and the

competitors’ achievements climbing them. A national ranking is established, enabling South African climbers to compete in international competitions.

Search and Rescue

In conjunction with other government bodies (such as the

police or air force) and the statutory emergency services, the

MCSA has over many years offered a highly effective voluntary mountain search and rescue service to provide assistance to hikers and climbers who get lost or suffer accidents

in the mountains.

Training and Development

The MCSA recognizes the importance of safety in mountaineering and climbing and has over the years provided

training in mountain leadership and in mountaineering and

climbing skills, both for its own members and for nonmembers. More recently it has taken the initiative in forming the

South African Mountaineering Development and Training

Trust (MDT), of which it is the chief patron, to formulate and

apply training standards. The MDT is now recognized both by

the Government and by the tourism industry as the relevant

authority in this field. MDT standards are fully documented

and are in the process of being incorporated into the standards set by the Government’s qualification authority.

The MCSA subscribes to the UIAA ethic contained in its

“International Year of the Mountains 2002 Summit Charter” (UIAA Summit Charter 2002) that everyone should be

free to enjoy the natural mountain environment and that

mountaineering and climbing contribute to the human spirit

and to human endeavor, as freedom sports with human and

social values. Therefore, it is aware of the importance of

providing opportunity to previously disadvantaged communities to use and enjoy South Africa’s mountain environment

in a safe and responsible manner. In order to introduce

members of these communities to the mountain environment and to convey a message to them regarding the safety

and responsibility aspects relating to going into the mountains, as well as the importance of protecting mountains, the

larger MCSA sections operate outreach programs.

Access and Conservation

Probably the single most critical element determining the

well-being of our Club’s mountaineering and climbing activities in South Africa is the question of maintaining access to

the mountains and to other climbing areas (such as river and

roadside crags or sea cliffs). Both at sectional and national

levels, enormous effort is put into ensuring that existing

MCSA access arrangements are maintained and, where

necessary, new ones are negotiated. The MCSA has over the

years both negotiated access servitudes with landowners

and purchased key properties to provide a guarantee of

access in perpetuity, particularly in important mountain

areas.

Mountaineering federations around the world report similar experiences in this regard, continually having to monitor

and, where necessary, take action to preserve their members’ access to mountains and climbing crags. Access is

inextricably linked to conservation of the mountain environment, and the MCSA clearly recognizes this when dealing

with access issues. In an effort to assist its member federations, through the dissemination of information on access
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 101

Schoon, Shroyer, and Hunziker An NGO’s Contribution to Mountain Conservation in South Africa

and conservation issues, the UIAA through its Access and

Conservation Commission is compiling information from

around the world on the current situation regarding access

to mountains and climbing crags. This includes the legal

status pertaining to access (and liability of the landowner)

and particular access difficulties that exist, as well as the

principal conservation issues affecting access. The MCSA

has already contributed information to the Commission in

the form of a State of the Nation Report (Shroyer 2001a)

setting out the status in South Africa in this connection.

In order to retain the wilderness character of the mountain properties that it has purchased, the Club has adopted

a policy restricting the construction of permanent shelters

(mountain huts), encouraging its members to camp instead,

making use of tents where necessary. Both on those few

properties where shelters have been constructed and on

properties without any such “improvements,” the MCSA

strives to apply the same environmental principles that it

would expect others to apply on similar land elsewhere.

In the case of the Club’s largest section in Cape Town, a

detailed land management plan for the Club’s properties is

in the process of being drafted and implemented, and it is

intended that the same provision will ultimately be applied

to all the Club’s properties.

The MCSA endeavors to become involved as an interested

and affected party for any development proposal in mountain areas. Where practically feasible in terms of its resources, it adopts a monitoring role on all forms of proposed

development that may pose a threat to the mountain environment, from proposed projects like the Witterivier and

Visgat Dams in the Western Cape, to the Mnweni cableway

in the KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg, to major development

plans in the Magaliesberg. In the case of the Table Mountain

cableway upgrade, the MCSA played a proactive role in the

public participation process.

In terms of one of its prime objectives, the Club strives to

initiate and support actions toward preserving and protecting the natural beauty and wilderness character of the

mountains and toward promoting their effective conservation management. The MCSA’s specific goals in this regard

are to:

• Prevent pollution of mountain environments.

• Maintain biodiversity of mountain ecosystems.

• Promote the sustainable use of resources.

• Support integrated environmental management procedures for development proposals or changes in land use

in mountain environments (this includes environmental impact assessments and public participation).

• Motivate its own members and the public to conduct all

activities in the mountains in an environmentally responsible way.

• Promote open communication on environmental issues

within the MCSA and, where appropriate, between the

MCSA and other parties.

The MCSA has adopted and strives to apply the UIAA’s

Environmental Guidelines (2002) in its various activities

and actions. Club members serve as Corresponding Members

on the Mountain Protection and Access and Conservation

Commissions of the UIAA.

The MCSA places a high importance on the conservation

of South Africa’s mountain heritage. The Club’s Cape Town

Section initiated an active program for the removal of

invasive alien plant species in 1945 and has ever since

steadfastly continued its work, more recently joined by other

younger sections in this conservation effort. Club members

frequenting remote mountain areas have contributed significant effort to the recent Protea Atlassing Project in the

country.

Potential for Change in the

Mountain Environment ________

Increase in Number of Users

The number of people going into the mountains in South

Africa is likely to rise dramatically. Although our mountains

are presently not heavily used, they will become more so. An

extreme example is the use of the Western Table on Table

Mountain where tourist traffic has increased in a very short

space of time. We should learn from other nations’ experience how to manage these problems, although some of them

are certainly unique to our situation.

One factor that may be unique to our situation is the likely

transition in a large section of our country’s population over

a period of time from a survival lifestyle to one where people

are relatively better off and will have the inclination and

means to participate more in recreational activities.

The MCSA believes that education will be an important

consideration in dealing with this increased interest. It is

important that people appreciate and understand the mountain environment, learning to conserve it, as well as how to

use it and enjoy it responsibly and safely. These are fundamental issues that the MCSA is already trying to address

through its outreach programs and will hopefully, in the

future, be able to address through the proposed development

side of the MDT.

Invasive Alien Plants

The effects of the invasion of alien plant species have had

a significant impact on native vegetation on some of South

Africa’s mountains. Members of our Club possibly appreciate more than others the extent of this problem, because

they see first hand how these alien infestations are taking

hold in some of our remotest areas. While the MCSA and a

few other concerned parties have for many years operated

plant conservation programs, actively participating in the

eradication of alien plants in mountain environments, it is

gratifying that there is now national recognition of the

threat posed by alien vegetation in our water catchment

areas, and very encouraging that a concerted effort is being

made to commence redressing this problem.

With the limited resources that are available, it is going

to take a huge effort to make this project a success. It is

important that available energies are used to best effect,

and we should ensure that expert knowledge available in

bodies like the MCSA is put to best use. Too often we have

seen a lot of time, effort, and money put into clearing

projects, which have been wasted through incorrect techniques being applied.
102 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Schoon, Shroyer, and Hunziker An NGO’s Contribution to Mountain Conservation in South Africa

Developmental Impacts

Various forms of development have made a significant

impact on the mountain environment. For example, there is

a proliferation of communication structures in our mountains. In themselves, these structures may have more of an

aesthetic impact than anything else, but in cases where

roads have been constructed to give access to the sites to

facilitate building and maintaining the structures, there has

often been severe environmental degradation. An example

where this has happened is on Ben Heatlie, near Worcester,

where an access road more than 20 km (12.4 miles) long has

been built in extremely fragile terrain. The MCSA is running

a project to compile information on existing communication

sites in sensitive mountain environments to try to apply

pressure to limit further degradation. Fortunately, new

environmental legislation is now in place to ensure that new

structures of this nature may be erected and other forms of

development undertaken only after a proper environmental

impact assessment has been done. But, it is still necessary

to keep one’s eyes open to see that the legislation is enforced.

Impacts of Users

An emotive issue relating to sport climbing (a comparatively recent development in rock climbing that has increased immensely in popularity throughout the world over

a very short time) is the fact that sport climbing relies on the

placement of fixed protection on the climbs in the form of

anchor bolts drilled and glued into the rock. However, this is

in fact a relatively insignificant impact in relation to the

impact of access. Because most sport climbing areas are

quite concentrated, with many climbing routes in a small

area, the impact on the vegetation caused by the climbers

moving between the routes and reaching the climbing area

can be far more serious.

In the 1990s, European climbing federations experienced

major problems with access to some of their climbing areas

(specifically sport climbing areas) being completely closed

down due to public pressure exerted on environmental

grounds, partly for the reasons already set out here, but also

due to possible disturbance of nesting birds, such as peregrine falcons. Largely from concerted efforts made by the

German Alpine Club (DAV) and the Swiss Alpine Club

(CAS), many of these constraints have now been removed.

Dialogue was initiated by these federations involving all

parties concerned so that the climbers’ aspirations and

needs and the environmental groups’ concerns could all be

heard and understood, and so that management plans appropriate for each particular area could be worked out and

agreed upon.

This successful process resulted in an informative joint

UIAA/World Conservation Union (IUCN) seminar held in

Barcelona in 1998, following which valuable guidelines

entitled “Access and Conservation Strategies for Climbing

Areas” were published by the UIAA’s Access and Conservation Working Group (UIAA/IUCN 2001).

Building on this experience and the information flowing

from it, the sport-climbing community, supported by the

MCSA, developed a management plan for sport climbing in

the Cape Peninsula National Park (CPNP) that has now

been accepted by South African National Parks and is being

implemented via a Sport Climbing Working Group. It has

been a very successful initiative and one that sets new

standards for recreation management in protected areas.

The MCSA is in the process of drafting proposals for a

similar management plan for mountaineering in the Cape

Peninsula National Park.

Challenges Regarding Wilderness

Management ___________________

There are very few wilderness areas set aside in South

Africa, particularly when we consider mountainous wilderness areas. The mountain wilderness areas that we do have

and that are afforded an enhanced conservation status must

be recognized as being extremely precious, and we should all

do our utmost to ensure that these areas are preserved in a

pristine condition for future generations.

There are other mountain areas that deserve recognition

as wilderness areas too but that are not afforded any special

conservation status. Such areas, together with their present

form of ownership and conservation status, need to be

defined and means sought to afford them with an enhanced

conservation status before the window of opportunity is lost.

To promote a better understanding of the present conservation status of mountains in South Africa, the MCSA,

together with the World Wide Fund for Nature—South

Africa (WWF-SA), sponsored a research project conducted

by Shroyer (2001b) entitled “Establishing the Status of

Mountain Conservation in South Africa.” The purpose of the

research was:

• To provide an overview of the major mountain ranges in

South Africa and their conservation status.

• To provide information about mountain communities

living in them.

• To provide a brief analysis of the policies, legislation,

and other “social contracts” affecting their conservation

status.

• To highlight some of the key threats to mountain wilderness in South Africa.

Opportunities___________________

The year 2002 offers South Africa a great opportunity to

focus its peoples’ attention on mountains through the United

Nation’s International Year of the Mountains (IYM 2002).

The MCSA recognized this opportunity and lobbied the

Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Mr. Valli

Moosa, and his department at Central Government to set up

a national IYM 2002 Committee to support and coordinate

the country’s efforts to make this event a big success, an

action that the Government has already set in motion.

The MCSA will be liaising closely with this IYM 2002

Committee to promote a number of important national

events that will take place during 2002. These will include

the declaration of Mountain Protection Days over the weekend of September 14–15, when it is hoped that countrywide

mountain conservation projects will be publicized nationally in the printed media and on television, as well as a
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 103

Schoon, Shroyer, and Hunziker An NGO’s Contribution to Mountain Conservation in South Africa

conference focusing on the KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg

Mountains, with the specific objective of contributing to the

Protected Area and Parks Conference to be held in Durban

in 2003. The Drakensberg conference, which will be supported by the UIAA as one of its international IYM 2002

projects, has exciting potential in view of the recent developments in the KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg—the declaration

of the Drakensberg as a World Heritage Site and the formation of the Maluti-Drakensberg Transfrontier Conservation

Area.

In addition to the contribution that it will make on these

projects, the MCSA is planning various other national events

to celebrate IYM 2002, the most important of which will be:

• The publication of a book on the history of mountaineering in South Africa.

• Application made to the Post Office for a commemorative stamp issue in South Africa focusing specifically on

mountains.

• The production of an educational video on the mountains of South Africa, emphasizing their importance

and the need to conserve them,

• Through partnerships with organizations like Working

for Water and Ukuvuka Firestop, undertaking special

IYM 2002 projects (such as the high altitude clearing of

alien vegetation) to publicize work done toward conserving mountains.

• The expansion of the Banff Festival of Mountain Films

to a major national event in South Africa.

Conclusions____________________

The MCSA, although a relatively small mountaineering

federation, endeavors to play a role in the conservation of the

mountains of South Africa, and this paper outlines the

actions it is taking in regard to some of the issues involved.

Membership of the UIAA, the World Mountaineering

and Climbing Federation, has provided useful guidance in

helping the MCSA to resolve some of the conservation issues

it has faced. Many of the problems in South Africa are not

unique and have been thought about and often successfully

addressed by our international friends. We should draw on

this experience where appropriate and use the support that

they are willing to give us.

Similarly, organizations like the MCSA should strengthen

partnerships with other NGOs to achieve common goals

relating to mountain conservation.

More work is needed, particularly with regard to defining

and taking action where mountain areas should be recognized as wilderness areas and afforded enhanced conservation status. The International Year of the Mountains 2002

affords South Africa a great opportunity to highlight the

importance of South Africa’s mountains and the need to

conserve them.

References _____________________

Shroyer, Maretha. 2001a. Mountain Club South Africa—a state of

the Nations report to the UIAA Access and Environment Commission, Mountains: the access and conservation situation in

South Africa. Unpublished paper on file at: MCSA Library, Cape

Town. [Online]. Available: http://www.mcsa.org.za (2002 August).

Shroyer, Maretha. 2001b. Establishing the status of mountain

conservation in South Africa—a research report for World Wide

Fund for Nature—South Africa and the Mountain Club of South

Africa. Project no: ZA 1232.

UIAA Environmental Guidelines. 2002. The International Mountaineering and Climbing Federation. [Online]. Available: http://

www.uiaa.ch/iym/

UIAA Summit Charter. 2002. Year of the mountains 2002: proposals for collaboration in relation to the International Year of

Mountains 2002. Union Internationale des Associations

d’alpinisme/The International Mountaineering and Climbing

Federation. [Online]. Available: http://www.uiaa.ch/iym/

UIAA/IUCN. 2001. Access and conservation strategies for climbing

areas. [Online]. Available: http://www.uiaa.ch/commissions/

other.asp?idobject=85
104 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Paul Mitchell-Banks, Ph.D., has now resigned as the Muskwa-Kechika

Program Manager—as such, this paper reflects his own opinions and not

necessarily those of the government. He is the owner of Central Coast

Consulting, 5839 Cree Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, V5W 2V8,

Canada. Phone: 1-604-322-1335, FAX: 1-604-322-1353, E-mail: pmbanks@

interchange.ubc.ca

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—The Muskwa-Kechika Management Area (M-KMA)

encompasses more than 6.3 million ha (24,324 miles2) of the

Northern Rockies and Great Plains in northeastern British Columbia. The M-KMA is one of the most significant wilderness

areas in North America, with extensive forests, spectacular geological formations, lakes, rivers, waterfalls, hot springs, subalpine

and alpine areas, and major wetlands. It is home to a huge variety

of wilderness and wildlife—much of the wilderness is ecologically

sensitive and some of the wildlife is threatened or endangered. The

M-KMA encompasses large oil and gas reserves, and the energy

sector is a major employer in the area. The central and western

areas of the M-KMA are high in metallic and nonmetallic resources. Exploration projects have been established, and there is

small-scale mining of sand and gravel. Portions of the M-KMA

have high timber values, with over 40 percent of the Fort Nelson

(one of British Columbia’s most northerly communities) economy

being driven by the forest sector.

The management model at M-KMA is intended to establish a

world standard for environmental and economic stability. The

management intent of the M-KMA is to maintain in perpetuity the

wilderness values, the diversity and abundance of wildlife, and the

ecosystems on which it depends. There is significant ongoing research, inventory, planning, enforcement, education, and extension

funded by a trust fund that can annually award up to $3 million to

supplement government base funding in the area. Projects are

awarded to government agencies, First Nations, nongovernmental

organizations (NGOs) and the private sector to undertake work

directly related to the M-KMA.

This paper will address the challenges of protecting and sustaining wilderness values in the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area

while also attempting to manage multiple natural resource uses

(trapping, hunting, oil and gas, mineral extraction, timber extraction, ecotourism, recreation, and so forth). Additional challenges

stem from the commodity-based nature of the extractive industries

within a global market and the uncertainties with respect to First

Nations rights and claims. The paper will lay out the history of the

M-KMA, review management challenges, and address five lessons

learned that could apply to other such areas.

Protecting and Sustaining Wilderness

Values in the Muskwa-Kechika Management

Area

Paul J. Mitchell-Banks

History ________________________

The Muskwa-Kechika Management Area (M-KMA) can

be considered a “child” of three Land and Resource Management Plans (LRMPs), which are large regionally based

planning processes that involve multiple stakeholder participation in drawing up a plan that attempts to address the

interests of all. The LRMPs can take from 3 to 7 years and

involve multiple roundtable meetings that are facilitated

and at which all participants are given voice. The three

LRMPs and their completion dates related to the MuskwaKechika Management Area were the Fort Nelson LRMP

covering 9.8 million ha (37,838 miles2

) (October 1997); the

Fort St. John LRMP covering 4.6 million ha (17,761 miles2)

(October 1997); and the Mackenzie LRMP covering 6.4

million ha (24,710 miles2

) (November 2000). Each of these

three LRMP processes essentially carved out an area of

special significance that was, in turn, amalgamated to create the M-KMA (Land Use Coordination Office, Province of

British Columbia 1997a, 1997b, 2000).

The 6.3 million-ha (24,324-miles2

) Muskwa-Kechika Management Area is unique within Canada and, indeed, the

world. It is an area of incredible beauty that has been

inhabited by First Nations for millennia and has been the

home, workplace, and recreational area for local residents

and international visitors for over a century. The M-KMA is:

...one of the few remaining large, intact and almost unroaded

wilderness areas south of the 60th parallel. It supports a

diverse number of large mammals including moose, elk, mule

deer, whitetail deer, caribou, plains bison, mountain sheep,

mountain goat, wolves, black bears and grizzly bears in

population densities of global importance. Few places in the

world match the natural features of the Muskwa-Kechika

Management Area in terms of species groupings, remoteness

and minimal development. The area is also well endowed

with rich energy and mineral resources. In general, oil and

gas reserves dominate the eastern portion of the area while a

variety of metallic and non-metallic resources can be found in

the central and western portions of the area. Valuable timber

resources are also present in the southern portion of the area

(Land Use Coordination Office, Province of British Columbia

1997b).

The 1997 Muskwa-Kechika Management Plan sets out

some ambitious objectives to address the unique beauty,

biodiversity, cultural importance, and resource wealth within

the M-KMA, specifying that:

The management intent for the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area is to ensure wilderness characteristics, wildlife, and its habitat are maintained over time while allowing

resource development and use, including recreation, hunting, timber harvesting, mineral exploration and mining, oil

and gas exploration and development. The integration of
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 105

Protecting and Sustaining Wilderness Values in the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area Mitchell-Banks

management activities especially related to the planning,

development and management of road accesses within the

Muskwa-Kechika Management Area is central to achieving

this intent. The long-term objective is to return lands to

their natural state, as much as possible, as development

activities are completed (Land Use Coordination Office,

Province of British Columbia 1997b).

Legislation

Arguably the roots of the M-KMA lie within the three

approved Land and Resource Management Plans. Specifically, however, it was a 1997 Order-in-Council (where ministers in the cabinet approve a decision without going to the

legislature) that established the Muskwa-Kechika Management Plan (Land Use Coordination Office, Province of British Columbia 1997c).

The following year, the government passed Bill 37-1998,

the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area Act, that directly

addressed the specifics of the Management Area and Plan,

provided for the establishment of the Muskwa-Kechika

Advisory Board (a public advisory group) and the MuskwaKechika Trust Fund, and some general issues such as the

power to make regulations. Both the Muskwa-Kechika

Management Plan and the Muskwa-Kechika Management

Act address the five required planning processes that are

required to be undertaken with the area: (1) Recreation

Management Plan, (2) Wildlife Management Plan, (3) Oil

and Gas Pre-tenure Plans, (4) Parks Management Plans,

and (5) Landscape Unit Objectives (for forestry planning).

What was unique about these plans was the requirement

for multiministry signoff, which was to assist in ensuring

that planning was coordinated and addressed a broad

range of issues and not necessarily just those of one ministry. With the new government, this has been scrapped, and

now the plans are signed off by single ministries, with the

Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management deemed to

be a “neutral” ministry and responsible for Recreation, Oil

and Gas, and Landscape Unit Objective Planning. The

Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection is responsible

for Wildlife and Parks planning.

Another innovative aspect of the planning is the excellent

working relationship between the local government managers who are the statutory decisionmakers. There is a teamlike

arrangement, in which the managers not only focus on their

own mandates but also work closely with each other to avoid

duplication, conflicting programs, and uncertainty. The government managers and staff also have established close

working arrangements with the M-K Advisory Board as a

whole and certain board members who are active participants in various planning processes. While board participation does not replace public participation, it does provide a

greater level of comfort that a wide range of values are being

addressed.

Muskwa-Kechika Advisory Board

The Muskwa-Kechika Advisory Board is appointed by the

Premier of British Columbia Province. Its role is to provide

advice on the natural resource management in the M-K

Management Area and to identify suitable projects and

proposals consistent with the purposes of the trust to receive

Trust funding (Minister of Environment, Lands and Parks

1998).

The board was originally established with up to 17 members to represent a broad range of interests, including but

not limited to, First Nations, environmental, business, labor, and Fort Nelson and Fort St. John Land and Resource

Management Plan participants. The current board is slightly

larger, including the acting chair, seven First Nations representatives, three local government representatives,

two members from the Oil and Gas sector, one mining sector

representative, a forestry representative, one labor representative, two environmental representatives, one trapper

guide member, a member of the British Columbia Wildlife

Federation, a backcountry tourism representative, and the

Muskwa-Kechika Program Manager (ex-officio position).

Over the past year, the Strategic Plan and Policy and

Procedures Manual for the Board has been approved, and

there has been a concerted effort to increase the levels of

awareness regarding ongoing issues and concerns. MuskwaKechika Advisory Board meetings are held a minimum of

three times a year, with at least one of the meetings being

held deep within the M-KMA to help orient the board

members to the issues and to increase their awareness about

the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area.

Muskwa-Kechika Trust Fund

One of the unique legislative features behind establishing

the M-KMA was creating the Muskwa-Kechika Trust Fund,

which has two primary purposes: (1) to support wildlife and

wilderness resources of the management area through research and integrated management of natural resource

development; and (2) to maintain in perpetuity the diversity

and abundance of wildlife species and the ecosystems on

which they depend throughout the management area. The

trust fund is currently annually provided with $1 million

Canadian per year, as well as a project fund top-up allowance in which the government will match dollar for dollar

contributions, to a maximum of $1 million. The base funding, as well as the maximum matching, creates a maximum

annual fund of $3 million.

Every fall there is a call for project proposals that are

submitted to the Muskwa-Kechika Advisory Board, subject

to a number of review processes, and then reviewed by the

Board with recommendations passed on to the trustee of the

trust fund. After the trustee has reviewed and approved the

recommended projects, management of the projects is then

given to the Muskwa-Kechika Program Manager who serves

as the trust fund projects manager and comptroller. Funding agreements addressing deliverables, reporting, and funding arrangements are negotiated and signed. Currently,

there are five project funding envelopes under the trust

fund: (1) building an information base, (2) supporting planning, (3) improving management, (4) advancing applied

science (research), and (5) promoting awareness and involvement. Every year the Premier (head of the Provincial

Government) is given a report from the Muskwa-Kechika

Advisory Board regarding the activities of the Board and the

highlights of the trust funded activities. There is ongoing

research with wildlife and habitat, particularly for certain

species such as grizzly, moose, elk, and Stone sheep.
106 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Mitchell-Banks Protecting and Sustaining Wilderness Values in the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area

Historically Significant Activities

Of all the activities within the M-KMA, it is the oil and

gas sector that is currently the most active, the most

visible, and that will likely create the greatest management challenges. With the recent sharp increases in both

oil and gas commodity prices, there is renewed interest in

investing in exploration and development, and this has led

to a sharp increase in the number of seismic, drilling,

facilities, and pipeline applications (Oil and Gas Commission 1999). The oil- and gas-rich Western Canada Basin

extends into the northeast corner of British Columbia and

extends west into the M-KMA. While to date the majority

of the oil and gas activity is outside of the M-KMA boundaries, given the high prices, there is increasing pressure

from industry and a desire by government to complete the

pre-tenure planning within the M-KMA, and thus open

planned areas to oil and gas development. During the fiscal

year ending March 31, 1999, a total of 1,801 applications

were approved, and for the fiscal year ending March 31,

2000, a total of 2,487 applications were approved—representing a 38 percent increase. Results are not available for

the fiscal year that ended March 31, 2001, but an increase

is expected again. One of the oil and gas exploration

initiatives that received a high degree of review and discussion occurred at Chicken Creek in the Upper Sikanni area

(one of the Resource Management Zones or management

units on the southeast side of the M-KMA). This is an

important wildlife area, and particular care is being paid to

monitor any potential impacts.

Forestry is a bit of an anomaly within the M-KMA. Whereas the forest sector is one of the Province’s largest and most

ubiquitous industries, the Muskwa-Kechika Management

Area is unique in that its timber resources are relatively

limited. At this time, there is long-term planning for limited

forestry development, with considerations such as road

development limitations and costs, haulage distances, stand

size, density, and piece size all limiting the development

potential. It is possible that forestry development will be

closely associated with the oil and gas sector and take

advantage of roads approved for the oil and gas exploration

and development. In the near future, it is quite likely that

forestry will initially focus in promising areas located at the

south end of the M-KMA in the Graham/North Resource

Management Zone.

The vast area of the M-KMA has important mineral

resource potential supported by a mineral occurrence database, existing tenure, and exploration and development

activity. Historically, the area has received limited exploration, but there is significant opportunity for future mine

production. One of the challenges that mining will face in the

area is how to deal with the controlled access to the area—

but there are opportunities to explore how to develop mines

in conjunction with other industrial activities such as oil,

gas, and forestry.

Trapping and guide-outfitting are historically important

activities within the M-KMA. While the numbers of employees does not come close to approaching the oil and gas sector,

there is still a strong commitment through both legislation

and ongoing management and planning to ensure that these

activities are supported and that their needs are considered

among all of the industrial activities. Hunters, anglers, and

backcountry recreationists have historically accessed the

area, with users from the local communities as well as others

traveling great distances to take advantage of the vast

wilderness spaces found within the M-KMA. Obviously,

wilderness values are important to these users.

Management Challenges _________

There are numerous challenges in attempting to effectively manage the M-KMA. The most obvious one is the

sheer size of the area at 6.3 million ha (24,324 miles2

).

Access is extremely limited (and controlled through Access Management) as directed by the LRMPs—with only

a few roads, and trails that are accessed by horseback,

snowmobile, or all-terrain vehicles. Government staff

make extensive use of helicopter and jetboat transport to

access the M-KMA because ground access is so limited.

Fuel often has to be remotely cached for both helicopters

and jetboats due to the long distances from staging points

and the size of the M-KMA itself.

Along with the huge distances are the extremes in temperature, with seasonal fluctuations of 80∞ C not uncommon.

At –40 ∞C (–40 ∞F), equipment is subject to heavy wear and

it is trying on the staff as well—particularly if there is a

breakdown or incident such as getting stranded. All staff

carry emergency survival gear (cold weather sleeping bags,

first aid kits, rations, satellite phones, and so forth) in

vehicles.

Another management challenge is the long distance (approximately 1,300 km [808 miles] by road, 2 hours by air)

from the Provincial Capital and the location of some of the

senior government executive managers that are ultimately

responsible for the success of the M-KMA. Extra care has to

be taken to keep the “southern” managers up to speed on the

issues and actions being taken by the “northern” statutory

decisionmakers responsible for government management

within the M-KMA. This can be occasionally frustrating for

both “southerners” who are more aware of the machinations

within the legislature and the “northerners” who are more

focused on the local situation.

There is the ongoing challenge of attempting to address

the overall intent of three Land and Resource Management

Plans (LRMPs) in the planning for the M-KMA. The LRMPs

tend to deal with generalities and do not give strong direction with respect to operational planning. This lack of

specific guidance is further complicated with five required

plans because the legislation provides no guidance as to

what the plans should entail other than the broad activities

(such as recreation or oil and gas development) that they are

supposed to address. As if that were not enough challenge,

there is also the overriding question of what exactly is

wilderness. This is a very hotly debated concept and incorporates issues such as manmade impacts and the presence or

absence of people, but in the case of the M-KMA, it was a key

component of the legislation but is not defined. Wilderness

remains an undefined concept 4 years later in the initiative.

One of the increasing challenges for the M-KMA is the

growing public awareness and level of expectations about

what “could” or “should” occur within the M-KMA. It is

difficult to ensure that everything that is planned—or even

more challenging, simply decided upon at a political level—
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 107

Protecting and Sustaining Wilderness Values in the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area Mitchell-Banks

can be effectively implemented. The M-KMA, by its very

nature of being a new approach to planning and management, demands that the government staff, board members,

and public participants in the planning process attempt to

address every challenge with a set of “fresh eyes” and often

innovative approaches.

The final, and potentially greatest, challenge revolves

around land claims. Treaty Eight was signed over a century

ago, and three of the board members represent Bands that

signed the treaty. The Kaska Dena Treaty is currently under

negotiation, and the treaty discussions are wide ranging and

at times very intense. Any legislation, decisions, or actions

within the M-KMA are “without prejudice” with respect to a

future treaty with the Kaska-Dena. Four of the board members represent Kaska Dena Bands (communities). A Letter

of Understanding (LOU) was signed in 1997 between the

Provincial Government and the Kaska Dena Council to

permit land use planning and other government management initiatives to continue, pending the signing of a treaty.

The LOU specifically:

...sets out a relationship between the two parties with respect

to the planning and management of lands and resources in

the LOU area from the date of signing of this Understanding

until such time as it is terminated according to the provisions

of this Understanding (Government of British Columbia and

Kaska Dena Council 1997).

Planning and management is underway without any future

certainty with respect to what lands the Kaska Dena may be

awarded in the north and particularly in the MuskwaKechika Management Area.

Lessons Learned to Date _________

There have been five major lessons to date from the

Muskwa-Kechika Management Area initiative.

Lesson One: There Is a Need for Adequate

Data and Knowledge

The first lesson revolves around the challenges of having

or obtaining adequate data and knowledge about the wilderness qualities, wildlife and habitat values, natural resource

values, and land management challenges. The difficulties

stem not only from the 6.3 million-ha (24,324-miles2

) size

but also from the tremendous biodiversity, differences in

physiogeography, and the problems of access to the area.

Many of the Resource Management Zones (management

units) are hundreds of kilometers dimensionally, and travel

by either helicopter (running between $800 to $1,000 per

hour) or jetboat (time consuming for staff) rapidly consumes

limited budget dollars and staff time.

The LRMPs were completed under a previous government that was not as time or cost conscious as the current

government. This has led to challenges when the successor

government cut back on staffing and budgets, and so the

same challenges remain with fewer resources to address

them. A lesson here is to formally commit (through legislation) to adequately follow up on unique land management

initiatives to ensure their successful implementation. Another strategy is to aggressively use triage and a project

management approach to see what the critical steps are in

the process that are time sensitive, and to focus on those

and practice risk management with respect to the budget

and timeline. In the case of the M-KMA, this requires

cooperation between the Advisory Board and the Government that was not always in place, with both parties having

differences of opinion with respect to priorities. In retrospect, the government should have mandated that all

planning would be completed prior to the expenditures

from the Trust Fund being used for any other approved

purposes, such as training, extension, or noncritical research.

Lesson Two: There Is a Need for Accurate

and Timely Analysis and Decisions

The second challenge is related to the previous lesson but

centers around the challenges of accurate and timely analysis and decisionmaking. This challenge involves a number of

components, including translating field data into the Geographic Information System (GIS), and devising adequate

tools to verify, correct, analyze, manipulate, and map the

output. A current initiative underway is determining how to

undertake sensitivity analysis and scenario planning to

permit the planners and management teams to have a better

understanding of potential consequences or outcomes. GIS

tools are being explored. GIS staff are in high demand from

both the government and private sectors, and we have lost

a number of high quality staff as a result of this—which has

in turn led to losing institutional geographic familiarity,

working relationships, technical skills, process memory,

and having to repeatedly retrain staff.

There are also the challenges of timing with respect to

planning requirements, implementation, and ongoing operational management. Politicians and industry can push a

timeline to finish planning and create “certainty” that leads

to challenges at best, and failure at worst, to complete

planning in a comprehensive and integrated fashion. This

becomes particularly frustrating with complex landforms

and resource values, and also heavy industrial and economic

development pressure—both of which apply to the M-KMA.

Oil and gas development pressure is particularly strong, and

remains so, with political instability in other oil-producing

areas. A troubled forest economy and significantly reduced

mining and fishing within a staples economy create fiscal

pressures on the government, which seeks to fuel its treasury through oil and gas development.

There are ongoing challenges with respect to out-of-date

inventories and missing inventories. Integrated and interactive planning tools, such as Conservation Area Design, are

being completed on timelines that do not inform planning

from the beginning, with the tools having to be creatively

shoe-horned into the truncated planning timelines—which

severely limit the benefits and values that can be obtained

from the tool development and application processes. Ideally, a Conservation Area Design would be completed before

any resource use was contemplated—and this is legislatively possible within the M-KMA—but due to heavy government and industrial pressures, the planning is accelerated,

and planners and land managers make the best with what

they have and can obtain within the planning timelines.
108 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Mitchell-Banks Protecting and Sustaining Wilderness Values in the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area

Similarly, incomplete and/or out-of-date inventories can

severely constrain the accuracy or value of management

decisions and planning. The adage “garbage in garbage out”

applies to planning as much as it does to models and

simulations.

There are a number of things that would greatly assist

accurate and timely analysis and decisionmaking of the

M-KMA:

1. Creatively retaining GIS staff through providing them

with challenging and intellectually rewarding tasks. Take

GIS staff out into the field; this not only gives them a greater

understanding of the challenges but also the pleasure of

getting out into the wilderness as well as an opportunity to

see the wildlife. Often the expense of doing this is minimal,

as the helicopter or jetboat is already paid for and the only

cost is staff time.

2. Take a project management approach to the planning

challenges and be certain to fully address the obvious and

potential challenges of political and economic/industrial

development pressures. This not only coordinates the activities of staff but also assists in expectation management and

in establishing an effective communications strategy to keep

all of the interested parties aware of progress.

3. Related to the previous point is the question of effective

policy. There needs to be a process to be able to evaluate the

short, medium, and long-term implications of planning actions or the lack thereof. It is tempting to think short term

and focus on revenue generation, particularly when there

are fiscal challenges for the government. Short-term solutions can result in inadequate planning, leading to financial

losses through less than satisfactory resource planning

(suboptimal planning for effective use or extraction) or

greater costs (associated with environmental restoration

and remediation). As importantly, and arguably ethically

more so, there is also the potential for species and habitat

losses. There is a strong argument that these should be fully

incorporated in the thinking in any policy evaluation, development, and implementation/administration.

Lesson Three: There Is a Need for

Adequate Resource Funding

The third challenge involves obtaining adequate resource funding for travel, sufficient staffing, equipment,

and resources to effectively manage the area, and to be able

to address not only ongoing management needs, but to also

proactively address anticipated developments—such as oil

and gas exploration and development continuing to increase in both scale and scope. Hiring freezes, challenges in

finding and retaining staff, particularly those in the GIS

area, compound this problem. The Trust Fund provides

some security in potential funding, but all governmentproposed projects seeking trust funding have to be vetted

before the Advisory Board and receive recommendations

prior to being approved by the Trustee (who is the Minister

of Sustainable Resource Management). This has led to

some frustration on the part of the Advisory Board as to

what are government core responsibilities (which the trust

fund is not supposed to give money for), and what are

activities incremental to base funding. The frustration is

mirrored by government staff, who “see” the money being

potentially available in the trust fund, but not necessarily

accessible for government activities.

There are a number of ways to reduce this occurring:

1. When drawing up the initial legislation or policy to

establish the area, real attention should be paid to the future

implications and costs of the planning and management

required. In other words, if you are building a Rolls Royce,

then budget a lot of resources to successfully do this—if a

Volkswagon, then your resource requirements will be less.

2. Commit to finishing one initiative or related initiatives

prior to taking on new challenges. Do not be tempted to

spread resources thinly, attempting to do a little bit of

everything. This relates to the project management argument—do the things that need to be done first, and make

certain that they are done adequately well. You don’t want

to have an elegant planning process established with no data

to feed into it, for example.

3. Ensure that there is a clear understanding through

legislation and administrative procedure on how funds and

staff time can be employed, and be consistent with the

approach while being flexible to real emergencies and not

just “nice to dos.” The Trust Fund administration was

clouded by some uncertainty with respect to how it could be

used, and more importantly, what exactly were the government core responsibilities that were not meant to be funded,

but which in reality often lacked funds and were key to

making the M-KMA work.

4. Initiate a fund-raising strategy as soon as the area is

established or the initiative implemented. Four years into

this process, fund raising is only now beginning to be seriously looked at—and it is a case of being very late to start and

having lost some very positive media opportunities while the

initiative was still new.

Lesson Four: Politics and Agendas

Politics and agendas are the fourth challenge, and are an

inherent part of the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area

initiative. There are politics in the capital with politicians

responding to lobbying and making decisions without consulting Government staff—often with very frustrating consequences, as the decisions are often made without any

appreciation of the existing situation or resources available to Government staff. The Muskwa-Kechika Advisory

Board is very political, with every member having a constituency and an agenda to address within the area. Government managers and staff are also political in that they

have the mandate of their ministries to fulfill, and there

can be clashes between the ministries with their conflicting

agendas. One of the most challenging aspects of the MuskwaKechika Program Manager’s job is to champion the MuskwaKechika Management Area initiative and to serve as a

liaison between the various groups and promote effective

communication, “buying” into a common vision and cooperation. This job plays a keystone role in not only holding

the process together, but also encouraging it to progressively continue forward.

Politics are always a wild card. Politicians can be very

challenging with respect to how they respond to perceived

problems—but their perception is often heavily influenced by

either key supporters, effective lobbyists, political assistants,
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 109

Protecting and Sustaining Wilderness Values in the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area Mitchell-Banks

or general public opinion—all of which are quite capable of

leading to decisions that do not support effective land use

planning. Communication and documentation play a key role

in setting the stage and making information and potential

scenarios known—it is more difficult for a political decision to

be made that is adverse to the land use management if key

supporters of the initiative (both within and without Government) are aware of the facts and the situation, so that

decisions are not made and observed in a vacuum. Management often involves a lot of time explaining to people what is

going on, and as importantly, what might go on.

Lesson Five: There Is a Need to Define

Roles and Responsibilities

The Muskwa-Kechika Advisory Board is unique in the

Province not only for the scope of their advisory and monitoring function, but also in that they are the body that makes

recommendations for a multimillion-dollar trust fund. Funding has grown increasingly scarce over the last decade, and

the trust fund is drawing increasing attention from both

within and without Government.

In many ways, it is the trust fund that can potentially

serve the greatest role in ensuring that the MuskwaKechika Management Area is a successful initiative, and

there needs to be a healthy appreciation between the

Muskwa-Kechika Advisory Board and government staff in

how to best apply the fund to complement existing government statutory responsibilities and initiatives. The trust

fund is there to advance the Muskwa-Kechika Management

Area with a view to maintaining the unique features of the

area, while also permitting industrial and economic development over three-quarters of the area. This is a daunting, but

not insurmountable challenge. It will require all parties and

individuals involved to assume their roles and cooperatively

work with everyone else to fulfill not only their individual

responsibilities but also those of the group as a whole. There

needs to be a greater accountability for decisions that are

made and a greater attempt to let the general public know

how the funds are being spent.

References _____________________

Government of British Columbia and Kaska Dena Council. 1997.

Letter of understanding. Victoria, BC: Government of British

Columbia. [Online]. Available: http://www.luco.gov.bc.ca/lrmp/

mk/kaskalou.htm

Land Use Coordination Office, Province of British Columbia. 1997a.

Fort St. John land and resource management plan. Victoria, BC:

Government of British Columbia. [Online]. Available: http://

www.luco.gov.bc.ca/lrmp/ftstjohn/toc.htm

Land Use Coordination Office, Province of British Columbia. 1997b.

Fort Nelson land and resource management plan. Victoria, BC:

Government of British Columbia. [Online]. Available: http://

www.luco.gov.bc.ca/lrmp/frtnelsn

Land Use Coordination Office, Province of British Columbia. 1997c.

Muskwa-Kechika management plan. Victoria, BC: Government

of British Columbia. [Online]. Available: http://www.luco.gov.

bc.ca/lrmp/frtnelsn/app7/app7toc.htm

Land Use Coordination Office, Province of British Columbia. 2000.

Mackenzie land and resource management plan. Victoria, BC:

Government of British Columbia. [Online]. Available: http://

www.luco.gov.bc.ca/lrmp/mackenzi

Minister of Environment, Lands and Parks. 1998. Bill 37-1998.

Muskwa-Kechika Management Area act. Victoria, BC: Government of British Columbia. [Online]. Available: http://www.qp.

gov.bc.ca/statreg/stat/M/98038_01.htm

Oil and Gas Commission. 1999. First annual report, October 23,

1998–March 31, 1999. Oil and Gas Commission, Fort St. John,

BC. [Online]. Available: http://www.ogc.gov.bc.ca/documents/

annualreports/9900annualreport.pdf
110 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Jeff Jarvis is Senior Wilderness Specialist, Bureau of Land Management,

United States Department of the Interior, Washington, DC 20240, U.S.A. Email: Jeff_Jarvis@blm.gov

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—The U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land

Management (BLM) has created a National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS) in response to their growing shift toward

protection of special areas. This NLCS brings National Conservation Areas, National Monuments, Wilderness, Wilderness Study

Areas, Wild and Scenic Rivers, and National Historic and Scenic

Trails into a single network in order to improve protection of benefits

and increase public awareness of scientific, cultural, educational,

ecological, and other values.

Introduction to the Bureau of Land

Management ___________________

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is responsible for

more land than any other agency in the United States of

America with over 260 million surface acres (1.05 million

km2

). The vast majority of this land is located in the arid

western third of the United States and in Alaska. These

lands are the canyons, deserts, and cacti of the American

Southwest, the open landscapes of the short grass prairie,

the isolated tundra, the wide-open landscapes that surround

Western towns, and the isolated retreats that often form the

image of the American West. Public lands managed by the

BLM are those Federal lands left over from the early years

of Western expansion. In the country’s first 150 years, our

national policy was to dispose of these Federal lands to build

a strong nation, raise funds, and encourage settlement of

new territories. Lands were sold or given to settlers, homesteaders, veterans, towns, colleges, private corporations,

and States. Some of the land was set aside to become

National Parks, National Forests, Wildlife Refuges, Indian

Reservations, or Military Bases. During the disposal era,

over 1.1 billion acres (4.45 million km2

) of public lands were

transferred out of Federal ownership.

The disposal era ended for the BLM in 1976 with passage

of its organic act: The Federal Land Policy and Management

Act. This law changed the course of BLM management in

numerous ways including directing that public lands are to

be retained in Federal ownership. The lands that remained

National Landscape Conservation System:

A New Approach to Conservation

Jeff Jarvis

are the 260 million acres (1.05 million km2) of public lands

that are now managed by the BLM. The BLM-managed

public lands are a priceless legacy and a long-term investment for the American people. Prized originally for their

commodity value, today the public lands offer much more:

unparalleled recreational opportunities, wildlife reserves,

and in the increasingly crowded American West, one of the

last guarantees of open space.

Special Values Identified _________

In the 1960s, Congress began to recognize the need to

protect some of the natural, historical, and cultural resources on these public lands. Efforts designed to raise

awareness of the BLM started in 1964 when the lands were

renamed the National Resource Lands. The need to protect

the unique values of public lands was realized by BLM and

Congress over the next decade. A major step in creation of a

BLM land protection system was taken in 1970 when Congress created the King Range National Conservation Area

on California’s northern coast. This first National Conservation Area was designated to conserve and develop for the use

and benefit of the people of the United States the lands and

other resources under a program of multiple use and sustained yield.

Congress expanded the areas protected under national

designations numerous times in the following decade. The

10.6 million acres (42,897 km2

) within the California Desert

Conservation Area were set aside in 1976. The Steese National Conservation Area, which contains 1.2 million acres

(4,856 km2

) in east-central Alaska, was designated in 1980

to protect wild and scenic rivers, crucial caribou calving

grounds, and Dall sheep habitat. Additional protective designations were passed into law for the rugged lava flows on

New Mexico’s El Malpais “badlands” (1987), the rich wildlife

and riparian area along Arizona’s San Pedro River (1988),

and other areas throughout the West. In total, Congress

created 14 National Conservation Areas in eight Western

States from 1970 to 2000.

In 1996, the BLM was entrusted with the responsibility of

managing its first National Monument with the Presidential Designation of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah. The Grand Staircase-Escalante

National Monument was designated to protect the area’s

objects of historic or scientific interest, including geologic

treasures, world-class paleontological sites, extensive archeological resources, and outstanding biological resources.

Since then, the BLM’s responsibilities have continued to expand. Congress and the President created an additional 14
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 111

Jarvis National Landscape Conservation System: A New Approach to Conservation

National Monuments in seven additional States from 2000

through 2001.

In addition to National Conservation Areas and National

Monuments, Congress used a variety of protective designations to protect the natural values of other landscapes,

including Wild and Scenic Rivers, National Trails, and

Wilderness. This explosion in land protection led to numerous changes in the BLM. The agency began the slow process

of changing from an agency responsible for developing commodities to an agency with an additional new mission, the

long-term conservation of public lands.

These designations created a pattern of special areas

where the overriding objective was long-term conservation,

restoration of the land, and protection of biological diversity.

A set of common management prescriptions emerged: the

areas are withdrawn from disposal, there is more intensive

management focused on providing visitor services and interpretation, and restoration is a priority. Many of the areas are

also withdrawn from mineral entry.

During development of these conservation designations,

Congress and the BLM learned that no single type of designation was appropriate for all situations and no single

designation was adequate to protect all the landscapes that

deserved protection. In some cases, Wilderness was the most

appropriate designation. In other situations, a National

Conservation Area designation did a better job of protecting

an area’s values while allowing certain existing uses. In

some cases, it is appropriate to have more than a single

designation for a special landscape. This most often occurs

when a Wilderness, Wild and Scenic River, or National Trail

is located within a National Conservation Area or National

Monument.

National Landscape Conservation

System ________________________

Although this expanding collection of special areas was

managed under somewhat consistent prescriptions, the BLM

did not have an organized approach to management of these

areas. In the summer of 2000, the BLM responded to the

growing concern over management of these areas with

creation of the National Landscape Conservation System

(NLCS). The NLCS brings into a single system BLM’s most

protected landscapes. By putting these lands into a single

system the agency hopes to improve management of these

special areas, improve public benefits that flow from a wellmanaged system of conservation areas, and increase public

awareness of these areas’ scientific, cultural, educational,

ecological, and other values. The NLCS includes the BLM’s

National Conservation Areas, National Monuments, Wilderness, Wilderness Study Areas, Wild and Scenic Rivers,

and National Historic and Scenic Trails.

Although the NLCS does not create any additional legal

protections, the BLM manages these great landscapes of the

American West with a set of common principles:

• The conservation of natural values is of primary concern.

• Areas are managed in partnership with surrounding

communities. In developing management plans, the

BLM is working with local communities, particularly

with regard to amenities such as food services and

lodging. The BLM does not provide food, lodging, and

intensive visitor services within the areas. Instead,

visitors are encouraged to see the landscape in the

context of the history and tradition of the entire region.

Intensive services are provided by the surrounding

communities.

• Conservation Areas and Monuments often include within

their boundaries Wilderness and Wilderness Study Areas

or Wild and Scenic Rivers, where motor vehicles are

excluded. Outside such areas, the maintenance of roads

and the use of motor vehicles are managed to protect

fragile soils, riparian areas and other plant communities, and wildlife habitat. Vehicles are restricted to

designated routes.

• Valid existing rights such as existing mineral leases are

recognized.

• Traditional uses such as grazing and hunting will continue, provided that these activities are consistent with

the overall purpose of the area. The BLM recognizes

that in many instances these uses can be compatible

with good wildlife management, protection of biodiversity, and enhancement of natural values.

• Many of the areas are unavailable for development

under the Mining Act of 1872 and various other general

lands laws that are incompatible with long-term protection of our natural environment.

• Management plans should be prepared, or existing

plans reviewed and updated, to reflect the importance of

the conservation principles for which the place has been

recognized.

• Acting with public and private partners, the BLM can be

the paradigm of the Interior Department’s motto: Communication, cooperation, and consultation all in the

service of conservation.

Early Success

Although it is too early for an assessment of the NLCS, its

creation appears to be a success. The BLM has improved

management of these special areas. Improved management

has in part been the result of an increase of approximately

$9 million in operation funds and $4 million in planning.

These funds have been used to increase staffing, improve

visitor services and facilities, and provide public information. The benefits from increased emphasis on planning will

take several years to show but will result in improved

management of various uses, restoration of disturbed areas,

and numerous long-term efficiencies in delivering public

service.

Public interest and support has been outstanding. Numerous national publications, including the National Geographic, Audubon, Sunset Magazine, Sierra, Sky Magazine,

Wilderness Magazine, Backpacker, and USA Today, as well

as untold local newspapers, have celebrated formation of the

NLCS and discussed some of the more outstanding landscapes protected under the umbrella of the system. And

finally, public support is building. One example of this is

public response to a series of letters sent by the Secretary of

the Interior, Gale Norton, requesting the views of public

officials regarding the management of the National Monuments. Over 7,000 responses have been received. The majority of these letters and E-mails addressed the overall topic of

monuments, without focusing on a particular area, and
112 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Jarvis National Landscape Conservation System: A New Approach to Conservation

supported protecting all newly designated monuments.

However, the majority who wrote about a particular area

also supported the management and protection of the monuments. Similar to the creation of the National Parks in the

1900s, some of the areas have been controversial. The

majority of Americans recognize the importance of these

designations, however, and support their long-term conservation management.

The Future _____________________

In an increasingly crowded American West, NLCS lands

are unique. They are havens of solitude and a reminder of

the West as it originally was. The BLM is proud to be

stewards of these special landscapes. As we continue to

improve our long-term conservation management of these

landscapes, we will assure the increased benefits that flow

from a well-managed system of conservation areas.

Conservation Areas _____________

With over 800 units in the NLCS, it is not possible to

describe them all. Summarized below, however, are a few of

the areas in the System:

National Conservation Areas

Black Rock Desert-High Rock Canyon Emigrant

Trails (December 21, 2000)—This area includes nearly

800,000 acres (3,237 km2

) in northwestern Nevada. Ten

Wilderness Areas provide additional protection to the rugged interior mountain ranges in the area. A National Historic Trail protects wagon wheel ruts and historic inscriptions, largely unchanged from when pioneers moved

westward through the area in the 1800s.

California Desert (October 21, 1976)—This area’s 10.6

million acres (42,897 km2

) feature vast desert areas with a

myriad of wildlife and recreational opportunities. The desert’s

outstanding values are also protected within 65 Wilderness

Areas, one National Monument, and two National Trails.

Colorado Canyons (October 24, 2000)—From saltbush desert to the spectacular canyons of the Black Ridge

Wilderness, this diverse area in west-central Colorado encompasses over 122,000 acres (494 km2

), including more

than 75,000 acres (304 km2) of Wilderness.

El Malpais (December 31, 1987)—These 226,000 acres

(915 km2) of rugged lava flows in west-central New Mexico

display some of the Nation’s most significant geological,

cultural, scenic, scientific, and wilderness resources.

Gila Box Riparian (November 28, 1990)—This 22,000

acre (89 km2

) desert oasis contains cliff dwellings, historic

homesteads, Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep, and more than

200 species of birds in southeastern Arizona.

Gunnison Gorge (October 21, 1999)—A variety of

natural and geologic features and unsurpassed recreational

opportunities are on display in western Colorado’s Gunnison

Gorge, a 57,725-acre (234-km2

) area. This unit supports a

diverse range of uses such as whitewater rafting, big-game

hunting, and domestic livestock grazing. The inner gorge is

designated Wilderness.

King Range (October 21, 1970)—West of Arcata, 35

miles (56 km) of remote coastline comprise the 57,000-acre

(231-km2

) King Range, the nation’s first National Conservation Area.

Las Cienegas (December 6, 2000)—This area’s 42,000

acres (170 km2

) of desert grasslands and rolling oak-studded

hills in south-central Arizona are home to a great diversity

of plant and animal life, including several threatened or

endangered species.

Red Rock Canyon (November 16, 1990)—This 197,000-

acre (797-km2

) area outside of Las Vegas boasts unique

geologic features, plants, and animals that represent some

of the best examples of the Mojave Desert. The area offers

spectacular climbing and hiking opportunities. The most

remote mountain areas within the NCA are also designated

Wilderness Study Areas.

San Pedro Riparian (November 18, 1988)—This

56,500-acre (229-km2

) area in southeastern Arizona supports over 350 species of birds, 80 species of mammals, and

40 species of amphibians and reptiles.

Snake River Birds of Prey (August 4, 1993)—Home to

the largest concentration of nesting raptors in North

America, this 485,000-acre (1,963-km2

) area in southwestern Idaho provides a complete and stable ecosystem where

both predators and prey occur in extraordinary numbers.

Steens Mountain (October 30, 2000)—Officially called

the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area, these 425,500 acres (1,722 km2

) in southeastern

Oregon include volcanic uplifts, glacier-carved gorges, wild

rivers, wilderness, and diverse plant and animal species.

Steese (December 2, 1980)—This 1.2-million-acre (4,856-

km2

) area in east-central Alaska contains a Wild and Scenic

River, crucial caribou calving grounds, and Dall sheep habitat.

Headwaters Forest Reserve (March 1, 1999)—These

7,400 acres (30 km2) in northern California, comanaged with

the State of California, protect old-growth redwood stands

that provide habitat for threatened species such as the

marbled murrelet, a seabird, and coho salmon.

National Monuments

Agua Fria (January 11, 2000)—An hour north of Phoenix, Agua Fria’s 71,000 acres (287 km2

) host one of the most

significant systems of late prehistoric sites in the American

Southwest.

California Coastal (January 11, 2000)—This National

Monument includes all the islands, rocks, and pinnacles off

the 840-mile (1,352-km) California coast. These areas provide essential habitat for an estimated 200,000 breeding

seabirds.

Canyons of the Ancients (June 9, 2000)—Located in

southwestern Colorado, this 163,000-acre (660-km2

) area

contains the richest known concentration of archaeological

sites in the United States.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 113

Jarvis National Landscape Conservation System: A New Approach to Conservation

Carrizo Plain (January 17, 2001)—Remnant of a once

vast grassland astride the San Andreas Fault zone, this

unit’s 204,000 acres (826 km2

) in central California are a

critical refuge for several endangered and threatened animal and plant species.

Cascade-Siskiyou (June 9, 2000)—The convergence of

geologically young and old mountain ranges gives this 53,000-

acre (214-km2

) Monument in south-central Oregon an extraordinary degree of biological diversity.

Craters of the Moon (November 9, 2000)—The 272,000

acres (1,101 km2

) of this remarkably preserved volcanic

landscape on Idaho’s Snake River Plain contain an array of

exceptional features, including cinder cones and vast lava

fields.

Grand Canyon-Parashant (January 11, 2000)—This

808,000-acre (3,270-km2

) unit contains outstanding geological and paleontological features in northwestern Arizona.

Grand Staircase-Escalante (September 19, 1996)—

Labyrinthine red rock canyons, high plateaus, and dramatic

cliffs and terraces make up this stunning 1.9-million-acre

(7,689-km2

) area in southern Utah. About one-third of the

area is designated as Wilderness Study Areas.

Ironwood Forest (June 9, 2000)—This 129,000-acre

(522-km2

) area protects a unique ironwood forest and a wide

array of bird and animal life in southern Arizona.

Kasha-Katuwe Tent Rocks (January 17, 2001)—This

area in northern New Mexico protects over 4,000 acres (16

km2

) of cone-shaped rock formations resulting from volcanic

eruptions and erosion that first built up and then wore down

this landscape.

Pompeys Pillar (January 17, 2001)—William Clark of

the Lewis and Clark Expedition carved his name on this

sandstone butte overlooking the Yellowstone River, adding

to a rich record of historic inscriptions now protected as a 51-

acre (21-ha) area in central Montana.

Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains (October 24,

2000)—This 86,500-acre (350-km2

) congressionally designated National Monument in southern California hosts over

500 plant and animal species, including the Federally listed

Peninsular bighorn sheep. The mountain core is designated

Wilderness.

Sonoran Desert (January 17, 2001)—Wide valleys

separated by rugged mountain ranges offer dense forests of

saguaro cactus—excellent habitat for a wide range of wildlife species—in this 409,000-acre (1,655-km2

) area in southwestern Arizona.

Upper Missouri River Breaks (January 17, 2001)—

The breathtaking limestone bluffs along this 149-mile (240-

km), 377,000-acre (1,526-km2) stretch of the Missouri River

in central Montana remain almost exactly the same as when

Lewis and Clark described them in their expedition journals. The opportunities for solitude are protected in several

Wilderness Study Areas.

Vermilion Cliffs (November 9, 2000)—An outstanding

assemblage of deep, narrow wilderness canyons make the

280,000 acres (1,133 km2

) in this northern Arizona Monument ideal for hiking and exploring.

Wilderness and Wilderness Study Areas

The BLM manages 148 Wilderness Areas with more than

6 million acres (24,281 km2

) and over 600 Wilderness Study

Areas with18 million acres (72,843 km2

). Wilderness and

Wilderness Study Areas are managed to protect their primeval character and influence.

Wild and Scenic Rivers

The NLCS includes 36 Wild and Scenic Rivers, accounting

for a total of over 2,000 miles (3,219 km). These rivers, in four

Western States and Alaska, offer unparalleled opportunities for recreation.

National Historic Trails

The BLM-managed portions of the National Scenic and

Historic Trails are also part of the NLCS. Nine Historic

Trails, including those followed by Lewis and Clark and

pioneers heading to Mormon Country, commemorate the

nation’s cultural heritage, while the Continental Divide and

Pacific Crest Scenic Trails offer 641 miles (1,032 km) of some

of the country’s most spectacular mountain settings.
114 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

David M. Johns is a Cofounder and Director of The Wildlands Project and

a Professor at Portland State University, P.O. Box 725, McMinnville, OR

97128, U.S.A. E-mail: djohns@viclink.com

©David M. Johns.

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—The Wildlands Project seeks to create a connected

system of protected areas across North America that will ensure the

survival of all native species, including top predators and wideranging species, in the context of fully functioning ecosystems. Core

protected areas are designated based on the biological needs of key

species and the requirements of critical ecological processes. To

work they must have, or will be restored to have, those attributes

traditionally ascribed to wilderness. Some critics argue that The

Wildlands Project model is inapplicable to other parts of the world,

especially the developing world. The inapplicability is based on

nonbiological considerations. The applicability of Wildlands type

conservation outside of North America is examined in light of largescale conservation work in Latin America and Asia. In both regions,

conservation efforts similar to those of The Wildlands Project are

underway and show promise. There are important differences, but

the similarities are significant enough to suggest the approach can

be applied. The similarities between conservation work in North

America, Latin America, and Asia is attributable in some cases to

Wildlands Project influence. In other cases, similarities are due to

similar strategies emerging from similar conditions leading to

species loss.

The Wildlands Project____________

The Wildlands Project has been working across North

America for 10 years to address the current extinction crisis.

In places like the “Yellowstone to Yukon” (Y2Y) and the Sky

Islands Wildlands Network (SIWN)—both multinational

efforts—conservationists are developing and implementing

systems of connected protected areas. These regional projects

are elements within a broader, continental program stretching from the Arctic to the Darien Gap. The continental scale

is important not just because the threats to nature are

continental. Threats aside, continents are evolutionarily

and ecologically significant (Flannery 2001; Soulé and

Terborgh 1999). Prefragmentation landscape level connectivity has played a major role in structuring communities,

and it affects both top-down and bottom-up regulation of

ecosystems (Clark and others 1999).

The Wildlands Project was created in response to accelerating species loss and massive landscape hemorrhaging.

The effects of habitat loss and degradation were magnified

The Wildlands Project Outside North

America

David M. Johns

greatly by the loss of connectivity. The legal boundaries of

protected areas were becoming actual boundaries as development and conversion consumed intervening unprotected

wildlands. These actual boundaries were biologically inadequate to sustain species and processes over the long haul,

even within the biggest islands like Yellowstone National

Park. This was especially true for wide-ranging species such

as top carnivores, some ungulates, and others, and for

important ecological processes like fire and succession (Noss

1992; Noss and Cooperrider1994; Terborgh 1999). It was

clear to us that more and bigger protected areas were

needed, and that natural connectivity also needed to be

protected and restored.

We also recognized that responding to threats, while

absolutely necessary, was not sufficient. We needed to create

an alternative vision, a positive vision of a biologically

healthy North America. We needed to be able to say that this

is what we stand for, rather than simply opposing this or

that development. The best defense, it has been said, is a

good offense.

Almost since the beginning, there has been global interest

in our approach as outlined in various publications describing it (Noss 1992; Soulé and Noss 1998; Terborgh and Soulé

1999; Terborgh and others 1999). There has also been skepticism about the application of our model outside of North

America, or even English speaking North America. The question is important because the extinction crisis is global, not

North American. We need answers about what works now.

There are two ways to approach the question of the applicability of our approach. The first is to examine essential

aspects of our approach and ask whether these can or should

be applied elsewhere. This approach involves more than just

thought experiments, but it certainly includes them.

Another approach, the one I will take, is simply to compare

our approach as it has evolved with other efforts around the

world. Michael Soulé (in press) has outlined our approach in

some detail. In summary, our goal is to create systems of

connected protected areas that have a very high probability

over the long haul of protecting existing or recovered populations of key species, including wide-ranging animals and

top carnivores; that encompass functioning ecosystems of all

types; that allow processes to operate unencumbered; and

that can accommodate climate change. At the heart of these

protected systems are big cores that have, or are restored to,

a wildlands state. By wildlands, I mean self-willed land—a

landscape undominated. Humans are very poor ecosystem

dominants and differ from other dominants (Rodman 1987).

These goals reflect fundamental values about the intrinsic

worth of nature and recognize the limitations of humans to

substitute their brains for evolution. Another feature of our

approach is the reliance on biology, ecology, and related

sciences to tell us what types of areas we need to protect, how

much, and where, in order to achieve our goals. Just as we
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 115

Johns The Wildlands Project Outside North America

must have a positive vision and not just respond, so we also

cannot simply accept the leftovers of civilization. We must

protect biologically valuable lands. As a species, we have

choices and extraordinary flexibility. Other creatures do not.

Our goals (which may be informed by a range of values)

and our reliance on science (which includes all systematized

and testable knowledge) are invariant aspects of our approach. The variant aspects are the human dimension. Societies vary in their patterns of land ownership and use;

attitudes toward nature and other creatures; population concentration and dispersal; economic development and geographic mobility; effectiveness of law enforcement; road

type and density access to wildlands and to firearms; and in

their organized and financial support for conservation. These

are not totally independent of biology, but interact in the

application of our approach. A society without firearms and

extensive motorized access may require smaller buffers (for

example Oates 1999). Lands of high agricultural value are

usually also of high biodiversity value. This conflict is

universal. But in societies where labor-intensive agriculture

predominates, there are large numbers of people present,

and this creates different kinds of pressures than in societies

where technologically intensive agriculture dominates and

fewer people are present, most having moved to cities (Houston 2001). Those remaining, however, are usually motorized

and armed.

With this model in mind, I will examine large scale conservation in Latin America and Asia. Much conservation is not

at a large scale, but it is important work. Without large-scale

protection, however, much will be lost.

Latin America___________________

The Ecological Corridor of the Americas (EcoAmericas) is

an effort to create a system of linked protected areas from

Tierra del Fuego to Alaska along the continents’ mountainous backbone (Wildlife Conservation Society 2000a). Project

goals include the designation of new protected areas, the

expansion of existing protected areas, and the creation of

linkages, all based on the principles of conservation biology.

EcoAmericas is also seeking to strengthen the management

of protected areas, improve their financial health, and improve cross-boundary coordination.

In the near term, EcoAmericas is working to consolidate

36 World Heritage Sites and Biosphere Reserves totaling

about 45-million ha (173,746-mi2) (Boza 2001). These sites

are in 15 countries from Argentina to Mexico. Other current

subprojects include: consolidating core areas and designating connections from coast to coast in the Talamanca region

(Panama/Costa Rica border); creating a new park of 25,000

ha (97 mi2) along the Costa Rica-Nicaraguan border to

maintain connectivity along the MesoAmerican Biological

Corridor; creating a major, 4-million-ha (15,444-mi2) linkage zone called the Yungas Andinas Biological Corridor from

Southern Bolivia to Northern Tucuman Province in Argentina; and consolidating management and enhanced protected status for Madidi National Park, Bahuaja-Sonene

National Park, and Tambopata National Reserve, which are

contiguous protected areas in Bolivia and Peru that lie in the

30-million-ha (115,831-mi2) Vilcabamba-Amboro Conservation Corridor. Work, of course, continues on the MesoAmerican Biological Corridor itself.

Not surprisingly, there are similarities and differences

between EcoAmericas south of Mexico and The Wildlands

Project. (Mexico north, and Wildlands efforts such as the

SIWN and Y2Y, are part of EcoAmericas.) The most important similarities are:

• Existing protected areas are too small and in many

cases do not include the most biologically important

parts of the landscape.

• New protected areas are needed and existing protected

areas need to be expanded, based on the principles of

conservation biology.

• Large-scale ecological and evolutionary process are a

major focus in protected area design.

• Connectivity, based on genetic, migration, and dispersal needs of selected species, is a major focus.

• A transboundary approach spans both intranational

and international borders.

• Human activities in buffer zones are limited to those

that are compatible with the needs of species in adjacent

protected areas, and that are sustainable.

EcoAmericas differs from the Wildlands model in that:

• Biodiversity is a major focus of protection, but wideranging species and top carnivores are not emphasized.

• Connections are not strictly protected in most cases, but

will have the status of buffer zones.

• Providing for change is a focus, but climate change is not

specifically mentioned. (The MesoAmerican Biological

Corridor’s predecessor, Paseo Pantera, does identify

climate change as a major design criteria [Sanderson

1993].)

• Limits on roads and motorized access are not emphasized.

• The ability of protected areas to contribute to the economic well-being of the adjacent communities is stressed.

On the face of things it does not appear so very different.

And it is too early to tell on the ground. I will hazard some

early analysis. It is one thing for scientists and advocates to

call for protection of lands adequate in type, size, and

location to protect most species and processes; it is another

to create a political coalition strong enough to create and

enforce such a strategy. It is in implementation, which

requires building coalitions of various kinds (grassroots and

elite), where limitations become sharply defined and the

choices are often stark and difficult. Humans often desire

the same biologically valuable lands that other species need.

This essential tension can make it difficult to designate

protected areas and certain management regimes, or to

meaningfully enforce those designations and regimes. Nonetheless, it is a very important accomplishment to have

conservation planning and implementation moving forward

at a continental, even multicontinental, level among over a

dozen countries.

Russian Far East and

Northern China _________________

There are many landscape-level protection and recovery

efforts underway in this region, but I do not know of any that

approach being continental in scope. Scientists from the
116 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Johns The Wildlands Project Outside North America

World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the Wildlife Conservation

Society (WCS)—both groups have a permanent and longtime presence in Asia—have proposed a large-scale framework for tiger protection and recovery (Dinnerstein and

others 1997). It includes the Russian Far East (RFE), India,

Southern China, Indochina, and South East Asia. Within

each of these regions, they have evaluated existing tiger

populations, suitable habitat, and mortality pressures, and

recommended priorities for protection. They propose clusters of core areas and connectivity among them to maintain

tiger populations. Habitat fragmentation, as well as habitat

loss, is considered a major immediate threat. The solutions

they propose are transboundary.

Another large-scale effort involves increased coordination

within Russia among Zapovedniks (Maleshin 1999; RCN

Editors 1999b). Established over the decades, based on

scientific findings of high biological value (ecosystem representation, not focal species), Zapovedniks have generally

been managed fairly independently, notwithstanding centralized funding. In the last decade, a lack of funding from

the central government has driven Zapovednik leaders to

seek joint solutions to their problems. Notwithstanding the

economic driver, discussions of biological problems and joint

strategizing about dealing with islandization and other

threats have occurred. Recognition of the importance of

cooperation across Russian administrative boundaries and

internationally has also increased.

Large-scale conservation planning and implementation

in the RFE and Northern China is well underway. Interaction with similar efforts exists, but not day-to-day coordination. One of the more important efforts is being led by the

Wildlife Foundation, headquartered in Khabarovsk, and

founded by Alexander Kulikov and others (Wildlife Foundation 2000). The Foundation works with other regional nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), international NGOs,

and government agencies in Russia, China, Mongolia, and

North Korea. Their work emphasizes protection of the Siberian (Amur) tiger, Far Eastern leopard, Japanese and hooded

cranes, and other rare, threatened, and endangered species.

Protection of core areas by Zapovednik or other designation, connectivity, and management of other areas for protection are primary tools. Extensive biological analysis of

target species, prey populations, habitat cover, and other

factors underlies the mapping and proposed management

regimes. The Foundation also works to stop poaching, to

cooperate with the Convention on International Trade of

Endangered Species (CITES) and government agencies on

illegal trafficking, and to find economic alternatives to the

most destructive, extractive activities. The Khabarovsk Krai

Government, due to the Wildlife Foundation, its cooperators’ efforts, and WWF funding, has committed to protecting

10 percent of its land base in a system of connected cores.

Protection of the region’s top predator, the Amur or Siberian tiger, has attracted many international NGOs and

scientists. In 1995, Bruce Marcot identified three corridors

that would link tiger habitat in the RFE and Northern

China. The first, along the Sikhote-Alin Mountains, runs

mostly north-south, linking various Zapovedniks, parks,

and refuges. It also includes east-west linkages to important

tiger habitat. Two other corridors are proposed: one linking

tiger habitat in Khaborovsk with tiger habitat inHeilongjiang

Province, China; and another linking habitat in Primorsky

with that in Jilin Province, China, and North Korea.

Miquelle and others (1999) and Pikunov and Miquelle

(2001) developed a more comprehensive proposal for Far

Eastern leopard and Amur tiger conservation that stretches

across Northeast China and the RFE. They have recommended connecting existing and proposed protected areas

with a system of corridors to create a core network. They also

recommend protecting all potential habitat outside the core

through a zoning system to delineate and appropriately

manage high-priority tiger habitat. They argue that all

remaining tiger habitat must be retained to sustain a minimum population of at least 500 tigers. Habitat outside of the

core system would be managed to provide for sustainable

human use compatible with tiger and leopard protection.

Restrictions would include limited road access, low-intensity logging, and well-controlled ungulate hunting. The plan

calls for transboundary connectivity at three points along

the Sino-Russian border. The first step toward creation of

transboundary protected areas has been taken with the

creation of the Hunchun Tiger and Leopard Reserve in Jilin

Province, China. Khabarovsk has agreed to implement a

refined version of this plan, while in Primorsky Krai, planning is still in the early stages.

As part of the same effort, Pikunov and others (2000) have

proposed large, core-protected areas, connections, and

regionwide zoning to ensure the survival of the Far East

(Amur) leopard. They stress the problem of fragmentation

and the need to protect very large areas and connect them.

Without such action, human activity will continue to cause

behavior changes and disrupted family structure that undermines successful reproduction, and the leopard will continue sinking toward extinction.

The Wildlife Conservation Society and the Heilongjiang

Forestry Department sponsored a workshop in October 2000

to plan a transboundary tiger and leopard reserve and also

to protect prey species (WCS 2000b). The New York Times

reported on September 11, 2001, that a reserve was established on the Chinese side.

Large predators are not the only focus of conservation in

Asian Russia. The two pieces of Khingansky Zapovednik—

home to endangered cranes and storks, as well as over 1,000

vascular plants—have been connected by creation of a special purpose preserve (Andronov 2000). The Zapovednik was

enlarged earlier so that it would be big enough to contain all

of the essential elements of critical hydrological processes.

Anthropogenic fires started outside the reserve are a real

threat to forests, and management changes have been proposed to address this problem.

In Central Asia, where Russia, Mongolia, and Kazakhstan

border each other, the Argali sheep has been confined to

islands in the high mountain ranges. Historically, these

areas were connected, and the sheep seasonally used the

lowlands. Efforts are underway to expand the two

Zapovedniks in Russia, create new protected areas, and

provide connectivity (Paltsyn 2001). In northwest Siberia,

the 5-million-ha (19,305-mi2) Great Vasyugan Bog is home

to high plant and animal diversity. A protection plan spanning several jurisdictions and watersheds is being implemented (Valutsky 2000). It includes several large core areas

and connections.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 117

Johns The Wildlands Project Outside North America

In Kamchatka, the League of Independent Experts and

others are proposing linkages among existing protected

areas and the creation of many new protected areas (Russian

Academy of Sciences 2000). Before the fall of the Soviet

Union, most of Kamchatka was off limits to exploitation, and

the region was shrouded in military secrecy. Since the Soviet

demise, the region has opened up to exploitation while law

enforcement has been weak. There is a tremendous urgency

to do the scientific work necessary to identify areas needed

for protection; work done to date suggests much critical fish,

avian, and bear habitat are not protected.

This brief review of some major conservation work in

Russian Asia and Northern China suggests some important

similarities with North American conservation, including:

• Conservation has long been science based in Russia,

perhaps back to the turn of the 19th century (Weiner

1988); other countries such as China, and Mongolia

have moved in that direction.

• There is widespread recognition, in the face of increased

development and other threats, that existing protected

areas are too small and need to include additional

critical habitat.

• New protected areas are needed, or absent that, zoning

is needed that effectively manages additional important habitat for biodiversity.

• Buffer zones are used to limit human activities to those

that are compatible with the needs of species in adjacent

protected areas.

• Predators are frequently emphasized in conservation

planning and implementation as both umbrella and

flagship species.

• Top predators, and in some cases large-scale ecological

and evolutionary processes, are a major focus in protected area design.

• Connectivity, based on genetic, migration, and dispersal needs of selected species, is a major focus.

• Transboundary approaches are common, spanning both

intranational and international borders.

• Limiting roads and motorized or other illegal access are

emphasized.

There are also important differences that cannot be

minimized:

• Continental-level planning is not well developed, and

where it is emerging, it is driven by the need to develop

economic support for protected areas, rather than by a

biologically based strategy.

• Broad, multispecies based reserve design is occurring in

some regions, but not most.

• High quality habitat is in many cases not proposed for

status as a core protected area, but is zoned for multiple

use with management regimes aiming to prevent habitat degradation, poaching, and so forth.

• Climate and other anthropogenic change is rarely noted

as a criteria for reserve and connectivity design and

designation.

• The ability of protected areas to contribute to the economic well-being of the adjacent communities is often

stressed in justifying their continued existence and/or

in proposals for new protected areas.

It is not too surprising, given the many biological, demographic, scientific, and even cultural similarities between

northern Asia and northern North America, that conservation efforts should also show similarities. Differences between the two large regions in economic stability, infrastructure development, effectiveness of law enforcement, role of

international borders, and stable funding for conservation

are real and important. They call for different strategies, if

not for different goals. Continental level coordination may

emerge in the future, but for now Asia, even northern Asia,

is very big, very diverse, and resources comparatively limited.

South and Southeast Asia ________

The Wildlife Protection Society of India (WPSI), founded

in 1994, identifies habitat fragmentation as a major threat

to wildlife, along with direct habitat loss (WPSI 2001).

Illegal trafficking, understaffed protected area management and enforcement, and extractive encroachment are

also high on the list of threats. The thrust of much WPSI

activity is on improved enforcement, especially poaching

and international trade in tigers and tiger parts. Although

committed to broad biodiversity protection, they see the

Bengal tiger as a flagship and an umbrella species. By

protecting tiger habitat much else is protected.

But tiger habitat is shrinking, not growing. Since 1973,

India has lost one-half, or 50,000 km2 (19,305 mi2), of its

tiger habitat (Sahgal and Scarlott 2001). The number of

tigers is down from 4,000 in 1990 to 3,000 now, and only

about 8 percent of the historic population of about 40,000 live

in and around 26 reserves and parks. Like Yellowstone

National Park, Glacier National Park, and the Bob Marshall

Wilderness area, Indian reserves such as Ranthambhore

and Sariska were once linked by 150 miles of forest, but they

are no more. Increasingly, forests are cut right to reserve

boundaries, and even beyond. Illegal woodcutting and edge

effects are not limited to poor villagers and desperate poachers, but to industrial logging, industrial mining, and hydro

operations—much of it driven by globalization and international financial institutions like the new, ecofriendly World

Bank. The solution to this onslaught, Project Tiger advocates say, is bigger reserves and the re-establishment of

connectivity.

Dinnerstein and others (1999) agree that existing reserves

are too small and cannot function as islands. Buffers must be

expanded, access by nearby large human populations must

be limited, and dispersal corridors must be recreated if

tigers are to persist. Voluntary resettlement of those living

in protected areas is also considered essential, along with

better enforcement: constant patrols, improved radio communications, armed backup, and an undercover strategy to

tackle professional poachers and smugglers, many of whom

are primarily drug traffickers (Kumar and Wright 1999).

Providing local people with a share in protected area revenues is also seen as important in gaining their needed

support.

Significant similarities exist between South Asian conservation work and North American work. Conservationists in

southern Asia recognize:
118 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Johns The Wildlands Project Outside North America

• Existing protected areas are too small and in many

cases do not include the most biologically important

parts of the landscape.

• New protected areas are needed and existing protected

areas need to be expanded, based on the principles of

conservation biology.

• Top predators are important as umbrella and flagship

species; they are also important ecosystem regulators.

• Connectivity, based on genetic, migration, and dispersal needs of selected species are critical in species

survival; much if not most has been lost and it must be

restored.

• A transboundary approach, spanning both intranational and international borders, is required.

• Buffer zones around protected areas must limit human

activities to those that are compatible with the needs of

species in adjacent protected areas, and be sustainable.

• Access to protected areas must be limited; economic

activities in protected areas are incompatible with

protection.

Unique characteristics of South Asia include:

• A greater emphasis is needed for improving basic enforcement in the field and in the courtroom.

• A greater emphasis is required for antipoaching and to

crack down on illegal trade in species.

• The need for generating revenue in buffer areas for local

residents is important.

• Less emphasis on multispecies approaches in largescale conservation.

• Connections are not strictly protected in most cases, but

will have the status of buffer zones.

• Providing for change is rarely noted as a focus of planning or protecting.

Again, I do not think these similarities should be too

surprising. South Asia and North America share habitat

complexity: thousands of miles of temperate and subtropical

coast line, a vast range of ecosystems, variants and gradations from the subtropical to the montane, striking seasonal

variation, and much more. South Asia, of course, has been

settled longer and more intensively, and its indigenous

cultural roots, notwithstanding British rule, still predominate in ways that cannot be said of much of northern Asia or

North America. Although parts of South Asia are heavily

populated, it is worth remembering that Florida and California, two of the most biodiverse areas of North America, are

heavily populated and growing rapidly. Despite the population growth in both States—and all that entails in a country

where giving birth to a child also means giving birth to

SUVs, TVs, and a host of other goods—protected areas have

increased and effective connectivity is being implemented

(Barotz and Spitler 1998/1999; Preservation 2000/2001).

Other Areas ____________________

Conservationists in other parts of the world are also

focused on predators, the large scale, and connectivity.

Jason Badridze in the Caucasus, the European Environmental Network, and the Large Carnivore Initiative in

Europe are examples. In 1999, the Ukraine committed to

more than doubling the amount of land in protected areas

and to creating biological connectivity (RCN Editors 1999a).

The Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park in Namibia and South

Africa consists of about 38,000 ha (147 mi2) and reflects the

underlying ecological unity of the area (Shroyer and others

2001). The park’s aims include protection of wild ungulates,

including their migration needs, and predation regimes. An

agreement between South Africa and Mozambique will

foster comanagement of Kruger National Park and adjacent

areas across the border, expanding the area of backcountry

protection. Several other transnational protected areas are

under creation or being linked and comanaged, including

efforts between South Africa and Botswana, and South Africa, Namibia, and Angola. Project Wild is restoring megafauna

such as elephant to Angola in an effort to recover ecosystem

functionality. Many of the National Parks and transboundary

parks are specifically providing for wilderness—areas where

humans will not visit in large numbers and management

will be minimal. Due to the vast arid expanses of many

parks and the presence of predators, jeep tracks, and some

roads will be permitted, but access restricted.

Discussion and Conclusions ______

What is the source of the striking similarities found, first

in the adoption of large-scale approaches, and second in

their similarity? Some will suggest imperial influence. While

human societies remain divided internally and among themselves, in patterns of structured inequality that are proving

very difficult to change, I do not think looking for an explanation there will get us very far. Yes, there are more U.S.

scientists in India than the other way around and that can

make a difference, but not, in this case, an essential one.

All human societies share a single planet, and it is to the

biotic and abiotic processes that we all owe our lives and

livelihood. There is one nature, one Earth. All human societies, despite their many differences and positions in the

international economic and political order, have directly or

indirectly, from growth in numbers and consumption, degraded, destroyed, and fragmented habitat. The threats

may vary in some detail, but the results are drearily the

same. Thus, it should not be surprising that careful observers around the globe would come to similar conclusions: if we

are to stop the current extinction crisis, enough of the Earth

must be set aside to allow ecological and evolutionary processes to recover and maintain their health with a minimum

of human intervention. Looking at wide-ranging species and

top predators is an important part of this approach. Whether

one looks at processes or species, large protected areas and

connectivity seem little more than common sense.

Other steps are important to conservation, including making human societies more Earth friendly. And on this topic

there is perhaps greater disagreement about strategies that

must be pursued. But there is no substitute for basic and

direct protection, and achieving it as I have just suggested

involves some essential actions.

Lest I appear to be overstating the role of science, let me

state clearly that science does not provide us with our

conservation values; it can only suggest means for realizing

goals chosen on the basis of values (Johns 1999). Are the

values underlying large-scale conservation driven by power

relations? It would be foolish to deny any influence, but I
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 119

Johns The Wildlands Project Outside North America

think fundamentally it is not the case. Respect and love for

nature exist in almost every culture to some degree, and our

deep roots are all the same—we were once hunter-gatherers.

Beyond that, I think it not surprising that there are many in

every culture that feel very strongly the bonds with all life

and seek to protect it.

While parallel evolution has thus contributed to the current convergence on large-scale conservation, diffusion of

ideas has also played an important role. Foreman (1998/

1999) and others (for example, Zahniser 2000) have set out

the larger historical sweep of this; I want to focus more

narrowly on the last couple of decades. I believe that The

Wildlands Project has had a profound influence—far beyond

its size—on the conservation movement. Sometimes our

influence is acknowledged (Ankerson 1993; WCS 2000a,b),

sometimes not. We, of course, have our own debts. And the

process of influence is less linear than it is interactive.

Briefly sketched, the immediate origins of the Wildlands

model went something like this: in the early 1980s, Larry

Harris of the University of Florida proposed landscape

linkages between reserves in that State. Reed Noss made a

similar proposal for protected areas in Florida. In early

1985, Noss and Harris working together proposed a connected reserve network for northern Florida. Later that

year, Noss developed a first Statewide map proposing connectivity across the entire State. In 1990, Archie Carr, also

in Florida, but working on MesoAmerican conservation,

conceived of Paseo Pantera. In 1991, the Paseo Pantera

Project was born, and in the same year the first workshop

was held that led to a $3-billion plan for acquiring land for

reserves and connectivity in Florida. In 1992, Noss published his Land Conservation Strategy article in Wild Earth.

The human dimension,the way in which particular societies—and the way in which the global economy works through

those societies—degrade the natural world, does vary. Political systems vary. Resources for conservation vary. These

variances call for a variety of strategies and specific objectives on the road to more common goals. Even here, however,

there are similarities:

• What it is currently possible to achieve in conservation

is inadequate—we must change what is possible in

order to achieve our goals. We must push, push, push

and never let up.

• While humans appear to exercise great power over

nature—at least destructive power—and hence appear

to define the context for nature, this is only appearance.

Nature is the foundation of and context for all that we do

and are.

• If, in our hubris we ignore this, the great tragedy of

extinction will continue.

• There are two kinds of human hope. One is based on our

psychological need to avoid despair—we hope in order to

keep from going crazy. Another kind of hope is based on

an assessment of the state of things—are they moving

in a direction we consider hopeful, that is, toward good?

We need to create the basis for that second sort of hope.

I think we have started to do that with efforts across the

globe aimed at large-scale conservation.

References _____________________

Andronov, Vladimir. 2000. The crane’s Zapovednik. Russian Conservation News. 22: 5–7.

Ankerson, Thomas T. 1993. The MesoAmerican biological corridor.

Part 1. Gainesville, FL: Center for Governmental Responsibility.

48 p.

Barotz, Celia; Spitler, Paul. 1998/1999. Wildlands 2000: new California wilderness for the new millennium. Wild Earth. 8(4): 58–61.

Boza, Mario. 2001. Activities of EcoAmericas. San Jose, Costa Rica:

Wildlife Conservation Society. 4 p.

Clark, Tim; Curlee, A. Peyton; Minta, Steven C.; Kareiva, Peter M.,

eds. 1999. Carnivores in ecosystems. New Haven, CT: Yale

University Press. 429 p.

Dinnerstein, Eric; Rijal, Arun; Bookbinder, Marnie; Kattel, Bijaya;

Rajuria, Arup. 1999. Tigers as neighbors: efforts to promote local

guardianship of endangered species in lowland Nepal. In:

Seidensticker, John; Christie, Sarah; Jackson, Peter, eds. Riding

the tiger: tiger conservation in human-dominated landscapes.

Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press: 316–333.

Dinnerstein, Eric; Wikramanayake, Eric; Robinson, John; Karanth,

Ullas; Rabinowitz, Alan; Olson, David; Mathew, Thomas; Hedao,

Prashant; Connor, Melissa. 1997. A framework for identifying

high priority areas and actions for conservation of tigers in the

wild. Washington, DC: World Wildlife Fund; New York: Wildlife

Conservation Society. 72 p.

Flannery, Tim. 2001. The eternal frontier. New York: Atlantic

Monthly Press. 404 p.

Foreman, Dave. 1998/99. Around the campfire. Wild Earth. 8(4):

inside cover.

Houston, Michael A. 2001. People and biodiversity in Africa. Science. 293: 1591.

Johns, David. 1999. Biological science in conservation. In: Cole,

David N.; McCool, Stephen F., Borrie, W. T.; O’Loughlin, J.,

comps. 2000. Wilderness science in a time of change conference—

Volume 2: Wilderness within the context of larger systems; 1999

May 23–27; Missoula, MT. Proc. RMRS-P-15-VOL-2. Ogden, UT:

U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain

Research Station: 223–229.

Kumar, Ashok; Wright, Belinda. 1999. Combating tiger poaching

and illegal wildlife trade in India. In: Seidensticker, John; Christie,

Sarah; Jackson, Peter, eds. Riding the tiger: tiger conservation in

human-dominated landscapes. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press: 243–252.

Maleshin, Nikolai. 1999. Taking the future of Russia’s protected

areas in their own hands. Russian Conservation News. 21: 9–10.

Marcot, Bruce. 1995. Tiger habitat corridors in Far East Russia,

Northeast China, and Northern North Korea: need for a conservation strategy. [Online]. Available: www.5tigers.org/Russia/

Marcot/marcot2.htm. [2001 September].

Miquelle, Dale; Merrill, Troy W.; Dunishenko, Yuri M.; Smirnov,

Evgeny N.; Quigley, Howard S.; Pikunov, Dimitry G.; Hornocker,

Maurice. 1999. A habitat protection plan for the Amur tiger. In:

Seidensticker, J.; Christie, Sarah; Jackson, Peter, eds. Riding the

tiger: tiger conservation in human-dominated landscapes. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press: 273–295.

Noss, Reed. 1992. Land conservation strategy. Wild Earth. Special

Issue on The Wildlands Project. December: 10–25.

Noss, Reed; Cooperrider, Allan. 1994. Saving nature’s legacy. Washington, DC: Island Press. 416 p.

Oates, John F. 1999. Myth and reality in the rain forest. Berkeley:

University of California Press. 310 p.

Paltsyn, Mikhail. 2001. Current distribution of Argali mountain

sheep. Russian Conservation News. 25: 17–19.

Pikunov, D. G.; Aramilev, V. V.; Fomenko, P. V.; Miquell, D. G.;

Abramov, V. K.; Korkishko, V. G.; Nikolaev, I. G. 2000. The

decline of the Amur leopard in the Russian Far East. Russian

Conservation News. 24: 19–21.
120 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Johns The Wildlands Project Outside North America

Pikunov, D. G.; Miquelle, Dale. 2001. Conservation of Amur tigers

and Far Eastern leopards in the Tumen River area, Northeast

Asia. Unpublished paper on file with author. Presented at:Second

workshop on environmental peace in Northeast Asia; 2001 August

28–31; Vladivostok, Russia.

Preservation 2000. 2001. Milestone reached—over 1 million acres

protected. [Online]. Available: www.dep.state.fl.us/lands/carl_ff/

index.htm

RCN Editors. 1999a. Protected areas multiply in Ukraine. Russian

Conservation News. 21: 4.

RCN Editors. 1999b. Zapovedniks: a close look at the last five years.

Russian Conservation News. 21: 5–8

Rodman, John. 1987. The liberation of nature? Inquiry. 20: 83145.

Russian Academy of Sciences. Kamchatka Branch, ed. 2000. Conservation of biodiversity of Kamchatka and Coastal Waters.

Materials of the regional scientific conference; 2000 April 11–12;

Petropovlovsk, Russia. 154 p. [In Russian].

Sahgal, Bittu; Scarlott, Jennifer. 2001. Stranded. Amicus Journal.

23(2): 12–17.

Sanderson, James G. 1993. Global climate change and its effect on

biodiversity. In:Vega, Alberta, ed. Conservation corridors in the

Central American region. Gainesville, FL: Tropical Research and

Development: 402–406.

Shroyer, Maretha; Engelbrecht, Martin; Kaketso, Odumeleng. 2001.

Wilderness management in the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park.

International Journal of Wilderness. 7(2): 11–15.

Soulé, Michael. [In press]. Wildlands network design: the role of top

carnivores in the regulation of ecosystem structure and diversity.

In: Martin, Vance; Muir, Andrew, eds. Wilderness and human

communities: proceedings of the 7th World Wilderness Congress.

Golden, CO: Fulcrum Publishing.

Soulé, Michael; Noss, Reed. 1998. Rewilding and biodiversity:

complementary goals for continental conservation. Wild Earth.

8(3): 18–28.

Soulé, Michael; Terborgh, John, eds. 1999. Continental conservation. Washington DC: Island Press. 227 p.

Terborgh, John. 1999. Requiem for nature. Washington DC: Island

Press. 234 p.

Terborgh, John; Estes, James; Paquet, Paul; Rawls, Katherine;

Boyd-Heger, Diane; Miller, Brian; Noss, Reed. 1999. The role of

top carnivores in regulating terrestrial ecosystems. Wild Earth.

9(2): 42–56.

Terborgh, John; Soulé, Michael. 1999. Why we need megareserves:

large scale networks and how to design them. Wild Earth. 9(1):

66–76.

Valutsky, Viktor I. 2000. Great Vasyugan Bog: Siberia’s wetland

oasis. Russian Conservation News. 22: 29–31.

Weiner, Douglas R. 1988. Models of nature. Bloomington: Indiana

University Press. 312 p.

Wildlife Conservation Society. 2000a. Ecological corridor of the

Americas: linking landscapes for the new millennium. Unpublished report on file at: Wildlife Conservation Society, New York.

10 p.

Wildlife Conservation Society. 2000b. China’s critically endangered

tigers poised for recovery: International workshop to develop

recovery plan for wild Amur tiger population in Northeast China;

2000 October 20–23; Harbin, China. [Online]. Available:

www.5tigers.org/China/amurwkshp.htm

Wildlife Foundation. 2000. The Wildlife Foundation. Unpublished

report on file at: Wildlife Foundation Office, P.O. Box 32/34,

Khabarovsk, 680054, Russia. 8 p.

Wildlife Protection Society of India. 2001. Wildlife Protection Society of India. [Online]. Available: www.5tigers.org/Conservation

Organizations/WPSI/wpsi_about.htm

Zahniser, Ed. 2000. Walk softly and carry a big map: historical roots

of wildlands network planning. Wild Earth. 10(2): 33–38.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 121

Perry Brown is the Dean, School of Forestry, the University of Montana,

Missoula, MT 59812, U.S.A. E-mail: pbrown@forestry.umt.edu

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Wilderness values have always been of critical importance to guide questions of wilderness policy, allocation, and stewardship. The Pinchot Institute report, Ensuring the Stewardship of

the National Wilderness Preservation System, is driven by these

wilderness values and will, hopefully, become a catalyst for action

in the United States.

Values of Wilderness ____________

Over the years, researchers and essayists have identified

a long list of values that people hold toward wilderness. I

have tried to put them into a manageable list of 10.

1. Historical Value. Some of this value is embodied in our

vision of untrammeled space that looks and feels like it did

in times past. Some value also is embodied in historical uses

that were made of wilderness.

2. Recreational Value. That people value wilderness for

cherished forms of recreation is well known and observed.

Primitive and unconfined forms of recreation are often

associated with wilderness.

3. Ecosystem Integrity Value. It has been observed that

people often envision wilderness as the place where ecosystems are least disturbed by humans and where natural

physical and biological processes operate.

4. Environmental Value. In this value set, we have those

environmental services and functions that wilderness provides so well, such as clean air and water, and diverse and

naturally occurring wildlife populations.

5. Landscape Value. Wilderness is often a place of undisturbed landscapes and the backdrop of scenery for human

observation from more developed and disturbed places. It is

valued for its scenic and aesthetic qualities.

6. Scientific Value. Wilderness is valued as a place where

baseline understanding of physical and biological processes

can be obtained, and as a place where scientific experimentation and observation can be conducted without the confounding nature of other human activities.

7. Spiritual Value. Given its vastness of scale and its

untrammeled nature, wilderness often is viewed as a place

where one can feel close to a creator or to the abstract called

nature. For many, wilderness provides opportunity for selfreflection, meditation, and communion with spiritual things.

8. Traditional Use Value. For some people wilderness

provides the setting for playing out traditional uses of

hunting, fishing, camping, and woodsman skills.

9. Intellectual Value. The intellectual value of wilderness

is expressed in writings about it, in song and art, and in

many forms of discourse among people. It often is valued for

the freedom of intellect that it permits and fosters.

10. Economic Value. While most of the values ascribed to

wilderness seem toward the anti-economic, wilderness also

provides opportunity for employment and economic development. It generates economic value in that it attracts the

interests of people for both on- and offsite use and consideration.

These values of wilderness are the fundamental factors

that drive us to want to ensure that there is wilderness and

that it is sustained over time. They are the values that

should drive our consideration of principles used to guide

wilderness stewardship, and they should drive our stewardship choices.

Pinchot Institute Report on

Wilderness Stewardship in the

United States ___________________

With these ideas about values of wilderness as background, I will turn my attention to the Pinchot Institute

report, Ensuring the Stewardship of the National Wilderness Preservation System. While this report is specific to the

U.S.A., much of its content is relevant to other locales

because it is based on an understanding of many of the

values of wilderness.

The Blue Ribbon panel that prepared the report was

composed of 10 individuals from conservation organizations

and academic institutions, and selected individuals retired

from Federal agencies, including a former U.S. Secretary of

the Interior who was in office when the U.S. Wilderness Act

was passed. I had the pleasure of serving as the chair of the

panel. It had two tasks:

1. Assessing the management of the National Wilderness

Preservation System in contemporary society.

2. Making recommendations regarding the future of wilderness stewardship and the sustainability of the system.

Some of the questions asked by the panel were:

• Is wilderness taken seriously by land management

agencies?

• Is the organizational location and level of wilderness

stewardship positioned for real success?

• Are sufficient funding and staffing resources allocated

to wilderness stewardship?

• Is stewardship clearly defined, and what kinds of stewardship are appropriate?

Personal and Societal Values, and

Wilderness Stewardship

Perry Brown
122 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Brown Personal and Societal Values, and Wilderness Stewardship

• Is there collaboration, cooperation, and consistency in

wilderness stewardship across management agencies?

• Are wilderness clients being well served?

• Can wilderness training and research be improved and

better focused?

The panel focused on stewardship of a resource that has

been growing in importance as a land use in the United

States. The U.S. Wilderness Act passed Congress and was

signed by the President in September 1964, 37 years ago.

Since the passage of the Act, the system has grown from over

10 million acres (4 million ha) in 54 units, to over 105 million

acres (43 million ha) in over 600 units. From surveys,

literature, music, behavior, and experience, we know that

wilderness is more important to the American people than

ever before.

While the panel found that there were some very good

examples of wilderness stewardship, it also found areas of

major and minor concern. Some significant and serious

contemporary dilemmas of wilderness stewardship were

identified:

• Ensuring both naturalness and wildness.

• That wilderness is not isolated from its surrounding

landscape.

• Manipulating wilderness conditions is philosophically

and practically problematic.

• That the place of recreational use in wilderness has not

been made very clear.

• That agency organization and commitment to stewardship are needed for success, but they often seem lacking.

• That excelling in an information exchange environment

implemented through modern information technologies

is new and challenging.

In reviewing the values of wilderness, the questions that

emerged about wilderness stewardship, these contemporary dilemmas, and the track record of the wilderness

management agencies over the past 37 years, eight Principles for Wilderness Stewardship were formulated by the

Panel. We believe that these principles should guide all

wilderness stewardship in the United States, and that most

of them are applicable to wilderness stewardship anywhere

it occurs. These principles are:

1. Adhering to the Wilderness Act is a fundamental principle for stewardship in the United States.

2. United States wilderness areas are to be treated as a

system of wilderness.

3. Wilderness areas are special places and they are to be

treated as special.

4. Stewardship should be science-informed, logically

planned, and publicly transparent.

5. Nondegradation of wilderness should fundamentally

guide stewardship activities.

6. Preservation of wilderness character is a guiding idea

of the Wilderness Act.

7. Recognizing the wild in wilderness distinguishes wilderness from most other land classes.

8. Accountability is basic to sound stewardship.

These principles led the Panel to formulate a set of

recommendations that, if implemented, would shape the

future for success in wilderness stewardship. The six broad

recommendations are:

1. Wilderness agencies and their leaders must make a

strong commitment to wilderness before the wilderness is

lost.

2. Wilderness agencies must organize to maximize stewardship effectiveness and to develop a fully integrated stewardship system.

3. Wilderness planning must be accelerated and plans

prepared for the guidance of stewardship activities.

4. Science, education, and training programs should be

enhanced to provide information, professional expertise,

and public support for wilderness stewardship.

5. Wilderness agencies should create wilderness stewardship positions and career opportunities from top to bottom and deploy financial resources for the explicit stewardship and support of wilderness.

6. Accountability for the maintenance and sustainability

of the wilderness system must be embraced by the wilderness agencies.

While we were critical of the state of the system and many

of the things that are being done, and the absence of things

that need to be done, we also found several activities ongoing

today that are helpful in leading us toward wilderness

stewardship. We need to accelerate them and more quickly

learn how to steward our wilderness resource.

The Wilderness Information Network (www.wilderness.

net) is one such activity. This Web site is a focal point for

information about wilderness, wilderness training, and wilderness research. It is multiagency in function and support,

and demonstrates how information can be managed and

shared to provide a repository of wilderness information for

everyone.

The Arthur Carhart National Wilderness Training Center

and the Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute are

interagency centers advancing understanding of wilderness

and the continuous training of wilderness professionals.

Their success as interagency cooperatives has varied over

time, but they demonstrate that it is possible to construct

interagency, collaborative units. There are also several

collaborating institutions in Alaska that provide examples

of information and policy bodies that are instructive for

collaborative work.

While there are good things happening today, the bottom

line of our report is the need to forge an integrated and

collaborative system across the four wilderness management

agencies. This is something that we have not done in our 37

years of wilderness stewardship, since the passage of the

Wilderness Act in 1964. Our agencies operate as if there were

four wilderness systems, not one, and it is high time that we

got on with developing one integrated system. To move in this

direction we proposed four specific recommendations for the

Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture, the ministers

who oversee the wilderness stewardship agencies.

1. The Secretaries should issue joint policies and regulations specifying common interpretations of law, and thus

provide broad guidelines for the stewardship of wilderness.

2. The Secretaries should devise an organizational structure to make stewardship happen across the agencies so that

a high quality wilderness system is continued in perpetuity.

3. The Secretaries should devise monitoring and evaluation systems to ensure that we know how well wilderness

areas are being stewarded, especially in the context of a
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 123

Personal and Societal Values, and Wilderness Stewardship Brown

system of wildernesses, and they should reinstitute regular

reporting on the state of the system.

4. The Secretaries should develop a means of informing

the American people about the National Wilderness Preservation System and about their wilderness heritage.

The same general needs likely exist for wilderness everywhere. They are to build and steward a system of wildernesses focused on the values that wilderness brings to the

human condition, especially in the relations of humans to

their sustaining environment.

The framework for action prescribed in our report is one

that can lead to effective stewardship and development of a

National Wilderness Preservation System. Recognizing the

many good examples of wilderness stewardship that have

been implemented over the past 37 years, we can adopt a set

of principles for stewardship, implement actions that will

shape the future for success, and work toward ensuring the

existence of a truly integrated National Wilderness Preservation System. That is our challenge, as the values of

wilderness become our stewardship responsibility.

Reference ______________________

Pinchot Institute for Conservation. 2001. Ensuring the stewardship

of the National Wilderness Preservation System: a report to the

USDA Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and U.S. Geological

Survey. Washington, DC: Pinchot Institute for Conservation,

Publications, 1616 P Street NW, Suite 100, Washington, DC

20036, phone: (202) 797-6580, E-mail: publications@pinchot.

org.[Online]. Available: www.pinchot.org/pic/wilderness_

report.pdf

125

4. Protection of Coastal/Marine and

River/Lake Wilderness

Storms River flows into the Indian

Ocean – Tsitsikamma National

Park (photo by Alan Watson).

USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 127

William R Bainbridge is an Environmental Consultant and a Director of

the Wilderness Action Group of South Africa, 314 Alexandra Road.,

Pietermaritzburg 3201, South Africa. E-mail wrbainbr@iafrica.com

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—The purpose of this paper is to describe a recent initiative to rationalize the commercial afforestation program on the

Western Shores of Lake St. Lucia. This initiative is believed to have

considerable potential benefits for the conservation of Lake St.

Lucia: to bring about a significant addition of conservation-worthy

land to the St. Lucia Wetland World Heritage Site, to make important contributions to the conservation of the unique natural communities of the area, and to promote tourism in a portion of the St. Lucia

system not previously available to the public. Overall, this is

expected to create employment opportunities in one of the poorer

parts of the country, stimulate the local economy, and benefit local

communities in other ways. Commercial afforestation, combined

with tourism (and ecotourism), will continue in portions of the

system that are most suitable for these uses, but in a manner

compatible with its World Heritage Site status. From a wilderness

conservation viewpoint, it will add a protective internal buffer to the

southeastern portions of the park, isolating the lake and terrestrial

wildernesses from disturbance from the developed areas along the

principal road and rail access routes to the west of the park.

Historical Perspectives___________

Lake St. Lucia, in the northeastern portion of KwaZuluNatal Province, is the largest natural water body in South

Africa. It has an international reputation because of its

historical background, its considerable natural beauty and

tourism appeal, and its significant natural resources, many

of which have considerable scientific value.

These were among the considerations that led to the

appointment of the St. Lucia Commission of Enquiry in

1964. The Commission was instructed to investigate alleged

threats to the survival of plant and animal life of the lake,

and factors causing high salinity levels in drought years,

which at times were higher than that of the sea. The salinity

regime is the principal physical factor that determines what

Rationalization of the Commercial

Afforestation Program on the Western

Shores of Lake St. Lucia for Nature and

Wilderness Conservation, KwaZulu-Natal

Province, South Africa

William R. Bainbridge

species, and hence ecosystem states, that may occur in the

system at any stage. The Commission was instructed to

recommend a solution that would best suit the lake and

surrounding agriculture, forestry, and domestic and commercial water needs in the total catchment area (Commission of Enquiry, Lake St. Lucia 1966; Taylor 1991).

The recommendations of the Commission were comprehensive and far reaching. Important recommendations included:

• The phasing out of plantations that had been established

in the immediate vicinity of the lake, and consolidation

of this land with other areas to increase the extent of the

protected area surrounding Lake St. Lucia.

• Placement of the lake and the expanded protected area

under a single management authority.

Unfortunately, these recommendations were largely ignored by the apartheid government of the day. The threats

to the lake were in fact intensified in the early 1990s by the

same government (Bainbridge 1993/4), when a proposal to

implement dune mining in the coastal dune cordon on the

Eastern Shores of the lake was given serious consideration

(Tinley 1985). It was anticipated that this form of strip

mining had the potential to cause significant negative impacts on freshwater flows into the lake. However, this threat

was averted by concerted public opposition from local and

international environmentalists (Bainbridge 1993/4; Brooks

and others 1993; Dominy 1992; Leon and others 1993).

An important additional benefit of this campaign to prevent dune mining was the decision by the government to

remove 5,600 ha (13,840 acres) of manmade forests from the

Eastern Shores, which was in itself a noteworthy achievement for the environmental movement. However, this decision did not at that time affect any of the plantations on the

Western Shores, despite the negative impacts on this sensitive environment.

Importance of the St. Lucia Wetland

World Heritage Site ______________

Importance for Nature Conservation

Lake St. Lucia is the estuary on the Mkuze River, but it

also receives water from a number of other smaller rivers

and streams. Although these are all relatively small rivers

by African standards, St. Lucia is one of the largest, if not the
128 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Bainbridge Rationalization of the Commercial Afforestation Program on the Western Shores of Lake St. Lucia...

largest, estuarine system on the African Continent. The lake

is located in the Maputaland Coastal Plain at the southernmost extremity of the Mozambique Coastal Plain, which lies

along the east coast of Africa between Somalia in the north

and Zululand in the northeastern corner of KwaZulu-Natal

Province in South Africa. Lake St. Lucia and its associated

terrestrial, wetland, and marine environments have long

been regarded as having major importance for nature conservation and tourism, and calls made for its protection

(Bruton and Cooper 1980; Delagorgue 1990; Ellis 1975;

Frost 1990; Taylor 1991). These are now protected in the

most important coastal protected area in the country, known

as the Greater St. Lucia Wetland Park, with an area of just

under 290,000 ha (716,600 acres).

The importance of this area has been recognized for over

a century. International recognition of the importance of the

area was accorded when the area was included in two

Wetlands of International Importance under the Ramsar

Convention in 1975 (Jackson 1992a), and admitted to the

World Heritage Site (WHS) list in 1999—the first South

African site to be accorded this prestigious status (KwaZuluNatal Nature Conservation Service 1999).

A complete description of the importance of the area for

nature conservation is provided in its nomination proposal

for WHS satus (KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation Service 1999). Among the many important attributes that

should receive mention is the role of the lake as a breeding

ground and nursery for marine organisms.

Wildernesses of the Park

There has long been appreciation that extensive portions

of the park remain substantially unmodified by technological man, and still retain the near-pristine condition that

pertained when the park was occupied by early huntergatherer people, well into the twentieth century. This is one

of the last remaining coastal areas to survive with its

wilderness character still largely intact, which is one of the

reasons why the park was awarded WHS status (Bainbridge

2001).

A high proportion of the park has been zoned as wilderness

by administrative arrangement for several decades, but

these zones have been revised as part of the management

plan for the WHS (LSDI 2000; Bainbridge and others 2000).

Included in the wilderness zones are an extensive area of the

eastern portion of the lake itself and a large area of land in

the central portion of the park, together with adjacent

marine sanctuary areas in both the central part of the park

and in the north (fig. 1).

These are the only remaining coastal wildernesses in the

country. It is envisaged that these wilderness zones will be

entrenched in law, in terms of recent legislation. Although

not yet afforded legal protection as wilderness areas per se,

they enjoy secure legal protection in terms of several statutes, including the World Heritage Convention Act of 1999.

The St. Lucia wildernesses are nevertheless vulnerable to

disturbance from several quarters, especially from development in the western peripheries of the park. This explains

the importance of the land-use rationalization exercise on

the Western Shores.

Afforestation on the Western

Shores ________________________

Extent of Western Shores Plantations

As noted above, the program to establish commercial

timber plantations on State land on the Eastern and Western Shores of Lake St. Lucia was initiated by the (then)

Department of Forestry nearly 50 years ago. There has been

persistent public opposition to this program from the outset,

since environmentalists were aware of the potential harmful impacts on the wetland systems and the lake itself.

However, the environmental movement at that stage was

not well organized, and this official arm of government

remained impassive, so the program was continued and

expanded. By the start of the present millennium, the total

extent of the manmade forests on the Western Shores was

approximately 23,700 ha (58,560 acres) (Zaloumis and others 1999).

Indications of the Impacts of the Western

Shores Plantations on Freshwater

Supplies to Lake St. Lucia

Typically, the lake has a highly variable salinity regime.

During extensive periods of low rainfall, sea water moves

into the system, and salinity levels may be as high as 90

parts per thousand. In wet seasons, the freshwater inputs

from streamflow and seepage result in almost total flushing

of the salt. These changes are accompanied by enormous and

changing biodiversity. However, while halophylic species

are able to retreat to the sea in times of low salinity, and are

able to recolonize the lake when conditions favorable to them

are re-established, survival options for freshwater species

under hypersaline conditions are more restricted. Plants

may recolonize the lake from the feeder rivers and swamps.

Animals, however, are entirely dependent on refugia maintained in sites with adequate, permanent freshwater inputs.

A high proportion of the water in the lake system is

derived from ground-water seepage and rainfall. From the

above, it is obvious that in times of drought, the importance

of freshwater inputs assumes critical proportions (KwaZuluNatal Nature Conservation Service 1999; Taylor 1991, 1998).

Tinley (1971) considered the ground-water seepage to be

critically important for maintaining salinity at acceptable

levels in periods of drought. Jackson (1992b) estimated that

the desiccating effect of the plantations on the Western

Shores has reduced dry season flow of freshwater from the

Mpate River (the catchment of which is entirely contained in

the Western Shores) by as much as 45 percent.

Decision to Privatize the Plantations of the

Western Shores

The South African government has, in recent years, developed a policy to privatize a number of State assets, including

the extensive timber plantations of the South African Forestry Company Ltd. (SAFCOL), which succeeded the previous Department of Forestry. Private forestry companies
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 129

Rationalization of the Commercial Afforestation Program on the Western Shores of Lake St. Lucia... Bainbridge

Figure 1—Western Shores afforestation, St. Lucia area.
130 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Bainbridge Rationalization of the Commercial Afforestation Program on the Western Shores of Lake St. Lucia...

were invited to submit tenders for various components of the

national timber plantation system. A private company,

Siyaqhubeka Ltd., with both forestry and ecotourism interests, was accepted as the preferred bidder for the Western

Shores plantation.

Study to Rationalize Portions of the

Western Shores Plantation________

Initial Study and Zoning Proposals

At about the same time, the government established the

Lubombo Spatial Development Initiative (LSDI), an arm of

the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, to

develop a new access route between northeastern KwaZuluNatal and Mozambique, and to promote economic development in this previously economically deprived area. Promotion of tourism was selected as one means of stimulating the

local economy and creating jobs, and it was decided that

development of the new World Heritage Site should form a

part of this program. LSDI was also given responsibility for

the establishment of a Park Authority in terms of the WHS

Act, with responsibility for the development of an Integrated

Development Plan for the park, which incorporates a tourism development plan (LSDI 2000).

Following the announcement to privatize the plantations

of the Western Shores, LSDI was instructed by the government to commission a study to investigate the plantations.

This study showed that certain portions of the plantations,

especially those in the western extremity of the plantation

area away from the park, were well suited for commercial

afforestation and were not causing significant impacts to the

park itself. In contrast, other portions in the immediate

peripheries of the park were of similar character to the St.

Lucia Wetland WHS in that they contained areas of conservation-worthy natural communities and wetlands, and also

contained plantations that had been established on hydromorphic soils. In addition, as might be expected by virtue of

its proximity to the park, the area was considered to have

significant potential for tourism (Zaloumis and others 1999).

The study proposed a zoning system for the area to be

privatized included two primary zones:

• A Commercial Afforestation Zone, comprising areas

suited for commercial afforestation.

• A Natural Zone, comprising areas of conservation-worthy natural communities and incorrectly sited plantations capable of rehabilitation back to a near-natural

state, for consolidation with the park.

These proposals had the effect of reducing the extent of the

plantations offered out to tender by approximately onethird, but were nevertheless found to be acceptable by both

the government and the preferred bidder. Acceptance by the

latter was subject to the proviso that the area of plantation

remaining should be economically viable. It was also based

on the stated policy of the company to adhere to the principles and criteria for sustainable forestry set by the Forestry Stewardship Council (FSC) (FSC 1999). Inclusion of

the proposed Natural Zone might have prejudiced their FSC

accreditation (Bainbridge and others 2000).

The government subsequently instructed the parties to

negotiate on the most acceptable means of delineating the

two zones, with the aim of retaining plantations on nonsensitive sites and with the least possible impact on their

economic viability; and selecting a consolidated natural

area, as above, to be incorporated into the protected area as

part of the WHS, and restored to its natural state by removal

of the plantations present and implementation of a rehabilitation program (Zaloumis and Brummer 2001).

Delineation of a Boundary to Separate the

Zones

A technical team comprising professional representatives

of the principal stakeholders was appointed to provide

delineation criteria for a boundary to separate the two zones.

The recommended criteria included the presence of important natural communities, water source areas, and wetlands

for the Natural Zone, and the presence of soils most suitable

for afforestation for the Commercial Afforestation Zone. A

reconnaissance study was implemented to identify broad

groupings of these. The study suggested that a boundary

following natural features would best satisfy these aims. A

standard rectilinear artificial boundary proved unsuitable

to separate the complex mosaic patterns of natural communities. The solution adopted was to site a natural boundary

separating broad soils groupings (essentially the interface

between dryland soils and wetland or hydromorphic soils),

by use of soil augurs, as described in the Procedure for the

Identification and Delineation of Wetland and Riparian

Habitats (Land-Use and Wetland /Riparian Habitat Working Group 2001). The intention was to site the boundary on

an alignment suitable for construction of a permanent road

track, following the principles for establishment of valley

bottom cutoff roads.

Conclusions____________________

This curvilinear natural boundary has provided a satisfactory solution to separation of the two zones, and has been

delineated over a distance of 158 km (98 miles) throughout

the entire length of the Western Shores. It has been fixed by

Geographic Positioning System points, and will be registered as the cadastral boundary for excision of the area for

permanent inclusion within the park.

Summary of the Principal Achievements

of the Initiative

The principal achievements of this planning exercise are:

• The South African government has decided to excise an

area (fig. 2) of approximately 9,000 ha (22,240 acres), which

is to be restored back to a near-natural condition and

consolidated with the park. A time schedule of 5 years has

been set for the removal of 2,000 to 3,000 ha (4,940 to 7,140

acres) of timber in this area and completion of the restoration program. This area contains important natural communities, water source areas, and wetlands, which will add
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 131

Rationalization of the Commercial Afforestation Program on the Western Shores of Lake St. Lucia... Bainbridge

Figure 2—Natural areas in relation to wilderness areas, St. Lucia Wetland World Heritage Site.
132 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Bainbridge Rationalization of the Commercial Afforestation Program on the Western Shores of Lake St. Lucia...

significantly to the biodiversity resources presently conserved in the park. The area is expected to form part of the

St. Lucia Wetland World Heritage Site, following completion of the restoration operations.

• The change in land use is also expected to benefit the

WHS by improvement of crucial freshwater supplies

into the lake following removal of the timber plantations, and by the provision of access for tourists for the

first time to the western portions of the lake.

• The changes will also benefit the wilderness areas (fig. 1),

since it will form an additional buffer within the park, to

protect the wildernesses from development in the western peripheries of the park.

• The remaining plantations, with a total area of about

15,000 ha (37,000 acres), are considered to form an

economically viable enterprise, and will constitute a

sustainable land use in the peripheries of the park.

• The proposals conform to the requirements for the

establishment of a Biosphere Reserve.

• The exercise will make important contributions to both

the national and local economies, and provide a significant number of permanent jobs.

Acknowledgments ______________

I wish to acknowledge the role of the Lubombo Spatial

Initiative in funding and coordinating this study, and for

permission to quote from its reports. I also wish to acknowledge with thanks the contributions made by my colleagues

Andrew Zaloumis, Roger Collinson, Andrew Blackmore,

Peter Gardiner, and Keith Snyman, who made major contributions to the study.

References _____________________

Bainbridge, W. R. 1993/4. Lake St. Lucia and the Eastern Shores.

The Natal Parks Board’s role in the environmental impact report.

Natalia (Journal of the Natal Society). 23 & 24 (December 1993

and December 1994): 45–60.

Bainbridge, W. R. 2001. An update on wilderness conservation in

the New South Africa. International Journal of Wilderness. 7(3):

38–42.

Bainbridge, W. R.; Blackmore A. C.; Gardiner, P. 2000. Unpublished

report on the delineation of a proposed boundary to separate

portions of the Western Shores State Forest into a timber production and a natural zone. Durban: Lubombo Spatial Development

Initiative. 16 p.

Brooks S.; Edgecombe R.; Ellis B.; Kotze, S.; Snell, M. 1993. Unpublished comment on Dominy, G. (1992). History of Lake St. Lucia

Eastern Shores. Submitted to the Natal Parks Board. 13 p.

Bruton, M. N.; Cooper, K. H., eds. 1980. Studies on the ecology of

Maputaland. Grahamstown, South Africa: Rhodes University.

560 p.

Commission of Enquiry, Lake St. Lucia. 1966. Report of the Commission of Enquiry into the alleged threat to animal and plant life

in Lake St. Lucia. Pretoria: Government Printer.

Delagorgue, A. 1990. Travels in Southern Africa. Killie Campbell

Africana Library: Durban; University of Natal Press: Pietermaritzburg. 359 p.

Dominy, G. 1992. History of Lake St. Lucia Eastern Shores. In:

Environmental impact assessment, Eastern Shores of Lake St.

Lucia. Vol. 1, Part 1: Specialist reports. Grahamstown: Coastal &

Environmental Services: 424–445.

Ellis, B. 1975. Game conservation in Zululand (1824–1947).

Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal. 60 p. Thesis.

Forestry Stewardship Council. 1999. Principles and criteria for

forest stewardship. Oaxaca, Mexico: Forestry Stewardship

Council. 11 p.

Frost, S. J. 1990. Lake St. Lucia: public opinion, environmental

issues to the position of the government, 1964–1966 to 1989–

1990: A case study in changing attitudes to conservation.

Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal. 136 p. Thesis.

Jackson, P. 1992a. Wetlands. In: Specialist reports, Eastern Shores

of Lake St. Lucia; environmental impact assessment.

Grahamstown: Coastal and Environmental Services: 377–404.

Jackson, P. 1992b Ramsar report. In: Specialist reports, Eastern

Shores of Lake St. Lucia; environmental impact assessment.

Grahamstown: Coastal Environmental Services: 695–734.

KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation Service. 1999. Nomination

proposal for the Greater St. Lucia Wetland Park to be listed as

a World Heritage Site. KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation

Service. 77 p.

Land-Use and Wetland /Riparian Habitat Working Group. 2001.

Practical field procedure for identification and delineation of

wetland/riparian habitats. Unpublished report by Mondi Forests, Pietermaritzburg. 42 p.

Leon, R. N.; Hotz, S.; Breen, C. M.; Ngubane, H.; Soni, R. 1993.

Eastern Shores of Lake St. Lucia Kingsa/Tojan Lease Area

Review Panel report. Pretoria: Department of Environment

Affairs. 57 p.

Lubombo Spatial Development Initiative. 2000. Integrated development management plan, Greater St Lucia Wetland Park.

Pretoria: Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism.

281 p.

Taylor, R. 1991. The Greater St. Lucia Wetland Park. Natal Parks

Board. 48 p.

Taylor, R. 1998. The ecology of Lake St Lucia. In: Proceedings of the

Living Lakes conference; 1998 November 15–17; Chater’s Creek,

St. Lucia, South Africa. [Online]. Available: http://www.

livinglakes.org/news/199811proceedings.htm#_Toc449251057

Tinley, K. L. 1971. Lake St. Lucia and its peripheral sand catchments:

the ecology and implications of proposals to save a condemned

system. Unpublished report. Durban, South Africa: Wildlife Society of South Africa. 68 p.

Tinley, K. L. 1985. Coastal dunes of South Africa. Southern African

National Scientific Programs, CSIR Report #109. Pretoria: Center for Scientific and Industrial Research. 293 p.

Zaloumis, A. P.; Brummer, N. 2001. Report on the findings and

recommendations of the working group on finalization of the

demarcation of State Forest Land for incorporation into the

Greater St. Lucia Wetland Park, and land to be retained for

commercial afforestation, Western Shores of Lake St. Lucia.

Durban: Lubombo Spatial Development Initiative. 6 p.

Zaloumis, A. P.; Collinson, R. F. H.; Bainbridge, W. R.; Blackmore,

A. 1999. A rapid environmental appraisal of commercial afforestation on the Western Shores of Lake St. Lucia. Durban: Lubombo

Spatial Development Initiative. 83 p.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 133

John J. Daigle is Assistant Professor and Program Leader of the Parks,

Recreation and Tourism Program, Department of Forest Management, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469, U.S.A. Phone: 207-581-2850, E-mail:

john_daigle@umenfa.maine.edu. Jamie Hannon is a Graduate Student in the

Parks, Recreation and Tourism Program. Cynthia Stacey is Associate Professor, Recreation and Leisure Studies Program, University of New Brunswick,

Fredericton, NB E3B 5A3, Canada.

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Factor analysis identified three major underlying dimensions characterizing indicators of experience quality: careless

or disrespectful resource impacts, solitude, and resource impact/

development. Certain indicators of experience quality were found to

be more important than others, depending upon user group. For

example, experiencing solitude was much more important for boaters who used the full river or river and lake sections of the waterway,

versus boaters who only used lake sections. Emotional/symbolic and

functional place attachment were measured for different user groups.

Lake users reported higher levels of agreement to emotional/symbolic and functional place attachment than river users. Compared

to lake users with a relatively low emotional/symbolic attachment,

lake users with high attachment levels indicated a stronger desire

for solitude and experiencing an undeveloped area with lightly

impacted campsites. Indicators of experience quality involving

careless or disrespectful resource impacts was important regardless

of type of user group, and it did not matter whether users had high

or low levels of agreement to place attachment statements.

Introduction ____________________

The St. Croix International Waterway is a complex of

lakes and river segments stretching approximately 115

miles (185 km) along the border of eastern Maine and New

Brunswick. The waterway is comprised of three major geographic zones: (1) a headwater lakes and river section characterized by mostly undeveloped shoreline, (2) a lower river

section of developed and industrialized river, and (3) a tidal

estuary and bay system. This study is concerned exclusively

with the headwater lakes and upper river section. This

region is the longest stretch of undeveloped international

waterway east of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area of

Factors Influencing Experience Quality:

Comparing User Groups and Place

Attachment at the St. Croix International

Waterway

John J. Daigle

Jamie Hannon

Cynthia Stacey

Minnesota and Ontario (SCIWC 1998). It is listed as one of

Maine’s Twenty Outstanding Rivers, and it is officially

recognized as the St. Croix Waterway Recreation Area by

the Province of New Brunswick (fig. 1). Most significantly,

the St. Croix was included in the Canadian National Heritage

river system in 1991, the first such designation in Atlantic

Canada.

Because the waterway is an international boundary, recreation and resource management is conducted by several

agencies, including the International Joint Commission, the

Bureau of Parks and Lands and the State Forest Service in

Maine, and the Department of Natural Resources and Energy in New Brunswick. In 1986, a Memorandum of Understanding between Maine and New Brunswick created the St.

Croix International Waterway Commission, an advisory

agency, which has since taken the lead in studying waterway-related issues and coordinating planning for future

waterway management needs. In a 1993 report, the St. Croix

International Waterway Commission noted, “distinct land

and water management policies are applied without integration on opposite sides of the waterway, leaving it vulnerable to incompatible uses and potential quality loss” (SCIWC

Figure 1—Originally intended to recognize multiple uses of the 32,000

miles of rivers and streams, the Maine Rivers Act (MRA) states the

need for balance among various uses. The MRA specifically recognizes the need to protect outstanding rivers that provide unparalleled

natural and recreational values, including unique recreational activities

and solace from an industrialized society. Here, overnight canoeists

travel the lower river section of the St. Croix International Waterway.
134 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Daigle, Hannon, and Stacey Factors Influencing Experience Quality: Comparing User Groups and Place Attachment...

1993). One of the key goals developed by the commission was

to protect and provide for the continuation of quality recreational experiences, especially traditional backcountry canoe trips.

Providing quality recreational experiences while preserving the natural character of the St. Croix International

Waterway poses some significant challenges (fig. 2). Primary among these is the unique combination of natural

setting and accessibility, and nearness to major population

centers in the United States and Canada. The waterway is

within a day’s drive of 32 million people, and is well known

regionally as an excellent canoe trip with summer water and

easy, enjoyable whitewater. No agency currently places any

kind of entry fee or use regulation on visits to the waterway,

and recreational use is essentially unmanaged.

Key to protecting backcountry experiences of the St. Croix

International Waterway is an understanding of the different

aspects of the visitor experience and recognizing which of

these are important to visitors. These indicators of experience quality are measurable variables that help define the

quality of the recreation experience and standards of quality

that define the minimum acceptable conditions (Manning

1999). Good indicators are practical to measure quantitatively, sensitive to the type and amount of use, and potentially responsive to management control (Lucas and Stankey

1985; Watson and others 1998). They are used in managerial

planning cycles such as Limits of Acceptable Change (Stankey

and others 1985) or Visitor Impact Management (Graefe and

others 1990) along with standards to guide the implementation of management strategies and monitoring efforts.

Several studies examining indicators of quality have revealed some variables to be more important than others

(Manning 1999). For example, litter and other signs of

visitor use impacts appear to be more important to recreation users compared to management-related impacts such

as signs and presence of rangers. Social indicators of quality,

especially those dealing with behaviors or types of other user

groups at secluded campsite locations, are more important

than ecological indicators. Visitors to more primitive areas

or sites may be generally more sensitive to a variety of

potential indicators of quality than visitors to more highly

used and developed areas or sites. On the St. Croix International Waterway, users have unrestricted access to both

primitive and developed sites and a wide range of wateroriented opportunities. The situation suggests the need to

understand the diverse recreation experiences and indicators of quality.

Matching the experiences visitors seek with opportunity

settings best suited to providing those experiences is one of

the major challenges to the outdoor recreation manager

(Clark and Stankey 1979). On one hand, a user allocates

personal resources (primarily time and money) to produce a

desired recreational experience (Jubenville 1986). Users

engage in a leisure activity with the expectation that it will

fulfill selected needs, motivations, or other desired states

(Schreyer 1986). Daigle and others (2002) report that choice

of a particular leisure activity may not only be closely related

to the specific benefits people derive, or believe they derive,

but also tied to the perceived likelihood that the benefits will

be produced. On the other hand, a manager provides a site

by combining various managerial inputs (physical development, regulation, resource management) with the specific

environmental setting (Jubenville 1986). Identifying the

consequences of management actions is extremely important because those actions can attract or deter a given

clientele group to a particular setting (Clark and Stankey

1979). For example, while some users may approve of management actions (for example, easier access), others may

disapprove and be forced to adjust expectations (for example, seeing more users). Increasing access may change

the type or number of visitors, and that in turn may influence the likelihood of fulfilling certain user desires (for

example, secluded travel and camping). In this scenario, a

certain clientele group may be displaced because the setting

is not likely to meet their needs. Understanding these

dynamics may be especially important in terms of a “home

range” for assessing relative availability of, and demand for,

different types of place-related opportunities for activities

and experiences sought within a particular region (Daigle

and others 1994).

A number of studies have examined place attachment as

a construct for understanding the relationship visitors have

to particular settings and as a tool for resource planning

(Moore and Graefe 1994; Warzecha and others 2000; Watson

and others 1991, 1992; Williams and others 1992). Warzecha

and others (2000) found that users of the Green and Colorado

Rivers had different levels of agreement with emotional/

symbolic and functional place attachment to each setting, as

well as between settings. Place attachment is embedded in

feelings for a specific place in contrast to specific attributes

of a place necessary for a particular activity (Schreyer and

others 1981). Users’ opinions regarding place attachment to

rivers appeared to be related to the levels of importance they

attached to motives for taking the trip. In addition, users

with high levels of agreement to place attachment with their

respective rivers attached different levels of importance to

motives. There was a stronger desire for wild land experiences and management actions that provide opportunities

for those types of experiences at one particular setting. The

authors conclude that in order to optimize the likelihood of

Figure 2—Better access, light and durable canoes, and growing

popularity of other self-propelled watercraft such as kayaks are a few

reasons for the increased diversity of use and user groups. Here a day

user runs the rapids at Little Falls on the upper river section of the

St. Croix International Waterway.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 135

Daigle, Hannon, and Stacey Factors Influencing Experience Quality: Comparing User Groups and Place Attachment...

meeting visitors’ needs at that particular site, it is appropriate to consider several different management strategies

intended to provide a diversity of experience opportunities.

The purpose of this article is to examine experience quality domains and the relationship of these domains to different user groups and their place attachment to the St. Croix

International Waterway. First, we answer the question,

“Which indicators are important in defining the experience

quality of St. Croix International Waterway visitors?” Second, we identify users’ relationship to resource in terms of

emotional/symbolic and functional place attachment for

different groups. Rather than examining differing levels of

agreement of place attachment for overall users to a specific

place or compared to other places, we focus on the diverse

users of the St. Croix International Waterway.

Methods for Experience Quality and

User Group Comparisons ________

In response to the Waterway Commission’s strong desire,

among others, to protect opportunities for secluded backcountry canoe travel and camping, we employed a similar

visitor survey approach conducted by Watson and others

(1992). A random sampling scheme was utilized, and a

modified Dillman (1983) mailing approach was implemented.

The survey methodology has been described in detail elsewhere (Stacey and Daigle 2000). Approximately 404 useable

questionnaires were returned, for an overall response rate of

62 percent. This extensive, self-administered, mail-back

questionnaire was designed to provide information on a

variety of variables related to use and user characteristics on

the waterway.

Based on a literature review and feedback from resource

specialists familiar with the St. Croix Waterway, we developed 22 items to assess social, resource, and management

conditions that may affect the quality of visitor experiences.

Respondents rated the significance of items defining the

quality of experience on the waterway on a 5-point Likert

scale ranging from “I care about the item ‘not at all’ to

‘extremely’.” The responses were subjected to factor analysis

with varimax rotation, using principal-components extraction (SPSS 1999). The number of factors was determined by

evaluating eigenvalues created from the factor analysis

(Kaiser 1960) and examining “scree” or the break in the

plotted line of eigenvalues (Kass and Tinsley 1979). The

internal consistency of each experience dimension scale was

assessed using reliability analysis (Cronbach 1951).

Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were computed for each set of

items comprising each experience dimension.

Although the procedure maximizes the differences between selected factors while minimizing the differences

within them, it does not express the magnitude to which

respondents relate to a given factor. Based on variables

defining each dimension, a mean scale score was developed

as a “strength-of-importance” measure to compare the magnitude of importance of each dimension across user groups.

As an example, we computed a mean scale score for the

dimension we labeled “careless or disrespectful resource

impacts” by first adding the scale scores for the variables that

loaded for this factor [var1 (amount of litter I see on the

riverbanks) + var2 (amount of litter I see around the campsite)

+ var3 (number of trees at campsites that have been damaged by people)] and then dividing the total score by 3, the

number of variables in this particular dimension. Mean

scale scores for the 3 dimensions were developed for the

combined user groups, as well as for defined user subgroups.

In a previous publication based on data from this survey

(Hannon and others 2002), we provided evidence for unique

user subgroups of the St. Croix Waterway. The groups are

distinguished by demographic and visit characteristics, mode

of travel, and prior experience in the waterway area. They

utilize distinct, sometimes overlapping zones within the

waterway, each of which is defined by geographic features

and accessibility. The first regional group is that which

utilized the upper lakes, a diverse group of motorized and

human-propelled visitors, about half of whom were overnight visitors. The next is that which utilized the lower

lakes, primarily day-use fishers. The third is that which

utilized only the upper river, a section typified by quick

water and numerous, easy rapids. The fourth is that which

utilized the full 40-mile (64-km) river section, combining the

quick water of the upper river with a more remote and placid

lower section. The final user group traveled on both a lake

and the 40-mile river section and stayed out for 2 or more

nights.

We used one-way analysis of variance to compare mean

scale scores of the importance of experience quality for each

factor across respondents in user subgroups. The comparison yielded insight on the variation of importance for certain

experience dimensions among user groups. Tukey post hoc

tests of pair-wise differences in means were used to identify

significant differences in average degree of importance for

the dimensions between user groups. Differences were reported at the p < 0.05 level of significance.

Results of Experience Quality and

User Group Comparisons ________

The factor analysis of the 22 items related to the importance of items that influence the quality of respondent’s

experience on the St. Croix International Waterway suggests that they could be grouped into four dimensions.

Kaiser’s criterion of retaining factor eigenvalues ≥1 and

Cattell’s methods of retaining the number of factors above

the break, or scree, were used to assist in identifying the four

dimensions. Considering variables with factor loading ≥0.5,

we labeled the four dimensions as (1) careless or disrespectful resource impacts, (2) management activities, (3) solitude,

and (4) resource impact/development. For the four factors,

total variance was 59.37 percent. The management activities factor, containing variables such as “water level for

boating conditions” and “availability of a toilet, picnic table

and firepit at campsite,” was not retained for the other

analyses because of a low Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of

items making up the factor. The item correlations were of an

acceptable magnitude for the other factors (Alpha = 0.91,

0.85, and 0.78, for solitude, careless or disrespectful resource

impacts, and resource impact/development, respectively).

The items for each of these remaining factors were therefore

averaged to form mean scale scores.

We compared mean scale scores for each factor on a user

group basis (table 1). The dimension of careless or disrespectful
136 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Daigle, Hannon, and Stacey Factors Influencing Experience Quality: Comparing User Groups and Place Attachment...

resource impact had the overall highest mean scale score

(4.21) for the combined user groups. Statistically significant

differences in levels of importance were demonstrated among

Extended Trippers (4.50) and Lower Lakes (4.00) user groups.

The importance of this factor as compared to the other

factors for all user groups is consistent with other authors’

findings that litter is the most highly ranked influence on

experience quality (for example, Roggenbuck and others

1993; Whittaker 1992).

In contrast to the careless or disrespectful behavior factor,

the importance of things that influence the quality of

respondent’s experience associated with solitude was more

variable among user groups. Statistically significant differences in levels of importance were found between Full River

(3.85), Extended Tripper (3.77) users groups, and Upper

Lakes (3.01), Upper River (2.98), and Lower Lakes (2.46)

user groups. In addition, statistically significant differences

in levels of importance were found between Upper Lakes,

Upper River user groups and the Lower Lakes user group.

The mean scale score for the combined user groups was 3.15.

The top three items in the solitude factor (“amount of noise

associated with human activities on the waterway,” “amount

of noise associated with human activities away from the

waterway,” and “number of other groups that camp in sight

or sound of my site”) all rated more than moderately important. These top items are not related to numbers of encounters (“number of large groups that I see along the waterway,”

“number of boats I see along the waterway,” and “the percent

of time other people are in sight while I am boating”), but are

indicative of types of visitor behavior, especially intrusive

noise. This finding is consistent with that of several studies

reported in Manning (1999), and that solitude or seclusion

evaluations involve more than just the number of people met

during a trip (Watson 1995).

The importance of experiencing an undeveloped area,

lightly impacted campsite, factor was compared across the

five user groups. Variables making up this factor included

“forestry operations visible from the river,” “the visibility of

lights originating outside the waterway,” “the visibility of

camps and homes along the shore,” “the amount of vegetation loss and bare ground around a campsite,” and “number

of makeshift camps created by visitors.” Statistically significant differences in levels of importance for this factor were

demonstrated between Extended Tripper (3.51), Full River

(3.51) user groups, and the Upper Lakes (3.03), Lower

Lakes (2.75) user groups. In addition, the Upper River

(3.22) user group was found to be significantly different than

the Lower Lakes user group. The three user groups that

utilized the river for all or part of their trip placed much

higher emphasis on the importance of campsite conditions in

influencing the quality of their visit. Cameron and Stacey

(2001) report that the campsites associated with the river

are more heavily impacted by use than are the campsites on

the lakes. Also, it is not surprising that the Lower Lakes user

group placed little importance on the condition of campsites

because only 24 percent reported an overnight stay.

We would like to note certain things that were important

to all user groups but did not load into a distinct factor or

there was poor inter-item reliability of variables making up

the management factor. For example, “water level for boating conditions” and “the availability of a toilet, picnic table,

and fire pit at a campsite location” were rated moderately to

very important for all user groups. The Extended Trippers

and Full River user groups had the most concern for solitude

and naturalness conditions; however, similar to the other

user groups, they thought these management activities

were important things influencing experience quality. Finally, “bank erosion at campsites,” which did not load into

any factor was rated moderately to very important for all

user groups.

Methods for User Group

and Place Attachment

Comparisons ___________________

To measure emotional/symbolic and functional place attachment, our study used place attachment statements from

previous research by Watson and others (1992) and similar

to recent research by Warzecha and others (2000). Five

statements measured emotional/symbolic attachment:

• This place means a lot to me.

• I feel no commitment to this place.

• I feel like this place is a part of me.

• I am very attached to this place.

• I identify strongly with this place.

Seven statements measured functional attachment:

• I would not substitute any other area for doing the types

of things I did here.

• I get more satisfaction out of visiting this place than

from visiting any other recreation place.

Table 1—A user group comparison of mean scale scores related to

importance of experience quality from a 1998 survey of St.

Croix International Waterway visitors.

Mean

Importance of User scale

experience quality N group scorea

Factor 1: Careless or 36 Extended Trippers 4.50b

disrespectful impact 106 Upper River 4.35

56 Full River 4.29

142 Upper Lakes 4.06

38 Lower Lakes 4.00b

378 Overall mean 4.21

Factor 2: Solitude 56 Full River 3.85c,d,e

34 Extended Trippers 3.77b,f,g

138 Upper Lakes 3.01e,g,h

104 Upper River 2.98d,f,i

36 Lower Lakes 2.46b,c,h,i

368 Overall mean 3.15

Factor 3: Resource 35 Extended Trippers 3.51b,g

impact/development 55 Full River 3.51c,e

104 Upper River 3.22i

131 Upper Lakes 3.03e,g

37 Lower Lakes 2.75b,c,i

362 Overall mean 3.17

a

 Means identified with the same letter are significant at the p < 0.05 level.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 137

Daigle, Hannon, and Stacey Factors Influencing Experience Quality: Comparing User Groups and Place Attachment...

• I enjoy doing the types of things I did here in the area

more than in any other place.

• This area is the best place for the things I like to do.

• The time I spent here could have just as easily been

spent somewhere else.

• No other place can compare to this area.

• This place makes me feel like no other place can.

Respondents rated the place attachment statements for

the St. Croix International Waterway on a 5-point Likert

scale from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree.” A numerical value was assigned after respondents answered the statements to reflect the following scale responses (+2 = strongly

agree, +1 = agree, 0 = neutral, –1 = disagree, and –2 strongly

disagree). For each user group (Upper Lake, Lower Lake,

Upper River, Full River, Extended Tripper), grand mean

scores were calculated for emotional/symbolic attachment

and functional attachment to determine the strength of

respondents’ agreement with the place attachment statements. (For analytical purposes, the 5-point scale was reversed for the statements “I feel no commitment to this place”

and “The time I spent here could have just as easily been

spent somewhere else” so it could be compared to the other

emotional/symbolic statements and functional statements,

respectively.)

We used 1-way analysis of variance to compare mean scale

scores of the level of agreement for each place attachment

between user groups. The internal consistency for the five

statements measuring emotional/symbolic attachment and

the seven statements measuring functional attachment

was assessed using reliability analysis (Cronbach 1951).

Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were computed for each set of

items comprising place attachment scales.

Similar to the Warzecha and others (2000) investigation,

we sought to determine whether there was a relationship

between high and low levels of agreement with place attachment statements and respondents’ importance with certain

experience domains. We compared the highest and lowest 25

percent of the mean scores for each type of place attachment

for the Upper Lakes and Upper River user groups. (For

analytical purposes, the other user groups were not part of

this analysis because of the low sample sizes.) Utilizing the

upper and lower limits allows us to examine both ends of the

agreement spectrum. As Warzecha and others (2000) point

out, the upper and lower limits do not represent the majority

of the user groups, but they may serve as an important

barometer in evaluating attitudes about resource management issues.

We used SPSS to run 2-tailed t-tests to determine whether

there were statistically significant differences between respondents with high and low levels of agreement with

emotional/symbolic and functional attachment statements

and how they responded to statements of importance for

experience domains. We examined differences in responses

within the Upper Lakes and within the Upper River user

groups, as well as between the Upper Lakes and Upper River

user groups, for respondents demonstrating high and low

levels of agreement with the place attachment statements.

Results of User Groups

and Place Attachment

Comparisons ___________________

Levels of emotional/symbolic attachment (rated on a

5-point scale, +2 to –2) were compared for the five user

groups (table 2). Statistically significant differences in levels

of agreement with emotional/symbolic place attachment

statements were found between the Upper Lakes (1.01) and

Full River (0.56) user groups. Inter-item reliability for the

five statements, as reflected by the Alpha scores, ranged

from (0.80 to 0.92).

Levels of functional attachment were compared across

user groups (table 3). Statistically significant differences in

levels of agreement were evident among the user groups.

Mean scores were highest for the Upper Lakes (0.67) and

lowest for the Full River (0.00) user groups. In addition,

statistically significant differences in levels of agreement

with functional place attachment statements were found

between the Lower Lakes (0.54) and the Full River user

groups. Overall, the inter-item reliability of seven statements for functional place attachment was slightly higher

than the reliability of emotional/symbolic statements (0.87

to 0.92).

For both types of place attachment, respondents in the

Upper Lakes and Upper River user groups with high and

low levels of agreement indicated differences in the importance of items defining the quality of experience on the

waterway (rated on a 5-point scale, 1 to 5). These differences

were apparent both within the Upper Lakes and Upper

Table 2—Levels of emotional/symbolic place attachment for five

user groups.

User group N Meana SD Alpha

Upper Lakes 147 1.01a 0.83 0.92

Lower Lakes 39 .87 .83 .89

Upper River 104 .81 .83 .92

Full River 54 .56a .57 .80

Extended trippers 36 .76 .64 .86

a Means identified with the same letter are significant at the p < 0.05 level.

Table 3—Levels of functional place attachment for five user groups.

User group N Meana SD Alpha

Upper Lakes 145 0.67a 0.89 0.92

Lower Lakes 38 .54b .88 .92

Upper River 102 .38 .84 .92

Full River 54 .00a,b .67 .87

Extended Trippers 35 .20 .79 .91

a Means identified with the same letter are significant at the p < 0.05 level.
138 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Daigle, Hannon, and Stacey Factors Influencing Experience Quality: Comparing User Groups and Place Attachment...

River user groups and between the Upper Lakes and Upper

River user groups. For example, for both user groups the

importance of experiencing solitude was rated higher for

respondents with high levels of agreement with emotional/

symbolic statements than for respondents with low levels of

agreement (table 4). For functional attachment, however, no

significant differences were detected between respondents

with high and low levels of agreement for either the Upper

Lakes or the Upper River user groups.

Strength of agreement also was associated with statistically significant differences in respondents’ ratings of the

importance of experiencing an undeveloped area and lightly

impacted campsite (table 5). For the Upper Lakes user

group, respondents with high emotional/symbolic agreement rated this factor higher than respondents with low

agreement (3.17 and 2.67, respectively). Evaluation of functional attachment, as associated with this factor, revealed

significant differences between respondents with high and

low levels of agreement in the Upper River user group (3.46

and 2.88, respectively). In addition, experiencing an undeveloped, lightly impacted campsite was more important for

the Upper River respondents with high levels of functional

attachment (3.46) than for respondents in the Upper Lakes

with high levels of agreement (2.90).

For both types of place attachment, respondents in the

Upper Lakes and Upper River user groups with high and low

levels of agreement did not differ significantly in the importance of careless or disrespectful behavior related to the

quality of experience on the waterway (table 6). For example, not seeing litter or damaged trees at a campsite was

rated similarly important for respondents in the Upper

River group with low levels of agreement to functional place

attachment (4.19), as compared to respondents in the Upper

River group with high levels of agreement to functional place

attachment (4.40). For both types of place attachment,

respondents with the same high and low levels of agreement

to statements did not differ significantly in the importance

of the careless or disrespectful behavior factor. For example,

not seeing litter or damaged trees at campsites was rated

similarly important in the Upper River group with high

levels of agreement to emotional attachment statements

(4.11) as with the Upper Lakes group with high levels of

agreement to emotional attachment statements (4.44).

Discussion _____________________

Providing high quality, backcountry recreational opportunities on the St. Croix International Waterway has become more challenging over time as ease of access has

increased and nearby population centers in the Northeastern United States and Atlantic Canada have grown. In this

region, the majority of backcountry experiences occur on

private or State-owned lands, most of which lack specific,

codified guidance as to the type of settings or activities that

managers should maintain. Also, the broad diversity of

users at the St. Croix Waterway suggests that experiencing

a remote or backcountry setting may not be a priority for all

or even a majority of users. In these conditions, the risk of

creeping product shift is great. The task of managing agencies becomes more complex as they try to provide for a

spectrum of recreational opportunities while still maintaining high quality backcountry experiences. For example,

recently, many campsites on the St. Croix International

Waterway have been hardened and enlarged, with singlecell sites split into multiple adjacent cells (Cameron and

Stacey 2001) (fig. 3). These steps were taken to meet a

perceived need for durable camping spots, but the possible

impact on traditional backcountry values was not considered. Understanding the users and their multiple definitions of a quality experience provides key information for

meeting these seemingly conflicting goals.

Experience Dimensions

The results of the factor analysis can provide guidance for

managing agencies of the St. Croix International Waterway. The analysis suggests that for some dimensions of

Table 4—Importance of solitude for respondents with high and low

place attachment on upper lakes and upper river sections

of the St. Croix International Waterway.

Emotional/symbolic Functional

attachment attachment

Upper Upper Upper Upper

Lakes River Lakes River

Low 2.46a 2.57b 2.77 2.73

High 3.32a 3.32b 3.23 3.24

Means identified with the same letter are significant at the p < 0.05 level.

Table 5—Importance of experiencing an undeveloped area, lightly

impacted campsite for respondents with high and low

place attachment on Upper Lakes and Upper River sections

of the St. Croix International Waterway.

Emotional/symbolic Functional

attachment attachment

Upper Upper Upper Upper

Lakes River Lakes River

Low 2.67a 3.03 2.81 2.88a

High 3.17a 3.53 2.90b 3.46a,b

Means identified with the same letter are significant at the p < 0.05 level.

Table 6—Importance of careless or disrespectful impacts for respondents with high and low place attachment on Upper

Lakes and Upper River sections of the St. Croix International

Waterway.

Emotional/symbolic Functional

attachment attachment

Upper Upper Upper Upper

Lakes River Lakes River

Low 3.75 4.12 4.03 4.19

High 4.11 4.44 3.96 4.40

Means identified with the same letter are significant at the p < 0.05 level.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 139

Daigle, Hannon, and Stacey Factors Influencing Experience Quality: Comparing User Groups and Place Attachment...

experience quality there is substantial agreement between

all user groups about levels of importance. For example, the

importance of careless and disrespectful impacts (litter, tree

damage) were only significantly different between the Lower

Lakes and Extended Trip user groups, and all user groups

rated the items in this factor very or extremely important.

This finding is consistent with that reported in other studies

(for example, Manning 1999). Management-related activities (campsite amenities, water level management, interpretive sites, and programs) were also similarly ranked by

all five groups, with a high importance placed on campsite

amenities and on water level management, and a low importance placed on interpretive signs and programming.

Differences also emerge from the factor analysis, particularly regarding the opportunities to experience solitude and

opportunities to experience lightly impacted campsites and

a primarily undeveloped natural setting. The two groups of

canoeists whose activities are most dependent on an undeveloped backcountry setting (Full River, Extended Trip)

placed higher importance on the opportunity to experience

solitude than did the other three user groups, and this aspect

of the experience was significantly less important for the

Lower Lakes user group than for all the other groups. The

Upper River group was also different than the two other

river-oriented user groups. This Upper River group contains

a higher proportion of day users, and day use has been shown

to be associated with lower importance for solitude (Cole

2001).

The importance placed on the opportunity to experience

an undeveloped viewshed and lightly impacted campsites

also differed between several of the user groups (fig. 4).

Again, the two river-oriented, multinight groups of canoeists placed the greatest importance on experiencing natural

conditions, and they are joined in this regard by the Upper

River user group. All three of these river groups rate higher

on this dimension than the two lake groups. This is not

surprising because the two lake groups have a much higher

proportion of day users (41 percent in Upper Lakes, 76

percent for Lower Lakes). Also, recent studies of campsite

conditions in the waterway (Cameron and Stacey 2001)

indicate that campsites on the upper river segment are in

substantially poorer condition than in other waterway regions. Hendee and others (1990) report that visitors are

usually less concerned with campsite conditions and other

resource impacts, instead focusing on various social conditions. Watson and others (1998) have reported similarity in

the rankings of social and resource indicators by wilderness

boaters, even though users were found to have diverse

motivations or experience preferences. Our findings suggest

that on the St. Croix International Waterway, while differences do occur, all groups except the Lower Lakes users

placed moderate to high importance on this experience

dimension. Generally, most visitors are very concerned

about certain kinds of resource impacts, and may be willing

to tolerate more heavy-handed management to ensure the

availability of high quality campsites.

Comparing these distinct user groups provides insight on

potential management challenges and opportunities. While

the five groups are unique in demographics, visit characteristics, and motives, their zones of travel often overlap. For

example, the Extended Trip group travels through every

zone of the waterway. These overlapping use zones are areas

with a high potential for conflict. However, the groups that

place the highest importance on the qualities traditionally

defining a backcountry experience—solitude and natural

conditions—also travel for at least a portion of their trip in

sections of the waterway that could easily provide those

conditions. These groups could benefit from the creation of

certain campsites along the waterway specifically reserved

for primitive camping and nonmotorized access. Areas of

the upper lakes are especially well suited to this strategy

because of the large number of islands, stretches of undeveloped shoreline, and numerous isolated coves. The lowest

stretch of river might also be well suited for this kind of zoning

Figure 3—User groups of the St. Croix International Waterway

were not as concerned with the number of others camped nearby as

they were with specific behaviors. Multi-cell campsites recently

established to accommodate more users at popular locations increase the likelihood of users experiencing disruptive behavior, such

as noise from other campers.

Figure 4—Approximately 95 percent of the land in the State of Maine

is privately owned. Consequently, most undeveloped recreation opportunities take place on these private lands. The undeveloped character

of private lands, especially those located near water, is threatened by

development pressure for second homes.
140 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Daigle, Hannon, and Stacey Factors Influencing Experience Quality: Comparing User Groups and Place Attachment...

approach because it is already used primarily by those

groups that place a high importance on maintaining

backcountry values. Also, campsite restoration projects such

as those needed in the upper river zone would benefit all user

groups, regardless of trip type or motivation. The Lower

Lakes group, which places the lowest level of importance on

all three experience dimensions, utilizes a region that is not

frequented by any other user groups. The variability between

these five groups suggests most of all that any recreation

management scheme for the waterway should be designed

with the specific geographic zones and distinct visitor groups

in mind. A blanket strategy would not meet the diverse

needs and desires of the waterway users.

Level of Attachment

Warzecha and others (2000) report that levels of emotional/symbolic and functional attachment were significantly

different between visitors to developed and backcountry

areas. They also report that these differences in levels of

attachment were associated with differing levels of support

for potential management actions on two Western United

States rivers. Our results only partially concur. Levels of

emotional/symbolic and functional attachment varied between the five user groups, with the two backcountry-oriented groups scoring the lowest on the scales of emotional/

symbolic and functional attachment, but there were actually

few significant differences. The five groups differ in many

ways including primary activity, length of stay, mode of

travel, group size, experience use history, and many other

variables. They bring to the waterway a desire for a diversity

of conditions and experiences. However, these results suggest that while the visitor groups may come to the St. Croix

International Waterway desiring a diversity of conditions

and experiences, nearly all users have a moderate to strong

feeling of place identity and a moderate to strong belief that

no other area can be substituted for this one. The uniformity

and strength of feelings and beliefs held by the visitors about

the waterway suggest that it is important for managing

agencies to incorporate opportunities for public involvement

in shaping recreation management goals and strategies for

the waterway. Further, it requires that this public involvement be structured in such a way that it includes representation from each user group.

For two groups, we investigated the relationship between

levels of attachment and importance of various experience

dimensions. The strongest relationship was between high

levels of emotional/symbolic attachment and higher importance of opportunities for solitude. A high level of functional

attachment was also associated with a high level of importance placed on experiencing a mostly undeveloped setting

with lightly impacted campsites. Level of attachment seemed

to have no relationship with the importance of careless or

disrespectful impacts encountered, suggesting that such

impacts are very influential to all users, even those who have

formed no attachment to either a specific place or a generalized setting. The two strong relationships suggest a perception by the user that the backcountry values—solitude,

natural conditions—available at the St. Croix Waterway are

not easily replaced. They also suggest the visitors’ perception that the emotional/symbolic relationship with the St.

Croix Waterway is a unique one, also not easily replaced.

They further suggest that opportunities for experiencing

solitude and natural conditions may be an important part of

developing emotional/symbolic relationships with the resource, possibly an important source of satisfaction in itself

for some users.

References _____________________

Cameron, S.; Stacey, C. 2001. Campsite assessment along the St.

Croix International Waterway. Unpublished report on file at: St.

Croix International Waterway Commission, St. Stephens, New

Brunswick. 71 p.

Clark, R. N.; Stankey, G. H. 1979. The recreation opportunity

spectrum: a framework for planning, management, and research.

Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-98. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range

Experiment Station. 32 p.

Cole, D. N. 2001. Day users in wilderness: how different are they?

Res. Pap. RMRS-RP-31. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 29 p.

Cronbach, L. J. 1951. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of

tests. Psychometrika. 16: 297–334.

Daigle, J. J.; Hrubes, D.; Ajzen, I. 2002. A comparative study of

beliefs, attitudes, and values among hunters, wildlife viewers,

and other outdoor recreationists. Human Dimensions of Wildlife.

7(1): 1–19.

Daigle, J. J.; Watson, A. E.; Haas, G. E. 1994. National Forest trail

users: planning for recreation opportunities. Res. Pap. NE-685.

Radnor, PA: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 13 p.

Dillman, D. A. 1983. Mail and telephone surveys. New York: John

Wiley and Sons. 325 p.

Graefe, A.; Kuss, F.; Vaske, J. 1990. Visitor impact management:

the planning framework. Washington, DC: National Parks and

Conservation Association. 105 p.

Hammitt, W. E.; Cole, D. N. 1998. Wildland recreation: ecology and

management. New York: John Wiley and Sons. 361 p.

Hannon, J.; Daigle, J. J.; Stacey, C. 2002. User preferences for social

conditions on the St. Croix International Waterway. In: Todd, S.,

comp., ed. Proceedings of the 2001 Northeastern recreation research symposium; 2001 April 1–3; Bolton Landing, NY. Gen.

Tech. Rep. NE-289. Newton Square, PA: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station:

320–325.

Hendee, J.; Stankey, G.; Lucas, R. 1990. Wilderness management.

Golden, CO: North American Press. 546 p.

Jubenville, A. 1986. Recreational use of public lands: the role of the

manager. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration. 4(1):

53–60.

Kaiser, H. F. 1960. The application of electronic computers to

factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement.

29: 141–151.

Kass, R. A.; Tinsley, H. A. 1979. Factor analysis. Journal of Leisure

Research. 11(2): 120–138.

Lucas, R. C.; Stankey, G. H. 1985. Role of research in applying the

limits of acceptable change system. In: Watson, A. E., ed. Proceedings: southeastern recreation research conference; 1985 February 28–March 1; Myrtle Beach, SC. Statesboro, GA: Georgia

Southern College, Department of Recreation and Leisure Services: 1–16.

Manning, R. E. 1999. Studies in outdoor recreation: search and

research for satisfaction. 2d ed. Corvallis: Oregon State University Press. 374 p.

Moore, R. L.; Graefe, A. R. 1994. Attachment to recreation settings:

the case of rail-trail users. Leisure Sciences. 16(1): 17–31.

Roggenbuck, J.; Williams, D.; Watson, A. 1993. Defining acceptable

conditions in wilderness. Environmental Management. 17: 187–97.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 141

Daigle, Hannon, and Stacey Factors Influencing Experience Quality: Comparing User Groups and Place Attachment...

Schreyer, R. 1986. Motivation for participation in outdoor recreation and barriers to that participation—a commentary on salient issues. A literature review: the President’s Commission on

Americans Outdoors. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office: M1-M8.

Schreyer, R.; Jacob, G.; White, R. 1981. Environmental meaning as

a determinant of spatial behavior in recreation. In: Frazier, J.;

Epstein, B., eds. Proceedings of the applied geography conferences. 4: 294–300.

St. Croix International Waterway Commission. 1993. St. Croix

International Waterway: a heritage—a future. Plan for the longterm cooperative management of the St. Croix International Waterway. St. Stephen, New Brunswick: St. Croix International

Waterway Commission. 60 p.

St. Croix International Waterway Commission. 1998. Resource and

recreation management concept: Spednic Lake/Upper River Section of the St. Croix International Waterway. St. Stephen, New

Brunswick: St. Croix International Waterway Commission. 24 p.

SPSS. 1999. Statistical package for the social sciences, Inc. Chicago,

IL. [Online]. Available: http://www.spss.com

Stacey, C.; Daigle, J. J. 2000. Recreational use assessment of the St.

Croix International Waterway: an overview of recreational user

characteristics and perspectives. St. Stephen, New Brunswick:

St. Croix International Waterway Commission. 24 p.

Stankey, George H.; Cole, David N.; Lucas, Robert C.; Petersen,

Margaret E.; Frissell, Sidney S. 1985. The limits of acceptable

change (LAC) system for wilderness planning. Gen. Tech. Rep.

INT-176. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station

[now Rocky Mountain Research Station]. 37 p.

Warzecha, C. A.; Lime, D. W.; Thompson, J. L. 2000. Visitors’ relationship to the resource: comparing place attachment in wildland and

developed settings. In: Cole, D. N.; McCool, S. F.; Borrie, W. T.;

O’Loughlin, J., comps. Wilderness science in a time of change

conference—Volume 4: wilderness visitors, experiences, and visitor management; 1999 May 23–27; Missoula, MT. Proc. RMRS-P15-VOL-4. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 181–184.

Watson, A. E. 1995. Opportunities for solitude in the Boundary

Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. Northern Journal of Forestry.

12(1): 12–18.

Watson, A. E.; Hunger, D.; Christensen, N.; Spildie, D.; Becker, K.;

Comstock, J. 1998. Wilderness boaters: protecting unique opportunities in the Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness,

Idaho, U.S.A. In: Watson, A. E.; Aplet, G. H.; Hendee, J. C., comps.

Personal, societal, and ecological values of wilderness: Sixth

World Wilderness Congress proceedings on research, management, and allocation, volume I; 1997 October; Bangalore, India.

RMRS-P-4. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 151–158.

Watson, A. E.; Williams, D. R.; Daigle, J. J. 1991. Sources of conflict

between hikers and mountain bike riders in the Rattlesnake

NRA. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration. 9(3): 59–71.

Watson, A. E.; Williams, D. R.; Roggenbuck, J. W.; Daigle, J. J. 1992.

Visitor characteristics and preferences for three National Forest

wildernesses in the South. Res. Pap. INT-455. Ogden, UT: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station [now Rocky Mountain Research Station]. 27 p.

Whittaker, D. 1992. Selecting indicators: which indicators matter

more? Defining wilderness quality: The role of standards in

wilderness management—a workshop proceedings. Gen. Tech.

Rep. PNW-305. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Experiment Station: 13–22.

Williams, D. R.; Patterson, M. E.; Roggenbuck, J. W.; Watson, A. E.

1992. Beyond the commodity metaphor: examining emotional

and symbolic attachment to place. Leisure Sciences. 14(1): 29–46.
142 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Laani Uunila is a Researcher and Commonwealth Scholar, Resource and

Environmental Planning Programme, Massey University, Private Bag 11

222, Palmerston North, New Zealand, FAX: 64 6 350 5689, E-mail: uunila@

xtra.co.nz

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship to

protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress

symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc. RMRSP-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky

Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—The objective of this paper is to examine the management of marine reserve committees in New Zealand according to

participatory theory. This analysis provides the basis for developing

more effective and appropriate mechanisms to involve New Zealand’s

indigenous people (the Maori) and local communities in the management of marine reserves.

Case studies of New Zealand marine reserves are used to analyze

the successes and failures of community involvement in marine

reserve management. Preliminary findings indicate a lack of national direction on how marine reserve committees should function.

In addition, a lack of funds available to committees limits the

successes they can achieve. Despite weaknesses in format, marine

reserve committees serve as a valuable link between government

and community. Any attempt to create more meaningful participation requires committee restructuring from advisory bodies to those

with more power and responsibility. However, this is not possible

under current legislation and policy.

Introduction ____________________

This study examines the effectiveness of New Zealand

marine reserve committees as a means for public participation. Marine reserve committees are advisory and advocacy

bodies that incorporate local stakeholder representation.

Case studies are used to examine marine reserve committees. The possible committee types are outlined prior to the

presentation of preliminary findings and the subsequent

discussion. Three themes exist: (1) little national direction,

(2) inadequate funding, and (3) strengthening community

relations. Before marine reserve committees are examined

in detail, an overview of marine protected areas and participation provides a background for the discussion.

Objective and Methodology _______

The objective of this study is to examine public participation in the management of marine reserves in New Zealand.

The main question to be answered is: Are marine reserve

committees an effective means to achieve participatory input

in marine reserve management? There are four case study

Community Involvement in New Zealand

Marine Reserve Management: Examining

Practice

Laani Uunila

marine reserve committees. The case studies are examined

in three manners: interviews with Department of Conservation (DoC) staff, a mail survey to marine reserve committee

members with followup interviews, and document analysis.

Currently, the DoC interview phase of the project is complete, with questionnaires still being returned; as such, only

preliminary results can be presented.

Marine Protected Areas __________

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are conservation measures with worldwide distribution. MPAs differ by nation,

and even within nations in terms of the reason for establishment, degree of protection, and method of management.

Agardy (1997, 1999) states that the term MPA is generic

enough to encompass all forms of marine protection, from

international biosphere reserves to small no-take reserves.

In this research, MPA is defined as:

Any area of intertidal or subtidal terrain, together with its

overlying water and associated flora, fauna, historical and

cultural features, which has been reserved by law or other

effective means to protect part or all of the enclosed environment (Kelleher and Kenchington 1992: 7).

Kelleher and others (1995) state that the region containing the most MPAs, 19.9 percent of those in the world, is

Australia and New Zealand. This fact is misleading for New

Zealand because only 4 percent of New Zealand’s territorial

waters are protected under the marine reserve system. The

New Zealand Government is not satisfied with the current

status and is working on creating a national representative

system (Parliamentary Commissioner 1999).

Legislation in New Zealand

Currently, there is little integration between marine protection initiatives across government agencies and levels.

Thirteen central government agencies, 16 regional councils

or unitary authorities, and 18 marine management laws

have a role in marine protection (DoC 2000). The Department of Conservation is the key agency responsible for

protected areas and species (DoC and Ministry for the

Environment 2000).

The main mechanism for creating marine protected areas

in New Zealand is the Marine Reserves Act 1971. Marine

reserves are specified as areas of the territorial sea, seabed,

and foreshore managed for scientific study and to preserve

the marine habitat in its natural state. The Marine Reserves

Act 1971 is fairly restrictive, as reserve status is for areas of

demonstrable scientific value, with only secondary regard
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 143

Uunila Community Involvement in New Zealand Marine Reserve Management: Examining Practice

for natural, scenic, recreation, and cultural values (DoC

2000).

The majority of New Zealand’s reserves are “no-take”

reserves. Walls and Dingwall (1995) state that due to the

fact that marine reserves are designed as no-take reserves,

they are subsequently small in area. International recognition and praise are accorded to New Zealand marine reserves, as the majority of reserves are no-take, banning even

recreational fishing (Boersma and Parrish 1999; Cole-King

1995; Shackell and Willison 1995). Currently, only one

reserve, Kapiti, allows for limited recreational fishing (DoC

2000).

The Marine Reserves Act 1971 is under review to address

several deficiencies, one of which is public involvement (DoC

2000). The Department of Conservation has requested feedback on how to strengthen the role of communities, Maori,

and other stakeholders in the management of reserves. Currently, stakeholders can have some degree of management

input through conservation boards (independent statutory

bodies) or marine reserve advisory committees. Ultimately,

however, the Department of Conservation is responsible for

management of marine reserves.

Participation ___________________

The meaning of the term “participation,” and the degree to

which it is used, have little consensus among managers and

planners. Using a term with many meanings can cause

significant problems, as expectations and realities differ

between groups. Dugdale and West (1991: 2) define public

participation as:

A two-way process of communication between planners

and the community that promotes the exchange of information and ideas and seeks joint problem solving and the

resolution of conflict in order to produce plans and policies

that are acceptable to the community and which can be

effectively implemented.

Participatory resource management and planning, therefore, is the inclusion of the public, either general and/or special

interest groups, to help create socially acceptable resource

management decisions via a communicative process.

There is a continuum of participation that ranges from

extracting information to empowerment (Arnstein 1969;

Chambers 1994; Michener 1998; Slocum and others 1995).

In recognition of this continuum, Arnstein (1969) created a

“ladder of citizen participation” that begins with nonparticipation methods, rises to degrees of tokenism, and ends with

degrees of citizen power (fig. 1).

Arnstein (1969) cautions about the use of empty participation versus true power sharing. Various authors (Arnstein

1969; Duffy and Hutchinson 1997; Forester 1989) warn of

the damaging effects of nonmeaningful participation:

• Frustration

• Mistrust

• Disillusionment

• Withdrawal of participation and/or consent

To create meaningful participation, Innes (1998) calls for

the establishment of a stakeholder group that works in

parallel to government, allowing community voices to be

heard.

Donaldson (1994) identifies three types of groups that can

be used in participatory resource management: (1) elite, (2) existing, and (3) new (table 1). Establishing a new group is the ideal,

as such a group can be representative of the community;

moreover, an established group may not be able to adapt to

participatory techniques.

Figure 1—Arnstein’s Ladder of Community Participation (source:

Arnstein 1969).

Table 1—Types of committeesa

.

Type of stakeholder

committee Elite Existing New

Stakeholders Special interest groups Existing group used Anyone—inclusionary

(for example, industry,

government, academia)

Membership Members invited Group selected Open

Weaknesses Exclusionary; no Problems with new Group needs to develop

community ownership mandates or structure cohesiveness

or representatives

Strengths Easy to identify Time saving Group grows together

stakeholders —can include general

public

a Source: Donaldson 1994.
144 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Uunila Community Involvement in New Zealand Marine Reserve Management: Examining Practice

There is not a homogeneous group that can speak to the

needs of the community, as people no longer have the

connection to each other and places that once existed

(Beauregard 1996; Cowan 1997; Gikey Dyck 1998). Duffy

and Hutchinson (1997) identify several ways for community to be represented: issue/common cause groups, target

groups, geographical, spiritual, and nets of social relations.

Resource managers and planners need to be aware of their

definition of community when selecting partners for collaborative planning practices. In New Zealand, marine reserve

committees represent a geographical and interest group

definition of community.

Duffy and Hutchinson (1997) found that when groups are

only given power at the operational level, not the strategic

level, frustration arises, as members want to be involved in

all levels of the process. Sharing of power and responsibility

are key as:

...the community can feel it “owns” the result, with most

members of the community believing that they have had a

chance to be involved, have a stake in the success of the result,

and in which some do not feel personally disadvantaged while

others have escaped disadvantage or have gained (Radford

1994: 395).

Participation at the earliest possible point, even before

plan conception, allows participants to truly belong to the

planning process, rather than being treated in a tokenistic

manner (Healey 1997; Innes and Booher 1999).

Community Participation in Marine

Protected Areas

The focus of marine reserve research has changed in the

past decade. For example, Kennedy (1990) suggested improvements to the management of Mida Creek marine

reserve; no mention was made of public involvement, save

for educating locals and tourists. While experts and researchers are now recognizing the need for public participation, there are still several gaps in the studies that have

been conducted. Much of the research on MPA effectiveness

focuses on the implementation of policy, management practices, and monitoring (for example, Nicholls 1998), not on

the effectiveness of public participation in influencing the

management process.

Preliminary Findings_____________

Until the new Marine Reserves Act becomes law, four

types of marine reserve advisory committees can be created

in New Zealand (table 2). Not all reserves are required to

have an advisory committee. Despite descriptions of different possible committees that can be formed under legislation, there are no national guidelines for operating a marine

advisory committee. In the mid-1990s, a discussion paper

was circulated with the aim to create national principles for

committees and the selection of members. Unfortunately,

there has been no action on this paper.

The marine reserve committees examined as case studies

are: Kapiti, Long Island-Kokomohua, Te Tapuwae o Rongokako, and Te Whanganui A Hei. An overview of each committee is presented in table 3. Marine reserve committees are a

combination of Donaldson’s (1994) elite and new groups.

The majority of positions, which are not allocated to iwi

(tribes), are for interest groups such as commercial and

recreational fishers, environmental groups, and dive clubs.

There is little or no representation of members of the general

public. Three main themes have become apparent from

interviews with DoC staff and the preliminary survey results: lack of a national approach, inadequate funding, and

invaluable community relations.

National Direction

The first and foremost theme is that respondents perceive

there is no nationally coordinated approach to participation

in marine reserve management. This theme can be split into

two subsections: (1) lack of national direction and (2) the

need to be flexible to the community.

The functions of the case study committees vary, from a

concentration on compliance and enforcement work, to raising public awareness, to approving applications for scientific

research. The resources available to committees also vary,

for example, some committees can claim travel expenses

while others cannot, some committees have access to funds

while others do not. These variations create an ad hoc system.

Committee membership, Department of Conservation

staff, and external influences all play roles in determining

the focus of the advisory committees. The differences appear

Table 2—Types of possible marine advisory committees.

Board

Type Advisory subcommittee Combined Ad hoc

Powers Advisory body Powers may be Advisory body No statutory

to the Minister delegated by and delegated power

Conservation Board powers

Weaknesses Does not allow Must act within Operates under No statutory

for management mandate of two different power

planning or Conservation sections of

policy advice Board legislation

Strengths Relationship Policy advice Advantages of Easiest

with Minster and planning both advisory committee to

(via Regional role and subcommittee setup

Conservator)
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 145

Uunila Community Involvement in New Zealand Marine Reserve Management: Examining Practice

to be random, with the personalities involved shaping the

process. It appears that the individual interests and enthusiasm of the members are major factors in determining the

actual tasks undertaken by a particular committee.

Each marine reserve and marine reserve committee is

forging its own way, making mistakes and creating successes. The lack of communication between reserves is something mentioned by DoC staff in all interviews. Some staff

members have attempted to create information exchanges,

such as the request for an exchange of minutes between Long

Island—Kokomuha and the Te Whanganui A Hei. These

information exchanges are few and far between, and more

often due to friendships with staff in other conservancies

than to seeking out information from all reserves.

Regional differences do need to occur, as each committee

is representative of the community and interest groups concerned with the reserve in question. Moreover, the rights of

the Maori, New Zealand’s indigenous people, must be respected. In addition to needing community support, marine

reserves need the support of the local iwi, who give up their

traditional fishing rights to the area. Due to the importance

of iwi support, they often have at least 50 percent representation on the committees. Sometimes, as in the case of

Te Whanganui A Hei and Te Tapuwae o Rongokako marine

reserves, only one iwi is involved; however, other reserves

require representation from several iwi.

Funding

Funding allocated specifically for marine reserves only

came about in 2001. Prior to this, the budget for the reserves

came from the conservancy budget. The lack of funds directly accessible to marine reserve committees is most likely

the biggest cause of frustration to the committee members,

as they cannot conduct all the activities that they would like.

This inability reinforces their role as merely an advisory

body to DoC, when they would like more of a hand in the

management of the reserves. One respondent stated that the

committee “would feel more useful if we could raise and hold

funds for campaigns,” because without funds members have

little they can actually do. Some committees would like to seek

sponsorship from outside DoC; but there is no consensus among

conservancy staff if external sponsorship is permissible.

Community Liaison

Marine reserve advisory committees are a key link between DoC and members of the community. The link is

strongest between iwi and specific interest groups, such as

commercial fishers; however, in some reserves, the link is

also established with members of the general public. DoC

staff considers the committees to be “watchdogs” who keep

pressure on DoC to uphold promises and ensure adequate

management. In addition to advising DoC, the committees

serve to provide a “reality check” and extra “eyes and ears”

for management. The importance of iwi connections was

emphasized by all DoC staff interviewed.

Discussion _____________________

In New Zealand, it appears that marine reserve committees, since they are only advisory bodies—equivalent to

Table 3—Marine Reserve Committee overview.

Long Island Te Whanganui Te Tapuwae

Kokomohua A Hei Kapiti O Rongokako

Reserve establlished 1993 1992 1992 1999

Committee established 1993 1993 1993 2000

Type Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Combined

Members 8 8 8 9

Stakeholders Conservation Conservation Conservation Conservation

Board (2); iwi Board (1); iwi Board (1); iwi Board (1); iwi

(4)a

; dive club (4); interest (4); interest (5); interest

(2); Fisherman’s groups (3)c groups (3)c groups/public (3)

Association (1);

Iwi representation Te Atiawa, Ngati Hei Ati Awa, Ngati Ngati Konohi

Tangata whenuab Toa, Ngati

Ruakawa

Focus Science research Interpretation/ Compliance and Operational plan

applications Public awareness law enforcement

Weaknesses Lack of quorum No long-term Compliance Committee still

and/or meetings vision for the focus learning the

in recent years reserve “ropes”

Successes — Interpretation Hired advocacy —

kiosk created, officer 2001

snorkel trail

a One of the Conservation Board representatives is also an iwi representative—meaning that the total number of places on the committee

is only eight. b “Tangata whenua” means “first people of the land.”

c

 Includes a National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research scientist.
146 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Uunila Community Involvement in New Zealand Marine Reserve Management: Examining Practice

Arnstein’s (1969) rung of consultation, a form of tokenistic

participation—have the potential to create feelings of disillusionment. For example, the Long Island-Kokomohua committee did not even meet in 2000. The lack of a budget for the

committee and the fact that the reserve is not a high use

reserve are two factors that may have contributed to

nonparticipation. It is impossible to tell without further

research if there are any other contributing factors to

nonparticipation, in this reserve and others.

Committees can have feelings of frustration at their inability to act in more than an advisory manner. The focus on

funding by both DoC and committee members suggests that

this is an area where the participatory process needs to be

improved. The marine reserve committees would acquire

new capacity if they were to have an operating budget for

activities that they desire to implement.

Not being able to create tangible benefits from their

participation, some committees get a negative feeling about

their ability to make an impact. For example, the Kapiti

Marine Reserve Committee has focused on compliance and

law enforcement for almost a decade, an area where the

committee does not have any power to make a direct difference; as such, little successes are nonexistent. The committee, however, has made a significant contribution, adding

extra “eyes and ears” to the reserve, in addition to pressuring

DoC staff and head office to ensure that compliance work is

being done and legal followthrough occurs. Tangible benefits

from such activities are small, if at all apparent. Innovation

is occurring in the Kapiti Marine Reserve, with extra funding requested, and received, for a temporary advocacy officer. The role of the officer is to liase with the marine reserve

committee and aid in the creation of promotional material,

as well as liasing with interest groups and members of the

public.

Though there are faults in the current system, marine

reserve advisory committees play an important role. They

liase with members of the community, provide a network of

people to assist in compliance activities, and are able to act

as an independent body and advocate for the marine reserve

through political channels. Without marine advisory committees, it is likely that there would be less community understanding of the actions of the Department of Conservation.

Summary and Conclusions _______

In New Zealand, national guidance is lacking in terms of

how to incorporate communities in marine reserve management. There is no operational consistency between marine

reserve committees, with differences in structure and contributions to management. Recognizing the fact that the

needs of each community are different, it is not necessarily

negative that each committee functions in a different manner. However, there should be better communication between the committees and reserve managers so mistakes are

not repeated throughout the whole system and successes can

be recreated.

Reserve advisory committees want to have funds available to them so they can implement promotional and advocacy programs without having to rely on the Department of

Conservation. Becoming financially self-sufficient would

allow the committees to become more effective in their roles.

Financial self-sufficiency also means that they would have

greater capacity, something that would require restructuring of current government philosophies in regard to public

participation. Research into transferring the current paradigm of participation into one that creates more meaningful

opportunities would be useful. Do marine reserve committees and Department of Conservation staff have divergent

views on the current level of participation? Are committee

members satisfied with the current process? If not, what

improvements can be made to ensure continued community

participation in marine reserve management? The need to

see tangible benefits from participation is key, and independent funding is one way to create visible successes. As such,

this is one area that requires future research.

This study contributes to more than marine reserve research, as the need to incorporate communities is a widespread phenomenon, be it in conservation or urban planning.

The needs of each country, region, and community differ.

However, the rights of people to participate in planning, and

the need to incorporate the visions of the community are key

if planning is to succeed.

References _____________________

Agardy, T. 1999. Creating havens for marine life. Issues in Science

and Technology. 16(1): 37.

Agardy, T. S. 1997. Marine protected areas and ocean conservation.

Austin, TX: R.G. Landes Company, Academic Press. 244 p.

Arnstein, S. R. 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. American

Institute of Planning Journal. 35(4): 216–224.

Beauregard, R. A. 1996. Voices of decline. In: Fainstein, S.; Campbell, S.,

eds. Readings in urban theory. Oxford: Blackwell: 363–391.

Boersma, P. D.; Parrish, J. K. 1999. Limiting abuse: marine protected

areas, a limited solution. Ecological Economics. 31(2): 287–304.

Chambers, R. 1994. Participatory rural appraisal (PRA): analysis of

experience. World Development. 22(9): 1253–1268.

Cole-King, A. 1995. Marine protected areas in Britain: a conceptual

problem? Ocean & Coastal Management. 27(1–2): 109–127.

Cowan, R. 1997. The connected city. Leicester, UK: Urban Initiatives. 27 p.

Department of Conservation. 2000. Tapui Taimoana: reviewing the

Marine Reserves Act 1971. Wellington: Department of Conservation. 64 p.

Department of Conservation; Ministry for the Environment. 2000.

The New Zealand biodiversity strategy: our chance to turn the

tide. [Online]. Available: http://www.doc.govt.nz/Conservation/

The-New-Zealand-Biodiversity-Strategy/pdfs/000~New- ZealandBiodiversity-Strategy-(Whole-Document).pdf. 146 p.

Donaldson, C. 1994. Working in multi-stakeholder processes. Ottawa: Environment Canada. 84 p.

Duffy, K.; Hutchinson, J. 1997. Urban policy and the turn to

community. Town Planning Review. 68: 347–362.

Dugdale, M.; West, S. 1991. Principles for public participation. In:

The Institution of Engineers, Australia, eds. The international

hydrology and water resources symposium: proceedings; 1991

October 2–4; Perth, Australia: 454–459.

Forester, J. 1989. Planning in the face of power. Berkeley: University of California Press. 264 p.

Gikey Dyck, R. 1998. Integrating planning and sustainability theory

for local benefit. Local Environment. 3: 27–41.

Healey, P. 1997. Collaborative planning. London: MacMillan Press.

446 p.

Innes, J. E. 1998. Information in communicative planning. Journal

of the American Planning Association. 64(1): 53–63.

Innes, J. E.; Booher, D. E. 1999. Consensus building and complex

adaptive systems: a framework for evaluating collaborative

planning. Journal of the American Planning Association. 65(4):

412– 423.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 147

Uunila Community Involvement in New Zealand Marine Reserve Management: Examining Practice

Kelleher, G.; Bleakley, C.; Wells, S. 1995. A global representative

system of marine protected areas: volume IV. Washington, DC:

The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/

The World Bank. 212 p.

Kelleher, G.; Kenchington, R. 1992. Guidelines for establishing

marine protected areas. Gland, Switzerland: ICUN. 79 p.

Kennedy, A. D. 1990. Marine reserve management in developing

nations: Mida Creek—a case study from East Africa. Ocean &

Shoreline Management. 14: 105–132.

Michener, V. 1998. The participatory approach: contradiction and

co-option in Burkina Faso. World Development. 26(12): 2105–

2118.

Nicholls, H. B. 1998. Canadian east coast marine-protected areas:

a review. Ocean & Coastal Management. 39(1–2): 87–96.

Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. 1999. Setting

the course for a sustainable future: the management of New

Zealand’s marine environment. Wellington: Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. 111 p.

Radford, A. D. 1994. Local architectural language and contextualisation. In: Scheer, B. C.; Preiser, W. F. E., eds. Design

review. Chapman and Hall: 165–174.

Shackell, N. L.; Willison, J. H. M. 1995. Preface. In: Shackell, N. L.;

Willison, J. H. M., eds. Marine protected areas and sustainable

fisheries. Wolfville, Nova Scotia: Science and Management of

Protected Areas Association: 5–10.

Slocum, R.; Wichhart, L.; Rocheleau, D.; Thomas-Slayter, B., eds.

1995. Power, process and participation: tools for change. London:

Intermediate Technology Publications. 251 p.

Walls, K.; Dingwall, P. 1995. Part B: New Zealand. In: Kelleher, G.;

Bleakley, C.; Wells, S., eds. A global representative system of

marine protected areas: volume IV. Washington, DC: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World

Bank: 171–200.
148 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Penny S. Bernard is an Anthropologist, Anthropology Department, Rhodes

University, Grahamstown, 6139, Eastern Cape, South Africa. E-mail:

p.bernard@ru.ac.za

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—This paper explores the ecological ethic intrinsic to the

traditional cosmologies of the Southern African Bantu-speaking

peoples, specifically in association with water sources and riparian

zones. It details the complexity of beliefs regarding the water spirits,

particularly related to the snake and the mermaid, and their role in

the calling of traditional healers in Southern Africa. The implications of these beliefs with regard to water and riparian zone

management are examined. The pools in which such spirits reside

have sacred status and are of key importance in the training of

healers, as well as being important sites for the performance of

family rituals. Many of these sites are threatened with environmental degradation, mainly by agroforestry and dam-building programs.

Over the last century, healers have been increasingly marginalized

from such pools through the privatization of land and the former

South African Government’s apartheid policies. It is argued that to

promote indigenous knowledge and wise stewardship of resources,

adequate protection of such sites is essential, and mechanisms need

to be explored whereby healers and their communities can be granted

access to such features of the landscape.

Introduction ____________________

There has recently been a surge of interest worldwide in

the way indigenous people interact with their environment

and the value of their knowledge systems. Many international organizations, such as the Convention of Biodiversity

(CBD-UNCED 1992), the United Nations Working Group on

Indigenous Populations (WGIP), the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO),

and the Working Group on Traditional Resource Rights

(WGTRR), are calling for the recognition of indigenous

peoples rights to self-determination, the value of their

knowledge, and the need for strategies to protect and

preserve this knowledge (Gray 1997; Posey 1999; Posey and

Dutfield 1996). This has largely been precipitated by the

global environmental crisis, which has revealed the shortcomings of an exclusively scientific approach, often within

the western economic development paradigm, in solving the

multitude of environmental problems facing present and

future generations.

Ecological Implications of Water Spirit

Beliefs in Southern Africa: The Need to

Protect Knowledge, Nature, and Resource

Rights

Penny S. Bernard

There has been a corresponding awareness of the need to

examine how indigenous people have managed to live in a

sustainable way within their environments, both in the past

and the present. The need to document and preserve such

knowledge is thus seen as crucial for humanity’s long-term

survival on Earth. It is pertinent to note that much of this

knowledge is intimately connected with the broader framework of peoples’ cosmology and world view, which is embedded within their physical, spiritual, and social landscapes

(Hirsch and O’Hanlon 1995; Tilley 1994). Hence, procuring

and preserving existing knowledge, although crucial, is only

one aspect of the equation. Knowledge is dependent on the

protection and preservation of these broad features of the

landscape, within which peoples’ identity, cosmology, and

knowledge are embedded. In terms of the physical landscape, protection and preservation are just one aspect of the

solution. Ensuring indigenous people access to these sites is

essential because such features are integral aspects of the

nature, formation, and transmission of knowledge. Throughout the world, over the last 200 years these communities

have become increasingly marginalized and denied access to

such resources, with the resultant threat to their knowledge.

In South Africa, indigenous African peoples are emerging

from centuries of alienation and marginalization imposed on

them by their colonial and apartheid masters. In the last

century, they were systematically denied access to a large

percentage of their resources. The Land Act of 1913 is well

recognized as the institutionalized mechanism that precipitated this, whereby it stipulated that over 80 percent of the

population was to be confined to 13 percent of the total

landmass of South Africa.

Since independence in 1994, efforts have been made to

correct this state of affairs, but the present process of land

restitution is slow, arduous, very expensive, and fraught

with many difficulties. Many who were uprooted from their

natural landscapes have lost their knowledge and traditions, or have repudiated them in favor of monotheism,

capitalism, and globalization. These transformations, as

well as the inevitable population pressures on the restricted

resources, have led to behavior changes, which have resulted in environmental degradation and abandonment of

much of the traditional ecological knowledge that is no

longer relevant to them. These modern forces have all

contributed to the “disenchantment” of the landscape,

whereby the respect for the spirits of the land is rapidly

disappearing and with it a powerful mechanism for limiting

human behaviors that have negative ecological impacts.

Despite these threats to knowledge, however, there remains a strong body of beliefs among a core of African

religious functionaries—the traditional diviner healers
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 149

Bernard Ecological Implications of Water Spirit Beliefs in Southern Africa...

(amagqirha, izangoma). Despite being heavily “demonized”

by their Christian invaders, they continue to play a significant and influential role in their communities.

The following summary demonstrates the intimate connection that exists between the physical, spiritual, and

social dimensions of Southern African spiritual healers’

knowledge and practice, particularly with reference to water

resources and the belief of water spirits. It must be noted

that water sources provide just one aspect of the knowledge

base. Plants, forests, and mountains are also integral to the

training and practice of traditional healers. The data presented comes from research I have done among the Zulu-,

Xhosa-, and Karanga/Shona-speaking groups over the last

4 years. These communities span a wide area of Southern

Africa, extending across several thousand kilometers and

over a number of State boundaries (South Africa, Mozambique, and Zimbabwe). It is worth noting that I have identified a common corpus of knowledge linking the African

healing traditions with the water spirits over this whole

region that is not exclusive to these groups only. It also

features strongly in other Bantu-speaking groups in the

region, such as the Swazi, Venda, Sotho, Tshangaan, Ndebele,

and Tswana, and they are also prevalent amongst the

earliest known peoples of Southern Africa, the Khoekhoe

and the San.

Water Spirits in

Southern Africa _________________

Among many of the Southern African indigenous people

(Khoisan- and Bantu-speaking people) there exists a set of

complex beliefs regarding water, river systems, and riparian

zones. The spirit world is regarded as the ultimate source of

such life-sustaining resources. Water is the essence of both

spiritual and physical life, and the spirit world is regarded

as the ultimate source of such life-sustaining powers. Integral to such beliefs are various zoomorphic spirit manifestations, primarily the snake and the mermaid, who reside in or

beyond the water and who interact with humans in a variety

of ways. The rivers, wetlands, and the sea are the dwelling

places of such manifestations and are of fundamental importance to many of the African healing traditions and their

practitioners.

The snake and the spirits of the water are specifically

associated with the calling of healers and are seen as the

providers of wisdom and knowledge, which are given to

chosen individuals. Water sources are essential parts of the

landscape for conducting rituals to aid communication with

the spirit world. Water in itself is regarded among many

African religious functionaries as a living force, which has

the power to transform us from one state to another at a

spiritual or physical level. It has the power to purify and

protect one from evil, or to heal and bring one from illness to

health. It is thus a vital element in the performance of many

religious and healing rituals.

Common Themes

What is remarkable about all the differing accounts of the

water spirits are the similarities in the myths and core

symbols. The central feature of these myths and rituals is

the association with the “calling” of individuals to become

diviners. This usually involves the physical submersion of

the candidate under the water of a certain river pool or the

sea (for a few hours, to days or even years) after which it is

alleged that the individual emerges wearing the full regalia

of a healer—a symbolic snake wrapped around his/her body

and medicines. This experience of being taken under the

water, often by a wind or a “snake” can happen in a dream,

but this is merely notification that the individual’s ancestors

are calling him/her to become a healer. The “calling” is

usually preceded by the candidate suffering an illness

(ukuthwasa), although sometimes, especially in the case of

children, they just happen to be playing near the water at the

time. Individuals who have had such experiences commonly

report seeing snakes, mermaids, or even their ancestors.

Skills in healing, sacred knowledge, psychic abilities, and

medicinal plants seem to be the gifts that are imparted to

these chosen people by the water spirits. It is the spirits that

choose the client, not the other way around, and resistance

to the “calling” usually leads to misfortune. Relatives are not

allowed to display any grief at the disappearance of one who

has gone under the water or he/she may never be returned

to the living. Anyone who enters these water sources without

the calling of the ancestors will disappear, never to return.

Key symbolic images linked to objects seen under the

water or to messenger animals that summon the “chosen”

one to meet the spirits are remarkably similar within all the

groups, namely, the snake or python, the water monitor

(leguuan), the hippopotamus, the dolphin, the otter, the

crab, the frog, the brown fly, and/or the horse fly. Among the

Zulu, snakes (especially pythons), and crabs that visit people

in their houses are regarded as ancestral manifestations and

should not be harmed.

Certain places are more favored by the river spirits than

others. They are believed to live in deep pools of certain

rivers, often below waterfalls, fast moving “living” water, or

in the sea. “Living” water is often associated with its ability

to generate foam, and the foam appears to be symbolically

important. Berglund (1976: 146) cites a diviner (isangoma)

informant who said,

It is as I said water that is living, running in the river. That

is the living water. If the water had been in a dam as you asked

(a while ago), then there would not be a snake in it. It is the

living waters.

It is believed the ancestors, or spirits of the water, live in

a dry area at the bottom of these pools and have a lifestyle

very similar to people living on earth, in that they have

houses, cattle, chickens, and so forth. They are prosperous,

peaceful, happy, and in fact, lead an idyllic life.

The occurrence of certain plants near pools and river

sources indicate the presence of the water spirits. Palmer

(1996) notes that in the Eastern Cape the presence of the

umkumzi (or imkhamzi) reed (typha capensis) on the edge of

pools is seen as a sure sign of habitation by the water spirits.

The reed is a key symbol in Zulu religion, and in one origin

myth they claim that they emerged from a bed of reeds. The

reed mat is an essential accoutrement of diviners, and this

is directly linked to its association with water, healing, and

creation.
150 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Bernard Ecological Implications of Water Spirit Beliefs in Southern Africa...

For the San (/Xam) the presence of reeds and water-buchu

indicates the location of the Water Snake’s dwelling place

(Hoff 1997). The foam generated from certain plants, the

sacred ubulawu, is used by the Zulu and Xhosa for washing

and eating in order to purify and connect an individual to the

ancestors through dreams. Many of these species come from

trees, bushes, and vines that grow near water sources (Hirst

1990). Ubulawu is very often administered to healers during

rituals conducted in river pools. Significant cave sites, often

with San paintings, are often found in close proximity to

sacred pools, and many rituals for healing and rainmaking

are performed at these sites.

There seems to be some discrepancy between the various

areas as to whether the water spirits are regarded as shades

(recently deceased relatives) of either paternal or maternal

origin, or belong to a generalized amalgam of nonspecific or

very old ancestors. In Natal, the water spirits, in the form of

the snake, are referred to as the “amakhosi” (the great

ancestors). They have explicitly stated that the snake is the

metamorphosed amalgam of one’s ancestors who live under

the water. Both Berglund’s (1976) informant and my informants suggest that they distinguish between the snake(s)

that is/are a manifestation of the “family” (shade snakes),

and the big one (“The one which is the Lord”) representing

the Supreme Deity. For instance, Berglund’s (1976: 148)

informant describes the python as iNkosi yamadlozi (“the

lord of the shades” or “the one above”) who resides in the pool.

The Zulu also recognize the existence of another category

of nonhuman water spirits or semi-daemons that are half

human/half fish (mermaids) and have stated that this is one

of the forms the heavenly princess, iNkosazana, can take.

These creatures often have transformative powers. For

instance, iNkosazana can manifest as the mermaid, the

snake, the rainbow, and gentle soft rain. The Shona are quite

specific that the mermaids, known as njuzu, are alien spirits

(mashave) of human and nonhuman origin (Aschwanden

1989). Certain mediums can be possessed by njuzu spirits

who will give them healing powers. Mermaids are believed

to come out of the water with their animals at night, and it

is for that reason people are reluctant to go near rivers or the

sea after dark.

Latham (1986), Aschwanden (1989), and Daneel (1971)

have indicated the close link between the Shona/Karanga

Supreme Deity, Dzivaguru (or Mwari), the original autochthon, from whence comes rain and fertility, and the spirits of

the pool. The njuzu (mermaids), closely linked within the

python and the puffadder, feature very strongly at the

shrines to Mwari (Mlimo) at the Matonjeni Cave complex in

the Matopos region of southwest Zimbabwe, as well as at the

Nyamakati Pool shrine to Dzivaguru in northeast Zimbabwe. The aforementioned shrines are central to the rainmaking cult in the region. This link with the rainmaking

forces and with fertility is a common theme throughout

Southern Africa. Inkosazana, the Zulu heavenly princess, as

the bringer of soft-soaking rains, is responsible for both

agricultural and human fertility. Propitiation and appeals

are made to her by virgins at the beginning of spring each

year, appealing to her to bestow her gifts of fertility and to

help them select a suitable husband.

There are many other rituals that are performed for the

water spirits at rivers throughout Southern Africa. The

purposes for conducting them and the ritual process may

vary from group to group. They are mainly conducted for

diviners at various stages of their training, but some households will propitiate periodically to appeal to the spirits to

bestow them with wealth, rain, good harvests, and fertility.

Among some Nguni groups, propitiation rituals are still

made prior to planting in spring. A portion of the seeds to be

planted are placed on the surface of the sacred pools. The

river spirits will accept half of them and return the other half

to mix with the remaining seed to enhance its fertility and

yield. If none of the seed sinks, but just spreads over the

water, this is an indication that the ancestors and spirit

world are offended by the misdeeds of the living. Should this

happen, the participants will immediately seek to determine

the cause of the ancestors’ anger, and frequently confessions

of social tensions and jealousies get brought to the fore.

These are discussed and resolved as speedily as possible,

often at the riverbank itself in the presence of the ancestors.

This reaffirms the intricate balance that they perceive to

exist between the social, spiritual, and physical worlds.

Sacred Pools, Behavioral Taboos,

and Ecology

As a result of the profound sacred status that the many

rivers, pools, and water sources hold for Southern African

indigenous communities, there existed in the past, and to

some extent today, a range of taboos surrounding their

access and utilization. Pools, rivers, and expanses of water

are held with a mixture of awe, fear, and reverence. Great

care was taken in the past to avoid disturbing or angering

the water spirits. Common people were forbidden to go near

sacred pools where the snake, mermaids, and spirits were

known to exist. This injunction was reinforced with the fear

that uninvited people would be taken under the water never

to return. Only healers, kings/chiefs, or those who are pure

of heart are allowed to approach such areas.

I have accompanied the izangoma to a number of these

pools, and they are always approached with singing and

prayer. The healer will inform the spirits who is approaching

and reassures them that they come as friends. It was strictly

taboo for anyone to extract plants or resources from the

water’s edge. This could only be done by healers who were

allowed plants for medicinal use. Traditionally, healers

approach the plant with humble clapping of the hands and

appeal to the ancestors to allow them to utilize the plant for

healing purposes. After removing the plant, they replace it

with white beads as a sign of thanks. Similarly, when

approaching water they often make offerings of beads and

silver money.

Killing or injuring any of the messengers of the water

(such as crabs, snakes, frog, or water birds) is also regarded

as a great offense, and there are many groups in Southern

Africa for whom the eating of fish is strictly taboo. Transgression of such taboos could result in the drying up of the

water source and droughts. Many groups limit the distance

to which residential units can be erected near rivers and

where cultivation may take place. Hoff (1997: 24) noted that

the San prefer not to live very close to a water source because

of their belief that,

Water Snakes wander in the immediate vicinity of their

homes, making these areas particularly dangerous.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 151

Bernard Ecological Implications of Water Spirit Beliefs in Southern Africa...

In many places, the effects of modernity and the pressures

for population resettlement have overwhelmed these traditional fears and restraints, leading to catastrophic results.

Many people living in squatter settlements along rivers and

streams in urban areas of South Africa have lost their lives

and homes to flash floods in recent years.

The water spirits are generally believed to live in pools and

swamps that never dry out. It is said that their role is to

protect water sources and keep them alive. They can, however, be chased away by disrespectful behavior, social disharmony, or if the overharvesting of riparian zones take place.

This will lead to the drying up and degradation of such

rivers. Such forces are regarded as the guardians of fertility,

morality, and life itself. Any disrespect shown to them may

result in drowning, droughts, floods, and tornadoes. In

Zimbabwe, Aschwanden (1989: 189) reports local opinion is

that,

In the past—before the arrival of the white man—there are

said to have been more pools and springs with water snakes.

The many noises that came with the Europeans made many

njuzu leave their habitats forever, which caused aridity.

However, disobedience by many people is also said to have

prompted the njuzu to retreat.

Damming or channeling water from rivers can also upset

the river snake. A well known example of this was the

resistance given by the valley Tonga when Kariba Dam was

constructed. Their main fears were that the great water

serpent Nyaminyami would be angered. The many disasters

that beset the project were largely attributed to Nyaminyami’s

distress from being separated from its mate downstream

from the wall. The more recent Lesotho Highlands Water

project encountered similar resistance from the local inhabitants, who attributed the seismic motions to the great

snake’s distress with the project.

How people harness the idiom of the water spirits to

mount powerful community opposition to social, political,

and developmental projects was clearly demonstrated in the

Ambuya Juliana movement that swept through Southern

Zimbabwe in the early 1990s. This was in response to certain

environmental catastrophes such as severe drought and

rodent plagues.

The movement was inspired by a prophetess by the name

of Juliana, who claimed to be an emissary of the water spirits

(njuzu), with whom she had resided under water for a period

of 4 years. She made her first appearance in the Zvishavane

Mberengwa region at the height of the drought of 1992. She

attributed the drought to the breakdown of respect that

people had for the Earth’s resources, particularly water

sources, for lack of social harmony and abandonment of

traditional practices and beliefs, and for the failure of the

government and state to acknowledge the role of the spirits

in the War of Liberation. The major grievances of the njuzu

were the construction of dams and the drilling of boreholes.

She stated that the smell of cement drove away the njuzu

who were pivotal in the provision of drinking water for the

people. It was stated (Mawere and Wilson 1995: 255) that,

The government is wrong in the manner in which they are

blocking quite a number of streams to make dams. The

government is also sinking boreholes and wells in a bad way,

making explosions that frighten away the spirits and all other

creatures.

She instituted a set of harsh taboos, which the community

had to observe should they wish the drought to break, and to

facilitate the return of the njuzu who would regenerate

mountain springs, underwater, and surface rivers. Among

these was the banning of the construction of dams and the

drilling of boreholes, as well as the use of soaps or the

immersion of metal or enamel containers into the rivers. It

was also forbidden to kill any wild animal or to collect wild

fruit or plants for sale, as these attract the rain.

The thousands of people who responded to her pronouncements, and adhered to the harsh taboos and restrictions

which she imposed, is a graphic example of the great respect

many people still hold for the water spirits in this region.

Many taboos revealed a collective rejection of the modern

economic forces of capitalism, agriculture, and religious

(especially Christian) intrusion into the area. All these are

seen as a threat to the maintenance of traditional practices.

This desire to return to tradition has been witnessed

recently in the Mvoti valley area of the Kwazulu Natal

Midlands, where certain rural communities have reinstituted the ancient day of rest for the heavenly princess,

iNkosazana. This day was known traditionally as lesuku

lweNkosazana and was regarded as the day when no one was

allowed to utilize the river or to tend their fields. The

reinstitution of this day of rest was in response to a claim

made by a lady (isangoma) who claimed that iNkosazana

had visited her while she was hoeing her field. She said her

children’s names were Saturday and Monday and that on

those days no one should use the rivers but should leave

them in peace to recuperate so she and her children could

enjoy them. The message was to be relayed to all five

chiefdoms in the area. Collecting water, washing, or utilizing any water directly from the river on her day (Mondays

and Saturdays) is now strictly prohibited.

Connected with the taboos, in respect of iNkosazana, is

the revival of the planting ceremonies for her in spring. In

the Mvoti area, all members of the chiefdom have to contribute a portion of their crop seeds and some money to purchase

a goat for the chief prior to planting. On a designated day, all

the people in the chiefdom awake early in the morning.

Taking with them their hoes and spades, traditional beer

(tshwala), and sour milk (amasi), they congregate together

in a forested valley above the river. The men demarcate a

piece of land that is to be dedicated to iNkosazana and

construct a fence around it. The soil inside the area is dug by

all present. Then, the chief’s mother and wife and all the

elder women plant the grain collected from the households

(households that do not contribute are fined).

Afterwards, a goat is sacrificed near the river, and an elder

takes the bile from the gallbladder and sprinkles some of it

into the river. He then ascends the mountain to the forest

where the field is located and sprinkles the remaining bile on

the field. I was told that this is a crucial part of the ritual

because a connection has to be made between the water and

the field. “This is done to show the significance that the

garden, the goat and the river, all belong to Nomkhubulwana.”

Traditional songs are sung and there is much dancing

performed. Following this, the women, dressed in leaves

from the Msenge tree (cabbage tree), a tree sacred to

iNkosazana, descend together to the river to take a bath. The

Msenge leaves are stripped off their bodies and thrown into

the water, and naked, the women wash themselves in the
152 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Bernard Ecological Implications of Water Spirit Beliefs in Southern Africa...

water. No males—young or old—are allowed anywhere near

the river at this stage. This is to emphasize respect for the

women’s bodies, as much as respect for the heavenly princess, the bearer of fertility. No woman is allowed to return

home until she has taken the bath. The bath signifies the end

of the ritual.

I conducted a small survey (n = 32) in this valley in early

2001 to evaluate how popular such rituals and constraints

on using the river were to the local community. The majority

of the respondents were very happy to be participating in the

rituals, even though many of them did not have a clear idea

of exactly who iNkosazana was, as these things had been

long forgotten.

It was noted, however, that those who don’t observe the

day of rest or participate in the rituals have very poor and

unproductive gardens. Those who had some hesitation or

doubts about the practices were converted Christians, who

claimed they had abandoned the ways of their ancestors.

One such respondent even went so far as to say that these

practices “were things of darkness,” and that ever since she

had met Jesus, she refrained from the practices of

Nomkhubulwana. All the respondents endorsed their support for traditional leadership through the chiefs. This is of

interest because I believe traditional governance through

the chiefs has a powerful role to play in ecological management, particularly where it has been sanctioned by the spirit

world.

While these examples can be seen as convenient idioms in

which communities object to the forces of modernity, capitalism, monotheism, land invasion, and loss of control of resources, it cannot be denied that they have all experienced

the negative ecological and social consequences that development has brought. These negative consequences merely

confirm the community’s conviction that the divine powers of

the water have been disturbed, and this idiomatic expression

is the most effective means by which protest can be voiced.

Environmental Threats to Sacred

Pool Sites: Implications for

Indigenous Knowledge ___________

In the majority of the areas where I have conducted

research, sacred pool sites of key significance for healers are

being systematically threatened by development projects,

mining, and modern agricultural practices. The privatization

of land has led to many of the sacred pools being inaccessible

to healers, and a number of healers have been arrested and

imprisoned for crossing private land to get to the sacred

pools. These restrictions can severely hinder a healer’s

training process.

Environmental damage through development initiatives

also pose a great threat to both the physical and sacred

status of pools. For example, in the Venda region of South

Africa, a recent newspaper report has highlighted the environmental damage that is being inflicted on Lake Fundudzi

(sacred to the Venda people) and other river systems in the

region by large scale mining and chemical and industrial

development projects in the area. Many of the rivers in the

region are so polluted with chemicals and radiation that

livestock and humans who drink from the water are suffering from multiple health problems, including birth defects.

The newspaper, Mail and Guardian (Nkosi and Arenstein

2001: 4), reports:

The threats to Lake Fundudzi were caused...because the

province failed to allocate enough staff to its environmental

impact assessment division and expected two staff to process

15 environmental impact assessments, 35 mining applications and roughly 15 other large development applications a

month. The government therefore simply allowed subsistence farmers to invade and begin ploughing the steep hills

above Lake Fundudzi on poorly constructed terraces without

conducting environmental impact assessments or obeying

other land use laws.

This report possibly overemphasizes the role of environmental impact assessments in curtailing such negative

effects, and does not investigate disadvantages of such

large-scale development projects in the region, or why there

has been a need for local peasant farmers to move into the

area in the first place. In the past, the region around the lake

has been strictly monitored.

van de Waal (1997: 51) documents the difficulties researchers had in gaining access to the sacred lake, and he

describes the “myths and superstitions” regarding it in the

Venda region. These are completely in keeping with the

general conceptions of the snake (python) and the water

spirits that I have already outlined.

This lake itself is alleged to be inhabited by the ancestral

spirits of the Vhatavhatsindi people. Even today, the foreign

public is not allowed access to the lake. Only Gota (headman)

Netshiavha can give permission to visit the lake itself. In an

attempt to conduct surveys on the lake, lengthy negotiations

with the headman and his Tshivase Tribal authority at

Mukumbane and Chief Tshivase himself were required, after

which temporary permission was given to conduct a short

pilot survey on the lake in 1988 which was later withdrawn.

The impact of large-scale agroforestry in many of the

areas where sacred pools exist pose another serious threat to

their well-being. The Mvoti River, which I have already

discussed, is under serious threat by intensive agroforestry

(pine, gum, wattle, and poplar plantations) and sugar cane

farming. Most of the Upper Mvoti Catchment region, which

feeds into this river, is now owned by a number of large,

multinational agroforestry companies.

A report done on the status of this catchment area by MBB

Engineering (Anon 1998) notes extensive afforestation, with

marked reduction in streamflow. According to this report, a

high density of alien vegetation presently exists in the

riparian zones of the various subcatchments in the area.

This is in direct contravention of the law, which in terms of

the Conservation of Agricultural Resource Act (1983), states

that no cultivation or soil disturbance may take place, and no

trees may be planted, within a minimum distance of 30 m (98

feet) from the edge of any watercourse, stream or river, or

within 50 m (164 feet) of any vlei, wetland, or spring.

Furthermore, landowners are legally responsible for clearing aliens from riparian zones and for maintaining these

zones in an “alien free” state. With regard to the Upper Mvoti

Catchment, the report (E.1.3.) notes that,

The Act is difficult to enforce and remote sensing studies in

a number of catchments reveal great variation in the application of the law and numerous cases of flagrant disregard.

The general consensus of the community surveyed in the

valley is that the water levels of the river have dropped
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 153

Bernard Ecological Implications of Water Spirit Beliefs in Southern Africa...

considerably in recent years, thus supporting the findings of

the report.

Similarly, I am working in another area in the northeastern Cape where there is a pool of great significance to the

local Xhosa/Mpondomise people. This pool is so sacred that

no one is allowed to approach it unless being led there by

children. The pool has recently become a popular trout fishing

spot for many South African anglers, which has the potential

to threaten its sacred status. Furthermore, this pool is now

under threat from large agroforestry plantations that are

being planted over an extensive area upstream in the river’s

main catchment area, which includes a significant wetland

that has been nominated as a RAMSAR site (see http://

www.ramsar.org/index_about_ramsar.htm#rd) worthy of

protection. A hydrological survey conducted in this quaternary catchment in 1996 to 1997, to assess the implications

of afforestation for the river, predicted marked reductions in

streamflow of 18 to 31 percent in the next 10 years (Forsyth

and others 1997).

At present, there are scarcely any mechanisms by which

healers can appeal for protection of sacred water sites and

ensure access to them. One option would be the introduction

of “culture significance” legislation in line with sacred site

protection laws that have been introduced in other countries, such as Australia (Ritchie 1994). The South African

National Heritage Resources Act (www.acts.co.za/ntl_

heritage_res/National: 1), 1999, has already established a

framework in which such protection could be accommodated. It states that,

For the purposes of this Act, those heritage resources of

South Africa which are of cultural significance or other

special value for the present community and for future generations must be considered part of the national estate and

fall within the sphere of operations of heritage resource

authorities...the national estate may include...landscapes

and natural features of cultural significance.

This may provide protection for sites, but in does not go far

enough to ensure rights of access, particularly when it

involves private land.

Potential legislative protection could also be afforded

through the concept of the Reserve, as outlined in the

National Water Act of 1998. The notion of the Reserve

consists of two parts:

1. The quantity and quality of water required for basic

human use (including religious and cultural needs).

2. The ecological Reserve, which is defined as the water

required to protect the aquatic ecosystems of the water

resource.

In addition to the Reserve, the National Water Act has

promoted the development of Catchment Management

Agencies and Water User Associations through the development of the Water Conservation and Demand Management

Strategy. Such structures may also provide a framework

through which claims to protection and use can be negotiated.

Conclusions____________________

In conclusion, this paper has demonstrated the scope and

complexity of common African perceptions of water sources

in Southern Africa and the need to recognize the importance

of indigenous beliefs and practices in issues of riverine

management. The repository of much of this knowledge

comes from indigenous healers, who are regarded as the

custodians of very ancient traditional wisdom and knowledge. This transferred knowledge is augmented through

spiritual insight and communication with the ancestral

world, and passed on to future generations through rigorous

systems of training and apprenticeship. This knowledge is

dependent on the availability and accessibility of resources.

Without the plants needed to get spiritual insight, or without the presence of healthy water sources where the spirit

forces reside, access to such knowledge will be denied.

Moreover, knowledge is now under tremendous threat of

being discarded and forgotten, as many communities are

abandoning their traditional ways in favor of western education and capitalist enterprise, where the priorities for

individual accumulation override the collective needs of the

group, with resulting devastating effects on the environment (both physical and spiritual) and the source of their

knowledge.

References _____________________

Anon. 1998. Umgeni Water Upper Mvoti catchment riparian zone

rehabilitation study. Pietermaritzburg, Kwazulu Natal: MBB

Consulting Engineers Incorporated. 35 p.

Aschwanden, H. 1989. Karanga mythology. An analysis of the

consciousness of the Karanga in Zimbabwe. Gwero: Mambo

Press. 287 p.

Berglund, A-I. 1976. Zulu thought patterns and symbolism. London:

C. Hurst & Company. 402 p.

Daneel, M. L. 1971. Old and new in southern Shona independent

churches: background and rise of the major movements. Volume 1. The Hague: Mouton & Co. 557 p.

Forsyth, G. G.; Versfeld, D. B.; Chapman, R. A.; Fowles, B. K. 1997.

The hydrological implications of afforestation in the North-Eastern Cape: a survey of resources and assessment of the impacts of

land-use change. WRC Report No 511/1/97. Stellenbosch: Division of Water, Environment and Forestry Technology, CSIR. 134 p.

Gray, A. 1997. Indigenous rights and development: self-determination

in an Amazon community. Providence: Berghahn Books. 134 p.

Hirsch, E.; O’Hanlon, M. 1995. The anthropology of landscape:

perspectives on place and space. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 268 p.

Hirst, M. M. 1990. The healer’s art—Cape Nguni diviners in the

townships of Grahamstown. Grahamstown, South Africa: Rhodes

University. 297 p. Dissertation.

Hoff, A. 1997. The water snake of the Khoekhoen and /Xam. South

African Archaeological Bulletin. 52: 21–37.

Latham, C. J. K. 1986. Mwari and the divine heroes: guardians of

the Shona. Grahamstown, South Africa: Rhodes University.

231 p. Thesis

Mawere, A.; Wilson, K. 1995. Socio-religious movements, the state

and community change: some reflections on the Ambuya Juliana

cult of southern Zimbabwe. Journal of Religion in Africa. XXV(3):

252–287.
154 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Bernard Ecological Implications of Water Spirit Beliefs in Southern Africa...

Nkosi, P.; Arenstein, J. 2001. Toxic waste poisons Northern Province water supplies. In: Mail and Guardian. Johannesburg: MG

Media. February 2–8, p. 4, top column.

Palmer, R. 1996. Residue of tradition or adaptation to an arid

environment—cosmology, gender and the struggle for water in

two rural communities in the Eastern Cape. Unpublished paper

on file with the author at: Anthropology Department, Rhodes

University, Grahamstown, Eastern Cape, South Africa, E-mail:

r.palmer@ru.ac.za. 28 p.

Posey, D. A. 1999. Cultural and spiritual values of biodiversity: a

complementary contribution to the Global Biodiversity Assessment. London: Intermediate Technology Publications. 730 p.

Posey, D. A.; Dutfield, G. 1996. Beyond intellectual property:

towards traditional resource rights for indigenous peoples and

local communities. Ottawa: International Development Research

Centre. 303 p.

Ritchie, D. 1994. Principles and practice of site protection laws in

Australia. In: Carmichael, D.; Hubert, J; Reeves, B; Schanche, A.,

eds. Sacred sites, sacred places. London: Routledge. 227–244.

Tilley, C. 1994. A phenomenology of landscape: places, paths and

monuments. Oxford/Providence: Berg. 221 p.

van der Waal, B. C. W. 1997. Fundudzi, a unique, sacred and

unknown South African lake. Southern African Journal of Aquatic

Sciences. 23(1): 42–55.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 155

Sally Wynn is Information Officer for The Zambezi Society, P.O. Box

HG774, Highlands, Harare, Zimbabwe. Tel: +263-4 747005, E-mail: zambezi

@mweb.co.zw, Web site: www.zamsoc.org

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship to

protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress

symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc. RMRSP-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky

Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—This paper outlines the findings of questionnaire research undertaken by a conservation nongovernment organization

(NGO), the Zambezi Society, to capture perceptions about wilderness and its values from people visiting four Zambezi River tourism

destinations in Zimbabwe. The research was conducted during a

tourism boom in the area when the Society was receiving complaints

that the wild values of the river were being eroded by tourism

malpractice.

The research produced a visitor-generated definition of “wilderness” in the Zambezi River context; a list of the attributes that make

a place wild; an indication of the high value of a wilderness experience

to Zambezi visitors; a list of factors that detract from people’s

enjoyment of a wilderness experience; a list of the wild areas most

valued by visitors to the Zambezi; and some detailed observations

about the Zambezi tourism experience, including problems at Victoria

Falls.

The Zambezi Society recognizes the vital role that tourism must

play in ensuring the survival of wild areas in developing Africa. Its

research suggests that because such high value is placed on the

Zambezi’s wild nature by surveyed visitors, wilderness tourism

should be promoted as the most appropriate and sustainable option

for the area. However, this cannot take place without wilderness

sensitivity being incorporated into Zambezi Valley tourism planning, management, and practice. The Society proposes a series of

wilderness training workshops for the natural resource and tourism

sectors in order to create awareness and establish guidelines for

wilderness-sensitive planning, management, and practice at all

levels. The Zambezi Society is seeking sponsorship to implement

this plan.

Introduction ____________________

The Zambezi Society is a Zimbabwe-based nongovernmental (NGO) membership organization devoted to conserving the biodiversity and wilderness values of the Zambezi

River in Central and Southern Africa, and to encouraging

people to find ways of benefiting from the river’s resources

without destroying them.

During the latter half of the 1990s, the Society began to

receive numerous complaints and concerns from various

Zambezi River: Wilderness and Tourism

Research Into Visitor Perceptions About

Wilderness and Its Value

Sally Wynn

sources, implying that tourism was having a negative impact on the Zambezi River’s wilderness values. The reports

were wide ranging: unchecked commercialization, ad hoc

development, tree cutting, border violations, unauthorized

road and camp building, noise pollution, littering and abuse

of camping sites, illicit tour and guiding activities, and so on.

The overriding tenor was that the special “wilderness value”

of the Zambezi River was being eroded by inappropriate

tourism behavior and development.

To provide a balanced response, the Society embarked on

a research project in 1998 aimed at capturing peoples’

perceptions about wilderness in the Zambezi context, as well

as providing a workable definition of the term “wilderness,”

its “values,” and its importance to visitors to the Zambezi.

It was hoped that this information might also help The

Zambezi Society to make a meaningful and practical contribution toward conserving Zambezi wild areas by influencing

management authorities and tourism practice.

Methodology ___________________

Research was conducted by questionnaire interview in

four main Zambezi Valley tourism destinations on the Zimbabwean side of the river: (1) Victoria Falls (fig. 1), (2) Kariba/

Matusadona National Park, (3) Mana Pools National Park,

and (4) Kanyemba/Mavuradonha Wilderness Area. Members of the Zambezi Society were also asked to complete a

postal questionnaire.

A total of 1,524 people were interviewed via 633 questionnaires. A wide variety of visitor types were chosen, encompassing those staying in hotels, safari lodges/safari camps,

self-catering/National Park lodges, on houseboats, and canoeing and camping.

Of visitors interviewed, 44 percent were of local/regional

origin, and 56 percent were international. Zambezi Society

members interviewed were mainly local.

Main Findings __________________

Visitors to the Zambezi Value Wilderness

Highly

• Ninety-eight percent of those interviewed felt it to be

important that wilderness exists.

• Eighty-four percent said they value wilderness

personally.

• Seventy-seven percent said they came to the Zambezi

Valley for a wilderness experience.
156 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Wynn Zambezi River: Wilderness and Tourism Research Into Visitor Perceptions about Wilderness and Its Value

Responses to the Questionnaire Provided

a Fairly Comprehensive Definition of the

Term “Wilderness”

This may be summarized as:

...a natural, undeveloped and unpopulated landscape, which

is scenically attractive or unusual, contains indigenous species, and induces an emotional state of mind in which the

visitor may feel any or all of the following: in harmony with

nature, freed from “civilization,” inspired, refreshed, invigorated, challenged, stimulated, humbled, or spiritually fulfilled.

A detailed breakdown of responses to this question is

provided in table 1. The definition had two basic components: physical values and nonphysical values.

Physical Values of Zambezi Wilderness

These appear to be especially valued by international

visitors interviewed and include:

• Natural/unspoilt landscapes—wide open spaces, and a

feeling that little has changed. (This is a fallacy, as

nature is always in a state of flux, but nonetheless, the

illusion is a powerful draw for wilderness appreciators.)

• Wild species—animals roaming free, indigenous plants.

• Lack of people—including the signs of their existence,

for example, pollution, litter, vehicles, noise.

• Lack of development—wilderness is seen as an escape

from/in direct contrast to urban civilization.

• Lack of commercialization—commercial tourism development/activities, and so forth, seem to be considered

inappropriate to wilderness areas, whereas low-impact

structures/activities in harmony with nature are considered appropriate

Nonphysical Values of Zambezi

Wilderness

These are often neglected in tourism planning, but are

particularly important to local/regional visitors for whom

wildlife is less of a novelty, and for Zambezi Society members. They include:

• Peace.

• Solitude.

• Isolation.

• A feeling of harmony with nature.

• Spiritual feelings.

• Challenge.

• Adventure.

Areas of the Zambezi River Considered by

Visitors To Be Most Important for

Wilderness Appreciation

These include:

• Mana Pools National Park (fig. 2)/Chewore Safari Area —

includes the Sapi Safari Area and Middle Zambezi (very

high wilderness satisfaction level).

• Lake Kariba/Matusadona National Park—especially

away from Kariba town (high wilderness satisfaction).

• Chizarira National Park/Mavuradonha Wilderness

Area—Zambezi escarpment mountainous terrain, different from the Valley as such. Especially popular with

local visitors (good wilderness satisfaction).

• Victoria Falls/Chirundu/Kanyemba—relatively settled/

urbanized, but with pockets of important wilderness

nearby (for example, Zambezi National Park near

Victoria Falls). (Wilderness satisfaction is lower here

than in other areas possibly due to the impacts of

settlement and developmental infrastructure.)

Tourism Choices That Offer High

Wilderness Value

These include:

• Canoeing.

• Boating on Lake Kariba.

• Safari lodges/bush camps, which offer guided walks and

“close encounter” bush experiences.

Figure 1—The Zambezi River at Victoria Falls (courtesy of

The Zambezi Society).
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 157

Wynn Zambezi River: Wilderness and Tourism Research Into Visitor Perceptions about Wilderness and Its Value Table 1—Visitor responses to question: What makes a place truly wild? Visitors interviewed in each location who cited each value “Truly wild” values Victoria Falls Kariba Mana Pools Communal lands Overall Zambezi Society Members (n = 435) (n = 160) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Percent --------------------------------------------------------------- Natural values 85 96 95 100 93 97 Presence of/proximity to wild fauna and flora 40 41 44 57 42 32 Animals roaming free/in natural state 11 18 18 0 15 12 Unspoiled, natural ecosystems/in “original state” 24 30 27 23 27 43 Scenic/landscape beauty 11 4 3 14 6 4 Large scale/size landscapes/open spaces 0 4 3 53 6 Undeveloped values 46 44 60 43 48 66 Lack of development/infrastructure/settlement 20 19 28 19 21 38 Undeveloped areas deliberately set aside 2 2 2 02 0 Nature-sensitive/simple/noncommercial development only 16 16 19 19 17 14 Lack of fences/roads/electricity, and so forth 7 7 11 5 8 14 Uncrowded values 38 40 73 52 49 96 Few/no people/tourists 15 17 35 19 20 46 Limited access (for example, vehicle restrictions/by foot only) 2 3 7 03 3 Lack of human activity (vehicles/pollution/litter) 3 12 19 19 12 34 Lack of human interference (controls/rules/signs) 15 9 12 14 12 12 Animals and people separated (guided tours only) 3 0 0 01 0 Small groups of visitors only 1 0 0 0 .5 1 Emotional/spiritual values 17 23 25 29 21 60 Silence (natural sounds only) 7 7 9 19 8 25 Feeling of being “at one with/in harmony with nature” 2 1 2 01 3 Peace/serenity 2 3 1 5 2 5 Solitude/seclusion 3 6 6 5 5 13 Remoteness/isolation 3 6 5 05 8 Feeling of mankind’s insignificance 0 0 0 00 6 Challenge/adventure values 3 4 6 10 5 6 Presence of danger/feelings of fear 2 1 3 02 1 Rugged experience/sleeping rough/fending for oneself 1 1 1 51 3 Unpredictability/encountering the unexpected 2 2 52 2 Cultural encounter values 4 1 0 02 2 Opportunity to interact with local peoples/traditions 4 1 0 02 2 Management values 3 2 3 04 3 Efficient but unobtrusive management 2 1 3 02 3 High standards of guiding 1 0 0 01 0 Good standards of comfort/safety 1 1 0 01 0
158 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Wynn Zambezi River: Wilderness and Tourism Research Into Visitor Perceptions about Wilderness and Its Value

Tourism Activities and Their Impacts

on Wilderness

The survey asked people to indicate what activities they

had undertaken in their visit to the Zambezi. Depending on

their perceived impact on wilderness, these activities were

categorized into three groups (low/medium/high). Among

the 10 most popular activities undertaken by visitors interviewed, seven fall within the low-impact category. They

include: birdwatching, walking, photography, fishing (from

land), swimming/sunbathing, and picnicking. The remaining three—sightseeing, gameviewing, and camping—are

categorized as having medium impact. High-impact activities are mainly undertaken by visitors to Victoria Falls,

Lake Kariba, and Kanyemba. None of the most popular

visitor activities, nor those that are special to Mana Pools

National Park (fig. 3), fall within the intrusive category. This

may partly explain the reason for Mana receiving high

ratings for wilderness experience.

Main Factors That Detract From

a Wilderness Experience

These were identified in visitor responses to the survey.

Table 2 details an outline broken down by areas of interview. To summarize, the main detractions are:

• Too many people—pollution/litter, unruly/insensitive

behavior (such as harassing wildlife with too many tour

vehicles), drunken/noisy behavior on river cruises, and

harassment by vendors/dealers.

• Noise—human-generated (for example, loud radios/

music in campsites), unnatural, mechanical noise (for

example, generators near lodges/camps, motorboats/

motorbikes/trucks/aeroplanes). Natural sounds appear

to be quite acceptable.

• Overdevelopment—too much infrastructure, too many

roads, lights, too many regulations. People appear to

seek wilderness to get away from the hustle and bustle

of urban civilization/development. Civilization detracts

from wilderness.

• Commercial tourism—There is a strong feeling from

visitors that low-key/low-impact infrastructure/activities designed to be nature sensitive are acceptable in

wilderness areas. It is felt that commercial tourism is

not, for example, big/luxury/high-rise hotels; insensitive architecture; advertising billboards on the edge of a

World Heritage Site; inappropriate activities, for example, commercial sales outlets at the entrance to the

“rainforest” at the Falls; and “tame” wildlife. Exploitation/extortion and harassment by vendors and dealers

is seen as detracting from wilderness quality. These

problems were of particular concern to visitors interviewed in Victoria Falls.

• Impacts on nature—damage to ecosystems, tree cutting/poaching, and presence of exotic species.

Some Hotels and Tour Operators May Be Contributing to the Erosion of Wilderness Quality—This was

noted in highly commercialized tourism areas, such as

Victoria Falls and Kariba town, where some tourism operations offer choices of activities as part of package tours that

have high impacts on wilderness. Such activities include:

scenic flights, river cruises, motorboating, golf, casinos, and

tourist “traps” (for example, moneymaking activities considered inappropriate and insensitive to wilderness). Motorboating on the Zambian side of the river opposite Mana Pools

National Park, for example, is mentioned as a considerable

detraction to the wilderness experience of visitors staying at

Mana. The presence of houseboats and the noise of their

engines and generators are mentioned as detracting from

the wilderness quality of the Matusadona National Park,

especially in the Kariba Eastern Basin.

Wilderness Satisfaction Is Lower in Victoria Falls

Than in Other Areas of the Zambezi River Used in the

Survey—Sixty-nine percent of visitors interviewed in

Victoria Falls were satisfied with the quality of their wilderness experience (as opposed to 92 percent in Mana Pools). It

is possible that the quality of the wilderness experience in

Figure 2—Elephants at Mana Pools National Park (taken

by Dick Pitman of The Zambezi Society).

Figure 3—The Zambezi River at Mana Pools (courtesy

of The Zambezi Society).
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 159

Wynn Zambezi River: Wilderness and Tourism Research Into Visitor Perceptions about Wilderness and Its Value Table 2—Visitor responses to question: What detracts from a place feeling truly wild? Percentage of visitors interviewed in each location who cited each factor detracting from the “truly wild” feeling Detractions from “truly wild” feeling Victoria Falls Kariba Mana Pools Communal lands Overall Zambezi Society members (n = 420) (n = 160) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Percent - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - People/human activities 61 66 88 43 70 98 Too many people/mass tourism 38 34 46 43 38 40 Too many vehicles 8 10 13 0 10 17 Pollution/litter 7 13 13 0 11 21 Harassment by curio sellers/vendors/currency dealers 3 1 0 0 11 Unruly/insensitive visitors 3 4 9 0 5 11 Unruly/too many operators 2 4 7 0 48 Presence of security guards 1 0 0 0 10 Noise 31 29 57 43 37 69 General noise (unspecified) 4 10 14 5 9 29 Aircraft (including helicopters and microlights) 13 5 7 0 76 Motorboats/boats/kapenta rigs 3 8 15 0 7 10 Cars/buses 7 3 7 14 6 11 Trains 2 0 0 0 1 0 Music/radios 1 3 7 24 5 9 Generators 0 0 6 0 1 5 Construction companies 3 1 0 0 10 Development (general) 38 46 62 57 48 72 Too much development/infrastructure/settlement 23 30 33 43 29 39 Roads (especially tarred) 8 7 14 10 9 17 Fences 3 2 4 0 3 4 Lights/electricity pylons 2 3 6 5 47 Signs 2 2 1 0 1 1 Rules and regulations/restrictions/lack of spontaneity 1 3 4 0 24 Commercial tourism 38 37 34 10 36 58 Commercialization/big hotels/luxury lodges/tourist traps 26 27 26 10 26 36 Inappropriate/insensitive development/architecture 5 5 3 0 5 10 Inappropriate activities (for example, discos/casinos/video games) 4 2 1 0 28 Presence of “tame wildife”/feeding of animals 2 2 3 0 23 Exploitation/extortion 1 1 0 0 11 Impacts on nature 9 7 13 14 13 27 Ecosystem damage/tree cutting /off-road driving/etc. 4 1 6 10 3 15 Presence of exotic species 1 0 1 0 11 Lack of wild fauna and flora 3 3 3 0 34 Harassment of wild animals (for example, spotlights/radio collars) 3 0 1 0 12 Lack of environmental protection/management 0 1 0 0 14 Poaching 0 1 0 5 1 1 Animals suffering (starvation, etc.) 0 1 0 0 10 Burning 0 1 0 0 1 0 People walking about unrestricted 0 0 1 0 10 Other detractions 2 4 0 0 26 Poor management of tourism facilities 2 2 0 0 11 Presence of domestic animals 0 1 0 0 14 Lack of knowledgeable guides 0 0 0 0 01
160 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Wynn Zambezi River: Wilderness and Tourism Research Into Visitor Perceptions about Wilderness and Its Value

the Falls is being eroded by some of the detractions identified

by interviewees, in other words, commercialization, people,

and overdevelopment.

Of People Interviewed in Victoria Falls, 58 Percent

Were Visiting No Other Destination in the Zambezi

Valley—The Zambezi Society believes that by experiencing a much-impacted wilderness, visitors to the Zambezi

who only visit the Falls may be missing out on the true

wilderness value of the River. This has implications for

tourism marketing.

Provision of Tourism Information or Interpretative

Material Is Inadequate—Visitors interviewed expressed

this opinion, especially in Mana Pools and Kariba/Matusadona National Park.

People Visiting the Wilder Areas of the Zambezi

River Expressed Themselves More Ready to Contribute Toward Wilderness Conservation Than Those

Visiting More Heavily Developed or Impacted Areas—While less than half the visitors interviewed in Victoria

Falls and 55 percent of those interviewed in Kariba were

prepared in principle to contribute financially to maintaining wilderness areas, 70 percent of those interviewed in

Mana Pools National Park and in Zambezi Valley communal

lands expressed themselves willing to do so.

The Zambezi River Is Visited by a Significant Proportion of Independent Travelers (in other words,

people traveling without a tour operator or guide).

This Tourism Category Has No Current Representative Voice—Most people interviewed (73 percent) were

visiting the Zambezi independently. Only 27 percent of

visitors interviewed in all areas were accompanied on their

holiday by a tour operator or guide. Although there are tour

operator and professional guiding associations through which

the interests of some Zambezi users might be represented,

there is currently no association or organization representing the views of the independent visitor to the Zambezi.

Some Observations on Research

Findings _______________________

The Zambezi Society survey clearly confirms the importance of “a wilderness experience” to people visiting the

Zambezi. In view of the economic and investment benefits

that international tourism brings to the region, this would

seem to underline the need to ensure that the river’s wild

values are conserved and to promote wilderness-sensitive

tourism in preference to other Zambezi tourism options.

However, there is a perception that setting aside wild

places for the enjoyment of a few tourists and wilderness

enthusiasts is a luxury that Africans can ill afford. Current

land use pressures and other development priorities tend to

push wilderness awareness, conservation, and management

very low down on the planning agenda, and a tendency to

maximize on short-term revenues at the expense of longterm sustainability is a problem becoming all too evident in

tourism “hot-spots” like Victoria Falls.

This shows a singular lack of understanding, not only of

the vital link between tourism and development, but of the

true value of Africa’s wild areas to the Continent’s people.

The developed world’s astonishing record of environmental

destruction now makes Africa’s “pristine” wildernesses global assets of great value—both biologically and in terms of

their economic potential from sustainable tourism. The

Zambezi River with its tropical diversity, forests, birds, and

large mammals has wilderness qualities that are unique in

the Southern African region, and unlike other wild tropical

rivers like the Congo, the Zambezi is an attractive tourism

destination, being relatively accessible and safe.

Governments of developing nations are not unaware of

this. The collapse of Zimbabwe’s tourism industry as a result

of recent political and economic turmoil has been a bitter pill

to swallow. Its ripple effects have been felt throughout the

Southern African region. In its efforts to recover, the industry is now considering new options, and is undergoing a

process of creative planning and review that might not

otherwise have occurred in the bustle of a thriving tourism

marketplace. The Zambezi Society believes that its research

on wilderness is well timed to take advantage of the current

climate of review.

Recommendations ______________

The Zambezi Society’s recommendations resulting from

the research, therefore, have two main messages:

1. Market wilderness and promote Zambezi Valley wilderness tourism.

2. Safeguard wilderness by incorporating wilderness sensitivity into all tourism planning, management, and practice

for the Zambezi Valley.

Marketing Wilderness

Specific recommendations for wilderness marketing

include:

1. Recognize the importance of wilderness and promote it.

2. Market a “Zambezi wilderness experience” and specific, low-impact wilderness activities to selected tourism

markets.

3. Target tourism markets that specifically appreciate

wilderness.

4. Provide more information/interpretation for visitors on

the Zambezi River and its wilderness (preferably available

free of charge).

Safeguarding Wilderness Through

Sensitive Planning, Management, and

Practice

Specific recommendations include:

1. Incorporate “the wilderness experience” into tourism

planning.

2. Safeguard wilderness quality by developing wilderness-sensitive guidelines for conservation and tourism.

3. Ensure that tourism activities and facilities in priority

wilderness areas are appropriate and wilderness sensitive.

4. Monitor effectiveness of and compliance with guidelines and visitor satisfaction with the wilderness experience.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 161

Wynn Zambezi River: Wilderness and Tourism Research Into Visitor Perceptions about Wilderness and Its Value

5. Improve the quality of the wilderness experience at

Victoria Falls.

6. Encourage wilderness visitors to contribute to maintaining wilderness areas.

7. Establish an association/organization to represent the

interests of independent visitors to the Zambezi.

Followup ______________________

The Zambezi Society recently presented the findings of its

research on wilderness values to Zimbabwean tourism

policymakers, planners, and operators, as well as to the

planning authorities, custodians, and managers of wild

places along the Zambezi River. The Society pointed out the

potential for wilderness-focused and wilderness-sensitive

tourism all along the Zambezi Valley as being the most

suitable, low-impact, sustainable option for Zambezi wild

areas, and urged the authorities to incorporate this into

their marketing strategies. However, the Society also underlined that such promotion will destroy the river’s unique

wilderness qualities unless wilderness-sensitivity is incorporated into the planning, management, and practice of all

existing and future Zambezi Valley tourism.

The research findings were well received, and much interest has been generated. The Zambezi Society has been invited

to contribute to the development process of Zimbabwe’s

Tourism Master Plan, which is currently under discussion.

The Society attended the 7th World Wilderness Congress in

South Africa in November 2001, sponsored by the WILD

Foundation, and through this same sponsor was able to send

the Acting Chief Warden of Zimbabwe’s National Park’s

Department to the week-long, pre-Congress Wilderness

Management Training Program. The Society specifically

chose a candidate who would be in a position to influence

future policy on wilderness management and tourism within

this Parks Department, which is the statutory custodian of

many of the Zambezi River’s wild areas. As a result of the

valuable learning experience afforded to its Chief Warden

and through contacts made at the Congress, the Department

has lent its full support to The Zambezi Society’s efforts to

develop its own program of wilderness management training for Zambezi wilderness custodians and managers in

Zimbabwe, Mozambique, and Zambia.

The Way Forward: Training and

Practical Guidelines _____________

The Zambezi Society is now seeking urgent funding to

hold a series of preliminary practical training programs and

workshops with custodians, managers, and tourism practitioners operating in Zambezi Valley wild areas. The objective would be:

1. To underscore the significance and value of the

Zambezi’s wilderness areas.

2. To reexamine existing conservation and tourism policies in light of The Zambezi Society research.

3. To examine some examples of wilderness conservation

and management from other parts of the world and assess to

what extent these might be applicable in the Zambezi context.

4. To develop some practical ways of encouraging wilderness-sensitive management and tourism in Zambezi wild

areas in the immediate future. (The Zambezi Society would,

for example, like to publish a series of Guidelines or Codes

of Conduct for management and tourism practitioners, which

would be widely distributed throughout the tourism and

resource management sectors.)

163

5. Spiritual Benefits, Religious Beliefs,

and New Stories

WWC7 participants gather at the entrance to the Boardwalk, which served

as the main symposium venue (photo by Alan Watson).

USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 165

Hafiz Nazeem Goolam is Associate Professor, Department of Jurisprudence, University of South Africa, P.O. Box 392, Pretoria, 3000, South Africa.

Phone: (012) 429-8598, FAX: (012) 429-3442, E-mail: goolanmi@unisa.ac.za

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—At the root of our contemporary ecological crisis is a

mindset that disregards the Lordship, Sovereignty, Power, Control,

and Will of God in the universe. The Islamic world view and

civilization centers around the Oneness of Allah or God. Nature is

Allah’s creation, it is a sacred gift for our living planet, and it is

through the wonders of nature that one begins to appreciate the

unique power and singular majesty of God. The human being, God’s

trustee on Earth, is responsible for treating the environment with

care, love, and respect. In her/his capacity as God’s trustee, the

human being must ensure that natural resources are used in a

judicious manner so that future generations will benefit from God’s

bounties.

The Islamic Approach ____________

In Islam, nature is God’s handiwork, which contains His

bounties meant for human use and enjoyment within the

limits set by Divine Law. Nature is therefore not a resource

without an owner, for God is the Owner of nature. The

Qur’an contains numerous verses (ayat) that reassert this

idea that the universe is Allah’s creation and that His

Dominion over all that is created is absolute (Ali 1991). For

example:

To God belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth

And God has power over all things.

(Surah Ali-Imran, [The Family of Imran], chapter 3, verse

189)

And again:

Unto God belongs all that is in the heavens and all

That is on earth.

(Surah Al Rum, [The Romans], chapter 30, verse 26)

The Qur’an declares that the creation of the universe, of

nature, and of the human being is purposive or teleological

and that these are signs (ayat) of God’s Existence, Power,

Wisdom, and Purpose (Ali 1991). It states:

Behold! In the creations of the heaven and the earth, and the

Alternation of night and day, there are indeed signs for

All who are endowed with insight.

(Surah Ali Imran, chapter 3, verse 190)

Preserving Paradise Through Religious

Values of Nature: The Islamic Approach

Hafiz Nazeem Goolam

And again:

And in the succession of night and day, and in the means

Of subsistence which God sends down from the skies,

Thereby giving life to the earth after it had been lifeless

And in the change of the winds: These are signs

For people who use their intellect.

(Al Jathiyah [The Kneeling Down] chapter 45, verse 5)

In the Islamic world view, the universe, the Earth and

their contents are made subservient to the human being, but

not in the sense that the human being can do with it what

she/he likes. Rather, the position of the human being is one

of trusteeship (khilafah), and this position carries with it

great moral responsibility. As the trustee of God on Earth,

the human being is responsible for treating the environment

with care, love, and respect, as well as ensuring that the

planet’s natural resources are used in a judicious manner so

that future generations will benefit from God’s bounties.

Again, the Qur’an speaks:

O mankind! Worship your Sustainer, who has created you

And those who lived before you, so that you may

Remain conscious of your duty towards Him

Who has made the earth a resting place for you and

The sky a canopy, and has sent down water from the sky

And thereby brought forth fruits for your sustenance.

(Al Baqarah [The Heifer] chapter 2, verse 21-22)

Indeed, the erythrina leaf or Umsinsi, which is the emblem of the Wilderness Leadership School, symbolizes the

relationships between homo, terra, and Deus (the human

being, Earth, and God). To fulfill God’s trust, in relation to

both the environment and the community, the human being

must abide by those values and principles of life and living

that lie at the very core of God’s eternal message to humanity. What this means is that mercy, love, and compassion

should guide the human being in her/his interaction with the

environment and the community. She/he should hold in

check greed and avarice and that all too human tendency to

pursue selfish interests to the detriment of her/his fellow

human beings. A moderate lifestyle that reflects balance

and equilibrium is the most cherished value of the Islamic

world view.

This leads to the question: What is the purpose of the

human being on Earth, what is the purpose of life? One

cannot discuss this question in any detail in this paper, but

suffice it to say that, in the context of the environment and

of nature, the Islamic world view postulates that the life of

the human being is subject to a perpetual test by God

regarding the human being’s behavior toward, and utilization of, all God-given, natural resources (both material and

nonmaterial). Are there, then, any principles or values in

terms of which the human being should be guided by in her/

his utilization of the planet’s natural resources?
166 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Goolam Preserving Paradise Through Religious Values of Nature: The Islamic Approach

One—perhaps it is the essence—of the fundamental principles of Islam is Balance or Meezan. This idea, applied to

environmental ethics, requires an equilibrium between

material progress or economic development on the one hand

and the protection and conservation of the environment on

the other. Harith bin Khelef, the Chief Mufti of Zanzibar,

pointed to the need of Islam to put human beings and other

organisms in good order, balance. If not, then there would be

mischief and disaster on our planet. Indeed, the fall of

nations and kingdoms is, from an Islamic viewpoint, a

consequence of the human being’s ingratitude to God. An

example is the parable of an ungrateful nation, the kingdom

of Sheba in Southwestern Arabia. In the Qur’anic chapter,

appropriately entitled Saba or Sheba, we find the following

(Ali 1991):

Indeed in the beauty of their homeland the people of Sheba had

Evidence of God’s Grace—two vast expanses of gardens

saying,

“Eat of what your Sustainer has provided for you, and render

Thanks unto Him: a land most goodly, a Sustainer

Much-Forgiving.”

But they turned away from Us, and so We let loose upon them

A flood that overwhelmed the dams and transformed their two

Vast expanses of gardens into gardens yeilding bitter fruits

Tamarisks and a few lote-trees.

(Verses 15-19; see also Al Nahl [Bees], chapter 16, verses

112–113)

The Islamic world view, through the principle or idea of

Meezan (Balance), establishes an equilibrium between economic development and environmental protection. However, the practical implementation of this idea has declined

within the Islamic world. What are the reasons for this

decline? Very briefly, five reasons can be outlined:

1. Ossification within religious civilizations, which very

often creates a situation whereby the underlying values and

true spirit are forgotten or set aside and, instead, static laws

and antiquated practices are projected as the defining characteristics of a particular faith.

2. The dominant pervasive power and influence of Western secular civilization in the contemporary world. The

secularization of society, which has its roots in the European

Renaissance, reached its peak in the twentieth century with

the acceptance that religion is a private matter and has

nothing to do with issues in the public realm, including the

community’s relationship with the environment.

3. The rise of a secular world view has seen the dramatic

expansion of a global economy, which emphasizes the maximization of profits, the penetration of markets, and the

attainment of high growth rates with little attention being

accorded to balanced development and ethical values.

4. Many of the elites in the South, who are either the

direct products of colonial education or the indirect products

of neocolonial cultural and media indoctrination, possess

meager knowledge of what their religious philosophies say

about the environment or about the human being’s role as

God’s trustee on Earth, or about the nexus between God (the

Creator), the natural environment, and human values. As a

result, many planners, public administrators, academics,

professionals, teachers, and journalists are in no position to

address wilderness, environment, and development from a

religious or spiritual perspective.

5. Even if there are groups capable of articulating the

religious world view, there is no guarantee that they will rise

to the defense of the environment or espouse the cause of

balanced development, especially if their own interests or

others associated with them are involved. Vested interests

linked to wealth, power, and status have always subverted

sublime values and altruistic ideals. This is why, in today’s

world, the greatest threat to the practice of harmonious

relations with the environment is the demon of self-serving

interests appearing in some guise.

Indeed, the degradation of the environment is the result of

the human being’s disregard of God’s Guidance on the

Management of His Resources. I believe that there lies

within a God-centered world view an indisputable strength.

This is why there should and must be a concerted effort to

educate society on the significance of a God-centered world

view, not just for the sake of the environment or for the sake

of balanced development but, more importantly, for the sake

of the future of humanity itself (Fatimah and Rahman 1995;

Tyndale 2001).

What is urgently and desperately required in our world is

a paradigm shift from a materialistic, secularistic world

view to an integralistic, transcendentalist world view, a

world view that all religions postulate (Hassan 1995). This

paradigm implies, inter alia, that:

1. Human and natural resources are God-given bounties

(ni’mah) and constitutive of the Divine Trust (amanah) held

by the human being.

2. The concept of accountability is not confined to public

accountability or accountability to human superiors, but is

extended to include answerability to God.

3. The idea that Allah is the True Owner and Manager of

His Resources liberates the human mind from the false

sense of autonomy or dominion over the Earth’s natural

resources.

As the late Dag Hammarskjold (in Muzaffar 1995: 8) once

couched it:

On the bookshelf of life God is a useful work of reference,

always at hand but seldom consulted.

References _____________________

Ali, A. Y. 1991. The meaning of the Holy Qur’an. Brentwood, MD:

Amana Corporation. 1760 p.

Fatimah, S.; Rahman, R. Abdul. 1995. Spiritual, moral way to

preserve environs. In: New Straits Times [Malaysian newspaper]: January 17: 6.

Hassan, M. K. 1995. Worldview orientation and ethics: a Muslim

perspective. Unpublished paper delivered at: International conference on development, ethics and environment; 1995 January

14–16; Kuala Lumpur. On file with author. 30 p.

Muzaffar, C. 1995. Worldview orientation and ethics: a Muslim

perspective. Unpublished paper delivered at: International conference on development, ethics and environment; 1995 January

14–16; Kuala Lumpur. On file with author. 9 p.

Tyndale, W. 2001. Towards sustainable development: a shift in

values. In: Commentary. International movement for a just

world. 1(8): 1–4.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 167

Baylor Johnson is Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, St.

Lawrence University, Canton, NY 13617. E-mail: bjohnson@mail.stlawu.edu

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship to

protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress

symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc. RMRSP-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky

Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Social scientists have investigated the spiritual benefits reported by wilderness users. This paper draws upon both

western and eastern religious traditions to suggest what features of

wilderness are sources of these benefits. Poets and nature writers

are used to support and enrich the paper. The God of western

monotheism is portrayed as eternal, unchanging, and omnipotent.

Buddhism suggests that everything is constantly changing and that

this is an aspect of duhkha and our dissatisfaction. For if everything

changes, then everything we love will perish. Through wilderness

we can have intimate experience of powerful forces and ancient

things, from the stars above and the mountains around, to the

“eternal” cycles of nature. For many, these provide the closest

approach to direct experience of God’s power and eternity, and the

spiritual comfort these can provide.

Just as we find features of wilderness that answer to our spiritual

needs, so too our own psyches help to explain the peace of mind

wilderness gives us. When we go into the wilderness we leave behind

our normal cares and obligations, and live for a time a simpler life

with simpler concerns, and we experience this change as a newfound peace of mind. We also challenge ourselves with material

simplicity and physical exertion beyond our normal routine. In

return we experience a kind of self-transcendence and renewal akin

to the “rebirth” known in nearly every spiritual tradition.

Introduction ____________________

I am concerned with the wilderness as we imagine it, or in

the current phrase, the wilderness we have “constructed.”

Scientifically verifiable features of wilderness inspire many

of our spiritual experiences of it. If this were not true, then

we would have these experiences as readily in a shopping

mall as in wild places. Still, our minds contribute essential

components to our spiritual experiences in wilderness, experiences to which we would remain blind if we lacked the

needed sensitivity. As sight emerges only when something

visible encounters an eye capable of seeing, so too spiritual

experiences require both an inner and an outer dimension.

Who is the “we” who have these spiritual experiences of

nature? First and foremost it is I, for this essay is necessarily

autobiographical. My own wilderness journeys gave me the

lens through which to see what others might find there as

well. But if this were no more than an autobiographical

Sources of Spiritual Benefits of Wilderness:

A Philosopher’s Reflections

Baylor Johnson

report it would be of little interest. So, I have tried to find

confirmation for my feelings in writers who have recorded

their own responses to wild nature. Ultimately, I think the

experiences of which I write are shared by many moderns,

particularly those influenced by the history and literature of

Europe and its satellite cultures. I have traced some elements of this experience beyond the western cultural tradition, and to me the experiences seem so deeply natural that

I am tempted to think that anyone who is capable of opening

himself or herself to nature must have them. I also know,

however, that it is difficult to sort what we contribute to

experience from what we find there, and so I will content

myself with this narrower claim: I hope to have captured

some central elements of the spiritual experience that many

modern westerners have of wild nature. If these experiences

are something that we share with our brothers and sisters

born to other cultures, then that is good. But I do not claim

to know enough to say that this is so.

Although I do not want to claim too wide a scope for the

spiritual experiences I describe here, the spiritual yearnings

that underlie them are transcultural. According to the

teachings of Buddha, for example, at the heart of human

existence lies duhkha. Though often translated as “suffering,” a better rendering might be “unsatisfactoriness” (Hagen

1997). Buddha himself began his quest for enlightenment

when, after an extraordinarily sheltered childhood, he discovered that disease, aging, and death are unavoidable for

all living beings. Though duhkha is a multifaceted concept,

a core element is the fact of change. Nothing abides. We

ourselves and everyone we love will age and die. Every

institution, every cause to which we devote our care and

efforts will eventually decay and cease to exist. Wherever we

seek, we can find nothing that remains stable and unchanging. As a result, all our mundane hopes are doomed to

failure, for in the end, if everything changes, nothing can be

accomplished—not, anyway, as a permanent achievement.

I think it is putting it mildly to say that this isn’t a happy

thought, as it is stating the obvious to say that the Christian

idea of an eternal and unchanging God who blesses us with

eternal life, reveals a western response to the same fear of

impermanence. The solutions are different. Buddhism says

that change and impermanence are ineliminable features of

existence and counsels us on how to live in peace with them.

Christianity says that they are illusions, and that the deepest reality is eternal and unchanging. But though the solutions are different, the stimulus, the disquiet we feel before

the threat of impermanence, is the same.

The God of Christianity promises us eternal life. The God

of the Old Testament, on the other hand, usually wore a

sterner face. This is revealed nowhere more clearly than in the

Book of Job (Holy Bible) where God’s most faithful servant is

visited with terrible afflictions. Job’s friends tell him that he

must have sinned and so deserved his punishment. But Job is
168 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Johnson Sources of Spiritual Benefits of Wilderness: A Philosopher’s Reflections

clearheaded and knows he has done nothing to earn the

suffering he endures. He calls upon God to give an accounting of Himself, and unlike the rest of us, whose sufferings

include the abysmal silence of the Universe, Job gets a reply.

God comes in the form of a whirlwind and speaks a great

hymn, much of it devoted to wild nature. Here are a few

excerpts (Job 38: 4–7, 18–21, 31–32):

Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?

Declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the

measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the

line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations therof fastened?

or who laid the corner stone therof; when the morning stars

sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?...

Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth? Declare if

thou knowest it all. Where is the way where light dwelleth?

and as for darkness, where is the place thereof, that thou

shouldest take it to the bound thereof, and that thou shouldst

know the paths to the house thereof? Knowest thou it, because

thou wast then born? or because the number of thy days is

great?...

Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose

the bands of Orion? Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his

season? or canst thou guide arcturus with his sons?...

The sense of this, I take it, is that Job is not the point of

God’s creation, but a weak, small, and ignorant fragment of

the whole. Why should Job know the reason of his suffering?

Why indeed should he think he should know? What he can

know is his modest place in the order of things, and when he

knows that, he will understand that he should praise God for

the scraps of grace and understanding he has been granted

rather than complaining that he does not understand what

God alone can grasp.

These images of the human condition and of the divine

lead us toward the first group of spiritual blessings we find

in wilderness. The God who speaks to Job from a whirlwind

is mighty beyond Job’s imagining. Later, the medieval philosophers declared Him—God, I mean—infinite in wisdom,

power, and goodness.

By definition, we cannot experience what is infinite, for

“infinite” means “without limit,” and what is literally without limit exceeds the compass of our senses. This is why God

must appear to Job in the form of a whirlwind, as he appears

to Moses in the form of a burning bush. He must assume

finite form to be perceptible.

Like Job and Moses, if we are to experience God we must

find Him in finite form, or perhaps better, in analogous form.

Neither the whirlwind nor the burning bush is God, but each

is godlike, in a way—in power and mystery perhaps. So, too,

wilderness is godlike and answers to our craving for something enduring in the midst of change. As God reminds Job

of his finitude—his ignorance, his weakness in comparison

to the wonders of nature, the shortness of his life, and the

inevitability of his death—so the wilderness reminds us of

all these things too. Yet, as God comforted Job despite His

awesome presence, so experience of the enduring and awesome faces of wild nature can comfort us and answer to our

yearning to be part of something larger and grander than our

puny, short-lived selves.

In wilderness we encounter, if not God himself, at least an

experience with divine qualities. Wild nature gives us the

divine in concrete, finite form. Rocks and rivers, if not eternal,

are at least very old, and if each season is new and quickly

fades, still the cycle of the seasons is, by comparison with our

short lives, forever. I live and die in a few decades, but the

giant sequoias stand for millennia. So, too, the geese I see

winging overhead are as mortal as I, but the pattern of

migration they enact is ancient and recurring. Whether

because the Buddhists are right and nothing is truly unchanging, or else because the theologians are right and

eternity, although real, cannot be given to the senses, we can

never experience the full eternity of the divine. In wild

nature, though, we encounter things and processes that are,

from the perspective of puny human life, ancient enough to

serve as stand-ins.

Immensity and power are also divine qualities found in

wilderness. In the modern world few of us live with any real

consciousness of the starry heavens above, but when we

move into wilderness they replace the roadways of suburbia

as our guides and companions. So, too, the immensity of the

mountains, the power of rivers, the glaciers, the sea, are

known directly when we travel in the wild. We crave these.

And in a strange sense we crave even the knowledge that all

of them are indifferent to the human realm—stern and

unrelenting like the God of the Old Testament.

These—the eternity of wild nature, its awesome power, its

indifference to human concerns—are what aesthetic theorists have called the “Sublime.” Thoreau knew the experience of the sublime as well as any writer ever has. He

encountered it when he was among the first white men ever

to climb Mt. Katahdin in Maine, later writing (Thoreau

1972: 64):

Vast, Titanic, inhuman nature has got [the beholder] at

disadvantage, caught him alone, and pilfers him of some of his

divine faculty. She does not smile on him as in the plains. She

seems to say sternly, why came ye here before your time? This

ground is not prepared for you. Is it not enough that I smile

in the valleys? I have never made this soil for thy feet, this air

for thy breathing, these rocks for thy neighbors. I cannot pity

nor fondle thee here, but forever relentlessly drive thee hence

to where I am kind. Why seek me where I have not called thee,

and then complain because you find me but a stepmother?

Shouldst thou freeze or starve, or shudder thy life away, here

is no shrine, nor alter, nor any access to my ear.

Robinson Jeffers knew the sublime face of nature, too, and

used it over and over again as a source of comfort. Here he is,

for instance, in Their Beauty Has More Meaning, comforting

himself against his own inevitable death (Jeffers 1963: 77).

Yesterday morning enormous the moon hung low on the

 ocean,

Round and yellow-rose in the glow of dawn;

The night-herons flapping home wore dawn on their wings.

Today black is the ocean, black and sulphur the sky,

And white seas leap. I honestly do not know which is more

 beautiful.

I know that tomorrow or next year or in twenty years

I shall not see these things—and it does not matter, it does

 not hurt;

They will be here. And when the whole human race Has

 been like me

Rubbed out, they will still be here: storms, moon and

 ocean,

Dawn and the birds. And I say this: their beauty has more

 meaning

Than the whole human race and the race of birds.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 169

Johnson Sources of Spiritual Benefits of Wilderness: A Philosopher’s Reflections

And here he is in a mood many of us have shared in recent

days, searching for some solace before the stupidity and

cruelty of human doings (Jeffers 1963: 84):

Calm and Full the Ocean

Calm and full the ocean under the cool dark sky; quiet

 rocks and the birds fishing; the night-herons

Have flown home to their wood...while east and west in

 Europe and Asia and the islands unimaginable agonies

Consume mankind. Not a few thousand but uncounted

 millions, not a day but years, pain horror, sick hatred;

Famine that dries the children to little bones and huge

 eyes; high explosive that fountains dirt, flesh and

 bone-splinters.

Sane and intact the seasons pursue their course, autumn

 slopes to December, the rains will fall

And the grass flourish, with flowers in it: as if man’s world

 were perfectly separate from nature’s, private and mad.

But that’s not true; even the P-38s and the Flying

 Fortresses are as natural as horse-flies;

It is only that man, his griefs and rages, are not what they

 seem to man, not great and shattering, but really

Too small to produce any disturbance. This is good.

 This is the sanity, the mercy.

 It is true that the murdered

Cities leave marks in the earth for a certain time, like

 fossil rain-prints in shale, equally beautiful.

E. B. White, took similar comfort, expressed in the following more gentle passage (in McKibben 1990: 85):

With so much disturbing our lives and clouding our

future...it is hard to foretell what is going to happen...I know

one thing that has happened: the willow by the brook has

slipped into her yellow dress, lending, along with the faded

pink of the snow fence, a spot of color to the vast gray-andwhite world. I know too, that on some not too distant night,

somewhere in pond or ditch or low place, a frog will awake,

raise his voice in praise, and be joined by others. I will feel a

whole lot better when I hear the frogs.

Perhaps Howard Zahniser, who did as much as any single

individual to bring about passage of the Wilderness Act of

1964, said it most directly (in Nash 1973: 214–215):

 To know the wilderness is to know a profound humility,

to recognize one’s littleness, to sense dependence and interdependence, indebtedness and responsibility.

In wild places, then, we can participate in something that

is, if not truly eternal, at least very long enduring in comparison to human life, and this is a comfort in the face of our own

mortality and the impermanence of all we care about. It is

vitally important to recognize that it is not the abstract idea

of the enduring that we encounter in wilderness, but experience of the enduring. Without the idea, our experience

would be—as Kant (1929: 93) famously said—blind: “Thoughts

without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are

blind.” But we can have the idea anywhere and anytime.

In wilderness we encounter the divine, or at least its

analogue, because we come face to face with ancient things

and timeless cycles there. You must be a clod indeed to sleep

under the tent of stars every night and not be reminded of

their age, and, indeed, of the immense mystery that enfolds

our lives. To climb down the Grand Canyon—at least with a

modicum of geological knowledge—is to feel oneself descending into the abyss of ages unfathomable. If we learn of these

things through textbooks, we face them in the wilderness,

and it is this face-to-face contact that makes a wilderness

experience a spiritual experience.

The passages quoted above do not speak only of the

timelessness of wild nature. They speak too of its vast size

and power, and even its indifference to man. These impressions are as powerful to a person in the wilderness as any

other. It can be a dangerous and scary place. Storms, the

great predators, the huge forces of flood and avalanche, and

even the very immensity of space all demand respect that

edges easily into fear. Beyond that, they all remind us in a

visceral way of our comparative weakness and vulnerability.

As Zahniser says, wilderness engenders humility.

But what is it in us that responds to this humbling? Why

does some part of us crave knowledge of forces and powers

that belittle us? How is it a spiritual benefit to be thus

humbled?

Humility is, of course, a virtue. It is good to know one’s

proper stature, especially in this time of so much human

hubris toward nature. But though this may be a good

consequence of being humbled by wild nature, it isn’t what

makes us feel so good, so blessed when we sojourn there.

The explanation of that, I think, is that wild nature

humbles not only us as individuals, but all of human kind

and all of its ambitions. To be insignificant in a human crowd

is painful, for it reminds us that we have not achieved the

fame and fortune that others have. To be insignificant in

wild nature, by contrast, can be comforting, for wilderness

dwarfs not only ourselves but fame and fortune, too. It

provides a perspective from which we can dismiss concern

with all such things and be content with whatever concrete

joys life affords us. And in wilderness these joys seem

abundant despite the simplicity, and even danger and deprivation, that wilderness travel can involve. There is a

mystery to be solved here that is similar to the mystery of the

comfort we find in nature’s humbling of us. Why should the

deprivation, exhaustion, challenge, and even danger we find

in wilderness bring us spiritual joy and peace, a feeling of

being fully alive?

Surely many different things interact to produce the

answer. What we have said above may form a background.

In wilderness we may already be feeling the comfort of

identification with places and processes much grander and

much more enduring than our individual egos, and feeling

too that the defeats and frustrations of our normal lives are

much less important than they seem from an office cubicle.

Beyond that, the challenges we overcome in wilderness are

empowering and invest us with a sense of our capability and

worth.

It is important that these challenges do not typically

throw one into competition with other people. Where we

compete against one another, as willy nilly we must in

modern civilization, there must be both winners and losers,

and the losers must outnumber the winners. When, as we

usually do in the wild, we compete only against ourselves,

success is much more likely, if only because a defeat of one

kind—failing to get to the mountain top, for instance—can

be a triumph of another—for example, the wisdom of knowing when to turn back, or the knowledge of how to cope with

failure. Indeed, perhaps in wilderness we can temporarily

forget about competition and focus instead on competence—

acquiring it, testing it, glorying in our possession and growth

in it.
170 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Johnson Sources of Spiritual Benefits of Wilderness: A Philosopher’s Reflections

This sense that the wilderness is a place of testing from

which we emerge strengthened and cleansed in spirit is not,

of course, a modern invention, a kind of urban cowboy play

for effete office workers only. The worldwide tradition of

vision quests and initiation rituals requiring wilderness

sojourns is a reminder of this. So, too, is the story that Jesus

tested himself by a journey into the wilderness, which

resonates with an even older tradition. Consider this passage from Wilderness and the American Mind (Nash 1973:

16):

The Israelites’ experience during the forty-year wandering

gave wilderness several meanings. It was understood, in the

first place, as a sanctuary from a sinful and persecuting

society. Secondly, wild country came to signify the environment in which to find and draw close to God. It also acquired

meaning as a testing ground where a chosen people were

purged, humbled, and made ready for the land of promise.

The demands and challenges of wilderness experience

focus the traveler’s attention in the same way as activities

that promote what Csikszentmihalyi (1990) calls “flow.”

Removal to wilderness has generally already pulled us away

from the tensions and troubles of our anxious daily lives.

And the life we lead in the wild is not only separate from the

sources of our tension, it is also stripped down to basics. We

live primitively (or at least did so until the first uncomprehending fool dragged his cell phone along), and the things we

must do, though possibly challenging, are few and fairly

obvious. But they are also important in obvious ways. We

need to get to a camping place by sundown; we need our tents

to stand up to the storm. We need to get up and over the pass

before that storm breaks. We feel, not the acid stomach

created by social anxiety, but the healthy thirst and hunger

from bodies taxed by exertion.

All these elements—physical removal from sources of

social anxiety, challenges that are few, focused, and deeply

felt, the feelings of competence and worth that we get from

meeting such obvious challenges—cooperate to drive ordinary anxieties from our mind, leaving us feeling peaceful,

worthy, and open to the spiritual meanings of humility and

eternity described earlier. I am not sure whether this is the

Bible’s “peace that passeth understanding” (Holy Bible,

Philippians 4: 7), but it is at least akin.

I know that the beauty of wild nature is also important to

the spiritual peace we find there, but this subject is so large

that I shall pass it by with only this one sentence addition to

what others have said. The beauty of the wild commands our

attention, pulls us outward and away from our egos, and like

the sublime, nurtures the self-forgetting that every spiritual

tradition extols. Appreciation of the beauty of wilderness

reinforces an effect that begins when we are humbled by

wilderness and seek refuge in its timelessness. All of these

pull us away from focus on ourselves as individual egos and

toward identification with the larger world, toward, that is,

the loss of self that spiritual humility demands.

In summary, I have suggested that in wilderness we

experience an image or analogue of the divine that speaks to

deep-seated spiritual yearnings. Ancient rocks and seas, the

seemingly timeless rhythms of life and the seasons comfort

us. They say that while individually we and all our earthly

hopes are mortal, still we are part of something everlasting.

The vast size and awesome power of wild places, and even

their indifference to us, is, oddly, another source of spiritual

comfort. For by comparison with wild nature our personal

troubles, and even the troubling doings of the human race,

seem petty enough to be forgotten. Another way of saying

this is that wilderness encourages the self-forgetting that is

extolled in every spiritual tradition. It pulls us away from

our own small troubles and toward identification with a

greater whole. This movement is strengthened by physical

removal from the scenes and causes of our normal concerns,

and by the demand that we focus attention on a few deeply

felt and immediate concerns. Not least, though neglected

here, the beauty of nature also consoles us, as all forms of

beauty do, and pulls us outward away from self and into our

surroundings.

I want to close with some questions to which I can suggest

only brief and partial answers. As McKibben (1990) has

suggested in The End of Nature, the wilderness landscapes

that provide our spiritual experiences are endangered, and

along with them the sense of nature as a scene of awesome

forces and timeless cycles, a place untouched as petty human

dramas play out their insubstantial plots. What will happen

to this sense of wild nature as a perceptible analogue of the

divine, as global climate change and other environmental

threats change the very face of nature? A lot of the answer

depends, of course, on what one thinks will happen. My own

expectations are pretty grim. If we have to watch the death,

not only of selected species, as we do already, but of whole

ecosystems, if reliable patterns of weather and climate

change, if even ocean currents and levels themselves alter

with the melting of large permanent ice fields, then I think

it will be hard to maintain the feelings about wilderness that

I have discussed in this paper.

Air pollution creates beautiful sunsets, and so dying

landscapes may still have their own stark beauty. There will

still be places where humans are few. Titanic forces will still

be at work in the world. Our doings do not yet trouble the

stars, and so those will remain as symbols of eternity. The

mountains will not grow younger because we have increased

the atmospheric concentration of CO2

. Rivers and seas will

still batter us about, indifferent to our wishes.

But these are further removed from the human sphere

than the spring peepers E. B. White was waiting to hear. If

the frogs are dying, if the dawn that Jeffers beheld recurs,

but its birds have become extinct, will we still feel enfolded

within the greater rhythms of nature? When what survives

does so only by our leave, when the entire world is but a park,

and a greatly impoverished one at that, will terrestrial

nature seem to anyone divine? Can wild nature figure as a

refuge from human mortality and failings when we know

that the refuge is mortal and a victim of our failings?

I am pessimistic about the answer. I fear that future

generations will soon be deprived of the spiritual comfort we

have found in wild nature. It will, of course, still be possible

to care about wild nature. But this caring will be from a

different perspective than I have described in this paper. It

is, I think, quite possible to care deeply about what depends

on you, but it is very difficult to see it as an awesome,

everlasting analogue of the divine. Wilderness can no longer

be our refuge from the human sphere once its inclusion in the

human sphere is obvious.

Ultimately, I think some of the spiritual benefits we derive

from wilderness depend upon seeing it as other: wilderness
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 171

Johnson Sources of Spiritual Benefits of Wilderness: A Philosopher’s Reflections

represents the natural versus the artificial, the everlasting

versus the human and mortal, the all-powerful versus the

petty sphere of mankind. The approaching global environmental crises will make it impossible to maintain these

dichotomies, as wilderness is revealed to be not a realm

apart from the human, but a part of the human realm, and

without these dichotomies, our descendants will be deprived

of at least some of the spiritual experiences of nature I have

described in this paper.

References _____________________

Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1990. Flow: the psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row. 303 p.

Hagen, S. 1997. Buddhism plain and simple. New York: Broadway

Books. 159 p.

Holy Bible, King James Version. Cleveland, OH & New York: World

Publishing Company.

Jeffers, R. 1963. Selected poems. New York. Toronto: Random

House. 115 p.

Kant, I. 1929. Critique of pure reason. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Toronto: MacMillan. 681 p.

McKibben, B. 1990. The end of nature. New York: Doubleday. 226 p.

Nash, R. 1973. Wilderness and the American mind (revised edition).

New Haven: Yale University Press. 425 p.

Thoreau, H. D. 1972. The writings of Henry David Thoreau: the

Maine woods. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 392 p.
172 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

David M. Johns is a Cofounder and a Director of The Wildlands Project

and teaches politics and law at Portland State University, P.O. Box 725,

McMinnville, OR 97128, U.S.A., E-mail: djohns@viclink.com

©David M. Johns.

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship to

protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress

symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc. RMRSP-00. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky

Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—As cultural animals we create meaning and order.

Stories are the primary means our species uses to do this. Stories

that rise to the level of myth exert powerful effects on behavior. The

dominant myths that explain our relationship to the natural word

have two serious failings: our self-importance and a superficial and

simplified image of who we are. These stories obscure more than

they enlighten, thereby preventing us from addressing the causes of

the current extinction crisis. Conservationists can and must fashion

new stories that take account of our disproportionate impact on the

Earth and its origins in our behavioral plasticity, and that offer

rules for constraining our destructive behavior. For such stories to

actually work in constraining human behavior, they must be deeply

internalized and socially reinforced within the framework of existing mythologies, both religious and secular. Two historical examples of how this has worked are examined, and specific recommendations are made for how conservationists can maximize their

cultural influence through storytelling and mythmaking.

Introduction ____________________

When Margaret Thatcher was preparing for the Earth

Summit in 1992, she called together a group of scientists to

advise her on the condition of the natural world. She was

uniformly told that things were grim and getting more grim.

Extinction rates were climbing, ecosystems were unraveling, and humans were on a path that would lead to the

destruction of the Earth. Depressed, she asked if anyone had

any good news. James Lovelock spoke up and said he

thought it was impossible for humans to destroy the Earth.

No doubt, he said, humans were causing a great extinction

episode, but five times previously great extinctions had

occurred and each time the Earth and life had recovered. The

Prime Minister was cheered and asked Lovelock about this

recovery—just how long would it take? Based on past episodes, he answered, about 5 to 15 million years. Prime

ministerial depression resumed.

The meeting in this story may have never happened, but

it doesn’t really matter. A story need not be true in every

sense to make its point. This is especially true of the most

important stories. But it’s a truth that is often lost today.

Our Real Challenge: Managing Ourselves

Instead of Nature

David M. Johns

We are storytelling animals. We make sense of the world

using story and metaphor. Even when we think we’re being

very literal, doing science for instance, rather than storytelling per se, we usually are relying on metaphor and story

to understand and navigate as individuals, groups, and

entire cultures. Stories are more than just a means of trying

to describe the order of the universe, be it physical or social.

They are also the primary way we create order and meaning.

There is a real world governed by regularities, and we can

discover those regularities and test the truth of our descriptions. But we must create meaning and purpose as individuals and societies; that order is not provided by our DNA for

the most part. It is nonetheless real for being created by us.

Our lives are shaped by human-created order from birth to

death and on the far side of both events. The truth of this order

is made real by our acceptance of it. We do not usually think

of that acceptance as creating order. Rather, we regard the

created order as natural as gravity. This sense of the natural

and the proper gives the created order stability in the face of

the challenge posed by alternatives that erode the created

order as surely as entropy does complexity in the natural order.

It is a perennial human problem (Rappaport 1999).

So, story is central in our lives because we are wired for it

and we are wired for it because it’s adaptive. Because stories

are so central, it is important that we have good ones. If the

map a story provides is bad and the rules inappropriate, our

problem solving will suffer. We will suffer, and the Earth will

suffer.

Good stories are stories that accurately reflect or otherwise take account of our circumstances. Good stories help us

understand the regularities of the universe. Good stories

help us create meaning, values, and a human order that sees

beyond the short term and impulse. And, good stories reinforce as proper and right our caring for life and that which

makes life possible—the Earth and evolution for instance.

There are lots of bad stories out there, and they are used

to explain and justify our destructive behavior toward the

natural world.

In some of these stories we are God’s gift to the universe,

special, and destined to rule. In secular versions of this story

we are special because we have reason, but still destined to

rule as evolution’s gift to the universe. In some versions, we

do great good and improve the world. In others, we are

destructive and will bring ruin to creation and ourselves. In

other versions, our drive to control and dominate is just

natural—we aren’t the only creature that affects its surroundings.

The problem with all of these stories is that they do not

accurately reflect or take account of our circumstances. They

do recognize our disproportionate effect on the world, but

they do not recognize our limitations and frailties, nor where

we are headed. They also fail to recognize that our disproportionate effect is a capacity, not a necessary aspect of our
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 173

Johns Our Real Challenge: Managing Ourselves Instead of Nature

existence. While there are stories critical of human hubris,

they are not aspects of the dominant cultures.

Our disproportionate effect on the natural world is the

result of our capacity for technological development and our

capacity for changing our social organization. These two

capacities allow us to adapt to virtually any ecosystem, and,

more importantly, to alter and even destroy ecosystems and

species to suit our purposes. The changes in social organization that marked the neolithic transition to civilization are

especially important, for they gave rise to a human social

dynamic of competition, conflict, and ever increasing intensification of exploitation that drives further manipulation

and domination of ecosystems. The transition to hierarchy

and civilization may initially have been driven by population

increases and other factors, but once complex societies are in

existence, internal and external conflict in the service of

maintaining and extending control become major drivers in

development (Adams 1966; Algaze 1993; Chang 1980; Harris 1977, 1979, 1989; Johnson and Earle 1987; Service 1975;

White 1959, 1969, 1987).

Despite the cost to nature, most people would argue that

civilization and development have been, on balance, good

things. Most would also argue that our behavioral plasticity

and our capacity for culture are remarkable adaptive mechanisms and good things. But capacity for culture, which

underlies the behavioral plasticity evidenced in changing

technology and social organization, clearly has some serious

downsides. These include our capacity for lying, denial,

distraction, alienation, and myopia. We do not see, or we can

ignore, the destructive consequences of our actions, especially if they are long-term (Ornstein and Ehrlich 1989).

Even in the best of circumstances, we usually cannot forecast intergenerationally. Hierarchy further magnifies these

negative attributes because it means rulers are usually

insulated from the consequences of their actions. The ruled

and the natural world pay the price.

The price is high, both materially and spiritually. D. H.

Lawrence (1968: 504) wrote that “we are bleeding at the

roots, because we are cut off from the earth and sun and

stars.” Our capacity for love—that which bonds us to others,

to life, to the Earth, withers “because we plucked it from its

stem on the tree of life” and it can’t “keep on blooming in our

civilized vase on a table.” We find ourselves members of

societies locked into an adaptive strategy that not only is bad

for nature but bad for us in so many ways. But just as a bad

wound triggers a flood of endorphins so we don’t feel the pain

instantly, so the wound of our estrangement makes us

oblivious to its causes. (Berman 1989; Shepard 1982) This

allows business as usual to continue, which in turn keeps us

estranged. It’s not a vicious circle but a downward spiral.

We need stories, then, that take account of all this and that

can guide us in the creation of societies and policies that care

for the natural world. Herman Daly (1996: 59), quoting in

part David Orr, put it this way. We need to manage ourselves, not the planet or nature, because nature is not the

problem. “Our self-management needs to be ‘more akin to

child-proofing a day care center than piloting spaceship

Earth.’ We need a playpen in which we can be free but also

protected from the excesses of our own freedom.” We make

poor dominants. We are not smart enough to manage nature.

To some, this sounds like a call for ecofascism. Perhaps it

would be if we tried to impose it from the top down. I think

any efforts in that direction would fail, and worse, would

backfire.

There is another way. The ethnographic record is abundantly clear: stories deeply anchored psychologically and

culturally can guide human action even in the face of human

desires to the contrary, but mostly by affecting the desire in

the first place. But it is not just any sort of story that can do

this. Only stories that are part of a mythological structure,

anchored in the sacred, have this influence (Campbell 1959;

Evans 2001; Fulford 1999; Lakoff 1996; Levi-Strauss 1969,

1973, 1978, 1981).

By sacred, I do not necessarily mean religious stories,

although they often are. Sacred is the quality of being

unquestionable—the basic assumptions that each individual

and all cultures necessarily possess at core. Sacred is that

which is ultimately invoked to explain the meaning of it all.

It is the basis for the human-created order and the particular

interpretation of the nonhuman-created order. Some of you

may have trouble conceiving of a secular sacred belief. I offer

Einstein. He said that among scientists existed a fundamental belief that knowledge is good. He also noted that such a

belief was not falsifiable, not subject to scientific testing. It

was a basic assumption, used in turn to legitimize more

specific axioms and rules for behavior. Many nonreligious

people hold similarly untestable beliefs that the universe is

good, or bad, or moral, or living.

Can we really consciously fashion stories that will be

accepted and guide human behavior toward the natural

world? Stories that would incline people, even motivate

them, to actively support policies doing the same? (The

ultimate test in America might be whether we could devise

a story that would get people out of their cars.) There is good

reason to think so and let me say why; first, by dealing with

some objections, and then by giving some examples.

A first objection to such an effort is that the sacred has

mostly been hijacked by ruling elites over the millennia to

justify the social order they construct—orders that benefit

them at the expense of everyone else and of nature. There is

much truth to this. But the cultural arena remains contested

territory more than the state or the economy. Wealth and

political power are increasingly concentrated and built on

the control and destruction of the natural world. Cultural

autonomy itself is increasingly limited by the concentration

of ownership of cultural institutions—they are at root just

another profit making business. Autonomy is further limited because more and more cultural institutions are owned

by corporations with a wide range of interests (nuclear

power, weapons) they seek to protect by fostering legitimacy

through shaping cultural content. But most cultural traditions, religious and secular, are diverse, home to both rigid

dogma and hierarchical control on the one hand, and centers

of creativity that are subversive of domination. Although

conservation must be effective in the economic and political

arenas, building this effectiveness depends on motivating

and mobilizing people—getting them to act on conservation

beliefs. Such beliefs are not now deeply enough anchored nor

widespread enough to make the difference we need to make

in policy.

A second objection is that it is ridiculous to assume that we

can engineer fundamental beliefs. People do not easily

change their world views once they have been internalized

in the socialization and enculturation process (Erikson 1968;
174 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Johns Our Real Challenge: Managing Ourselves Instead of Nature

Wallace 1969). Even effecting intergenerational change is

difficult and takes enormous resources. Not even companies

with billions to spend on public relations would try to start

a new religion or equivalent—although in the space of a

century consumerism may well have come to resemble one.

Companies, in selling products or particular brands of

products, do appeal to important human needs for belonging, emotional security, and status, but normally not the

need for certainty of order that the sacred provides. It might

be argued that consumerism strengthens various higher

order beliefs that have helped to make it possible—humanistic or Christian notions of progress for instance. At the

same time that material well-being undercuts religious

fervor, it also has proved unsatisfying—it doesn’t fulfill the

needs it promises to. Sports team loyalty is a special case,

because it can generate a sense of participatory community

and even involves ritual. But it typically is made to carry a

greater load than it can deliver in terms of meeting human

needs, and ultimately feels more compensatory-like consumption—than genuine. In other words, both sports and

consumption can be drugs used to create a state of well-being

not anchored in actual conditions (Lasch 1978).

I acknowledge the difficulties and do not think we have to

change people’s most fundamental or sacred beliefs.

Rapapport (1999), in his analysis of the structure of mythic

systems, identifies a hierarchy of beliefs and stories. At the

pinnacle are beliefs that are sacred in and of themselves, in

other words, the unquestioned. They are anchored in ritual

and the deepest layers of socialization. Invariably, he found

them to be about immaterial things—literally. They were

about the nature of God, the afterlife, trinities, the goodness

of knowledge, or the evil of the loss of innocence through

knowing. Their primary function is to provide a foundation

of certainty—the unquestioned and the unfalsifiable—that

is used to sacralize lower order beliefs: general principles

about how the cosmos, nature, and society work; specific

rules for everyday behavior in particular situations and

circumstances and problemsolving; and, rules for recognizing certain states of the world as significant and requiring

action. Part of what makes the sacred sacred is that it is

viewed as unchanging. But lower order beliefs are susceptible to change, the more so as one moves down the hierarchy

of general to specific. Change occurs continuously, increasingly in our era by design. It is worth noting here that the

hallmark of what we call fundamentalism is the belief that

lower order statements are in and of themselves sacred and

not subject to change. Thus, some belief systems that regard

divine creation as true can accommodate evolution because

it is about the “method” of creation and thus a lower order

belief susceptible to change; fundamentalists cannot. It is

not their literalism that is the problem—they too cannot

avoid metaphor—but their estimation that lower order beliefs are in and of themselves sacred and unchanging.

So, we do not need to change fundamental assumptions,

the most sacred of stories. We need only change lower order

stories and beliefs, and they are by their nature susceptible

to change. To be successful in promulgating stories about

how to behave better toward nature, we must make our

stories compatible with the most sacred beliefs of particular

groups. Sometimes even a word can make a difference,

linking what we say to the maps and meanings people

already possess. A few years ago, Michael Soulé got tired of

explaining to audiences what biodiversity is. He started

using the word “creation” or the term “living creation.” Everyone, Christian and atheist, knew exactly what he meant.

Let me give two examples in which deeply rooted beliefs

about the material world, sacralized by a variety of sacred

assumptions, guided social movements in successfully constraining the behavior of dominant groups in the United

States.

Throughout the last two-thirds of the 19th century, attitudes of economic laissez-faire were dominant in the United

States and justified the ruthless exploitation of people and

nature. Laissez-faire did not really exist, of course—the

state intervened constantly in the economy on the side of

capital. But the doctrine was used to justify to the public the

lack of state intervention in response to demands for decent

treatment of workers and others. Organized resistance that

eventually brought about reform had many roots—populist,

abolitionist, working class, middle class, and even upper

class to a point. By the 1890s, demands for increased social

and economic justice were making some headway, although

it would be another 40 years before many goals were realized. This resistance and reform movement rejected laissezfaire as doctrine, called for regulation based on a different

standard of justice, and changed policy significantly (Kolko

1967; Polyani 1944; Wolfe 1977). It was guided by nonelite

cultural norms embedded in stories about justice. The power

of these stories lay not just in the fact that they resonated

with the experience of the exploited by calling their exploitation evil, or identified an alternative state of society where

such exploitation was at least ameliorated, but also that

they provided a guide to action (Sinclair 1915). Their power

rested in the notion that these stories were right, in other

words, they were situated within the context of larger stories

and values that were not questioned.

More recently, in the United States there have been efforts

to weaken the Endangered Species Act (ESA), one of the

strongest pieces of conservation legislation in the world. The

Republican Party leadership in the House of Representatives was brought to power without the help of organized

conservationists and didn’t need us to keep power. Indeed,

they pandered to anticonservation interests. So our opposition was not important to them—they didn’t have to listen to

us. What helped to derail efforts to weaken the ESA was the

Evangelical Environmental Network (EEN), a group of

thousands of churches with more than a million members

(Barcott 2001). Arguing that the natural world was God’s

handiwork and that it was therefore gross human arrogance

to think that people could improve it by causing extinctions,

paving it over, and so forth, the network undercut the sacred

mantel that developers and despoilers often hide under. The

beliefs of people leading this network in no way diverged

from their basic core beliefs, although it clearly represented

a change in the secondary and lower order beliefs, or a

change in emphasis. (There clearly are elements in the

Christian tradition that have been nature friendly, but they

have never predominated.) Because these churches were

part of the conservative coalition Republicans depended on,

they could not ignore the EEN.

The same Christian groups, normally aligned with Republicans on many social issues, helped to defeat legislation that

would have permitted drilling for oil in the Arctic National

Wildlife Refuge.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 175

Johns Our Real Challenge: Managing Ourselves Instead of Nature

Let me give one more example that does not demonstrate

any effects I can prove, but does offer an example of how a

story can get into the stream. Death is a profound event in

the lives of humans. So much of our storymaking and telling

is about trying to make some sense of death, trying to come

to terms with the loss of loved ones, and with our own. A few

years ago Terry Tempest Williams (1991) wrote a book about

the death of her mother from cancer, called Refuge. The story

of her mother’s death, her family, her own story of coming to

terms with the dying and the death, did what the most

powerful stories do: link the particular with the universal,

and allow us to find a place in it. Hundreds of thousands read

her book because of this, not because of their feelings or

Williams’s feeling about conservation. But in this book about

death Williams also talks about life, the life of the Bear River

Migratory Bird Refuge, threatened by rising waters. This

refuge was not just a refuge for nature, but for her as well.

The very place she sought solace and nurture in the face of

her mother’s death was itself being threatened. The interweaving of these stories of maternal death and nature told

nature’s story to people who would have not otherwise

sought it out and heard it. It allowed people to connect

through something they were familiar with—loss of a loved

one—with the natural world, something they may not have

been so well connected with, and taught them to see its

value, to care.

Conservationists were directly responsible for successful

strategies to protect parrots in several Caribbean countries

(Butler 1992). By making parrots a symbol of nationhood

and thereby linking protection of parrots to national pride,

conservationists were able to achieve a significant decrease

in poaching and generate positive behavior to protect parrot

habitat. This is what we need to be much better at.

We need to create, refashion, generate, and promulgate

stories that will resonate with people to the point of becoming internalized. The likelihood of internalization will depend on several things. Our stories must:

• Be compatible with the varieties of existing sacred

(highest order) beliefs, secular and religious.

• Work better than existing lower order stories; thanks to

science and people’s experience it’s becoming clear to

most that there’s something seriously wrong with our

relationship with nature; many current stories don’t

adequately explain why nor do they offer solutions.

• Speak to important emotional needs—aspects of our life

cycle including transitions, the problem of alienation,

connection and identity; we need to be able to find

ourselves in them.

• Be emotionally honest; in speaking to our emotional

needs they must arise from the genuine (Soulé 1988).

• Be good stories—compelling, enticing, well-crafted.

We desperately need powerful stories that will help develop broad-based support and action for conservation policies. We also need stories that will motivate people in their

individual lives to make decisions that will make conservation possible. Policies that create protected areas will ultimately fail if we don’t reduce consumption and population.

We need stories that will lead us to:

• Limit our numbers.

• Limit our consumption.

• Leave much of the world off limits to human exploitation even though we want products nature can be

converted into.

• Practice humility.

• Recognize the intrinsic value of nature.

We cannot confine our stories to the written and spoken

word, although they remain in many ways foundational to

the development of all story and even ritual. But they are not

enough in the world of mass, electronic, semiliterate culture.

Two of the most critical media for us—for anyone seeking to

change stories—are film and music.

Film is a medium that is broadly shared and can form the

basis for genuine and broad social interaction. A film can be

seen by tens, even hundreds of millions of people in a

relatively short time. Film, when it works as it should, is the

perfect mythmaking form. It compresses into 120 minutes

stories that can meld the now with the eternal, the architectonic with the particular, the familiar with the unfamiliar.

Films do this with all of their attributes—script, acting,

music—but above all by color, costume, camera, composition, and editing. We are primates, and vision is primarily

how we know the world, literally and metaphorically. To

know something with any sense, we almost always say, “I

see.” The technique of film easily takes us in—we gladly

suspend our sense of reality to enter into a well-crafted story.

We even give ourselves to poorly told and barely told stories.

Film is nonetheless profoundly influential (Charney and

Schwartz 1995; Kawin 1992; Nichols 1981; Rosenbaum

1997).

Music is another mass medium that has far surpassed

writing in its ability to reach hundreds of millions of people

in a relatively short time. Music ranges from 3-minute

popular songs to multihour operas, but storytelling is usually an important element. But there is more. Music, especially if danced to but even if not, comes closest to generating

a ritual-like experience. Ritual often includes singing and

dance and these aspects anchor myth somatically, by virtue

of the physiological states they induce through rhythm and

repetition (d’Aquila and Laughlin 1975, 1979; Lex 1979;

Radcliffe-Brown 1964; Turner 1969). Repetition is also important in that the same piece of music can be performed or

heard on different occasions, reinforcing the message and

the social bond that strengthens the constraining aspects of

message and belief. Ritual also anchors itself through participation: participation in ritual is physical acceptance to be

bound by the order it embodies (Rappaport 1999). Live music

performances or dances, with or without live music, share

some elements of this aspect of ritual as well (McNeill 1995).

Because of their intrinsic appeal, both film and music have

enormous influence. People experience them as entertainment, not education. They are able, therefore, to engage in

new or different ways of seeing things without the defensiveness that is often engendered when people feel others are

trying to educate or persuade them. This is a fact we ignore

at our peril.

Both film and song have short lives with some few exceptions. The market and narcissism have formed a happy

marriage in which the value of the new as new is mutually

reinforcing. Each year thousands of new songs and hundreds of new films are released. To be effective, we need to

tell our story in many songs and films.
176 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Johns Our Real Challenge: Managing Ourselves Instead of Nature

Our stories cannot be fashioned mechanically. There really is art involved. They must emerge organically. But we

have master storytellers. Indeed, the most widely read

scientists in the world are among the best storytellers.

Admittedly, there are fewer songwriters and filmmakers

who pursue a conservation agenda than writers or scholars

or activists. We must address that weakness. But above all,

we must make a conscious effort to craft stories that fit with

the highest order beliefs of key constituencies.

References _____________________

Adams, Robert McCormick. 1966. The evolution of urban society.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 192 p.

Algaze, Guillermo. 1993. The Uruk world system. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 162 p.

Barcott, Bruce. 2001. For God so loved the world. Outside. 3: 84.

Berman, Morris. 1989. Coming to our senses. New York: Simon and

Schuster. 525 p.

Butler, R. 1992. Parrots, pressures, people, and pride. In: Beissinger,

S. R.; Snyder, N. F. R., eds. New world parrots in crisis. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Press: 25–46.

Campbell, Joseph. 1959. The masks of God. Volume 1. Primitive

mythology. New York: Viking. 514 p.

Chang, Kwang-Chih. 1980. Shang civilization. New Haven, CT:

Yale University Press. 417 p.

Charney, Leo; Schwartz, Vanessa R., eds. 1995. Cinema and the

invention of modern life. Berkeley: University of California Press.

409 p.

Daly, Herman E. 1996. Beyond growth. Boston: Beacon Press. 253 p.

d’Aquila, Eugene; Laughlin, Charles D. 1975. The biophysiological

determinants of religious ritual behavior. Zygon. 10: 32–57.

d’Aquila, Eugene; Laughlin, Charles D. 1979. The neurobiology of

myth and ritual. In: d’Aquila, Eugene; Laughlin, Charles D.;

McManus, John, eds. The spectrum of ritual. New York: Columbia University Press: 152–182.

Erikson, Erik H. 1968. Identity, youth and crisis. New York: Norton.

336 p.

Evans, Dylan. 2001. Emotions, the science of sentiment. Oxford:

Oxford University Press. 204 p.

Fulford, Robert. 1999. The triumph of narrative. Toronto: Anansi

Press. 158 p.

Harris, Marvin. 1977. Cannibals and kings. New York: Random

House. 239 p.

Harris, Marvin. 1979. Cultural materialism. New York: Random

House. 381 p.

Harris, Marvin. 1989. Our kind. New York: Harper and Row. 547 p.

Johnson, Allen W.; Earle, Timothy. 1987. The evolution of human

societies. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 360 p.

Kawin, Bruce F. 1992. How movies work. Berkeley: University of

California. 574 p.

Kolko, Gabriel. 1967. The triumph of conservatism. New York: Free

Press. 344 p.

Lakoff, George. 1996. Moral politics. Chicago: University of Chicago

Press. 413 p.

Lasch, Christopher. 1978. The culture of narcissism. New York:

Norton. 268 p.

Lawrence, D. H. 1968. A propos Lady Chatterly’s lover. In: Roberts,

Warren; Moore, Harry T., eds. Phoenix II: Unpublished, uncollected and other prose works by D. H. Lawrence. New York:

Viking Press. 487–515.

Levi-Strauss, Claude. 1969. The raw and the cooked. Volume 1.

Introduction to a science of mythology. New York: Harper and

Row. 387 p.

Levi-Strauss, Claude. 1973. From honey to ashes. Introduction to a

science of mythology. Volume 2. New York: Harper and Row. 551 p.

Levi-Strauss, Claude. 1978. The origin of table manners. Introduction to a science of mythology. Volume 3. New York: Harper and

Row. 512 p.

Levi-Strauss, Claude. 1981. The naked man. Introduction to a

science of mythology. Volume 4. New York: Harper and Row. 745 p.

Lex, Barbara. 1979. The neurobiology of ritual trance. In: d’Aquila,

Eugene; Laughlin, Charles D.; McManus, John, eds. The spectrum of ritual. New York: Columbia University Press. 117–151.

McNeill, William H. 1995. Keeping together in time. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press. 198 p.

Nichols, Bill. 1981. Ideology and the image. Bloomington: University of Indiana Press. 334 p.

Ornstein, Robert E.; Ehrlich, Paul R. 1989. New world, new mind.

New York: Doubleday. 302 p.

Polyani, Karl. 1944. The great transformation. New York: Farrar

and Rinehart. 305 p.

Radcliffe-Brown, A. R. 1964. The Andaman Islanders. Glencoe, IL:

The Free Press. 510 p.

Rappaport, Roy A. 1999. Ritual and religion in the making of

humanity. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. 535 p.

Rosenbaum, Jonathan. 1997. Movies as politics. Berkeley: University of California Press. 359 p.

Service, Elman. 1975. Origins of the state and civilization. New

York: Norton. 361 p.

Shepard, Paul. 1982. Nature and madness. San Francisco: Sierra

Club Books. 178 p.

Sinclair, Upton, ed. 1915. The cry for justice. Philadelphia: J. C.

Winston Publishing. 891 p.

Soulé, Michael. 1988. Mind in the biosphere; mind of the biosphere.

In: Wilson, E. O., ed. Biodiversity. Washington, DC: National

Academy Press: 465–469.

Turner, Victor. 1969. The ritual process. Chicago: Aldine. 213 p.

Wallace, Anthony F. C. 1969. Death and rebirth of the Seneca. New

York: Knopf. 384 p.

White, Leslie. 1959. The evolution of culture. New York: McGrawHill. 378 p.

White, Leslie. 1969. The science of Culture. 2d ed. New York:

Farrar, Strauss and Giroux. 444 p.

White, Leslie. 1987. The energy theory of cultural development. In:

White, Leslie, ed. Ethnological essays. Albuquerque: University

of New Mexico Press: 215–221.

Williams, Terry Tempest. 1991. Refuge. New York: Pantheon. 304 p.

Wolfe, Alan. 1977. The limits of legitimacy. New York: The Free

Press. 432 p.
177

6. Personal and Societal Values of

Wilderness

Delegates from Africa, Russia, Brazil, India, the United

States, and Canada come together before the Congress for

discussions (photo by Roseanne Clark).

USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 179

Lisi Krall is an Associate Professor of Economics, State University of New

York College, 65B Madison Street, Cortland, NY 13045, U.S.A. Phone: 607/

753-2438, E-mail: Krallm@cortland.edu. John Organ is Wildlife Program

Chief, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Region, P.O. Box 45,

Buckland, MA 01338, U.S.A. Phone: 413/253-8501, E-mail: John_Organ

@fws.gov. Florence R. Shepard is a Board Member of The Murie Center and

Professor Emerita at the University of Utah, P.O. Box 99, Bondurant, WY

82922, U.S.A. Phone: 307/739-0667, E-mail: frshepard@earthlink.net

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—The preservation of wilderness and the wise management of resources are two aspects of conservation ethics spawned at

the turn of the nineteenth century. They grew out of the devastation

reaped by economic expansion set in place in the United States

during the early to mid-nineteenth century, as public concern over

the destruction of habitats and natural resources became more

apparent. This dynamic continues today and not only demands a

new look at the value of wilderness but also at the consequences of

careless use and misuse of public and private property, of the dire

consequences of unfettered growth, and of the overexploitation of

finite nonrenewable resources upon which life on Planet Earth

depends. After a brief historical review of conservation in the United

States, we suggest ways to alter the self-destructive course followed

for three centuries.

Value __________________________

What a mélange of being and meaning the word “value”

conjures when we consider wilderness: the spiritual and

biological worth of wilderness; the moral principles that

guide its protection; the tone and quality of its sounds and

colors; the priceless living systems; the beauty of it all. Our

intent here is not to redefine those values elaborated so

brilliantly by philosophers, scientists, and social scientists

over the past century. Instead, we hope to emphasize that

standing in opposition to the value of wilderness are values

of an ever-expanding global economy in which wilderness is

deemed important because of its potential extractable resources and devalued to the degree that it prevents the use

of these resources for human utilization.

It is our view that the present course of the global economic

system is not only opposed to conservation ideals but is

contrary to the way the world was formed, an evolving world

with internal limits that sustain rather than destroy the life

upon which other life depends. To better understand the dire

circumstances of wilderness today, we look first at the

historical roots of conservation in the United States, particularly in the nineteenth century. It was then that the dynamic

Value of Wilderness Revisited

Lisi Krall

John Organ

Florence R. Shepard

of economic expansion created the stem that would yield the

two branches of conservation we recognize today:preservation

and resource management. Secondly, we propose that our

self-destructive course can be changed by making the ecological health of the planet the first order of business at all

levels of society, and we offer suggestions for achieving this

goal.

Building a Land Ethic ____________

When settlers, such as Captain Arthur Barlow, first arrived by ship in the United States (1584), they felt they were

approaching “some delicate garden abounding with odoriferous flowers” (Huth 1957: 1). At that time, there were

hundreds of nations of indigenous people living in this

“garden” in very diverse habitats. Whether they were perfect

ecologists is debatable. What is undeniable is that American

Indians, living in low density, were intimately related to the

land. Their use of resources was ritually linked to their

spirituality and carried important ecological knowledge and

respect for wild nature.

In contrast, European settlers who first took up residence

in America, often in separatist enclaves according to religious dogma, were joined by one common belief; they did not

value wilderness. In fact, they saw it as a threat to their

spirituality—evil, hostile, and unforgiving. They considered

both “savages” and wilderness uncouth. Michael Wigglesworth

described it as (in Huth 1957):

A waste and howling wilderness/Where none inhabited/

But hellish fiends, and brutish men/the Devils worshiped.

As colonization proceeded in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, orientation to the land varied between two

extremes: (1) the pious, industrious, practical, and stern—

an ethic that discouraged the pleasures of life; and (2) the

wealthy, who enjoyed leisurely and lavish lives. Meanwhile,

on the ecotones of civilization were those who chose simple

subsistence and independence away from the pressures of

organized society. As the fertility of the land became rapidly

depleted from north to south, the frontier boundaries pushed

westward carrying along these diverse settlers with immigrants drawn in by free land from all corners of the Earth.

The rudiments of nature appreciation and conservation

were barely visible in these fledgling years of our nation,

although a nature aesthetic was slowly creeping into language. But, for settlers, the worth of the land lay not in its

beauty but in unrelenting clearing and cultivation (Huth

1957: 5):

Then with the Ax, with Might and Strength/The trees so

thick and strong.../We laid them all along.../Which we with

Fire, most furiously/To ashes did confound.
180 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Krall, Organ, and Shepard Value of Wilderness Revisited

Nature appreciation finally blossomed as the alarming

contrast between pristine nature and the slash-and-burn

landscape became apparent. Natural history—especially

botany as a hobby of the elite—flourished in the colonies, as

well as in Europe. The influence of the “Lake Poets” of

England, with descriptions of the peace found in nature and

the development of a theory of aesthetics that classified

landscape into the sublime and picturesque, furthered nature appreciation (Shepard 1954: 25).

During early colonialism, Imperial England dominated

the seas and the fur trade as far west as the Mississippi

River. But the great western expanse beyond Ohio seemed

uninhabitable and nonagricultural, and was not seriously

considered for fulfilling the agrarian dream of free land.

Benjamin Franklin, one of the few who not only saw the

potential in the land but also understood exponential

growth, predicted in 1761 that the birth rate, under the

influence of an abundant supply of vacant land, would

double every 20 years (Smith 1970).

The key figures in the creation of the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution were propertied gentry, who

met secretly “making history but not knowing the kind of

history they were making” (Ellis 2001). Although they defined the rights of people everywhere, they also set in place

forces of economic expansion that conflicted with the legitimacy of wilderness. The events that followed were explosive

and unpredictable.

When elected to the presidency in 1801, Jefferson was

determined to both find a waterway to the Pacific Ocean to

establish commercial markets with the Orient and to assess

and exploit fur and other resources in the West. With

permission from Spain, he commissioned the Lewis and

Clark expedition (1803–1806) to gather geographical information. A second covert goal was to usurp British sovereignty over the trans-Mississippi West (Smith 1970). The

Lewis and Clark expedition, although unsuccessful in finding a commercial waterway, opened up possibilities for westward movement. As potential for development in western

lands became more apparent, and as United States boundaries were extended with the Louisiana Purchase, a route for

transport of materials and people became imperative.

In 1820, William Ashley and Jedediah Smith pioneered an

overland route—through the Rockies, along the Platte River,

and over South Pass—that became the Oregon Trail. By the

1840s, the fur trade was waning but travelers passing along

the Oregon Trail gave little consideration to farming the

Great Prairies. The soil was deep and rich, but trees—needed

for fuel, fencing, and building—were scarce. In search of the

commerce of souls, gold, and materials, they were headed for

the Pacific where settlements and missions had been established during the fur trade, primarily by Spanish missionaries and expansionists (Shepard 1954).

George Catlin, a young Philadelphia lawyer who went

West to paint portraits of American Indians in 1832, quickly

acquired a passionate respect for his subjects and the “pristine beauty and wildness” in which they lived. Articulating

a prophetic understanding of the value of wilderness and

indigenous cultures, he said (Shepard 1954: 155–56):

Many...wilds in Nature’s works...are destined to fall before the deadly axe and desolating hands of cultivating man;

amongst here ranks of living, of beast and human; we often

find noble stamps...worthy of our preservation and protection.

In a reverie he looked into the towns and cities of the East

where he “beheld buffalo robes hanging...for traffic...and

the curling smokes of a thousand stills,” and he asked, “O,

insatiable man...Wouldst thou tear the skin from the back of

the last animal of this noble race, and rob thy fellow man of

his meat, and for it give him poison!” He proposed “a nation’s

Park, containing man and beast, in all the wildness and

freshness of their nature’s beauty.”

Contemporaries of Catlin, such as the Hudson River

Painters, and American writers such as William Cullen

Bryant, James Fennimore Cooper, and John Greenleaf

Whittier, who themselves were influenced by the Lake Poets

of England, developed in their nature writing the rudiments

of a preservationist ethic. Along with Catlin, artists such as

Thomas Moran, Thomas Cole, and Albert Bierstadt brought

romantic landscape paintings to the easterners and Europeans who would never see the West.

In spite of the logistical problems of wilderness and intermittent warfare for sovereignty between our fledgling nation, American Indians, and countries with holdings—and

later our own Civil War—the western movement continued

full force. The tremendous breadth of unoccupied westward

expanses, like some huge vacuum, sucked people into its

vast reaches from far and near in search of free land and a

share of the takings.

Early nineteenth-century America, honed in an era of

rural people living in low density on a landscape with

unlimited frontier, experienced an “unprecedented era of

economic and demographic growth” (Oelschlaeger 1991: 97).

From 1820 to 1860 (a period of unrestrained urbanization of

America) the proportion of Americans living in cities grew

from 5 percent in 1820 to 20 percent in 1860—a four-fold

increase. Westward movement increased in crescendo, leaving deep ruts in the Oregon Trail and a swath of denuded land

10 miles wide. Much deeper than the ruts was the disruption

of American Indian cultures and ecological relationships on

the prairies and in the mountain lands of the West

As the West became progressively more accessible, and

settlements in the East became less desirable, nature appreciation and beautification projects in cities grew to counter

pollution and slums. Tourism became popular as those of

means fled to the countryside for relief. The New York

Sportsmen’s Association, like other hunters who noticed a

decrease in wildlife, mobilized to halt exploitation and destruction of wildlife for profit. And in the 1840s, the Supreme

Court passed a landmark decision that would become known

as the Public Trust Doctrine, stating that all wild animals

are the property of the people to be held in trust by the

government. This doctrine, reinforcing the utilitarian benefit of wildlife to which all people should have access, paved

the way for State and Federal agencies established in the

late nineteenth and twentieth centuries to uphold this

public trust.

President Lincoln signed the Homestead Act in 1862 that

held that freeborn Americans had a right to a piece of land to

live on. Although it brought thousands of people to the West

to claim their 160 acres, in the end, agricultural development

would not take the form of the agrarian dream embodied in

the Homestead Act. Concentration and centralization of

land and capital and the imperative toward mechanization

would result in agribusiness. Agriculture would go the way

of manufacturing.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 181

Krall, Organ, and Shepard Value of Wilderness Revisited

In 1862, in the midst of this upheaval, Henry David

Thoreau, advocate of wildness, died of tuberculosis at the age

of 45. A prolific writer—his journals alone contain 2 million

words—his ken was natural philosophy, a deep knowledge of

the natural world as it related to human existence and spirit.

He brought the human condition down to earth rather than

reifying it. He foresaw the impact of civilization on nature,

and warned that the preservation of the world rested in

wildness. During his short lifetime, the population of America

had grown from 7 to 31 million (Botkin 2001).

In 1864, Lincoln signed a bill that placed the Yosemite

Valley in the care of California. This action represented a

decisive step toward the preservation that Thoreau had

proposed. The purpose of the “park,” in the words of Frederick

Law Olmsted, a leading advocate of the bill, was “as a

playground for the nation...to be managed for the free use of

the people” (Huth 1957: 149–50). By this time, the pace of

economic expansion gave rise to a preservation reaction.

Because of the precedent set by Lincoln, subsequent presidents would follow his example by signing bills and invoking

executive power to set aside forest reserves, parks, and

refuges for public use. Thus, presidents have contributed

significantly to the cause of preservation when feet-dragging congresses influenced by commercial interests have

blocked such legislation.

By the second half of the nineteenth century, as Catlin had

forewarned, the prairie was littered with the bones of near

extinct bison that had numbered in the millions. Sport

hunting was not a major cause of their decline. The decimation occurred primarily for political and economic motivations. First, the demise of the bison would help solve the

“Indian Problem,” the acculturation of the Plains Indians by

destroying their food source and making farmers of them.

Secondly, it was a laissez-faire market reaction to the demand for bison hides for robes, their tongues as delicacies,

and later, their bones for fertilizer.

George Perkins Marsh, a man of tremendous intellect and

breadth of experience, in his book Man and Nature, set out

the potential for ecological destruction (in Oelschlaeger

1991). He pointed out that the consequences of unmitigated

growth—the squandering of renewable resources, bad forestry practices that compromised the health of watersheds,

and species extinction—would eventually curtail economic

progress.

Indispensable to market expansion was the completion of

the transcontinental railroad in 1868. With the application

of steam power, it provided an effective means of a two-way

exchange of resources, goods, and people. Not only lumber,

but also prefabricated houses could be shipped to North

Dakota or Nebraska or the Central Valley of California from

industrial regions that secured the timber from somewhere

else. And as cities became more uninhabitable and fertile

lands scarce in the East, western lands offered possibilities

for grazing, dry-land farming, and farming with irrigation.

During the decade after the Civil War, unprecedented growth

spread like a cancer horizontally along railroad lines throughout the West, spawning unimaginative towns along its course

(Jackson 1972).

The second half of the nineteenth century was one of the

most critical ecological times in the history of America. Until

the 1860s, very little government attention was paid to

resource depletion and species decline or extinction although hunters, bird watchers, and mountaineering groups

were expressing concern (Botkin 2001). By the end of the

century, not only bison but also bowhead whales and salmon

on the east coast and sea otter and elephant seals on the west

coast had dangerously declined. From this time to just before

World War I, public and political concern fomented environmental consciousness. At the same time, environmental organizations like the Audubon Society and the Isaac Walton

League were chastised and challenged by radical environmentalists such as Roslie Edge. Awareness of critical ecological problems spawned a full-fledged conservation movement.

John Muir, an important actor at this time in conservation

history, arrived in California when this movement was

gestating (Fox 1985). Although he hated politics, he eventually determined to do something about “the gobble, gobble

school of economics” (Jackson 1972: 86). With national

visibility from essays that emphasized the spiritual nature

of wilderness published in eastern journals, he became a

leading preservationist. At the turn of the century, he was a

consultant to conservation-minded people such as Gifford

Pinchot, Theodore Roosevelt, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and

George Bird Grinnell. He went nationwide with a struggle to

stop the massive commercial exploitation of forest reserves

and the transformation of the Yosemite Valley into an

entertainment park.

The ideals of the frontier spirit, personified in Theodore

Roosevelt, were translated into national policies to protect

wildlife and forests. Conservation became institutionalized

as a household word, but under the direction of Pinchot,

Roosevelt’s chief forester, its connotation clearly became one

of “conservative use,” the safeguarding and controlling extraction of resources for use by human society.

The two sides of the conservation ethic were clearly

demarcated in preservationist Muir and resource manager

Pinchot, who parted company over their disagreements

about the building of the Hetch Hetchy Dam. Although its

building was approved by Congress in 1913, it solidified a

block of environmental organizations that had emerged in

the latter nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. During

this time, they cut their teeth on ethics, business management, and lobbying interests that helped make environmental organizations the critical force they are today.

In the 1930s, the New Deal Reformation combined social

and conservation programs designed by President Franklin

Roosevelt with the ecological insight of the Interior Secretary, Harold Ickes. The combined effects of a depression,

drought, and depletion of land, which came home to rest

graphically in a dust bowl, necessitated the revamping of

government that became active as never before in the management of national lands. Political parties changed sides

and became polarized, one favoring social intervention, and

the other big business protection. Although citizen participation was included in advisory boards, these boards were

primarily constituted, as they are today, to support the

status quo and to commercialize rather than protect public

lands.

After World War II, the government proceeded with its

soil conservation and wildlife management programs. In his

book, A Sand County Almanac, Aldo Leopold (1949) professed a new land ethic that would combine management

and preservation. He had a foot in both fields; a creator of the

profession of wildlife management, he was also a founder
182 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Krall, Organ, and Shepard Value of Wilderness Revisited

and vice president of the Wilderness Society. The protection

of wilderness demands, as Leopold stated, an understanding

of the cultural value of wild things. It demands, as Frederick

Jackson Turner stated in 1893, a realization that our American democracy arose not out of transplanted English institutions, but out of a mobile people’s constant, vitalizing contact

with the great wilderness.

Beginning with Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring in 1962,

that identified the destruction of wild species caused by the

unmitigated use of DDT, reform environmentalism was

reborn. Unprecedented legislation, including the Wilderness Bill and the Endangered Species Act that protected

animals and habitats in their own right, was passed.

Today, we benefit from the strong and thoughtful critiques

and reformation plans conceived in those days and refined

today by men and women working in such fields as conservation biology, deep ecology, environmental justice, and

steady-state economics. However, as time has progressed,

necessity has directed much effort away from the source of

the environmental problems and into mitigating their ill

effects. This cursory review of the history of conservation in

the United States shows us that resource management and

preservation were conceived in the same crucible of conservation that arose from the exploitation of the rich continent

we colonized.

Sustainability of Nature __________

Wilderness today stands as the icon of generative life in

the continual process of evolutionary refinement. But no

matter how much faith we have in this natural model, we

cannot save and sustain wilderness or restore the health of

the human-altered habitats at the rate we are now exploiting both. To survive spiritually and materially, we must

acknowledge our dependence on the natural world. The

frontier is indeed lost to history. There is no more free land.

We have exceeded the limits. Our goal must be reduction, not

growth.

We cannot turn the tide of ecological destruction and

social disintegration without complete dedication and effort

at all societal levels, from individuals to global economies.

Such sea change requires a mindful reorientation to a world

of finite resources. History suggests, and many contemporary authors agree, that such transformation is only likely to

occur if we are forced to it by disaster—a very dismal prospect

(McKibben 1989). We believe there are alternatives.

Open discourse is necessary if democratic action is to

occur. Essential to such discourse is a self-critical examination of values held. Robert Brulle (2000: 278–282), with his

suggestions for internal evaluation by environmental organizations, sets out an excellent model for reassessing priorities throughout society. Brulle suggests that for collective

action to be effective, groups and individuals must be bound

by “truth, morality, and authenticity.” Expanding on this

assertion, we suggest that collective action must be founded

on authenticity, truth, and spirituality, and that each of

these action bases must be infused with a deep morality

directed at the “common good” as defined by environmental

theologian John Cobb (1966), one that serves society while

maintaining the ecological health of the planet.

When communities are founded authentically, the members work in a democratic rather than an oligarchic mode, at

the grassroots level from the ground up, not from the top

down. They remain representative and unconstrained. From

local to national, all groups are active politically, with an

abiding interest in electing intelligent and ecologically informed public representatives. Truth, as much as we can

discern it by drawing from “special management, scientific,

and legal capacities” (Brulle 2000: 278), provides the basis

for ethically grounded action. The present conservation

biology movement is a good model in this respect, where the

most recent scientific knowledge is combined with a deep

valuing of the Earth. Pure science, solely as empiricism,

however, is suspect if not connected to moral application.

Beginning with the atomic bomb and proceeding into the

horrors of our day, we must understand the misrepresentation of objective, value-free science, which is only one piece

of the puzzle that is truth.

The spiritual basis for ecological action, bound closely to

ethics rather than religious institutions, must not be devalued because it cannot be proven empirically. Spirituality,

infused with aesthetics and caring, provides the basis for

action rising out of group consciousness and concern for

Planet Earth and all her creatures. We do need animistic,

theological, or aesthetic theories in order to sense the eminent creative force in a pristine habitat that indigenous

people referred to as The Great Mystery. Whether chaos

theorist or ordinary wayfarer, we feel the overall harmony of

a dynamic system always in the process of righting itself. We

must trust our hearts. Aesthetics or beauty is not enough if

unconditioned by moral considerations. Consider, for example, the awesome symmetry in that mushroom cloud and

the beautiful colors in striations of a strip mine or on the oily

surfaces of polluted, toxic ponds. Beauty and spirituality

cannot be context free; they are grounded, like activism, in

the roots of communities, biological and societal.

Beyond agencies and organizations, we, in our daily lives,

can make profound statements by living ecologically—curtailing our procreation, reducing consumption, cherishing

nature, preserving its supreme manifestations in wilderness, and resurrecting our spiritual attachment to Mother

Earth, as understood by our Pleistocene ancestors (Shepard

1998). Together we can erase consumer confidence as an

indication of the health of a nation and replace it with

ecosystem health as an indicator of the state of the planet.

The reduction of population is a foremost global concern, we

all agree. But we must also increasingly cherish the children

we have and guide them in an ethic that cherishes wild over

synthesized and domesticated nature.

It is useless simply to lecture to the poor about simplifying

lives and limiting children. Their lives are already simple

and their children are their only assets. We must, instead, be

dedicated to social and environmental justice; the rights of

humans to healthy work and home environments and to

equitable treatment and benefits—to helping all peoples

achieve a level of economic stability wherein they can make

viable choices. Rather than the poor, it is we who are most

involved in this global consumption frenzy and who can in

our lifestyle alter the course of society. And we must demand

that the perpetrators of power and growth follow suit and

help us. At base, we must not forget that most problems of

environmental and social justice are an outgrowth of depleted
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 183

Krall, Organ, and Shepard Value of Wilderness Revisited

and mismanaged natural systems, a problem that we must

own up to and transform.

It should be clear to us that growth is not sustainable. No

growth or diminished growth must be the goal. Nonrenewable resources are exactly that; they end as dispersed energy

and rubbish. Prudence dictates that we develop renewable

energy sources, such as nonpolluting solar and wind power,

to replace nonrenewable resources at the rate they are

depleted. Conservation practices—small-scale improved technologies, intensive but small-scale organic farming, pollution control, recycling and making do, and refurbishing

rather than tearing down and building anew—are necessary

priorities. Such practices renew appreciation for biodiversity and wilderness for which there are no substitutes.

Restoration will undoubtedly be the watchword of the

coming century, as the role of resource managers in maintaining the health of wild and domesticated lands increases.

Although management of all natural systems, including

wild lands, is necessary, we believe it is often overapplied.

The prevention of further degradation of ecosystems—especially remnants that now remain relatively pristine—is the

first priority in considering resource extraction, control of

pollution of air, water, and soil, and the restoration of

depleted lands. We should understand by now there are no

tradeoffs. Depletion of a habitat that developed over millions

of years can never be adequately mitigated or restored. And

even with the best science, we cannot foresee the consequences of our actions. Restoration is often needed to correct

the effects of past mismanagement. Unfortunately, we still

carry a belief in the superiority of “Lord Man,” John Muir’s

name for our species. Our confidence in our infinite power

and wisdom goes against us when, in many cases, the best

alternative is simply to stop what we’re doing.

At the national level, using the great conservationists as

an example, we can become radical, insisting that our state

and national governments stop their imperialistic, materialistic expansion. Competence and intelligence, ecological

enlightenment, morality, and courage are qualities we must

look for in leaders and develop in ourselves as citizens. Some

economists believe that applying no-growth policies in the

long term will create a more stable, equitable, and just

society, but we face formidable opposition in achieving no

growth, both in ourselves and in the multinational world.

In our personal goals, work, and businesses we can set

limits to our own expansionary tendencies—limits to how

much we accumulate in our lifetimes and how much is

enough to insure a moderate standard of living that will

sustain us to our end without dependence on others. And we

should never exceed those limits. When assets grow beyond

what is needed to live rightly, returning the surplus to the

public trust or to worthwhile nonprofit organizations or

charities makes good sense.

The same rules apply with small and large businesses. In

the world of profit, competition creates large corporations

like giant octopuses with their tentacles reaching into every

sector of the world economy. A no-growth policy would

encourage corporations to use assets to improve the lot of

workers and redistribute wealth among them. Government

intervention is necessary to set upper limits to both personal

and corporate wealth and increase minimum wages to ensure this redistribution. Taxes, when properly applied, can

expedite this effort, just as they can in limiting population.

The same limits to growth must apply to governments and

their agencies, and active citizen groups must constantly be

the watchdogs of governing bodies to keep them honest and

representative.

In a painfully real sense, we are no different from the

pioneers who saw no limits to what the land could provide.

The major difference is that today we have no intimate

relationship to the land, and as a result we care less. But

those of us who value complex and diverse relationships on

Earth can strengthen our case by showing the worth of

simplified, nonmaterialistic lives and the love of wild nature.

Conclusions____________________

After the explosion of the first atomic bomb, the picture of

the mushroom cloud rising, expanding, dispersing, carrying

its load around the Earth, slowly sifting down deadly radiation, jolted us to a new level of reality. The power in the bomb

was tremendous, but so were its lethal effects that could

come home to rest on us. It was sobering for us to learn that

the limitless power of the atom, unleashed, diminished our

own freedom.

On September 11, we were handed another image, of two

technological forces colliding, an airplane like many others

that command the skies and a highrise, a monument to

commerce so sturdy it was expected to last thousands of

years. When these two icons of power and profit met head on,

they imploded, starting a process that sent them tumbling

down, carrying with them thousands of martyrs who in

their human way had simply gone to work that day. All the

magnificence of that creation, technological as well as human, lie intermingled in a decaying mass of rubble that came

down on itself. We should ask ourselves not how we should

seek revenge but why we are so hated. We should think twice

about retaliation that destroys people and ecosystems that

can never be replaced by so-called “aid.”

This icon of disaster is not unrelated to our wilderness

problem or to the problem that two centuries ago threatened

the bison. The two are directly related. We are capable of

taming, despoiling, and populating every inch of wild Earth.

But unless we forestall the insidious, malignant growth

mania that infects us, we will leave future generations a

totally domesticated Earth, socially and biologically pathological, as well as absolutely boring. If wilderness is completely tamed, the creative spirit will also die. As Thoreau

foretold in 1854, “We can never get enough of nature.” We

need wild places “where we can witness our limits transgressed” (Thoreau 1906).

References _____________________

Botkin, Daniel. B. 2001. No man’s garden, Thoreau and a new vision

for civilization and nature. Washington, DC: Island Press/Shearwater Books. 288 p.

Brulle, Robert J. 2000. Agency, democracy, and nature, the U.S.

environmental movement from a critical theory perspective.

Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 347 p.

Carson, Rachel. 1962. Silent spring. New York: Houghton Mifflin,

Mariner Books. 368 p.

Cobb, John B. 1996. Ecology, ethics, and theology. In: Daly, Herman

E.; Townsend, Kenneth N., eds. Valuing the Earth: economics,

ecology, and ethics. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press: 211–228 p.
184 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Krall, Organ, and Shepard Value of Wilderness Revisited

Ellis, John J. 2001. Founding brothers. New York: Knopf. 287 p.

Fox, Stephen. 1985. The American conservation movement, John

Muir and his legacy. ISBN 0-299-10634-9. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press. 436 p.

Huth, Hans. 1957. Nature and the American mind, three centuries

of changing attitudes. Berkeley: University of California Press.

250 p.

Jackson, John Brinkerhoff. 1972. American space, the centennial

years, 1865–1876. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. 254 p.

Leopold, Aldo. 1949. A Sand County almanac. New York: Oxford

University Press. 228 p.

McKibben, Bill. 1989. The end of nature. New York: Random House.

226 p.

Oelschlaeger, Max.1991.The idea of wilderness, from prehistory to

the age of ecology. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 477 p.

Shepard, Paul. 1954. American attitudes toward the landscape in

New England and the West, 1830–1870. New Haven, CT: Yale

University. 395 p. Thesis.

Shepard, Paul. 1998. Wildness and wilderness. In: Shepard,

Florence, R., ed. Coming home to the Pleistocene. Washington,

DC: Island Press/Shearwater Books. 206 p.

Smith, Henry Nash. 1970. Virgin land, the American West as

symbol and myth. New York: Vintage Books. 305 p.

Thoreau, Henry David. 1906. Walden. NY: Houghton Mifflin. 367 p.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 185

Peter B Myles is a Tourism Consultant and Researcher, Tourism 2000

Network cc, P.O. Box 12653, Centrahil, 6006, Port Elizabeth, South Africa.

E-mail: tournet@iafrica.com

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship to

protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress

symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc. RMRSP-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky

Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—There is a global concern that ecotourism and adventure travel is becoming a mass tourism market rapidly losing its

tourist appeal. Ecotourism is fast becoming “egotourism,” and the

benefits are not flowing back to the host communities, especially

communities in rural areas where poverty alleviation is essential

for the protection of the environment. Tourism in wilderness settings can make a valuable contribution by restoring an appreciation

for an authentic nature-based tourism experience. This will require

repositioning ecotourism and adventure travel in the marketplace

by introducing elements of exclusivity, perhaps at a premium price,

so that the true value of the outdoor tourism experience will be

measured by learning from nature rather than by boasting of

luxury lodges in exotic locations filled with noisy, adrenalinpumping activities

Ecotourism: Curse

or Blessing? ___________________

There are many different definitions of ecotourism, but

most agree that it involves tourism into areas of great

natural beauty or interest, with minimum impact on the

environment and maximum benefit to local communities.

The Ecotourism Society (1992) defined ecotourism as:

...purposeful travel to natural areas to understand the cultural and natural history of the environment, taking care not

to alter the integrity of the ecosystem, whilst producing

economic opportunities that make conservation of natural

resources financially beneficial to local citizens.

Many commentators have criticized the use of the term

ecotourism because it has been applied widely to cover all

manner of tourism experiences with a vaguely “green” tinge,

particularly nature-based tourism. The term ecotourism has

many meanings. It can refer to a genuine attempt at environmentally sustainable tourism, or it can be used in a cynical

way to try to attract greater numbers of visitors to an area.

For example, the term ecotourism does not differentiate

between:

1. A large group of people visiting a private game reserve,

arriving at their destination by aircraft, staying in luxury

accommodations, expecting to be pampered with all the

Contribution of Wilderness to Survival of the

Adventure Travel and Ecotourism Markets

Peter B. Myles

modern conveniences, and spending very little money at the

destination because everything is prepaid before departure;

and

2. A low impact ecotraveler, backpacking or camping to

save money on accommodations, but spending money spontaneously wherever they travel, pursuing a minimal impact

experience in a wilderness environment.

These hypothetical examples illustrate that ecotourism

can refer to a wide range of activities that might have

different environmental impacts and attract people with

different sets of values and motivations. Special interest and

activity holidays represent the single largest growth area

within the tourism industry.

Special interest travel is travel for people who are going

somewhere because they have a particular interest that can

be pursued in a particular region or destination. What sets

special interest tourism apart from other forms of tourism is

that the whole point of the trip is to exercise the mind and/

or body in some fashion. It is interesting to note that in the

year 2000, the year of millennium activity, global travel

experienced its best growth in a decade, as many tourists

selected destinations that they had identified with some

body, mind, and spiritual experience.

Adventure Tourism ______________

Activity-based tourism is another form of special interest

tourism. There are so many examples of stress-related

behavior in society such as road rage, air rage, family killings,

and school rampages. The question that needs to be raised is,

“why would anyone engage in a potentially dangerous activity as a form of recreation?” The common answer is, “adrenaline rush.” While those involved in high-risk activities may

welcome the initial adrenaline rush, such as whitewater

rafting, bungee jumping and extreme sports, it is not possible for them to sustain the rush for any length of time,

hence, the adrenaline junkies. One cannot help wonder if

most adventure tourists are not substituting one kind of

stress for another.

However, what is of greater concern is that many of these

adventure tourism activities disturb the environment, causing noise pollution, visual pollution, and in some cases, even

mud slides and avalanches. These activities are all marketed as ecotourism.

Nearly 80 percent of the world’s population is now urban.

Therefore, it is logical that urban dwellers need rural experiences for a change in daily routine. There is an old saying

that says “a change is as good as a holiday.” Humankind

generally needs spells of solitude, peace, and tranquility,

and an escape from heavily industrialized, overcrowded urban environments in order to relax and recover. A wilderness

experience is far more therapeutic and ultimately beneficial
186 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Myles Contribution of Wilderness to Survival of the Adventure: Travel and Ecotourism Markets

to society than most of the ecotourism and adventure tourism activities currently offered. We need to put wilderness

back into ecotourism experiences if nature-based tourism is

to have a positive impact on society in general. We need to

awaken a spirit of wilderness deep within the human psyche

to restore sanity to the human race.

“Deep ecotourism” and “shallow ecotourism” are terms

that can be used to differentiate between ecotourism that

verges on a form of mass tourism, and genuine attempts at

environmental tourism. Deep ecotourists should demonstrate in their lifestyles a true sense of values, that is, a

philosophy of sustainability wherever they are.

Spiritual Leaders ________________

All the great spiritual leaders who founded religions

needed times of solitude in exclusive areas not only for

prayer and meditation but also for stress relief. They were

physically and mentally exhausted from the demands of

their followers. They had to escape from crowds and get in

touch with nature in order to recover. Mohammed went to

the mountain, Jesus had both a wilderness and mountaintop

experience, and Buddha recovered in retreats. Many people

describe certain places with almost a spiritual reverence

because the space, tranquility, and solitude provide a therapeutic benefit. They feel better after their visit. The karoo is

almost a natural wilderness area and has been described as

a place “where the land meets the sky.” It is a place where the

crisp clean air invigorates stressed minds and tired bodies in

a silent world where it is said “you can hear God think.”

A Healthy Society _______________

Governments need to expand wilderness areas for the

future mental and physical well-being of their citizens.

However, keeping wilderness areas exclusive, pristine, and

free from crowds means that they should remain relatively

undeveloped. With limited infrastructure to generate income, it is difficult to make wilderness areas viable. Wilderness areas therefore need to be subsidized to survive, but

there is a cost benefit. A financial contribution by Government dedicated for the expansion of wilderness areas will

yield a good return on investment. This is mainly because a

more balanced, considerate, relaxed, friendlier, and stable

society will ultimately be a far less destructive force and

therefore cost less in health maintenance, for example, lower

medical bills.

Sustainable Development ________

The delicate relationship between tourism and the environment was highlighted by the Manila Declaration of the

World Tourism Organization (1997), which stated:

The protection, enhancement and improvement of the

various components of man’s environment are among the

fundamental conditions for the harmonious development of

tourism.

In the mid-1970s, sustainable development became a

global buzzword, but since then it has become a concept

much discussed, used, and abused.

The World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) first introduced the so-called “stewardship” role

of sustainable development, aimed at maintaining resources

in perpetuity and stated:

Sustainable development is development that meets the

needs of the present without compromising the ability of

future generations to meet their own needs.

Colin Hunter (1995) suggested in his Journal of Sustainable Tourism that over the short and long term, sustainable

tourism development should:

1. Meet the needs and wants of the local host community

in terms of improved living standards and quality of life.

2. Satisfy the demands of tourists and the tourism industry,

and continue to attract them in order to achieve the first aim.

3. Safeguard the environmental resource base for tourism, encompassing natural, built, and cultural components,

in order to achieve both of the preceding aims.

Perhaps the future survival of ecotourism as a unique,

nature-based, outdoor experience has something to do

with the implementation of the second point suggested by

Hunter, that is, have tour operators gone overboard in

their quest to satisfy the demands of tourists and the

tourism industry? Has greed transformed ecotourism into

“ego-tourism?” In many cases, ecotourism and all other

forms of responsible tourism are little more than marketing ploys—mass tourism disguised as responsible tourism. There is a need to review ecotourism to address some

of its negative perceptions.

Ecotourism and Protected Areas:

Mutually Beneficial? _____________

Tourism uses landscape, flora, and fauna as important natural attractions, while conservation of the built environment

also provides tourists with sites of interest. Where conservation interests have been successful in designated zones from

which all human activity is excluded, tourism interests are

forced to compete with other excluded interests in the zones

adjacent to protected areas. Under such circumstances tourism is often easily outmaneuvered, or outbid by well-organized interests such as mining or forestry.

A rather unusual variation on this theme is where

ecotourism acts as the forerunner to alternative developments, as in the case of biotechnology prospecting, to seek

out species that might provide genetic material to produce

pharmaceuticals or other products. Bio-piracy is the theft of

plant and animal species by unscrupulous biotechnology

companies, including the theft of intellectual property, such

as local knowledge of herbs and medicinal plants.

Most definitions of ecotourism include travel to “natural

areas,” or refer to “natural beauty” and “natural resources.”

Perhaps this is where ecotourism has deviated from its

original purpose and the term nature-based tourism has

become too wide in its interpretation. The International

Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) views a natural area as:

...one where biological processes and geological features are

still relatively intact and where the primary objective of the

area is to ensure that natural processes remain as the dominant force in the system.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 187

Myles Contribution of Wilderness to Survival of the Adventure: Travel and Ecotourism Markets

Reinventing Ecotourism __________

According to international tourism consultant Dr. Auliana

Poon (2001), there is a paradigm shift occurring in the

tourism industry the world over. The golden age of mass

tourism, of unlimited growth and disregard for the environment, and of standardized, rigidly packaged products and

services is over.

A new tourism is emerging: sustainable, environmentally

and socially responsible, and characterized by flexibility and

choice. A new type of tourist is driving it: more educated,

experienced, independent, conservation-minded, respectful

of cultures, and insistent on value for money. Information

technology is opening up an astonishing array of travel and

vacation options for this new tourist. To remain competitive,

tourism destinations and industry players alike must adapt.

For many, the challenge is to “reinvent tourism.” Market

intelligence, innovation, and closeness to customers have

become the new imperatives.

Taking a leaf from this book, perhaps we need to “reinvent

ecotourism.” And this is perhaps what we are trying to

achieve in Africa by introducing our own unique brand of

“Afrikatourism,” that is, ecotourism that is unique to Africa.

Afrikatourism: Ecotourism Unique

to Africa _______________________

Afrikatourism, drawn from Open Africa’s vision (1994), is

a restorative, sustainable, and profitable tourism sector,

particular to Africa’s circumstances and characteristics. It

defines an entirely new, responsible, and essentially African

industry, with community participation and conservation as

its cornerstones. Afrikatourism highlights a niche for African

supremacy in nature-interactive tourism. It can be found

and experienced only in Africa. It also integrates perfectly

with the political vision for an African Renaissance.

Conclusions____________________

Ecotourism is, at its best, perhaps somewhere close to

our ideals for responsible tourism. However, the difficulty

is that there is nothing to prevent any operator, destination, or other “player” in the tourism industry from using

any title they choose. Because there are no clear industry

standards, there are no guarantees to the consumer that a

particular tour to a particular protected area complies to

any acceptable guidelines for responsible ecotourism. “Mass

ecotourism” is already emerging, and many will say that

ecotourism is not delivering on its promises. Ecotourism is

therefore in danger of losing its integrity, and perhaps

there will come a time when deep ecotourists will be prepared to pay a premium price for the exclusivity of a true

wilderness experience. In this regard, it is imperative that

large areas are set aside for wilderness.

To illustrate this point, the Eastern Cape is the poorest

Province in South Africa in terms of the economy, but the

richest in terms of biodiversity. Few people are aware that

the Eastern Cape is the only Province in South Africa, and

one of the few places on earth, where all seven biomes can be

found as well as 29 Acocks Veld Types. However, 19 of these

veld types are threatened and fall well below the 10 percent

of each vegetation type that should be set aside for pristine

or near-pristine use proposed at the Rio Convention.

Perhaps the answer lies in stimulating a desire amongst

ecotourists and ecotourism operators for an authentic natural experience. This may mean that we have to awaken a

“spirit of wilderness” in the human psyche.

References _____________________

Ecotourism Society. 1992. In: Study notes on responsible tourism.

Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College, Wellesbourne

Campus, School of Leisure and Tourism, Kingshill Road, High

Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, HP13 5BB, UK.

Hunter, Colin. 1995. In: Study notes on responsible tourism.

Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College, Wellesbourne

Campus, School of Leisure and Tourism, Kingshill Road, High

Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, HP13 5BB, UK.

Open Africa. 1994. Afrikatourism. [Online]. Available at: http://

www.openafrica.org/theme

Poon, Auliana. 2001. Reinventing tourism. [Online]. Available at:

http://www.tourism-intelligence.com/reinventing.html

World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our

common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 43–44.

World Tourism Organization. 1997. Declaration on the social impacts of tourism. In: World tourism leaders’ meeting on the social

impacts of tourism. [Online]. Available at: http://www.worldtourism.org/cgi-bin/infoshop.storefront/3a9d4f9e007054cd

2718c28c164c06b5/Home. 46 p.
188 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Laura M. Fredrickson is an Assistant Professor of Environmental Studies

at St. Lawrence University, 101 Memorial Hall, St. Lawrence University,

Canton, NY 13617, U.S.A. Phone: 315-229-5890, FAX: 315-229-5802, E-mail:

lmfmoeller@yahoo.com

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship to

protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress

symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc. RMRSP-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky

Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—At this present historical juncture, many would argue

that there is an obligation to change our societal attitudes toward

the environment, as well as to reassess human values and lifestyles

with respect to ecology. To accomplish this task, societies must

promote deep environmental awareness and respect for the Earth’s

natural systems and wilderness places. This environmental awareness effort must reach virtually everyone in the society, especially

peoples from more developed countries (MDCs) who have the luxury

of engaging in recreation and leisure. It is these recreationists who,

while traveling in natural wilderness (or wildernesslike) settings, are

most likely to come in close contact with nature, and thus acquire

deeper environmental awareness. However, peoples from lesser

developed countries (LDCs) must also be educated about the advantages of embracing sound forms of ecotourism as a viable means of

economic advancement and long-term environmental protection.

Broadly defined, environmental education portends the message

that: Earth’s environment is not an object to be subdued by people,

Earth’s resources are not free of cost, Earth clearly has carrying

capacity limits, and finally, the past paradigm of human domination

over the planet is no longer valid, given the inarguable signs (for

example, global climate change) that we are beginning to exceed

Earth’s carrying capacity.

Sound ecotourism activities (especially wilderness ecotourism)

attempts to educate visitors from MDCs about the ecological and

sociocultural impacts of their travels on the lands and peoples in

various LDCs they visit, while at the same time educating indigenous peoples about alternative means of attaining long-term

sustenance from their local surroundings through various sustainable development practices and ecotourism activities. Through a

review of various case studies, this paper articulates the importance

of the educational initiatives involved in sound ecotourism as a

means of promoting a widespread international environmental

ethic among peoples from both MDCs and LDCs.

Introduction ____________________

Early human attitudes toward the environment tended

toward viewing Earth’s resources as useful commodities that

were more or less unlimited, or renewable, if not severely

overused. Throughout history, human attitudes toward

Wilderness Ecotourism and Education as

a Means of Promoting an International

Environmental Ethic

Laura M. Fredrickson

nature and the environment have tended toward utilitarian,

that is, useful, rather than decorative or luxurious. From the

planet’s fertile soil, which produces the food that we eat, to

the global hydrological cycle that ensures and regulates

planetary moisture levels, most would agree that the Earth’s

resources are essential to life as we know it. Yet few people

are truly aware of the danger present in the prevailing

utilitarian approach toward the environment. The Earth’s

resources are limited and can be exhausted if overused or

stretched beyond one’s limit of adaptability. This attitude

still prevails today among most development profiteers and

policymakers concerned primarily with jobs and profits; the

term “cornucopian” has been used to describe those who hold

this type of environmental attitude. This sector views nature

as a commodity to be developed and sold in the market

place—the tourism sector notwithstanding—and the cost of

maintaining the goods and services the environment supplies is frequently overlooked or viewed as a writeoff on some

distant future debt.

The other extreme on the continuum of human attitudes

toward the environment has been described as “greenfundamentalism” (Lowenthal 1990), consisting of radical zealots

and nature purists representing a societal reaction or backlash to the many environmental abuses that resulted from

the onset of the Industrial Revolution, especially the environmental assaults that have occurred since the 1960s. It is

an attitude that embodies the feeling that any form of

human activity harms nature and fears a global integrated

economy, assuming a nationalist, antifree market, antimaterialistic, economically self-sufficient, and protectionist

attitude. In its most extreme form, green fundamentalism

advocates an antidevelopment policy, halting all economic

growth or curtailing present levels of economic activity in an

attempt to protect the environment. Additionally, those who

hold this attitude argue against private ownership of land

and against human access to natural ecosystems, suggesting that these areas have to be protected from human

impact, including nature travel and tourism. Some believe

that the impact of tourism—nature tourism notwithstanding—should automatically be evaluated as negative, stating

that the undesirable environmental externalities of tourism

are inherently objectionable (Mieczkowski 1990). This ecological argument is supported by criticism of the sociocultural and economic problems associated with tourism.

However, both of these positions are extremist and untenable in the real world. There is nothing intrinsically wrong

with development. To demonize any economic activity, such

as ecotourism or nature tourism and travel, as automatically

leading to decreasing environmental quality is shortsighted.

Depending on the scale at which the development occurs and

the degree to which local participation in the project occurs,
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 189

Fredrickson Wilderness Ecotourism and Education as a Means of Promoting an International Environmental Ethic

these are more the pivotal elements that determine the

overall success or failure of a particular development project,

with regard to decreased environmental quality. The critical

challenge is to develop systems and projects that ensure

economic survival in a world where long-range sociocultural

and environmental deterioration may ultimately result in

economic disaster. Mainstream environmentalists don’t believe in just any form of development—but specifically in

sustainable development that operates within stringent

environmental constraints that maintain and enhance economic prosperity and quality of life without environmental

deterioration, in other words, development projects (including nature travel and tourism) that are done in an environmentally sound and aesthetic manner, enhancing their

current recreation value while still leaving ecosystems fully

functional and unimpeded.

The prerequisite for environmentally sustainable development is to remain within the limits of nature’s carrying

capacity, while minimizing the negative and maximizing the

positive effects of human activity. Ultimately, the goal is to

achieve economically efficient (working within economies of

scale) sustainable development, and simultaneously a sustainable natural environment. Yet this approach—the middle

road approach—must be undertaken in the spirit of balanced compromise, that is, recognizing the limits of both

human ingenuity and the environment, and approaching

development projects with a degree of educated respect,

caution, and built-in flexibility. However, a firm pro-environment attitude must take precedence; one that accords

basic priority to the ecology is imperative.

For a society, the middle-road approach requires a shift in

societal values and attitudes, in world economic systems, in

international conservation agreements, and by the granting

and receiving of foreign aid for development projects. For the

individual, it means curtailing our pursuit of economic and

technological advancement so as to procure and maintain a

lifestyle based primarily on the acquisition of material

goods. Ultimately, where uncertainty exists regarding a

specific environmental decision associated with development, it is most wise to give the benefit of doubt to nature and

to side with conservation. In other words, it is wisest to err

in favor of the environment than in favor of unmitigated

development.

Importance and Application of

Environmental Education

Programming in Ecotourism

Activities ______________________

As noted in the previous section of this paper, there is an

obligation to change our societal attitudes toward the environment, as well as to reassess human values and lifestyles

with regard to the basic ecology of the planet; perhaps most

importantly is this attitudinal shift in the modernized West.

One way in which to accomplish this task is to actively

promote environmental education for peoples of all society,

both those in more developed countries (MDCs) and those of

lesser-developed countries (LDCs). Whereas many governments in LDCs promote various forms of nature tourism and

travel as a means of economic development and the most

prevalent connoisseur of this type of economic development

are people at leisure, one must acknowledge the danger or

costs associated when marketing an area’s unique flora and

fauna, not to mention the drawbacks of marketing an area’s

rich cultural heritage—when unmitigated, profiteering development is the driving force behind the enterprise.

In essence, it is those people who are traveling and

recreating in an outdoor setting that are most likely to

develop a sense of environmental awareness or ecological

literacy (Orr 1992). The hope is that through repeated

outdoor recreational experiences, the individual develops a

level of sensitivity to the range of human impacts that

threaten natural ecosystems—from seeing the effects of acid

rain on a once lush evergreen forest to witnessing the lack of

basic sanitation and its effect on a community of people in a

remote village in the Himalayas. Seeing and experiencing

these things will, over the long run, help the individual to

develop an environmental ethic, or earth consciousness,

that takes into account not only the basic principles of

ecology but then also applies them to the realm of social

systems and ongoing cultural advancement.

More specifically, participation in ecotourism activities,

especially those based in remote or wildernesslike settings,

combined with some degree of ecological training of

ecotourism operators in LDCs, contributes to the development of an environmental ethic among the masses. The

inference is that this will translate into political activism on

matters of the environment, both domestically and abroad

(Gunn 1988a,b; Jackson 1988; Pigram 1980).

Select Case Studies: Moving Toward

Success

Annapurna Conservation Area Project, Nepal—The

King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation established

the 7,629 km2 (2,946 miles2

) Annapurna Conservation Area

Project (ACAP) in December of 1986. Its status as a multipleuse area, as opposed to the more restrictive national park

model, is an innovative concept in achieving environmental

protection along with sustainable community development.

Multiple use is accommodated in part by the subdivision of

the area into zones, including special management areas,

intensive-use areas, limited use areas and wilderness areas

(Gurung and DeCoursey 1994). Moreover, the project embraces traditional subsistence activities that are woven into

a framework of sound resource management, supplemented

by conservation, development, and alternative energy programs, to minimize the negative impacts of tourism and

enhance the living standards of the local people.

The biological diversity of the Annapurna Region is equally

rivaled by its rich cultural diversity. Since the first trekker

came to the Annapurna area in 1957, the natural and

cultural features of ACAP have made it the most popular

tourist destination in Nepal, drawing more than 60 percent

of the country’s total trekkers. ACAP follows a grassroots

philosophy of maximum peoples’ participation, sustainability, and its role as a catalyst whereby the local people are

involved in all aspects of the conservation and development

processes, both as principal actors and prime beneficiaries.

ACAP is spread out in five districts of the Western Development Region of Nepal and covers 55 Village Development
190 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Fredrickson Wilderness Ecotourism and Education as a Means of Promoting an International Environmental Ethic

Committees. ACAP is divided into seven units with conservation offices located in the field at Jomsom, Manang, and

Lho Manthang in the north and Bhujung, Lwang, Sikles,

and Ghandruk in the south. While the focus of Jomsom,

Manang, and Ghandruk, which are also popular areas for

trekking, is on integrated tourism management and agropastoralism, the program priorities for Bhujung, Sikles, and

Lwang are poverty alleviation and integrated agriculture

and livestock development, agroforestry, and community

development, respectively. The focus in Lho Manthang,

Upper Mustang, which came under the jurisdiction of ACAP

in 1992, has been on managing controlled tourism on a

sustainable basis, and promoting heritage conservation,

which is the major tourist attraction along with alternative

energy, resource conservation, and community development

programs. The Conservation Education and Extension Project

(CEEP) has been implemented in the entire ACAP and forms

the backbone of all its conservation efforts in the region.

Implementation of ACAP was achieved through the King

Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation (KMTNC), a

nongovernmental, theoretically autonomous, nonprofit organization, described as very effective because of its international connections, autonomy, international fund-raising

capacities and ability to bypass the cumbersome bureaucracy frequently present in LDCs. The ultimate goal of the

KMTNC is to see that the local people themselves, with

minimal intervention from government and/or other institutions, manage ACAP. That is, ACAP was designed so that

most startup costs would initially be borne by outside donors, but then financial stability would be gradually achieved

through user fees charged to international visitors and

placed in an endowment fund that would generate funds for

future conservation efforts in the area. One of the major

innovations of the ACAP is that local communities are

expected to contribute, in money or in kind, at least 50

percent of the costs of any project, assuming that such

financial contributions not only indicate a serious initial

intent, but ensure a long-term community commitment

because of the vested funds involved (Wells and Brandon

1992).

Tourism-related components of ACAP that emphasize

active ecotourism initiatives aimed at the visitor include:

• Establishment and maintenance of visitor information

centers to disseminate advice to trekkers, using videos,

brochure and publicity materials, and other interpretive/educational sources.

• Litter and pollution control through the installation of

toilets and trash receptacles in lodges and through the

distribution of brochures directed toward changing the

behavior of high-impact tourists.

• Lodgeowner training through a 1-week course, involving

fuelwood savings and substitutes (as through the use of

back boiler water heaters), hygiene, garbage disposal,

and the formation of lodge management committees.

• Trekking guide training focusing on minimal impact

camping protocol (“leave no trace” principles).

• Formation of local Lodge Management Committees

(LMCs) who are heavily involved in the decisionmaking

process as to how excess funds are distributed and

reinvested in the conservation project.

• Search and rescue arrangements for emergency helicopter evacuation for visitors.

• Ecocamp site development in ecologically/culturally sensitive areas (based on “leave no trace” principles).

Conservation-related components of ACAP that emphasize education aimed primarily at the local population

include:

• Conservation education classes in schools.

• Conservation awareness camps for local villagers.

• Village cleanup campaigns.

• Formation of local natural history museums and visitor

information services, including an environmental resource library.

• Formation of extension and conservation education

inhouse for Community Forestry Groups (CFGs).

• Implementation of the policy of incremental access

through limited access permits into trekking areas.

Since ACAP was first implemented, many ecological and

sociocultural improvements are evident: reduced firewood

consumption, enforcement of kerosene-only policies (for

cooking) in certain areas, a complete ban on hunting, cleaner

lodges and enhanced sanitation systems, better waste management, economic diversification, and improved revenue

retention. Since 1989, ACAP has charged an average entrance fee of 200 rupees (USD 9), yielding an annual revenue

of 4 million rupees (USD 160,000), which has then been

reinvested into various conservation efforts, as well as

educational and social welfare initiatives, such as

microlending programs, trekking guide training programs,

and women’s literacy programs. The revenues generated

from ACAP are equivalent to approximately one-half the

revenues of trekking permits for all of Nepal. Overall, a

major accomplishment of ACAP has been the creation of an

environmental ethos among locals and tourists (Buckley

1991).

Sunungukai Camp, Zimbabwe—On the banks of the

Mazowe River is Sunungukai Camp, the first ecotourism

project run by a small community of some 25 households in

five rural villages (Kapandoro, Hodzi, Munando, Chidaramumba, and Mapini). Opened in March 1993, Sunungukai

is run by a locally elected committee, under the Communal

Areas Management Program for Indigenous Resources

(CAMPFIRE), with funding and management training provided by the Zimbabwe Trust. The philosophical underpinning of this ecotourism venture was to solve the threat of

unsustainable exploitation of natural resources by ensuring

that local people reap economic benefits on nonconsumptive

tourism activities. Visitors to the area come to enjoy mountain hiking and scenic vistas overlooking the river, fishing

for a variety of game fish, or photography and viewing

wildlife. Local guides take people to see nearby bushman

paintings or to consult the traditional healer. Visitors camp or

stay in traditional round huts and can make arrangements to

share traditional meals with local residents.

CAMPFIRE, as the umbrella organization, facilitates the

formation of Community Based Organizations (CBOs) for the

purpose of natural resource management. Through the CAMPFIRE principles of decentralization and devolution, CBOs

are formed and structures developed linking them to local

authorities, ensuring local participation in decisionmaking
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 191

Fredrickson Wilderness Ecotourism and Education as a Means of Promoting an International Environmental Ethic

and hands-on management of the area’s natural resources.

Besides receiving benefits from the revenues of the camp,

some locals have been trained (and now work) as guides.

Others make handicrafts and souvenirs to sell at the camp.

Community workshops and meetings are held to ensure that

the locals can voice their opinions on the impacts of the

ecotourism in their area.

Prior to the start of the project, access to and use of the

area’s natural resources in the Communal Lands of the

Mazowe River Basin were unrestricted. This led to serious

degradation of the natural environment. For example, demand for fuelwood led to the destruction of forests, poor

agricultural practices led to serious soil erosion, and gold

panning activities aggravated the problem of river siltation—issues not that uncommon in other developing countries. Add to this the problem of increased population density throughout the whole of Zimbabwe, and you’ve got an

area that is teetering on the brink of ecological and cultural

bankruptcy. The problem of environmental degradation is

by no means confined to the Mazowe River Basin. On the

contrary, it is a national problem for Zimbabwe where over

70 percent of the population is rural and depends on land

resources for its livelihood.

Given that local communities were not compensated for

nonuse of natural resources and the fact that the state had

access to much needed resources under a principle of exclusion under the national policy of Protected Areas, the environment was severely compromised. Yet, if the clearing of

woodland for agricultural production and harvesting of the

forests for fuelwood and construction poles continued unabated, the forest resources would have been completely

depleted, and the river would have silted beyond repair.

With the silting of the river, the fish population would have

declined, which could have then triggered game poaching as

a source of protein (a practice that is frequently found in

other parts of sub-Sahara Africa). In general, mounting

environmental degradation had a direct and negative impact on economic development in the Sunungukai area.

Determined to bring change to their community, local

villagers decided to establish an income-generating project.

This was to build a camp, and a suitable site was identified

in Kapandaro Village. An elected committee of local community members oversaw the construction and management of

the site. Sunungukai Camp was built on one hectare (2.5

acres) of land, and the owner of the land is continually

entitled to 10 percent of the camp revenues. Another 5 to10

percent goes to the Uzumba-Maramba-Pfungwe Rural District Council (UMPRDC), which serves as a link between the

project and the central government and provides technical

support on project implementation. Decisions about the remaining revenues are made by the management committee.

The camp consists of four roundavel lodges, each with its

own grilling site, a reception/information building, communal kitchen, and a caretaker’s room. The layout of the camp

is based on traditional Shona architecture and was constructed using locally available materials with local labor

provided by the community. All the bricks used in construction were made by the local people, and they provided

thatching grass and poles for roofing. Cement, windows and

doorframes were bought with cash provided by the Zimbabwe Trust, and fencing materials (to keep out unwanted

wildlife) was bought with donated funds from the New

Zealand High Commission in Zimbabwe.

Since its inception in 1993, the area has experienced a

remarkable change in the way the community is actively

involved in monitoring natural resource use and generating

an income from ecotourism. This has led to controlled gold

panning and better use of other resources, such as poles and

thatch used in building construction. Additionally, members

of the local community have received extensive training

from the CAMPFIRE Association and other community

conservation groups on natural resources management and

ecotourism opportunities. Most of the money generated thus

far has gone to pay staff and to continue with renovations

and facility upgrades. One of the most pressing problems

still facing beautiful Sunungkai Camp is that the area is

not well marketed and remains somewhat underutilized.

Future revenues are earmarked for marketing the site

internationally and increasing the tourism management

and training for the local labor force. Nonetheless, in the

perspective of the community, “it is now true to say that the

majority of our people have an increasing realization of what

the environment means to them and to future generations”

(Munasinghe 1995).

Tourism-related components of Sunungukai Camp that

emphasize active ecotourism initiatives aimed at the visitor

include:

• Formation of Community-Based Organizations (CBOs)

that initiate and organize local communities around

economic empowerment and resource conservation

projects.

• Tour guide training focusing on minimal impact camping protocol and photographic safaris (“leave no trace”

principles).

• Formation of the local Sunungukai Management Committee (SMC) who is heavily involved in the decisionmaking process as to how excess funds are distributed

and reinvested in the conservation project.

• Eco-campsite development (no running water, no flush

toilets, no electricity) in sensitive areas (based on “leave

no trace” principles).

Conservation-related components of Sunungukai Camp

that emphasize education aimed primarily at the local

population include:

• Conservation awareness workshops for local villagers.

• Village cleanup campaigns.

• Drafting of the Sunungukai Management Committee

Peoples’ Constitution that monitors community natural

resource use regulations and implements sanctions

against offenders.

• Collection of user fees for use of natural resources by

nonlocals.

Toledo Ecotourism Association: The Toledo

Guesthouse and Ecotrail Program—The Toledo Ecotourism Association (TEA) is comprised of Mopan, Kekchi,

and Garifuna (Carib/African) villages in the forgotten southern district of Toledo in Belize. This program was formed to

enable the local peoples to directly plan, control, and profit

from ecotourism. Profits from the TEA program go to a

general fund, which contributes to village health and education, rainforest conservation, and central office operation.
192 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Fredrickson Wilderness Ecotourism and Education as a Means of Promoting an International Environmental Ethic

More than 80 percent of all funds stay in the individual

village that is visited.

Established in 1990 after the Toledo Home Site Farming

and Ecology Center organized a series of free, communitysponsored public workshops focusing on profiting from sound

ecotourism, TEA has, from the start, been a grassroots

organization. Villagers who attended these initial workshops first developed the Toledo Guesthouse Program by

building four simple guesthouses throughout the southern

district of Belize where visiting ecotourists could stay. The

original four TEA guesthouses were built by local community members and were constructed from local building

materials in a style that matched traditional Belizean home

design. Each guesthouse was constructed of palm leaf roofs,

wooden walls, and dirt or concrete floors, and each guesthouse

contained only four bunkbeds, thereby minimizing the number of people who could stay at one particular guesthouse.

Additionally, the guesthouses were designed to be environmentally low impact. The guesthouses do not have electricity but instead rely on traditional oil lamps. Restrooms

consist of nonflush, composting toilets, and the washroom

consists of a basin of water and a dipper and towel for

bathing. Different host families prepare traditional meals,

and it is expected that visitors rotate their visitation to

individual homes for meals so as to economically benefit a

greater percentage of the local community.

To date, there are roughly 18 guesthouses spread throughout the southern district of Toledo, and because each of the

TEA villages are located within relatively close proximity to

one another, visitors typically walk from one inland village

to the next. Accompanied by local guides, the Toledo Ecotrail

system allows visitors to travel through a diverse array of

landscapes—from virgin jungles rich with over 500 species

of tropical birds, 200 types of wild orchids and the elusive

jaguar, to climbing in the foothills of the Maya Mountains

that provide spectacular views of the rainforest below. While

traveling inland, tourists make their way from one village to

the next, incorporating visits to ancient Mayan wonders that

have survived over a thousand years, such as Lubaantun or

Uxbenka, both ancient Mayan ceremonial centers.

In striking contrast, the Ecotrail system travels through

the beautiful fishing village of Barranco, which is a fine

representation of traditional Garifuna culture. In striking

contrast to the Mayan villages inland, Barranco offers a

coastal setting and a rich culture derived from the

Amerindian/African heritage of the region. Days in the

coastal village of Barranco can be spent fishing in dugout

canoes or visiting the Temash River Forest Reserve; nights

come alive with Garifuna drumming and dancing.

The main objective of the Toledo Guesthouse and Ecotrail

Program is to provide visitors to the area a glimpse into

everyday life as experienced by the Mopan, Kekchi, and

Garifuna peoples. Visitors to the area have the unique opportunity to observe traditional farming, cooking, weaving, and

basketry; enjoy traditional dances, music, and storytelling;

and, learn arts and crafts, such as backstrap weaving,

embroidery, and jippy-jappa basketry.

Finally, all programming is locally supported and sanctioned by an elected village executive, who oversees the

running of the program in each particular village. Additionally, there is a district executive, who is elected every 2 years,

to manage and control the TEA program on a district level.

The entire organization of 201 members, representing 10

villages, holds regular monthly meetings to decide longterm planning and strategizing.

Apart from providing a rich and memorable experience to

the visitor, another important objective of the Toledo

Guesthouse and Ecotrail Program is raising monies to help

fund alternatives to slash and burn agriculture, the number

one cause of deforestation in the Toledo district. As previously mentioned, approximately 80 percent of the monies

raised through this particular program remain in each

separate village and goes toward improving village health

and education initiatives, as well as providing individual

families who participate in the program with a source of

personal income.

Tourism-related components of the Toledo Guesthouse

and Ecotrail Program that emphasize active ecotourism

initiatives aimed at the visitor include:

• Tour guide training focused on educating the visitor

about the daily life practices of indigenous residents and

their local relationship to the environment.

• Low impact guesthouse design (no running water, no

flush toilets, no electricity) villages.

• Rotational work basis for tour guides, educating visitors

about the importance of balancing traditional work

with that of ecotourism activities.

Conservation-related components of the Toledo Guesthouse

and Ecotrail Program that emphasize education aimed primarily at the local population include:

• Appointment of an elected village executive who initiates and organizes local community members around

economic empowerment and resource conservation

projects.

• Conservation awareness workshops for local villagers

about proper guesthouse construction using locally available resources.

• Establishment of consistent user fees for individual

households who host visitors to the Toledo district.

• Collection of user fees for use of natural resources by

nonlocals.

• Appointment of elected district executives who are

heavily involved in the decisionmaking process as to

how excess funds are to be distributed and reinvested at

the regional level in various health, education, and

conservation initiatives.

Discussion and Conclusions ______

In all countries of the world, both poor and rich, wilderness

ecotourism (or wildernesslike settings) has the potential of

playing an outstanding role in educating peoples from both

MDCs and LDCs about the importance of adopting an

international and universally accepted environmental ethic.

This international environmental ethic must include such

things as:

• The recognition of the complexity of nature and a repudiation of the belief that we can scientifically understand and technologically manipulate nature without

limit.

• Restraint in our behavior toward the natural world and

restriction of our wants.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 193

Fredrickson Wilderness Ecotourism and Education as a Means of Promoting an International Environmental Ethic

• The cultivation of a comprehensive sensibility toward

nature that is equally far from the overly romantic,

anthropomorphic view as from the utilitarian or

cornucopian view of nature.

Moreover, this type of paradigmatic change in humans’

views toward nature will not come about without also recognizing that ecological protection and cultural preservation

are inextricably linked, and maintaining both are integral to

establishing long-term ecological integrity.

Participation in sound ecotourism, combined with appropriate environmental education and ecological training (for

example, “leave no trace” principles), can contribute to the

development of a deep environmental ethic among people

from MDCs who travel internationally to visit wilderness

settings in various LDCs, while also increasing the sociocultural concerns for the lives of peoples living in close contact

with these wilderness settings. In the long run, this translates to political activism on matters of the environment, in

addition to matters of social equity for persons in LDCs

whose lives are inextricably linked to wilderness settings.

Yet, at the same time, only minorities of people in LDCs are

educated to behave responsibly toward the natural environment. That is, the least environmentally concerned, due to

their economic disadvantage, are residents of rural agricultural areas living in close proximity to wilderness (or

wildernesslike) settings, and who are wholly dependent on

the local flora and fauna for their sustenance. In many

instances, inhabitants of these areas regard natural vegetation primarily as a source of food and fuel, and wildlife as a

source of meat—or harbingers of destruction to agricultural

crops. For many peoples in LDCs, the land is not an arena for

leisure pursuits but a means of livelihood and survival. In

other words, the very concept of nature and wilderness in

most LDCs is very different than the environmental ethic

that drives much of the preservationist and conservationist

activities in MDCs.

Through the use of decentralized political and economic

decisionmaking processes utilized in ecotourism development projects, local indigenous community members of

various LDCs are becoming vested caretakers and stewards

of their cultural heritage and the natural environs that

support their given way of life. The three case studies

described exemplify many of the positive outcomes of sound

ecotourism activities.

In conclusion, however, those of us from MDCs –—who

have the great luxury of travel to far off and distant wildlands—must ask ourselves the difficult question of whether

we should stop traveling altogether. In the struggle to return

control of tourism activities to the local communities in

LDCs, we must increasingly scrutinize our motives for

traveling, deciding whether we have the right as consumers

to buy other cultures and environments, and yet still try to

support responsible tourism.

In an age where the media dominates and shapes our view

of the world, it is imperative that we utilize ecotourism as a

means to communicate with one another. In fact, there is no

better way to understand the global environmental crisis

that we all face than through people-to-people contact and

firsthand interaction. Through one-on-one meetings with

people we encounter through our travels, we discover universal themes of human culture. In other words, we become

acutely aware that no matter where we live, we are all

confronting similar situations.

References _____________________

Buckley, M. 1991. Himalayas under siege: notes on Annapurna.

Explore. Spring: 36–38.

Gunn, C. 1988a. Tourism planning. New York: Taylor & Francis.

208 p.

Gunn, C. 1988b. Vacationscape: designing tourist regions. New

York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. 460 p.

Gurung, C.; DeCoursey, M. 1994. The Annapurna Conservation

Area Project: a pioneering example of sustainable tourism? In:

Cater, E.; Lowman, G., eds. Ecotourism: a sustainable option?

Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons: 177–194.

Jackson, I. 1988. Interpretation of tourism and environment through

resource planning and management. In: Edwards, F., ed. Environmentally sound tourism development in the Caribbean.

Calgary: University of Calgary Press: 47–55.

Lowenthal, D. 1990. Awareness of human impacts: changing attitudes and emphases. In: Turner, B. L., ed. The Earth as transformed by human action: global and regional changes in the

biosphere over the past 300 years. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 121–135.

Mieczkowski, Z. 1990. World trends in tourism and recreation. New

York: Peter Lang. 496 p.

Munasinghe, M. 1995. Tropical forests and sustainable development: a framework for analysis. In: Kramer, R.; Sharma, N.;

Munasinghe, M., eds. Valuing tropical forests: methodology and

case study of Madagascar. Washington, DC: World Bank: 11–18.

Orr, D. 1992. Ecological literacy: education and the transition to a

postmodern world. Albany: State University of New York Press.

183 p.

Pigram, J. 1980. Environmental implications of tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research. 7(4): 554–583.

Wells, M.; Brandon, K. 1992. People and parks: linking protected

area management with local communities. Washington, DC:

World Bank.
194 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Sophie Jakowska is Professor Emeritus of Biological Sciences, College of

Staten Island, City University of New York, E-mail: jakowska@hotmail.com.

Dyrce Lacombe is Member Emeritus, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro,

Brazil, E-mail: dlacombe@bol.com.br

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Wild plants and animals share cities with people as

survivors of urbanization processes or as later settlers. Only a few

are recognized disease vectors, but many are seen as undesirable.

City people prefer their homes free from centipedes, insects, spiders,

scorpions, slugs, frogs, toads, snakes, lizards, birds, bats, and mice.

Some people have never seen any of these “undesirables” in their

lifetime. Fumigation experts are regularly employed or pesticides

and insecticides applied as sprays, sometimes in aerosol form.

Mechanical and chemical means of maintenance eliminate many

harmless and nonvisible life-supporting forms, while unclean dumps

shelter insects and rodents—food for city birds and homeless dogs

and cats. The survival of growing cities depends on clean air and

water, and on nature-conscious communities set on preserving

areas as green belts, parks, “nature pockets,” and tree-lined squares

and streets. These attract wildlife and provide nature for some,

while irritating others who prefer “sterile” surroundings. Efforts

must be made so that city people do not become totally estranged

from the rest of the living world. Urban naturalists must encourage people to notice, to observe, and to protect the forms of life that

make a city alive and interesting, especially to tourists. It is desirable to carry out systematic surveys to determine trends in behavior

and attitudes toward plants and animals, most of which are at risk

in fragile urban habitats, with constant influx of new dwellers from

rural areas into peripheral slums where they live crowded, threatened with violence, and lack basic facilities for healthy living. It is

important to promote sustained efforts for teaching and applying

bioethics under such precarious conditions to ensure proper survival for humans and other forms of life.

Growing Cities __________________

The future of cities depends on choices about management of their green and wildlife heritage. Some make the

wrong choices and tend to deteriorate, while others do all

they can to pull themselves up by the bootstraps. While

Curitiba, Brazil, is an example of people-oriented, ecologically positive development (Hawken and others 1999: 285–

308), Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, is now entering

a negative phase. Santo Domingo, the only “gothic” town in

the Americas, with 1 million people in l978, had an average

Wildlife in Growing Cities:

Eco-Socio-Cultural Considerations

Sophie Jakowska

Dyrce Lacombe

of 4 m2 (43 ft2) of green space per inhabitant. In 1986, an

additional green area for a large urban park was added,

totaling 4 million m2 (988 acres), but by that time the

capital city had 2,700,000 inhabitants and thus it had only

3 m2 (32 ft2

) of green area per person. The situation became

worse when, in 2001, the city population reached

3 million, now with a total green area, including the green

belt, of only about 8 million m2 (1,977 acres)—only 2.96 m2

(31.8 ft2) per person (Hernandez 2001).

As we write this, parts of a valuable park are being transformed into installations for accommodating the Olympic

games, at the dismay of local citizens. Some define it as

“crimen laesae patriae” (Jakowska 2001f). At the same time,

parts of the legally established green belt of the city of Santo

Domingo with valuable natural vegetation is threatened

unless it is possible to remove squatters to other areas. It is

not easy to convince people to move away from illegally

occupied land where they have been left undisturbed for a

number of years. Besides, there are no places to house them

anywhere else. Their continued presence within the space

designated by law as the green belt affects the perception of

the significance of these spaces for the future of the growing

metropolis and promotes further law breaking that damages

natural resources. Allowing things to continue as they are,

with further intrusions into established parks by converting

green space to other uses, makes it more difficult to achieve

nature consciousness among urban dwellers and to provide

them with healthy living conditions, even with a strong

educational effort (Jakowska, 2001a,b,c,d,e,g,h).

More than 326 cities in the world, each with more than 1

million inhabitants, represent the chief source of environmental pollution. Urban history tells us that early in the 20th

century there were dreamers who proposed a network of

clean, self-sufficient “garden cities” for the United States of

America, where the best social aspects of city life could

coexist with the beauty of nature. They felt an urgent need

to replace ill-ventilated, unplanned, unwieldy, and unhealthy

cities—products of the industrial revolution. But cities today still do not sustain a more equitable society in harmony

with nature and are more a caricature of the garden city

ideal. Sustainable development, as conceived in the

Brundtland Commission’s report, Our Common Future, also

remains an unfulfilled dream. In 1900, one-tenth of the

world’s population lived in cities; now, past the year 2000,

half of the world’s population are city dwellers. Major urban

problems today are: air pollution, lack of drinking water,

urban waste, transportation, poor city planning, and housing.

In l996, in Istambul, 171 nations and 579 cities met for the

Second United Nations Conference on Human Settlements

(Habitat II). Little has been achieved for lack of political will

and money. The reports prepared for Istambul+5 indicate
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 195

Wildlife in Growing Cities: Eco-Socio-Cultural Considerations Jakowska and Lacombe

that globalization had a detrimental effect on the poor in

slums and squatter settlements (Tibaijuka 2001). Unsustainable resource use poses a threat to the continued existence of cities. Perhaps it is easier now to starve in the

countryside than in the city due to the destruction of agriculture as a direct source of food, resulting in food insecurity

(Arputham 2001).

Be Nature Conscious!____________

Nature consciousness is a form of ecological literacy that

is a natural quality of some cultures and communities that

consider caring for the Earth as part of their way of life. In

crowded cities, where landless farmers seek their fortune, it

is difficult to find this form of sensitivity and even harder to

find ways to instill it.

For many years, conservation-related groups and institutions have been trying to find paths to bring this “caring for

the Earth and its creatures” into the way of life of people in

cities and in rural areas. During the time when I started to

serve in 1977, The World Conservation Union’s (IUCN)

Commission on Education, which has some of the best

environmental education experts, tried changing names,

approaches, and methods. Presently, and during the two

terms served by Frits Hesselink, the Commission has called

“on education and communication,” an approach promoted

by the Chair and by the special efforts of Wendy Goldstein,

the IUCN Communication Officer. Both have been using

different means of communication, starting innovative networks and internet consultations and debates, promoting

films, television programs, and “summits.” The present

chair of the Commission, Denise Hamú, is expanding the

promising ways of communication and maintains close links

with members all over the world. Other similarly-minded

organizations and institutions produce materials and programs to increase the transmission of necessary knowledge.

While we have better means of transmitting knowledge

with electronic devices, what we cannot transmit, unless the

destinataries have the right disposition, is empathy for the

world we live in and for all the creatures that share the Earth

with us. When there is no link of affection between people

and nature, the best of environmental education (such as,

teaching about biodiversity) is totally meaningless. But it is

necessary to insist, no matter how deficient, on environmental awareness within school curricula on all levels, since it is

never too soon or too late to confront environmental issues.

It is important to continue harping at the root causes of

biodiversity loss and the need to live “in peace” with Nature,

even though we cannot always find this peace with our own

kind (Wood and others 2000). Certainly, in crowded growing

cities it is apparently more urgent to preach the message of

“Peace with Nature” (Jakowska l989) in order to transmit

the message of the importance of biodiversity in protected

areas to millions of urbanites estranged from nature.

How to “plug in” the fashionable biodiversity into different

methods of communicating and sharing values is the preoccupation of many authors of recent articles (Hesselink 2001a).

Many good practical proposals have been offered (Hesselink

2001b).

Education involves not only the intellect but also the spirit.

If the heart cannot be engaged, worthless are our efforts to

promote the need to preserve nature in all forms and circumstances. This is especially difficult when interest clashes with

good intentions. Nature consciousness, when sincerely

achieved, obliges one to face the global, counter-nature trends

and rampant consumerism that stresses or destroys the

common good while making a play of “sustainability.”

Nature-conscious people need green areas, friendly city

gardens, plots to grow fruit, vegetables, and flowers. Unfortunately, well-intentioned people who seek the help of specialists to design their gardens often end up with manicured

lawns, which are practically ecological deserts. The Polish

press recently pointed out that insects, including mosquitoes, are just as important in an urban biotope as are the

songbirds people enjoy. They serve as food to other species.

But people who may wish to protect nature usually do not

know what to do; the smaller the garden in the city, the

greater the errors that are committed. People plan their

gardens mostly for their visual pleasure, and forget that

living creatures always serve one another, dead or alive

(Jakowska l979, 1996), and that the natural food chains

must be preserved for them to survive. City dwellers think

of supermarkets, not of food chains, and have no qualms

when buying products that may include genetically modified

organisms.

“Food + Shelter = Survival” is a simple formula expressing

the essential needs in order to preserve life. Entire populations live below that requirement, as starving homeless

nomads, due to geopolitical circumstances. This may be said

of plants, animals, and people. While other creatures continue to serve under the most difficult circumstances, in the

case of the human race, poverty down to the extreme tears

down physical structure starting before birth, and continues

to erode the body, exposing it to stress and disease.

With all our present advances in science and technology,

with fascinating medical advances to ease pain and prevent

the spread of epidemics that used to ravage humanity in old

times, we are still at a loss for the means to keep peace on

Earth. Years of effort writing charters on human rights and

creating laws and agreements to protect flora and fauna

from destruction have not given us the formula to save us

from the calamities, disasters, and wars resulting from the

wrong applications of the technologies that should be the

glory of our creativity. The horrors of violence, products of

the culture of death, are instantly known today in all parts

of the world. May we all learn to achieve peace within

ourselves, our families, with our fellow creatures, and promote the civilization of love, which is the true destiny of

humanity. Let us meditate with the young, whose time it is

to start their nature apprenticeship, because it is never too

late for us to learn (Jakowska l989).

Fear Us Not! Live and Let Live_____

Fear is one major factor in our relations with others. It

is a quality that contributes to self-preservation through

reasonable caution. It may become hysteria, panic, and

violence. Much of the cruelty that we commit against

living creatures is due to ignorance of their true role in the

world and the wrong interpretation of their nature or

their action. It is proper to teach from childhood to be

careful with wild plants or animals due to possible rash or
196 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Jakowska and Lacombe Wildlife in Growing Cities: Eco-Socio-Cultural Considerations

infection, but one ought to teach from the start the love for

all creatures as co-owners of our Earth, companions in the

same spaceship, the Planet Earth, to which we are so

much in debt. No creature that appears scary or repugnant by individual criteria need be considered as hostile

or ugly.

Toads and bats have an unjust bad reputation, the first

because of their wart-covered skin, and the second because

they need to expose their teeth in order to perceive the

environment. People associate bats with vampires, legendary creatures, while the one and only blood-sucking species

of bats are never found outside Brazil or in urban conditions.

Most people do not realize how vulnerable bats are, especially in their first weeks of life, and how helpless they may

be, depending on the time of day when their metabolism may

be down. Bat swarming may bring a whole town in Spain into

a bat-killing frenzy, and as a first childhood experience it

may be traumatic for life, as we have seen in documentaries.

Other species of city fauna may also look repugnant, but

need not be hostile and will go away when left alone.

It is correct to keep dwellings clean from “vermin,”

especially the insect vectors of known major diseases. The

kissing bugs of Central and South America were present for

years in cracks and crevices of homes, especially those of

native materials. Their relation to the acute and chronic

forms of illness caused by a trypanosome was not recognized until the start in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, a hundred

years ago, of the institute that bears the founder’s name,

“Instituto Oswaldo Cruz,” with which the second author

was associated as histology expert in the Entomology

Department and where she continues her work in “active

retirement.” These bugs, as well as mosquitoes (potential

vectors of different types of malaria, dengue, and yellow

fever), are not welcome in homes for sanitary precautions.

Similarly, different species of roaches that urban naturalists (Garber 1987) delight in describing are undesirable for

their “dirty” habits that destroy and contaminate food and

damage household objects.

I was surprised that my entomologist coauthor, who enjoys

collecting and observing small ant-like embiids, could not put

up with the sight of the large tropical roach, the “palmetto

bug.” Its attractive (to me) nymphal forms, of all stages, live

in the garden under stones just outside my kitchen. We moved

into the house in 1977 and started gradually liberating the

ground of a heavy coat of cement. I am proud to say I have

never used pesticides, weedkillers, or even chemical fertilizers in my small, fully-enclosed city garden. The first Christmas, just as a sign of “peace with nature,” unexpectedly, there

appeared lovely, bright, pink flowers from crocus-like bulbs

that had survived for years under the cement, patiently

awaiting liberation. I have since planted them in other places,

and they continue to delight me.

Many “unwanted” plants appear in unexpected places—

street drains, wall cracks, and on the edges of the sidewalks.

Some are removed by the “tidy,” just as are the beautiful

little trees and bushes cast in the garbage when they outgrow the garden. We call these “orphan plants,” and take

them in whenever we can place them in our care.

Tropical climates provide for a greater variety of domestic

flora and fauna. The speed with which vegetation grows

after destruction by people or by natural disasters leads to

attitudes that do not promote friendship across evolutionary

levels. The household lizards of different species, whose

chief enemies are playful well-fed cats with persistent hunting instincts, are, in the absence of insect-eating bats, some

of the best and “simpatico” pest controls. There is no reason

to fear them. But many people have a natural fear of snakes,

justified in places where, unlike on the island where I live

now, there are no poisonous species and all of them are

useful in rodent control, though unjustly destroyed. In the

residential part of Santo Domingo in the late l970s and early

l980s, local species of snakes made frequent appearances in

the closets of the residence of the French ambassador. They

were collected and placed in safety by the best Dominican

herpetologist, who was always willing to oblige. In some

cultural settings it is hard to imagine this kind of attitude

and gentle treatment of a dangerous snake but, perhaps, it

may be instilled gradually from childhood, teaching and

learning to live in peace with the whole world, the great

desire of all, especially in our age of violence (Jakowska

l989).

I know of giant centipedes, 12 inches long, first identified

by Linnaeus with an elegant Latin name, living in the

Colonial City of Santo Domingo. Their minor relatives of

unidentified species, less than 2 inches long, keep hatching

seasonally in my house surroundings. We try to transfer

them to safety whenever possible, and there is always a

feeling of a “life lost” when we hear the familiar crunch

while walking in the dark. There are also lovely spiders,

hard working like the mythological Arachne, who build

attractive webs from bush to bush, while others contribute

to insect control in the home, capturing flies and

nondesirable termites during swarming, and whose work

we occasionally destroy where it would give a bad testimony to our housekeeping.

In our “live and let live” community, there are scorpions of

different kinds, interesting but potentially dangerous; ticks

that infest the dogs; and ants of all sizes, from the microscopic ones forming a tightly packed circle around a single

sugar crystal left on the sink, to some big, biting ones among

the organic matter on the ground and under the stones. Ants

also feed (and are fed on by lizards) on the fallen mango fruit

and figs we leave to the poor city birds who suffer the effects

of their preference for “sterile” urban dwellings with tiled or

cemented garden spaces.

We have the pleasure of regular visits from the palm chats,

national birds of the Dominican Republic, who come to feed

on the fruit of the royal palm, the national plant of this

country, which their ancestors originally planted in our

garden about l977. The second smallest humming bird in

existence also lives on this island and occasionally visits our

garden to drink the nectar of the flowers. Every day I have

contacts with all forms of life besides the dogs and cats we

have as pets. My days are a constant canticle of the creatures

and a prayer of thanksgiving for all the joys and benefits life

continues to offer as I approach my 80th birthday.

Realistic Bases for Hope _________

Poverty, characteristic of the periphery of growing cities

(Tibaijuka 2001) is not exclusively limited to humans. The

forces that shape the state of the world today are mostly of

our making, and impoverish natural resources at every level
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 197

Wildlife in Growing Cities: Eco-Socio-Cultural Considerations Jakowska and Lacombe

of evolution, as well as the nonrenewable ones which, when

exploited directly or indirectly, affect all creatures.

Nature has been betrayed by globalization, sustainability,

green science, green production (Anastas and Warner 1998),

green organizations, and green politics of doubtful interests,

and, on a personal level, by the acceptance by most of us of

a consumerist approach to life.

Wildlife seems to have no place in this scheme of things

except as a negotiable item, especially in countries that try

to imitate First World habits. Robert Shapiro, chairman of

the Monsanto Corporation, is quoted as saying in l997

(Ayres l999) that the most fundamental issues facing the

world at the start of the new millennium is “living within

your energy income, not expending more energy than the

sun provides, and not putting out waste products faster than

nature makes them harmless.” Industrialists seldom speak

in those terms and cannot afford to live up to such principles,

which sound like “small is beautiful” (Schumacher 1999), or

like the eco-village mentality (Jakowska 2001a,b,c,d,e,g,h).

It seems in conflict with the present energy consumption of

Monsanto, largest producer of the herbicide Roundup, difficult for Nature to absorb.

With demographic predictions that world population will

double around 2030, Shapiro warns that we will end up as “a

few islands of privilege and prosperity in a sea of misery and

violence. The world is headed either for famine or for ecological catastrophe.” It need not be so if we share “good” knowledge before, as someone said, it becomes an endangered

species, and apply this knowledge to a remedial mode of

action. But the public is easily confused by occasional,

supposedly green, leaders and organizations which, for

example, send out reports that the rising carbon dioxide

level is good for us because it helps grow vegetables. But we

also know that it fosters the spread of malaria and cropkilling weeds and pests (Moser and Mathers 2001). These

authors warn, in the official organ of the Union of Concerned

Scientists, that scientists ought to debunk such statements

by “climate skeptics” urging us to “learn to distinguish the

real science from the junk science” in respect to the use of

fossil fuels and genetically modified organisms.

Only through the acceptance of “God’s last offer “ to

defend our world, rather than our bank accounts, might we

have any real chance of saving our world, not just ourselves

(a foolish consideration), and regain the sense of personal

and family security we care about so deeply (Ayres 1999).

In making choices, we must select reliable consultants such

as the Union of Concerned Scientists, Friends of the Earth,

or other equally worthy organizations. As we face the problem of violence that, especially in our times, pollutes nature

and human souls (Jakowska 1998) and assaults the dignity

that is the essential feature of humankind (Jakowska

2000), we must turn to eco-spirituality, the humble way of

caring for the Earth (Jakowska l996) and help the survival

of as many creatures as possible that share our world, to

ensure our own dignified survival. We must draw upon

Bioethics, the global bioethics built by recently deceased

Van Rensselaer Potter on the “Leopold Legacy,” as indicated by the subtitle of his second major contribution

(Potter 1971, 1988). The paper Potter wrote for the Policy

Forum Section of the journal Science, was received by the

Bioethics Core Group and Working Group of Affiliates in

mid-May of 2001. It ends with the following statement:

We are indeed losing the war to save the planet and the

future of humanity. To win the war we need scientists who are

not avoiding the ethical issues. Sustainability Science [the

last word underlined by Potter] is not enough. We need to

launch the Crusade of the 21st Century under the banner of

Bioethical Sustainability.

May this dream come true! We must also seek alliances

where inter-religious dialogue raises voices of hope in the

struggle to save the planet (Hope and Young 2000). Some of

our considerations were inspired by our personal experiences in the big cities of the Old and of the New World.

References _____________________

Anastas, Paul T.; Warner, John C. 1998. Green chemistry—theory

and practice. New York: Oxford University Press. 152 p.

Arputham, Jockin. 2001. Whose city is it anyway? Our Planet. 12(2): 14.

Ayres, Ed. l999. God’s last offer: negotiating for a sustainable

future. New York: Four Walls Eight Windows. 358 p.

Garber, Steven D. l987. The urban naturalist. Mineola, New York:

Dover Publications. 242 p.

Hawken, Paul; Lovins, Amory; Lovins, L. Hunter. 1999. Natural

capitalism: creating the next industrial revolution. New York:

Little, Brown and Company. 396 p.

Hernandez, Rafael Tomas. 2001. Mientras la Ciudad Crece, los

Parques Verdes son Destruidos. Mundo Ecológico. [While the city

grows, the green parks are destroyed.] Ecological World. 9: 21–22.

Hesselink, Frits. 2001a. Communicating biodiversity values in

protected areas. Editorial. Newsletter, Central and East Europe.

Cambridge, UK: World Conservation Union (IUCN) Environmental Program. September: 1–2.

Hesselink, Frits. 2001b. Communicating biodiversity: ten facts of

life. Newsletter, Central and East Europe. Cambridge, UK:

World Conservation Union (IUCN) Environmental Program.

September: 2.

Hope, Marjorie; Young, James. 2000. Voices of hope in the struggle

to save the planet. New York: The Apex Press. 377 p.

Jakowska, Sophie. 1979. Hijos de la Tierra. Meditaciones para

Niños y Adultos sobre la Protección Ambiental y Conservacion de

Recursos. [Children of the Earth. Meditations for children and

adults on environmental protection and conservation of natural

resources.] Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic: Editora Taller.

36 p.

Jakowska, Sophie. 1989. Peace with nature—meditations for the

young. The New Road. The Bulletin of the WWF Network on

Conservation and Religion. No.9, April–June.

Jakowska, Sophie. 1996. Eco-Spirituality—the humble way of caring for the Earth. Paper presented at: World philosophers meet;

1996 November 24–30, Pune, India. [Online]. Available: http://

www.here_now4u.de/eng/eco_spirituality_the_humble_.htm

Jakowska, Sophie. 1998. Violence that pollutes nature and human

souls. World philosophers meet; 1998 August 20; Geneva, Switzerland. [Online]. Available: http://www.here_now4u.de/eng/

violence_that_pollutes_nature_.htm

Jakowska, Sophie. 2000. Preserving human dignity as key to survival. Paper presented at: Conference on human survival in the

new millennium, International Society for Human Values; 2000

September 12–15; Geneva, Switzerland. On file with author.

Jakowska, Sophie. 2001a. Como la Parroquia puede organizar un

Trabajo de Cuidado de la Naturaleza. [How can a parish get

organized to work for naturecaring.] Dominican Republic:

CAMINO [National Catholic Weekly]. September 29: 17.

Jakowska, Sophie. 2001b. Ciudades en Crisis y el Ideal de Vida EcoAldeana. [Cities in crisis and the ideal of an eco-village life.]

Dominican Republic: CAMINO [National Catholic Weekly]. September 30: 16.

Jakowska, Sophie. 2001c. Basura omnipresente y el Sueño de una

Ciudad Saludable. [Omnipresent garbage and the dream of a

healthy city.] Santiago de los Caballeros, Dominican Republic.

CAMINO [National Catholic Weekly]. October 7: l8.

Jakowska, Sophie. 2001d. Actitudes y Comportamiento Necesarios

para la Sostenibilidad de Areas Verdes. [Necessary attitudes and
198 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Jakowska and Lacombe Wildlife in Growing Cities: Eco-Socio-Cultural Considerations

behavior for the sustainability of green areas.] Santiago de los

Caballeros, Dominican Republic. CAMINO [National Catholic

Weekly]. October 14: 19.

Jakowska, Sophie. 2001e. Lo Pequeño es lo Hermoso. [Small is

beautiful—economics as if people mattered.] Dominican Republic: CAMINO [National Catholic Weekly]. October 21: 13–14

Jakowska, Sophie. 2001f. Crimen Laesae Patriae. Santiago de los

Caballeros, Dominican Republic. CAMINO [National Catholic

Weekly]. September 7: 15.

Jakowska, Sophie. 2001g. Comedores Económicos en los Mayores

Parques Urbanos? [Inexpensive diners in major city parks?]

Santiago de los Caballeros, Dominican Republic. CAMINO [National Catholic Weekly]. August 29.

Jakowska, Sophie. 2001h. La Eco-Aldea dentro de Nosotros y

Nuestro Ideal Eco-Aldeano. [The eco-village within us and our

eco-village ideal.] Santiago de los Caballeros, Dominican Republic. CAMINO [National Catholic Weekly]. September 28: 15–16.

Moser, Susanne; Mathers, Jason. 2001. Cool answers to counter hot

air. Nucleus. 2: 1–3.

Potter, V. R. 1971. Bioethics—bridge to the future. Englewood

Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 202 p.

Potter, V. R. 1988. Global bioethics—building on the Leopold legacy.

East Lansing: Michigan State University Press. 202 p.

Schumacher, E. F. 1999. Small is beautiful—economics as if people

mattered: 25 years later with commentaries. Point Roberts, WA:

Hartley and Marks Publishers Inc. 304 p.

Tibaijuka, Anna. 2001. The city century. Our Planet. United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) Magazine. 1(1): 32.

Wood, Alexander; Stedman, Edward; Mang, Johanna, eds. 2000.

The root causes of biodiversity loss. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd. 399 p.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 199

Les Wadzinski is the Recreation Program Manager, U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Hoosier National Forest, 811 Constitution Avenue, Bedford, IN 47421, U.S.A., phone: 812-275-5987, E-mail: lwadzinski

@fs.fed.us

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Wildlands continue to be challenged with the pressures

of modern society as more people use and impact these special areas.

Complicated issues create situations where managers must strike

a balance between offering a wilderness experience and protecting

wilderness resources. Nine years ago, the Charles C. Deam Wilderness in the Midwestern United States provided just such a challenge

to wilderness managers at the U.S. Department of Agriculture

(USDA) Forest Service, Hoosier National Forest. This small wilderness had a very long list of problems that made this area bear little

resemblance to the wild area for which it was intended. Several

management actions were implemented to move this area to a

wilderness condition. These actions resulted in improved trail

conditions, better opportunity for solitude, fewer impacts from

horses, less depreciative behavior, reduced user conflict, and a

stronger appreciation of wilderness by users. Managers found a

surprising degree of success in implementing some controversial

changes, and attributed that success to two factors: extensive

involvement by the public in the development phase of these

changes, and the implementation of several concurrent management actions.

Introduction and Background _____

The Wilderness Act of 1964 defines wilderness in the

United States as “...an area where the Earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is

a visitor who does not remain.” Such an area is to be a place

where natural forces are dominant and one may find opportunities for solitude. This concept is supported by challenging visitors to cope with nature on its own terms. Modern

conveniences such as developed facilities, the use of mechanical or motorized equipment, and roads are generally

prohibited.

This wilderness character may be somewhat easier to

achieve in the Western United States due to the remoteness,

size, and original pristine condition of those areas. In contrast, eastern wildernesses are sometimes located near

large metropolitan areas with accompanying overuse problems and evidence of past land abuses. Such factors often

prevent a wilderness from providing the primitive character

Management Actions to Protect Wilderness

Experiences and the Resource

Les Wadzinski

for which it was intended. The Deam Wilderness, although

created by Congress in 1982, was suffering from these ills,

and managers were doing little to offer a wilderness experience or resource protection.

The Deam Wilderness is a relatively small wilderness

located in south-central Indiana in the midwestern area of

the United States. The area covers almost 13,000 acres

(5,261 hectares) and is bounded on three sides by road and

one by water. The terrain is rugged by midwestern standards with steep ravines, and is heavily forested predominantly with hardwood species and also nonnative pines. In

the 1930s, it was occupied by 78 homes or farms and was

laced with 57 miles (92 km) of roads. It is currently managed

by the USDA Forest Service, and is part of the 198,000-acre

(80,128-hectare) Hoosier National Forest. Popular recreation uses include: hiking, horse riding, backpacking, and

deer hunting.

Problems ______________________

The Deam Wilderness was plagued by a number of issues,

with overuse as the overriding factor. A variety of seemingly

unrelated conditions were occurring simultaneously, but

together were degrading the wilderness experience and the

wilderness resource. These conditions and their effects are

summarized below.

Lack of Public Land

Indiana is a very poor State in terms of public land

available for outdoor recreation, with only 4 percent of the

land base titled to a government entity. This is in sharp

contrast to Western States where public land ownership

often exceeds 50 percent. In addition, the Deam is the only

wilderness in Indiana offering those seeking wilderness no

other choice without traveling long distances. Indiana is also

a densely populated state, resulting in a situation where

there are many people wanting to use a small amount of

public land.

Location and Access

Although wilderness is supposed to offer solitude, the

location of this wilderness made it too easy for people to visit,

thus encouraging overuse. The area is located adjacent to a

busy State highway and a very popular reservoir, is within

easy driving distance of several large metropolitan areas,

and is bisected by a graveled county road. Another factor was

an overabundance of access points into the area. Sixty-four

access points were inventoried that further increased the

ease in which large numbers of people could visit (USDA
200 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Wadzinski Management Actions to Protect Wilderness Experiences and the Resource

Forest Service 1993). It was believed that visitors came to

the Deam Wilderness simply because of the convenience

rather than for a wilderness experience.

High Trail Density

A wilderness should also offer challenge, but in this case

over 109 miles (175 km) of trail were available in this small

area, creating a trail density of 5.35 miles (8.6 km) of trail per

square mile (2.5 km2

) of land (USDA Forest Service 1993).

Numerous short loops were everywhere and required little

endurance or navigation skill to use. Such a density would be

more appropriate in an urban setting than a wilderness.

Poor Trail Conditions

Most of the 109 miles (175 km) of trail were not designated

trails that were built and maintained by the Forest Service.

Rather, they were “user made” trails that simply formed

from repeated use by horse riders. As a result, many were

located on steep slopes or poorly drained low areas, and on

fragile soils creating severe erosion problems and muddy

quagmires.

Intense Horse Use

For over 50 years the area was popular for horse riding.

Horses can be extremely damaging to soil types found in this

area. Their relatively small hooves, coupled with their great

weight, create a gouging action as they use the trails. This

problem is compounded when it occurs on wet and fragile

soils or on steep slopes. In dry times, the trail tread is

pockmarked, and in wet times it becomes a muddy bog. The

effect is severe soil erosion and a very unpleasant experience

for those using the trail for hiking. A large Forest Service

public camp known as the Blackwell Horsecamp served as a

major trailhead and access point, and was the source for

most of this horse use.

Inadequate Management

For whatever the reasons, previous managers of the area

did not intensively manage the land. As a result, few rules

or regulations were in place or enforced, no staff was assigned, little money was budgeted, and no trail system was

designated or maintained. Users could ride their horses

wherever they wished, litter was common, and crimes such

as drug use, excessive drinking, and fighting were prevalent

at the Blackwell Horsecamp.

Lack of Wilderness Values

The concept of wilderness was new to most people in

Indiana, and many had no idea that a designated wilderness

was a special place that required special behavior. In fact,

many complained about the lack of facilities and couldn’t

understand why the use of mechanical equipment was

prohibited. Many visitors were simply looking for a place to

drink beer, ride horses, and shoot guns. They did not seem

interested in the wilderness values of solitude, challenge,

and closeness to nature.

User Conflict

Hikers objected to damage caused by the horses, and some

reported that horses interfered with their enjoyment. The

horse clubs, on the other hand, became inflamed at even the

hint of regulation. A study by Watson, Niccolucci, and

Williams (1993) indicated that separate trails for each use

was generally supported by hikers but not by horse riders.

The Forest Service seemed caught in the middle as the

hikers accused the Forest Service of siding with the horse

people, and the horse clubs accused the Forest Service of

being anti-horse. None of the groups were talking to each

other. At a public meeting, the Forest Service suggested a

compromise to limit horses to 60 miles (96.5 km) of designated trail. The result was a roomful of angry people, all

feeling betrayed by the Forest Service. As one manager

described it, Forest Service officials had “their backs to the

wall and a long way to the exit” (Slover 1996). Other user

groups, such as hunters and environmentalists, had their

own concerns as well. It seemed everyone wanted the wilderness managed, but only for his or her activity.

Roads and Cemeteries

Ideally, a wilderness should not contain roads or permanent reminders of human influence such as cemeteries.

However, as in all things, there are exceptions and this

wilderness had plenty of them. This wilderness is actually

divided into two segments, separated by a county road. This

road functioned as an unofficial 5-mile (8-km) linear campground and attracted more than its share of unsavory

characters and law enforcement problems.

There are also five cemeteries within the wilderness

boundaries, with one of them privately owned and therefore

exempt from wilderness regulation. A 1.5-mile (2.4-km) road

leads to this cemetery, and access is guaranteed by the

legislation that created the Deam Wilderness. The owners of

this cemetery regularly drive back there to mow it with

power mowers and occasionally conduct a burial. The remaining cemeteries have abandoned access roads in very

poor condition but also are mentioned in the legislation as

having access permitted. Several citizens not able to walk

long distances have requested motorized access to these

cemeteries so they could visit the graves of their loved ones.

This was a particularly challenging problem due to the fact

that very extensive work would be needed to bring the roads

up to a usable condition, not to mention the conflict between

wilderness values and the humanitarian need to allow

gravesite visitation.

Working Toward a Solution: Citizen

Involvement ____________________

The challenges facing managers of this area were indeed

formidable. In 1992, several new Forest Service staff members were hired and upon arrival immediately saw a great

need for change. This author was personally motivated after

viewing the scene at the Blackwell Horsecamp the first

weekend on duty in May 1992. Over 300 horse trailers were

squeezed into a 40-acre (16-hectare) field, goats and pigs

were running loose, teenagers were racing horses, loud
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 201

Wadzinski Management Actions to Protect Wilderness Experiences and the Resource

music and alcohol was everywhere, and many riders sported

pistols. It looked like a scene from a movie about the Wild

West. This horsecamp was the main entry into the wilderness and obviously contributed little to instill wilderness

values.

The new managers inventoried the problems and arrived

at the list previously described. It quickly became apparent

that many forces were at work in preventing this wilderness

from being wild, and there would be no single or easy

solution. Forest Service officials knew that a “big picture”

approach was needed but were not sure where to start. The

biggest obstacle to proceeding with any changes to date had

been the animosity of the user groups, both among themselves and with the Forest Service. For any changes to occur

it would be critical to have support of the user groups, so the

journey started there.

Forest Service officials had several options. They could

simply ask a few users for opinions and then decree some

changes based on what they thought was best. However, the

public meeting previously described proved that approach

was ineffective. Another option was to simply do nothing.

After all, the wilderness had been managed in this manner

since 1982, and in fact, some users liked it the way it was.

Fortunately, Forest Service managers felt they had a greater

responsibility. Yet another option was to embark on a

methodical planning process that would involve the public,

analyze multiple alternatives, and result in a clearly defined

plan. It was no secret that if the users were part of that

process they would be much more supportive of the outcome.

For that reason, the Forest Service selected a process known

as the Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) as described in

Stankey and others (1985).

LAC is an alternative to carrying capacity, designed to

determine how much change is acceptable before management actions are needed to mitigate impacts. In this case, a

citizen’s task force was formed to implement the process.

Interested parties could apply to be on the task force, and

people in leadership positions from the user groups were

encouraged to apply. This process brought the wilderness

users together, and forced them to sit at the same table and

work out their differences.

The process ultimately resulted in implementing management actions designed to promote a wilderness environment. The Forest Service cannot abdicate decisionmaking to

nongovernment entities, so in this case the task force only

provided recommendations. They developed three alternative solutions, with a variety of management actions in each.

One alternative favored recreation, another favored the resource, and a third alternative offered a compromise of the

two.

The Forest Service went forward with additional public

involvement using the compromise recommendation as a

starting point. The process included numerous mailings and

open houses to ensure that all citizens, not just those on the

task force, had an opportunity to comment. Based on this

additional input, managers analyzed the alternative management actions and incorporated most of the recommendations. Ultimately, some of the more significant management

actions were incorporated into an amendment to the Forest

Land and Resource Management Plan. This plan provides

long-term guidance for management of the forest that managers are required to follow. Additional management actions

were also implemented through rules and regulations and

by incorporation into other action plans.

Even though Forest Service officials were the final

decisionmakers, there was good support from the public

because they participated directly in the development process. Some actions were effective, some were not, and some

were influenced by factors beyond anyone’s control. The

management actions and their effects are discussed below.

Working Toward a Solution:

Management Actions ____________

Basic Strategy

It was recognized early on that the area was being overused, and mostly by people that were not really there for a

wilderness experience. Rather, they wanted a convenient

place in the woods to recreate. Therefore, the strategy

focused on redirecting many of those users to nearby

nonwilderness areas. The Forest Service certainly wanted

the Deam Wilderness to remain open and accessible, but

only to those willing and desiring to cope with the inconveniences and challenges of a wilderness experience.

Designated Trails

One of the first orders of business was to designate a

formal trail system and limit the number of trail miles. This

was a drastic change from historical use, but users surprisingly accepted the change. The total number of trail miles in

the wilderness was capped at 40 (64 km), down from the 109

miles (175 km) inventoried. It is encouraging to note that

this number is far less than the 60-mile (96.5-km) “compromise” that initially met with such opposition. Managers

attribute this success to the fact that the public had a chance

to participate in the process. A 36-mile (58-km) route of

several large loops was officially designated based on the

recommendations of the LAC task force, leaving a 4-mile (6-

km) buffer for future uncertainties. Five of these miles (8

km) were set aside for hikers only, although hikers may also

hike off trail if they choose. The large loops were selected to

provide a challenge and discourage those users that were not

seeking a wilderness experience. Short, easy loops were

provided nearby at a trail in a nonwilderness area to serve

those users.

The next step was to improve trail conditions, which was

accomplished through additional funding. This included

rerouting some poor trails, installing drainage devices, and

hardening the trail with gravel in some instances. Signs were

installed so users would know which trails were official.

Horse users were then required to ride only on this

designated trail system. A regulation was implemented

requiring this, and riders found off trail were fined. This

action forced riders to stay only on trails that were properly

located and maintained, and could sustain the impact. For

the most part, riders observe this rule although there is still

some evidence of user-made trails.
202 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Wadzinski Management Actions to Protect Wilderness Experiences and the Resource

Staffing Changes

To help accomplish the above actions, personnel were

reassigned from other jobs to the wilderness. A large Forest

Service campground outside the wilderness was changed

from a Forest Service operation to a concession, thereby

freeing up Forest Service staff for wilderness work. A staff

member was appointed to the position of wilderness ranger

and worked full time in the wilderness. Other technicians

were assigned to help as needed. Duties consisted of enforcing rules, performing trail maintenance, and simply being

visible so the public knew that the agency cared enough

about the area to be present. Forest Service law enforcement

staff also increased patrols of the area.

Use of Work Animals

A horse and mule augmented the staffing. In accordance

with wilderness law, even the Forest Service as the managing agency may not use modern equipment for maintenance.

Therefore, it is beneficial to resort to older and more primitive means of assistance such as the use of animals. All trail

work is accomplished using a plow and grader pulled by a

mule, and equipment and supplies are packed in using the

animals. Although a common feature in Western States, this

wilderness was believed to be the first to use animals east of

the Mississippi River.

The horse is used mainly for patrol and provides two major

benefits. First, it is an efficient means of travel and has been

very helpful in search and rescue and enforcement of rules.

Second, and perhaps more significant, it provides credibility

with the horse community. When the Forest Service is a horse

owner just like the users, the users are more apt to accept the

Forest Service opinion on issues involving horse use.

Redesign of Horsecamp

The Blackwell Horsecamp was redesigned to decrease

capacity but improve the experience. Large, fenced exclosures

were installed to decrease the available area, thus limiting

the number of campers that could crowd into the camp. This

action is allowing vegetation and badly needed shade trees

to return to the area. Aging restrooms were replaced and

small corrals were built. Law enforcement patrols were

stepped up, and regulations were implemented and enforced. In one short year, this campground turned from a

party spot to a family campground. To help serve those users

who did not like the changes at the Blackwell Horsecamp,

the Forest Service worked with adjacent private horsecamp

owners to provide access to the nonwilderness trails on the

Hoosier National Forest. These camps offered more amenities such as water, electrical hookups, short loop trails, and

so on, and were able to attract and provide for those users not

seeking a wilderness experience.

Reduction of Access Points

The problem of too many access points and the problem

with camping along the county road was eliminated by

limiting wilderness access points to five trailheads. All

others were closed, and parking and camping was limited

along the county road only to those designated sites. While

ultimately successful, there was initially a jurisdictional

conflict with the county. County officials and some citizens

opposed the restrictions based on their belief they had

control over a right-of- way extending beyond the edge of the

road. The Forest Service prevailed, and the restrictions

remained in place. This action greatly reduced the number

of people coming to the area for a nonwilderness experience.

The Forest Service publicized information on alternative

areas nearby where visitors could still find a roadside camping opportunity.

Improve Wilderness Awareness

The problem of lack of wilderness knowledge or ethics was

addressed through an educational program and facilities.

For the first few years, the forest entered into an agreement

with Indiana University to provide a wilderness education

specialist. This person roamed the wilderness providing a

wilderness message, and also had an active program in local

junior high schools. Selected classes participated in a fivepart series of field trips and classroom exercises, and at the

end held a wilderness summit where students developed

their own solutions to ongoing management issues. After

that program was completed, the Forest Service kept up the

effort through volunteers and seasonal employees.

The forest also moved an old log cabin from a remote

location to an entry into the wilderness. The cabin serves as

a visitor contact station for wilderness users, and is staffed

by volunteers who provide a message on wilderness values.

Other educational efforts included the development of bulletin boards and wayside exhibits at each major trailhead.

There, visitors are able to obtain a wilderness ethics message, as well as information about the area and rules. A high

quality map available for a modest fee was developed that

showed the trails and topographic details of the area, and

also included a wilderness message. A free handout map was

also developed with a similar theme, and the same information

is also available on the Hoosier Forest website at: www.fs.fed.

us/r9/hoosier

Develop Cemetery Access Policy

The cemetery access issue proved to be particularly challenging, but a workable solution was found. The portion of

the Deam Wilderness legislation that addressed cemetery

access was vague, and required a good bit of legal analysis.

At issue was the conflict between wilderness values (no

roads or motorized equipment) and the rights of families to

visit their loved ones. It was determined that the Forest

Service did indeed have an obligation to provide access. The

problem, however, was that hundreds of thousands of dollars would be needed to bring the roads to these cemeteries

up to driveable standards. The forest was reluctant to get

into the business of rebuilding and maintaining an extensive

road system in a wilderness, and did not have the resources

for such an undertaking.

A cemetery visitation policy was developed and has been

successful thus far. The forest first cleared all the roads to

cemeteries to make them at least minimally passable during

dry times. If a visitor requests motorized access, the forest
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 203

Wadzinski Management Actions to Protect Wilderness Experiences and the Resource

first determines that the request is legitimate. The forest

will then set up a time to have a Forest Service official

provide transportation to the cemetery using an all terrain

vehicle or four wheel drive vehicle. This access is dependent

on the weather, however, because the roads are not passable

when wet. Fortunately, there are only one or two requests a

year, and people seem to be satisfied with this arrangement.

Other Management Actions

Additional management actions have also been implemented to deal with the other issues raised during the public

involvement process. A 10-person party limit is in effect to

promote the concept of solitude. Hunting is still permitted,

but target shooting is not allowed in order to promote a

quieter environment. Camping is prohibited within 100 feet

(30.5 m) of water sources. Horse users are required to

purchase a daily permit for $3 or annual permit for $25, with

the revenues used for trail maintenance.

What’s Next? ___________________

Overall, the Deam Wilderness can be said to be vastly

improved from its 1992 condition. The trails are in much

better condition, erosion has been greatly reduced, it is

possible to find solitude, and users seem at least a little more

aware that the wilderness is a special place that requires

special treatment. Progress has been made on the goal of

reducing use and impacts.

However, the area is still a long way from being a true

wilderness. Unlike the pristine western wildernesses, this

area has a lot of healing to do because of the many years of

human influence. Nature will have to play a lot of “catch

up” to be the dominant force as described in the Wilderness

Act of 1964. Fortunately, the recent management actions

implemented by the Forest Service are providing a good

start to the process. Not so fortunately, though, some conditions remain that will make the job inherently difficult and

may never be resolved. For example, the lack of public land,

proximity to large populations, and the cemetery issues will

likely be around for some time.

Most visitors appear to be happy with the situation and

few complaints are received. Some dissatisfaction remains,

such as the few hikers who don’t want horses allowed at all,

and the few horse riders that want more trails. All new

concerns and suggestions are considered, although the Forest

Service intends to continue to use the current guidance unless

new information or changed conditions become apparent.

In summary, Deam Wilderness managers attribute the

accomplishments thus far to the big-picture approach to

problem solving, and focusing on a variety of issues simultaneously. One significant component of this approach was the

high degree of public involvement. The situation would not

have changed without public support, even if new rules and

regulations were applied. Rather, because the users themselves actually helped form some of the policy, the Forest

Service was able to make the sweeping changes that improved the Deam’s wilderness character. Wilderness managers plan to continue this approach, keeping in mind the

ultimate goal of providing a quality wilderness experience

while protecting the wilderness resource.

References _____________________

Slover, Bruce L. 1996. A music of opinion: collaborative planning for

the Charles C. Deam Wilderness. Journal of Forestry. 94(5): 19.

Stankey, George H.; Cole, David N.; Lucas, Robert C.; Petersen,

Margaret E.; Frissell, Sidney S. 1985. The limits of acceptable

change (LAC) system for wilderness planning. Gen. Tech. Rep.

INT-76. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station

[now the Rocky Mountain Research Station]. 37 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1993. Deam Wilderness citizen’s task force summary and recommendations.

Bedford, IN: Hoosier National Forest. 35 p.

Watson, Alan; Niccolucci, M.; Williams, D. 1993. Hikers and recreational stock users: predicting and managing recreation conflicts

in three wildernesses. Res. Pap. INT-468. Ogden, UT: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station [now Rocky Mountain Research Station]. 35 p.
204 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Patrick T. Maher is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Social Science, Tourism and

Recreation Group of the Environment, Society and Design Division, P.O. Box

84, Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand, FAX: (64) (3) 325 3857,

E-mail: maherp@lincoln.ac.nz. Gary Steel is a Lecturer in Social Psychology,

Social Science, Tourism and Recreation Group, P.O. Box 84, Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand. Alison McIntosh is a Senior Lecturer in

Tourism, Social Science, Tourist and Recreation Group, P.O. Box 84, Lincoln

University, Canterbury, New Zealand.

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Antarctica, as a continent, is one of the most beautiful,

remote places on the planet. For many people Antarctica is a place

of mystery, a place of historic exploration, discovery, and suffering.

Antarctica is where huge icebergs sweep by populous penguin

rookeries, and where majestic albatross sweep along on wind

curling off the polar plateau. These preconceptions are perhaps why

Antarctic tourism has grown substantially over the past two decades, now numbering nearly 15,000 visitors each year. Antarctic

wilderness is vast, its flora and fauna not diverse, but plentiful and

unique. The questions are now whether (1) tourism and wilderness

are compatible, (2) tourism can support and conserve the Antarctic

wilderness, and (3) Antarctic wilderness can support current or

increased tourism. This paper is an attempt to reveal and combine

some of the known information, but also acts as a call for further

empirical research, including that proposed by the authors.

Antarctica: Tourism______________

We cannot build a barrier around the Antarctic and keep

tourists or the science community out. The Antarctic Treaty

grants us all freedom of access to Antarctica. With that

freedom comes a responsibility which we all share (Landau

2000: 15).

Travel and tourism is the world’s largest industry, transporting 528 million people and generating $322 billion in

receipts in 1994 alone (WTTC, WTO, EC 1995). By 2005,

estimates are that tourism will have a gross output of $7.2

trillion, create 305 million jobs, and account for 11.4 percent

of the world's Gross Domestic Product (WTTC, WTO, EC

1995). Global tourism is growing 23 percent faster than the

world economy, and by the year 2010, 937 million tourists

are expected to travel each year (Shackley 1996).

Tourism in Antarctica has traditionally been defined to

include:

• Commercial sea-borne operations, accessing coastal sites.

• Private yacht visits.

Antarctica: Tourism, Wilderness,

and “Ambassadorship”

Patrick T. Maher

Gary Steel

Alison McIntosh

• Continental overflights.

• Flights to King George Island, Patriot Hills, or the

South Pole for land-based operations.

• Special interest tourism (adventure, scientific,

ecotourism, private expeditions).

• Visits by media, government dignitaries, and other

politicians.

• Base personnel on their free time (Benson 2000).

However, argument over such an inclusive definition can

and does occur in previous research (Bauer 2001; Benson

2000; Enzenbacher 1992; Hall 1992; WTO 1999).

Antarctic tourism is not a recent phenomenon: 130,000

tourists have visited since 1965, but it is small in scale

compared to global tourism. While often portrayed as a new

pressure on the southern polar region, it is quite possible

that tourism activity has simply been overlooked until the

huge growth of the past two decades. Lars-Eric Lindblad

began large-scale, ship-borne tourism in 1966, but tourists

had made landings on Sub-Antarctic Islands as early as

1882, and by 1933 most large Sub-Antarctic Islands surrounding the continent had been visited (Headland 1994).

In the 1990/1991 season, 4,842 tourists visited Antarctica.

This total of Antarctic visitors was less than two-thirds of all

the visitors to Maria Island, the least visited tourist destination in Tasmania, Australia’s smallest State (Herr 1996). In

the 1999/2000 season, 14,762 tourists traveled to the ice

(IAATO 2001). This figure includes all land-based tourists,

small ships, yachts, and even large cruise vessels that do not

land passengers. Looking into the future, a total of 26,000

tourists are expected for 2005/2006.

Visitors to Antarctica today are from a wide variety of

nations, but are still typically first-world citizens. In 2000/

2001, 47 percent were from the United States, 13 percent

from Germany, 10 percent from the United Kingdom, 8

percent from Australia, 4 percent from Canada, 3 percent

from Japan, 2 percent from the Netherlands, and the remaining 13 percent from other countries or nationality

unknown (IAATO 2001). Typically, these tourists are tertiary educated, well traveled, have high disposable incomes,

and are looking for a unique nature-based experience

(Kriwoken and Rootes 2000). Geographically, visits to the

continent are highly concentrated, with less than 0.5 percent

of the continental area visited; this is an area measuring

only 56,000 km2 (21,622 miles2

), which is roughly the size of

Sri Lanka (Cessford 1997). Overall, the sites are widely

dispersed around the continent, but the Antarctic Peninsula

takes 90 percent of the tourist activity (Cessford 1997). A

quick comparison underscores the bias towards peninsula

visits. The “most visited site” in the peninsula region is Port

Lockroy, which receives upward of 7,500 visits per year,
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 205

Antarctica: Tourism, Wilderness, and “Ambassadorship” Maher, Steel, and McIntosh

while the most visited site in the Ross Sea region is Terra

Nova Bay, which is currently seen by approximately 800

tourists per year (IAATO 2001).

Governance of Antarctica falls under the Antarctic Treaty

System (ATS). Regulation of tourism has fallen to the ATS

because the relatively minor levels of tourism activity and

numbers in Antarctica make it uninteresting to large tourism organizations and regulatory bodies; in turn, the ATS

simply sees tourists as “other visitors” (Herr 1996). In 1961,

the ATS was a group of 12 signatory nations, but today

consists of 43 nations representing two-thirds of the world’s

population. Although the ATS has treated tourism in Antarctica as a minor inconvenience, if Antarctica is now in the

“tourism period,” as White (1994) has speculated, the ATS

may have no choice but to face tourism issues head-on. This

creates an interesting dilemma: Should tourist activity be

managed, exploited, or completely shut out?

One of the original signatories, New Zealand, is a staunch

supporter of a pristine and conserved Antarctica (Dingwall

1992), although it allows tourist cruises to depart from its

ports. Another original signatory, Chile, has pushed hard

to exploit the destination for its economic means (Pinochet

de la Barra 1992). For political compromise and international relations, there is an increasing need for agreement

on tourism issues. As Mickleburgh (1988) states, “If we

cannot succeed in Antarctica we have little chance of

succeeding elsewhere,” and, as suggested by Landau (2000)

above, responsibility regarding access to Antarctica must

be shared.

Antarctic tourism can be meaningfully divided into the

categories of ship-borne, land-based, and airborne tourism

(Hall and Johnston 1995). These will be discussed immediately below.

Ship-Borne Tourism

In 1970, Lars-Eric Lindblad built the Lindblad Explorer,

the first polar vessel constructed specifically for tourist

purposes (Benson 2000). Having gone through various name

and ownership changes, the M/S Explorer still remains a

leader in Antarctic tourism (Headland 1994). Two other

important vessels in Antarctic tourism history are the Bahia

Paraiso and the Kapitan Khlebnikov. The Bahia Paraiso

was an Argentine naval resupply vessel that additionally

carried tourists between Ushuaia and King George Island in

the South Shetland Islands chain, and the Kapitan

Khlebnikov was the first vessel to circumnavigate Antarctica after 2 months at sea (Splettstoesser and others 1997).

On January 28, 1989, the Bahia Paraiso became grounded

in Arthur Harbor near the U.S. Palmer Station, was then

abandoned, and eventually sunk (Headland 1994). The

logistics of rescue and tourist management during this

incident led to a closer examination of Antarctic tourism

and, in turn, likely spurred the formation of IAATO in 1991

(Splettstoesser 1999).

The Kapitan Khlebnikov, affectionately referred to as the

“KK,” continues to carry passengers to the ice to this day. The

KK is an ex-Russian research vessel, and some growth of

tourism in Antarctica in the early 1990s can be attributed to

the commercial availability of such Russian ice-strengthened research vessels and icebreakers after their conversion

to tourism use (Cessford 1997). Given the interest shown by

tourists on these cruise vessels, it is likely that circumnavigation of the continent or at least partial circumnavigation

will increase in popularity. Such cruises allow visitors to see

both the historic sites of the Ross Sea Region and the wildlife

of the Antarctic Peninsula (Mason and Legg 1999).

With closer proximity and less time crossing the Southern Ocean, ship-borne tours to the Antarctic Peninsula are

much cheaper and friendlier, in terms of comfort, than

those from New Zealand or Australia to the Ross Sea

Region (Hall and Wouters 1995). The ease of transport,

distance, and a milder marine climate have led scientists to

refer to the peninsula as the “Banana Belt” (Campbell

1993), and with the buildup of tourism, the peninsula has

also been dubbed the “Antarctic Riviera” (Hart 1988). From

Ushuaia, the Antarctic Peninsula can be reached in as little

as 48 hours, whereas from New Zealand and Australia to

the Ross Sea Region, the voyage may take as long as 10 days

(Suter 1991).

Also possible in the peninsular region are private yacht

tours, with 237 tourists electing to take up this option in the

1999/2000 season (IAATO 2001). Yacht tours create a difficult situation for IAATO and the ATS because their numbers are increasing and the activity of yachts is much more

difficult to regulate and monitor (Splettstoesser 1999). Yacht

tours will remain popular in Antarctica because of price and

flexible schedules, but to many ATS signatories such tours

are much more of an environmental threat than any other

type of tourism (Splettstoesser 1999).

Land-Based Tourism

The building of a 1,300-m (4,265-ft) hard runway at the

Chilean Tiente Rodolfo Marsh Station, on King George

Island in 1979/1980, signaled the ability for land-based and

airborne tourism to be able to operate in the Antarctic

(Benson 2000). On January 8, 1982, a group of 40 tourists

flew to Marsh Station to stay prior to boarding a cruise

(IAATO 2001; Swithinbank 1992). From 1982 to 1992, Chile

operated the “Hotel Estrella Polar,” a converted 80-bed,

military barracks at Marsh Station, which served as a rest

spot for tourists between cruise ships and tourists’ flights to

King George Island (Headland 1994). Both the Chilean

military and commercial operators offered flights in to the

“hotel,” and from there excursions to nearby attractions

were conducted. Following the cessation of Chile’s polar

hotel operations, Argentina began flying tourists to its base

on Seymour Island, but today all such accommodations have

reverted back to official use. The claim of sovereignty to the

Antarctic Peninsula by Chile and Argentina have often led

to bolstered tourism or population efforts by these two

nations (Hall and Johnston 1995).

In 1989, the Australian House of Representatives Standing Committee on Environment, Recreation and the Arts

(HRSCERA) heard a unique land-based tourism proposal.

“Project Oasis” was submitted by Helmut Rohde and Partners and was a detailed plan to operate a facility near Davis

Station in the Vestfold Hills (HRSCERA 1989). The project

was to contain an airport, visitor education and research

centers, accommodation, hospital, search and rescue capabilities, and ATS administration facilities (HRSCERA 1989).

Estimates indicated that up to 16,000 people per year could

use the facilities, with 2 flights per week to and from
206 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Maher, Steel, and McIntosh Antarctica: Tourism, Wilderness, and “Ambassadorship”

Australia. The maximum number of people projected to be

onsite at any time would be 588 (344 tourists, 70 researchers, and 174 staff) (HRSCERA 1989). “Project Oasis” never

proceeded past the proposal stage, but it gave an interesting,

and to some, alarming insight into the possibilities and

implications of future land-based tourism in Antarctica.

Today, land-based tourism in Antarctica centers around

one particular company, Adventure Network International

(ANI). ANI operates a tented summer camp at Patriot Hills

in the Ellsworth Mountains, which can accommodate 50

people and takes advantage of a natural, blue ice runway to

land large Hercules aircraft (Benson 2000). From Patriot

Hills, ANI operates a service, via Twin Otter and Cessna, to

Vinson Massif, the South Pole, and numerous glaciers and

Emperor Penguin colonies (Benson 2000; Kriwoken and

Rootes 2000). Polar Logistics, the logistical arm of ANI, also

operates flights from Cape Town, South Africa, to a blue ice

runway at Holtfjella (Blue Ice I) located 200 km (124 miles)

inland of the Russian Novolazarevskaya base in Dronning

(Queen) Maud Land (Benson 2000; Kriwoken and Rootes

2000). In 1997/1998, ANI carried 131 passengers to Antarctica with eight Hercules flights being made between Punta

Arenas and Patriot Hills (Swithinbank 1998). Two years

later, 1999/2000, ANI only carried 139 of the total 14,762

tourists to Antarctica, and estimates for the 2000/2001 rises

to just 200 tourists (IAATO 2001).

Airborne Tourism

Ship-borne and land-based tourism may include elements

of airborne tourism. Air travel from ships is limited to those

vessels equipped with helicopters such as the KK, with these

helicopters being used to increase the range of sites available for tourism (Cessford 1997). ANI’s airborne tourism is

primarily a means of transporting visitors and goods rather

than offering sightseeing as found on overflights (Benson

2000).

This category of tourist travel currently consists primarily of continental overflights from Australia, and in the

past from New Zealand and Chile. Overflights began in

1956 with LAN Chile flying over the South Shetland Islands (Stonehouse and Crosbie 1995). In 1957, a rare

landing was made by a commercial flight at McMurdo

Station. No regular flights were made over Antarctica until

February 1977, when both Qantas and Air New Zealand

began operations (Kriwoken and Rootes 2000; Swithinbank

1992). Both companies flew extensively through 1979, with

a total of 16 flights in 1977/1978, 17 in 1978/1979, and 7 in

1979/1980, for a total of 11,145 passengers and 43 flights

(Reich 1980). The journey involved in these overflights was

11 hours in duration from New Zealand or Australia; the

actual overflight of the continent lasted a total of 90

minutes (Reich 1980). Overflights ceased dramatically on

November 28, 1979, when Air New Zealand DC-10 flight

TE901 crashed into Mt. Erebus on Ross Island, killing all

257 passengers and crew aboard (MacFarlane 1991).

Resuming in 1994/1995, overflights are now being organized by Croydon Travel in Victoria, Australia, and departing

aboard Qantas Boeing 747s from Melbourne, Sydney, or

Adelaide. Such flights fly for 11 to 12 hours at a minimum

altitude of 3,050 m (10,000 ft) above sea level, or 610 m (2,000

ft) above the highest ground within 185 km (115 miles) of the

aircraft’s position (AAD 1997; Benson 2000). As well, aircraft

must run their engines at one-third full power in order to

reduce noise and pollution (AAD 1997). In the first five

seasons since resuming operations, it has been estimated that

over 13,000 passengers have taken part. From 1996 to1998,

over 10,000 passengers flew over the continent from Australia

(IAATO 2001). Beginning in 1998/1999, the Chilean airline,

Avant, offered overflights of the peninsula region, and carried

approximately 1,000 passengers in its maiden season.

Antarctica: Wilderness ___________

Antarctica, as a wilderness area, covers 50 million km2

(19.3 million miles2), including the surrounding Southern

Ocean (Kriwoken and Keage 1989). The continent alone is 14

million km2 (5.4 million miles2

), which is roughly the size of

the United States and Mexico combined (Cessford 1997). Of

the entire continent, 98 percent is covered with ice that is an

average of 2 km (1.2 miles) thick (Rubin 1996). With

Antarctica’s ice sheet holding 90 percent of the world’s fresh

water supply, not only is it majestic in size and beauty, but

also extremely important with respect to the global environment (Kriwoken and Rootes 2000). Antarctica has a harsh

climate, exemplified by the fact that the minimum temperature ever recorded (–89.6 ∞C, or –129.28 ∞F) occurred at

Russia’s Vostok Station (Rubin 1996). In addition to the

harsh physical climate, Antarctica is notable for its unusual

ecology. Consider these facts:

• From diatom (a one-celled organism), to the largest of all

animals (the Blue Whale), there is only one step in the

food chain.

• If one leaf of one Amazonian Palm was counted for

mosses, fungi, lichens, mites, and insects, there would

be more species on it than are found on the entire

Antarctic Continent (Campbell 1993).

What the Antarctic ecosystem lacks in terms of diversity,

it makes up for in numbers. Chester (1993), quoting the

Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR), states

there are the following populations in Antarctica:

• 1 million pairs of breeding king penguins

• 2.5 million pairs of Adelie penguins

• 7.5 million pairs of chinstrap penguins

• 3.7 million pairs of rockhopper penguins (mainly in the

Sub-Antarctic)

• 315,000 pairs of gentoo penguins

• 12 million pairs of macaroni penguins

• 200,000 pairs of emperor penguins

• Between 250,000 and 800,00 Weddell seals

• 200,000 Ross Seals

• 30 to 70 million crabeater seals

• 400,000 leopard seals

• 600,000 southern elephant seals

• 2 million Antarctic fur seals

These numbers do not even consider the numerous populations of whales, albatross, petrels, krill, or even mosses

and grasses found in the Antarctic. In addition, Antarctica

is a weather factory of winds and ocean currents, which

through many series of events may have driven speciation

even in the distant tropics (Campbell 1993).
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 207

Antarctica: Tourism, Wilderness, and “Ambassadorship” Maher, Steel, and McIntosh

Politically and managerially, wilderness in Antarctica is

unique among other continents. Antarctica is a neutral

territory with no military presence other than that used to

support scientific research (Mason and Legg 1999). Although claims of national sovereignty have been made,

these have been held in abeyance for several decades, and

Antarctica is currently under the international regime of

the ATS. The ATS governs Antarctica above all national

claims, laws, and conflicts, creating a unique wilderness

management situation. As described by Davis (1992: 39),

the Antarctic Treaty is today “one of the most successful

international regimes of our time.” In terms of management for the Antarctic wilderness, there are several specific international agreements, aside from the ATS, which

cover additional avenues of concern for Antarctica.

The ATS was established by the United Nations, following

the International Geophysical Year (IGY 1957–1958). Set

up to allow for free scientific discovery, the ATS now indirectly encompasses much more, including tourism legislation and environmental protection. The Antarctic Treaty

System provides legal status to all land and resources of the

entire Antarctic continent (Hall and Johnston 1995). As a

management regime, the ATS allows Antarctica to be recognized as a shared resource for all humankind to promote

peaceful and scientific purposes (Rubin 1996).

In 1964, the ATS adopted the first major Antarctic conservation regime, the Agreed Measures for Conservation of

Antarctic Flora and Fauna. Under this regime, two types of

special conservation areas were considered: Specially Protected Areas (SPAs) and Sites of Special Scientific Interest

(SSSIs). Specially Protected Areas preserve both unique and

representative examples of the natural ecological systems of

areas, which are of outstanding scientific interest. Sites of

Special Scientific Interest protect any kind of scientific

investigation or set aside undisturbed reference areas for

the needs of a particular science. These sites can only be

designated where there is a demonstrable risk of harmful

interference. These designations are relatively small in size

and number, with little management planning and effective

implementation (Lucas 1995). Thus, successive additional

designations and governance of Antarctic wilderness has

been and is necessary.

The Protocol on Environmental Protection (Madrid Protocol) is an agreement by ATS nations that deals with the

specifics of environmental management, and promotes Antarctica as a scientific vessel for global understanding. The

Protocol sets regulations regarding activities, duration, impact, protection, and adverse effects and change for a number of areas. Essentially, it enhances environmental standards set out in the ATS. Originally drawn up in 1991, the

agreement was not ratified by all Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties, until Russia signed in 1997 and Japan in 1998.

Annex V of the Madrid Protocol sets out the types of values

to be considered when deciding whether an area warrants

special protection. It also describes the process for preparing

and submitting a draft management plan through the Committee for Environment Protection (CEP) to the Antarctic

Treaty Consultative Meetings. Annex V is expected to come

into force by 2002, and thus areas in Antarctica will fall

under a new system of protected areas, designated ASPA

and ASMA.

Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) are intended

to protect:

• Areas to be kept free of human impact for comparative

purposes

• Representative examples of major ecosystems

• Places with important or unusual animal or plant

communities

• Type localities or only known habitats of species

• Places of value for scientific research

• Places with outstanding landform attributes

• Areas of outstanding aesthetic and wilderness value

• Places of historic value

Specially Protected Areas and Sites of Special Scientific

Interest will be combined as Antarctic Specially Protected

Areas (ASPAs).

Antarctic Specially Managed Areas (ASMAs) provide a

framework for managing activities so as to improve coordination of different activities and minimize environmental

impacts. They may include areas where activities pose

risks of mutual interference or cumulative environmental

impacts. They may also include places of historical significance. Antarctic Specially Managed Area status is available under Annex V to assist in the coordination of activities and the minimization of environmental impacts for

areas of greater activity, or areas where more than one

operator is active.

Before the Protocol, international concern about fishing

rights and catch sizes led to the 1980 Convention for the

Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources

(CCAMLR), while possible mineral exploitation led to the

1988 Convention to Regulate Antarctic Mineral Resource

Activities (CRAMRA) (Benson 2000). The idea of a Worldpark

became a significant Antarctic conservation issue between

1981 and 1984 at successive IUCN meetings with Nongovernmental Organization (NGO) support (Lucas 1995). The

Worldpark designation would have provided overriding protection of Antarctica, although its failure likely sparked

some of the debate that led to the Madrid Protocol.

Many nations who have signatory status in the ATS also

have specific domestic laws to regulate their citizen’s activities in Antarctica. Regulations in the United States, for

example, include aspects of environmental protection, but

focuse more on issues such as theft, land purchase, and

general conservation regulation.

Research in Antarctica has regulatory bodies such as

SCAR and the Council of Managers of National Antarctic

Programs (COMNAP), while the tourism industry is selfregulated, mainly through the auspices of IAATO. These

regulatory bodies generally cooperate to issue guidelines,

such as those for tourist behavior jointly agreed upon by

IAATO and the ATS, as well as guidelines for the implementation of a framework for Antarctic Protected Areas

(COMNAP and the ATS). While there is cooperation, there

is also occasional conflict that leads to difficulties in enforcement. These conflicts emphasize the impression that

international agreements or regulations regarding Antarctica lack “teeth.”
208 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Maher, Steel, and McIntosh Antarctica: Tourism, Wilderness, and “Ambassadorship”

Antarctica: “Ambassadorship” ____

The mighty sea and monstrous icebergs are playing their

giant’s games under the grey and lowering sky, caressing or

fighting, and in the midst of these marvelous manifestations

of nature, which are not made for man, we feel that we are

merely tolerated, although a kind of intimacy may be created

between us and our magnificent hosts (Charcot 1978: 289).

Tourists enjoy an Antarctic experience with views and

awe much like Charcot’s, but what values do they then place

on the continent? Is a bond formed between the tourist and

the continent similar to the tolerance and intimacy Charcot

expresses? With no scientific results from tourist visits,

what possible benefits do they have for the ice? Unfortunately, very little rigorous research has been aimed at

answering these questions. Tourism may help to preserve

the character of Antarctic wilderness (Suter 1991), but

tourists may also simply leave their mark on the environment and never think of it again (Campbell 1993).

“Ambassadorship” is a difficult term to define. It can quite

easily be synonymous with advocacy, stewardship, and the

like. Quite often, and in other geographic settings, it is used

interchangeably with these terms, but in the Antarctic

context, “ambassadorship” appears to be the term of choice.

As stated by the Honorable Mark Burton (2000: 6), “ambassadorship” is the process of advocating the “preservation of

the continent [by] those who have been to the ‘ICE’ and so

have a first hand experience of the values [being sought] to

protect.”

With no empirical research on the specific definition and

actions associated with “ambassadorship,” it is necessary to

try to synthesize other theories and ideologies from a number of disciplines. “Ambassadorship” appears in the literature and studies of many Antarctic writers and tour operators (Heritage Expeditions 1997; Kershaw 1998; Suter 1991;

Thomas 1994). Tourist operations draw a connection between visiting the continent and subsequent “ambassadorship.” Heritage Expeditions (1997: 7), for example, suggests

that tourism creates

“ambassadors” by raising awareness...through sharing

with them the unique natural history of Antarctica and the

Sub-Antarctic, allowing Expedition members to visit historic

sites and discussing with them the conservation issues confronting the Antarctic Continent.

Yet this may or may not be the case. Research simply has not

been conducted that would support or disconfirm this view.

To date, research on “ambassadorship” in Antarctica focuses on IAATO and what the tour operators’ association is

doing to conserve and protect the Antarctic wilderness

(Splettstoesser 2000). IAATO works hard to create conservation-focused guidelines and to educate the tourist public.

Individual tourists and their “ambassadorship” are only

briefly examined by Marsh (1991, 2000) and Bauer (2001).

There is little doubt that people (operators, national programs, tourists) want to keep Antarctica pristine, but combining the commercial nature of tourism and the wilderness

values being sought to protect is difficult. With little to no

research findings available, the debate over tourism and its

justification and place in Antarctica goes around in circles.

Science accuses tourism of disturbing the wilderness and

vice versa, everything is focused on the negative impacts,

but what of the positive, the benefits and theoretically the

“ambassadorship”?

In conservation, benefits, and sociological literature,

research has been done on similar or synonymous ideas,

but are the results adequate to explain “ambassadorship”?

Worldwide and polar case studies indicate that a conservation benefit may accrue to parks or protected areas via

tourism (Boo 1990; Marsh 2000; WTO 1999). Boo (1990)

explains that tourists become emotionally attached to an

area and will thus contribute funds to protect it or improve

its conservation status. Cessford (1995) generated research

findings that suggest that among tourists visiting the

remote islands of Little Barrier and Tiritiri Matangi, there

is conservation benefit. Cessford (1995) indicates that

insight into a particular ideal or having a particular experience does, in fact, aid in learning about conservation,

change visitor opinion, and create a commitment to conservation. Marsh (1991) has shown initial research findings in

this area regarding Antarctic tourists, but his sample was

relatively small and mainly consisted of a single nationality. In addition to Cessford’s (1995) study, the work of

Cessford and Dingwall (1996) suggests that satisfaction

and positive experience create a personal value shift. Boo

(1990) concludes that for conservation management to

succeed, tourism must be a tool to educate, thus creating

real benefits for a geographical location. Findings from

general benefits research (Anderson and others 2000; Bruns

and others 1994; Driver and Bruns 1999; Kelly and Brown

1981; Manning 1999) support the above studies.

In popular literature (Rowe 1990; Searle 2000), the idea

that wilderness holds value for people, and that peoples’

values are affected by experiencing wilderness, is common.

Research studies into the connection between outdoor recreation and environmental attitudes has been done (Dunlap

and Heffernan 1975; Theodori and others 1998; Van Liere

and Noe 1981), but with little concrete results transferable

to an Antarctic context.

Conclusions____________________

The authors of this paper propose research aimed at

understanding “ambassadorship” as a cycle, inclusive of

tourist’s anticipation, onsite experience and behavior, and

benefits realized through recollection. Such research would

relate to the tourist’s travel process and answer the following vital research questions:

• What are the Antarctic tourist’s expectations prior to

visiting Antarctica?

• What is the tourist’s pre-existing world view regarding

the environment and conservation?

• What is the tourist’s experience while in Antarctica?

• How does the tourist behave in Antarctica?

• What is the tourist’s world view following a visit to

Antarctica?

• What are the perceived benefits the tourist has following their visit to Antarctica?

• Do these perceived benefits extend beyond the individual (in other words, conservation benefits)?

• Are the perceived benefits put into action?
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 209

Antarctica: Tourism, Wilderness, and “Ambassadorship” Maher, Steel, and McIntosh

References _____________________

Anderson, D. H.; Nickerson, R.; Stein, T. V.; Lee, M. E. 2000.

Planning to provide community and visitor benefits from public

lands. In: Gartner, W. C.; Lime D. W. eds. Trends in outdoor

recreation, leisure and tourism. New York: CABI Publishing.

480 p.

Australian Antarctic Division (AAD). 1997. Australia’s Antarctic

program beyond 2000: a framework for the future. Hobart:

Commonwealth of Australia. 62 p.

Bauer, T. G. 2001. Tourism in the Antarctic: opportunities, constraints and future prospects. New York: The Haworth Hospitality Press. 275 p.

Benson, J. 2000. Tourism in Antarctica: a unique undertaking in

development and international environmental management.

Pacific Tourism Review. 4(1): 7–18.

Boo, E. 1990. Ecotourism: the potentials and pitfalls. Volume 1.

Washington, DC: World Wildlife Fund (WWF). 85 p.

Bruns, D.; Driver, B. L.; Lee, M. E.; Anderson, D.; Brown, P. J. 1994.

Pilot test for implementing benefits-based management. Paper

presented at: The fifth international symposium on society and

resource management; 1994 June 8; Fort Collins, CO: Colorado

State University. 32 p.

Burton, M. 2000. Minister of tourism—official opening address. In:

Antarctica New Zealand, eds. Proceedings of the Antarctic tourism workshop. Christchurch, NZ: Antarctica New Zealand: 6–7.

Campbell, D. G. 1993. The crystal desert: summers in Antarctica.

London: Minerva. 308 p.

Cessford, G. R. 1995. Conservation benefits of public visits to

protected islands. Science and Research Series #95. Wellington,

NZ: Department of Conservation. 62 p.

Cessford, G. R. 1997. Antarctic tourism: a frontier for wilderness

management. International Journal of Wilderness. 3(3): 7–11.

Cessford, G. R.; Dingwall, P. R. 1996. Tourist visitors and their

experiences at New Zealand Sub-Antarctic islands. Science and

Research Series # 96. Wellington, NZ: Department of Conservation. 68 p.

Charcot, J. B. A. E. 1978. (Reprint of 1911 translation) Voyage of the

Pourquoi-pas? London: Hurst. 315 p.

Chester, S. R. 1993. Antarctic birds and seals. San Mateo, CA:

Wandering Albatross. 80 p.

Davis, B. W. 1992. Antarctica as a global protected area: perceptions

and reality. Australian Geographer. 23(1): 39–43.

Dingwall, P. R. 1992. Establishing a conservation basis for management of Antarctic tourism. In: Kempf, C.; Girard, L., eds. Tourism

in polar areas: proceedings of the first international symposium;

1992 April 21–23. Colmar, France: IUCN and Ministry of Tourism France.

Driver, B. L.; Bruns, D. H. 1999. Concepts and uses of the benefits

approach to leisure. In: Jackson, E. L.; Burton, T. L., eds. Leisure

studies: prospects for the 21st century. State College, PA: Venture

Publishing: 349–369.

Dunlap, R. E.; Heffernan, R. B. 1975. Outdoor recreation and environmental concern: an empirical examination. Rural Sociology.

40(1): 18–30.

Enzenbacher, D. 1992. Tourism in Antarctica: an overview. In:

Kempf, C.; Girard, L., eds. Tourism in polar areas: proceedings of

the first international symposium; 1992 April 21–23. Colmar,

France: IUCN and Ministry of Tourism France.

Hall, C. M. 1992. Tourism in Antarctica: activities, impacts and

management. Journal of Travel Research. 30(4): 2–9.

Hall, C. M.; Johnston, M. E., eds. 1995. Polar tourism: tourism in

the Arctic and Antarctic regions. Chichester, UK: John Wiley &

Sons. 346 p.

Hall, C. M.; Wouters, M. 1995. Issues in Antarctic tourism. In: Hall,

C. M.; Johnston, M. E. Polar tourism: tourism in the Arctic and

Antarctic regions. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

Hart, P. D. 1988. The growth of Antarctic tourism. Oceanus. 31(2):

93–100.

Headland, R. K. 1994. Historical development of Antarctic tourism.

Annals of Tourism Research. 21(2): 269–180.

Heritage Expeditions Ltd. 1997. Initial environmental evaluation

for the Antarctic cruise program 1997/1998 of polar research

vessel Akademik Shokalskiy. Christchurch, NZ: Heritage Expeditions Ltd. 29 p.

Herr, R. A. 1996. The regulation of Antarctic tourism: a study in

regime effectiveness. In: Stokke, O. S.; Vidas, D., eds. Governing

the Antarctic: the effectiveness and legitimacy of the Antarctic

Treaty System. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press:

203–223.

House of Representatives Standing Committee on Environment,

Recreation and the Arts (HRSCERA). 1989. Tourism in Antarctica. Canberra, Australia: Australian Government Publishing.

55 p.

International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators (IAATO).

2001. [Online]. Available: URL: www.iaato.org

Kelly, J. R.; Brown, P. J. 1981. Social benefits of outdoor recreation.

Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 83 p.

Kershaw, A. 1998. Antarctica and tourism in 2010. In: Tetley, G., ed.

Antarctica 2010: a notebook. Christchurch, NZ: Antarctica New

Zealand: 79–82.

Kriwoken, L. K.; Keage, P. L. 1989. Introduction: the Antarctic

treaty system. In: Handmer, J., ed. Antarctica: policies and policy

development. Canberra, Australia: Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, ANU: 1–6.

Kriwoken, L. K.; Rootes, D. 2000. Tourism on ice: environmental

impact assessment of Antarctic tourism. Impact Assessment and

Project Appraisal. 18(2): 138–150.

Landau, D. 2000. Tourism scenarios. In: Antarctica New Zealand.,

eds. Proceedings of the Antarctic tourism workshop. Christchurch,

NZ: Antarctica New Zealand. 15–18.

Lucas, P. H. C. 1995. National parks and protected areas in polar

regions. In: Martin, V. G.; Tyler, N., eds. Arctic wilderness: the 5th

World Wilderness Congress. Golden, CO: North American Press:

161–169.

MacFarlane, S. 1991. The Erebus papers. Wellington, NZ: Avon

Press Ltd. 736 p.

Manning, R. E. 1999. Studies in outdoor recreation. Corvallis:

Oregon State University Press. 384 p.

Marsh, J. 1991. The characteristics of a sample of tourists visiting

Antarctica. Santiago, Chile: Report for SERNATUR. 20 p.

Marsh, J. 2000. Tourism and national parks in polar regions. In:

Butler, R. W.; Boyd, S. W., eds. Tourism and national parks:

issues and implications. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

125–136.

Mason, P. A.; Legg, S. J. 1999. Antarctic tourism: activities, impacts,

management issues, and a proposed research agenda. Pacific

Tourism Review. 3: 71–84.

Mickleburgh, E. 1988. Beyond the frozen seas: visions of Antarctica.

London: Bodley Head. 256 p.

Pinochet de la Barra, O. 1992. Tourism in Antarctica: position of

Chile. In: Kempf, C.; Girard, L., eds. Tourism in polar areas:

proceedings of the first international symposium; 1992 April 21–

23. Colmar, France: IUCN and Ministry of Tourism France.

Reich, R. J. 1980. The development of Antarctic tourism. Polar

Record. 20: 203–214.

Rowe, J. S. 1990. Home place: essays on ecology. Edmonton: NeWest.

253 p.

Rubin, J. 1996. Antarctica: a lonely planet survival kit. Hawthorn,

Australia: Lonely Planet Publications. 362 p.

Searle, R. 2000. Phantom parks. Toronto: Key Porter Books. 288 p.

Shackley, M. 1996. Wildlife tourism. London: International Thomson

Business Press. 152 p.

Splettstoesser, J. 1999. Antarctica tourism: successful management of a vulnerable environment. In: Singh, T. J.; Singh, S. eds.

Tourism development in critical environments. New York: Cognizant Communication Corp. 137–148.

Splettstoesser, J. 2000. IAATO’s stewardship of the Antarctic environment: a history of tour operator’s concern for a vulnerable part

of the world. International Journal of Tourism Research. 2(1):

47–55.

Splettstoesser, J. F.; Headland, R. K.; Todd, F. 1997. The first

circumnavigation of Antarctica. Polar Record. 33(3): 244–245.

Stonehouse, B.; Crosbie, K. 1995. Tourist impacts and management

in the Antarctic Peninsula area. In: Hall, C. M.; Johnston, M. E.,

eds. Polar tourism: tourism in the Arctic and Antarctic regions.

Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons: 217–223.

Suter, K. 1991. Antarctica: private property or public heritage?

Leichhardt, Australia: Pluto Press Australia. 160 p.
210 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Maher, Steel, and McIntosh Antarctica: Tourism, Wilderness, and “Ambassadorship”

Swithinbank, C. 1992. Airborne tourism in the Antarctic. In:

Kempf, C.; Girard, L., eds. Tourism in polar areas: proceedings

of the first international symposium; 1992 April 21–23. Colmar,

France: IUCN and Ministry of Tourism France.

Swithinbank, C. 1998. Non-government aviation in Antarctica

1997/98. Polar Record. 34: 249.

Theodori, G. L.; Luloff, A. E.; Willits, F. K. 1998. The association of

outdoor recreation and environmental concern: re-examining the

Dunlap-Heffernan thesis. Rural Sociology. 63(1): 94–108.

Thomas, T. 1994. Ecotourism in Antarctica: the role of the naturalist guide in presenting places of natural interest. Journal of

Sustainable Tourism. 2(4): 204–209.

Van Liere, K. D.; Noe, F. P. 1981. Outdoor recreation and environmental attitudes: further examination of the Dunlap-Heffernan

thesis. Rural Sociology. 46(3): 505–513.

White, K. J. 1994. Tourism and the Antarctic economy. Annals of

Tourism Research. 21(2): 245–268.

World Tourism Organization (WTO). 1999. Tourism satellite account (TSA): a conceptual framework. Madrid, Spain: WTO. 52 p.

World Tourism Organization (WTO); United Nations Environment

Program (UNEP). 1992. Guidelines: development of national

parks and protected areas for tourism. Madrid, Spain: WTO.

World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC); World Tourism Organization (WTO); Earth Council (EC). 1995. Agenda 21 for the

travel and tourism industry: towards environmentally sustainable development. London: WTTC. 78 p.
211

7. The Role of Science, Education,

and Collaborative Planning in

Wilderness Protection and

Restoration

Congress venues ranged from

bushcamps to convention halls

(photo by Alan Watson).

USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2002 213

David N. Cole is Research Biologist, Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute, P.O. Box 8089, Missoula, MT 59807, U.S.A. E-mail:

dcole@fs.fed.us

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness

Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa.

Proc. RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Ecological research is needed to provide a foundation of

knowledge for appropriate management of protected areas. Basic

ecological research on the phenomena that exist in protected areas

is important, as is applied research that will contribute to protection

of these resources. Research on animals, plants, soil, ecological

processes and their interactions, as well as threats to these entities

are all needed. Using research on recreation ecology as an example,

this paper describes how a foundation of knowledge was built and

suggests important lessons that can be applied to development of

protected area research and educational programs. In particular, it

seems important (1) for researchers to be protected area researchers

first and disciplinary specialists second, (2) for research to be cumulative and long term, (3) for research to be conducted and integrated

across varied scales, and (4) to engage and integrate a broad range of

disciplinary specialties.

Protected areas are designated because they provide a

wide array of benefits to society, including the benefit of

preserving nature for its own sake. The goal of protected

area management should be to maximize these benefits.

This requires understanding the resources within protected

areas, increasing societal benefits that accrue from these

resources, and protecting these resources from threats.

Research, education, and management are all necessary.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss how ecological

research can best contribute to the education of protected

area managers and the improved management of protected

areas, drawing particularly from the perspective of experience gained in the United States. I will begin broadly,

describing the breadth of research that seems worthwhile,

offering remarks about where progress has been substantial

and where it has not. Then I will use examples from my

personal experience, conducting recreation ecology research,

to make more specific observations and recommendations

regarding development of the knowledge base for high quality protected area educational and management programs.

Basic Ecological Research in

Protected Areas _________________

Traditionally, most of the research conducted in protected

areas has involved basic studies of the biological phenomena

found in protected areas. In most of the National Parks in the

United States, for example, there have been studies of

individual animal species and of plant communities. At

Yellowstone National Park, individual scientists have spent

much of their career studying grizzly bear populations,

bison, and vegetation patterns. This type of research is

probably most common because it is most consistent with

the disciplinary organization and orientation of academia.

Most students are trained within departments that emphasize basic rather than applied research and single rather

than multidisciplinary studies.

This research has contributed significantly to the education of protected area managers, the management of protected areas, and the benefits that accrue to society. It

should be encouraged and continued, as there is much more

that needs to be learned about ecological phenomena in

protected areas. Beyond being receptive to such research,

however, there may be little need for protected area management programs to promote such research. Scientists working within traditional biological disciplines will continue to

work in protected areas, when they are the best places to

study certain phenomena. However, there may be more need

to promote basic research that (1) is of a long-term nature,

(2) is interdisciplinary in scope, and (3) is designed to make

use of wilderness as a baseline or reference, for comparison

with more manipulated and disturbed landscapes. All of

these types of research are critical to realizing the values

and benefits of protected areas, but none are common.

Existing institutional structures and funding mechanisms

tend to present formidable barriers to research of this type.

Threats-Based Ecological Research

in Wilderness ___________________

Recently, substantial ecological research has focused on

threats to the integrity of ecosystems in protected areas,

direct and indirect effects of human activities both internal

and external to protected areas. This research is critical to

developing the knowledge base needed to truly protect lands

designated for protection. Research is needed to understand

a wide variety of threats to diverse protected area resources.

Ecological Research and Educational

Programs to Support Protected Area

Management: Lessons From the United

States Experience

David N. Cole
214 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Cole Ecological Research and Educational Programs to Support Protected Area Management...

Significant threats to wilderness lands in the United States,

for example, include recreation use, fire management, livestock grazing, introduction and invasion of alien species,

diversion and impoundment of water, emission of atmospheric pollutants, and management of adjacent lands (Cole

and Landres 1996).

Research conducted by specialists from a wide variety of

disciplines needs to be applied to the development of this

knowledge base. Moreover, as is the case with basic research, there is particular need to design long-term studies

that utilize interdisciplinary approaches. In the rest of this

paper, I will discuss how research related to one of these

threats—recreation use—has developed, particularly in the

United States. Based on this perspective, I will offer some

recommendations regarding how research can best contribute to the effective education of protected area managers.

Development of Knowledge in

Recreation Ecology______________

The field of recreation ecology is primarily concerned with

assessing the responses of ecological systems to recreational

use and disturbance, usually for the purpose of understanding how to manage recreation within protected areas. Although recreation ecology research can be traced back at

least to the 1920s (for example, Meinecke 1928), it was in the

1960s and 1970s that interest in recreation ecology intensified. Management agencies—such as the Forest Service and

National Park Service in the United States—recognized

that increasing recreation use threatened the integrity of

both their facilities, such as campgrounds, and the biophysical resources of the areas they were to protect. Increasingly,

they funded research projects that described recreation

impacts and suggested means of mitigating those impacts.

Initially, studies were short-term, descriptive case studies

that provided a wealth of site- specific insight for the funding

agency but that did little to develop general knowledge. In

the mid-1970s, the first syntheses of recreation ecology were

compiled (for example, Liddle 1975; Speight 1973; Wall and

Wright 1977). Not surprisingly, these syntheses were largely

confined to description of the impacts of different types of

recreation on different impact parameters. There was little

rigorous documentation of how impacts were changing over

time, and little understanding of how impacts relate to

factors that influence the magnitude of impacts. Consequently, little of this research was capable of developing

general principles and strategies to guide management.

This began to change in the late 1970s and 1980s with the

development of long-term, cumulative recreation ecology

research programs, first in the Forest Service and then in

the National Park Service. With these programs it was

possible to develop long-term studies to identify trends over

time, as well as to replicate studies in different places to

assess the generalizability of results. Multiple methodologies were applied, providing richer insights than those

provided by single methodologies. For example, in their

study of campsites at Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, Marion and Cole (1996) assessed changes over a

5-year period on long-established campsites, recently opened

campsites, and recently closed campsites, as well as on plots

subjected to experimental trampling.

By the late 1980s, general principles of recreation ecology

were emerging. In a synthesis paper, for example, I (Cole

1987) postulated that the magnitude of impact was largely

determined by amount of use, type of use, season of use, and

environmental conditions, and provided empirical examples

of the effects of each of these influential variables. I developed simplified models, in which it was possible to manipulate variables one at a time, to show the general influence of

these variables on amount of impact (Cole 1992). Subsequently, Kuss (1986), Leung and Marion (1996), and Liddle

(1991) have summarized information about how impact

varies with environmental conditions.

Equally significant has been work that relates empirical

research findings to general management strategies. The

factors that influence magnitude of impact can each be

modified by management so that impact is minimized. A

handbook that summarizes the likely effectiveness of alternative management strategies, based on empirical research

has been developed (Cole and others 1987). In their recent

synthesis of recreation ecology, Leung and Marion (2000)

organized much research around these management strategies. The content of low-impact (Leave No Trace) educational messages have also been based on the results of

empirical studies (Cole 1989). Experience with descriptive

studies of impacts has been used to develop monitoring

methods, most notably in the work of Marion (1991). Finally,

recreation ecology has provided a foundation for developing

indicators and standards for contemporary recreation planning frameworks, such as Limits of Acceptable Change

(Stankey and others 1985).

Once a discipline matures to the point where general

principles emerge and management applications of those

principles have been explored, education becomes much

easier and more effective, and transfer of information to

managers is facilitated. Starting in the late 1980s, now that

principles derived from recreation ecology research had

been postulated and interpreted within management contexts, more generally useful recreation ecology textbooks

were written (Hammitt and Cole 1987; Hendee and others

1990; Liddle 1997). The availability of textbooks and also

popular books on low impact education for the public (Hampton and Cole 1995) further increase the effectiveness of

education.

Important Findings of Recreation

Ecology _______________________

To illustrate the linkage between recreation ecology research and management of protected areas, six of the most

important general principles derived from recreation ecology are described below:

1. Many of the impacts of recreation are positive

feedback loops. For example, trampling eliminates vegetation cover, which in turn reduces inputs of organic

matter into the soil and alters the microorganisms that live

in the soil. Because soil organic matter and microorganisms are critical to the establishment and growth of vegetation, vegetation may be extremely slow to recolonize

damaged recreation sites, even in the absence of further

trampling. Managers must sever this positive feedback
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 215

Ecological Research and Educational Programs to Support Protected Area Management... Cole

loop by artificially amending soils with the organic matter

and microorganisms that vegetation needs to establish and

grow.

2. Impact is inevitable with repetitive use. Numerous studies have shown that even very low levels of repetitive use cause impact. Therefore, avoiding impact is not an

option unless all recreation use is curtailed. This means that

managers must decide on acceptable levels of impact and

then implement actions capable of keeping use to these

levels—the approach at the core of the Limits of Acceptable

Change and related planning frameworks.

3. Impact occurs rapidly, while recovery occurs

slowly. This principle underscores the importance of proactive management, since it is much easier to avoid impact

than to restore impacted sites. It also suggests that relatively pristine places should receive substantial management attention, in contrast to the common situation of

focusing most resources in heavily used and impacted places.

Finally, it indicates that rest-rotation of sites (periodically

closing damaged sites, to allow recovery, before reopening

them to use) is seldom likely to be effective.

4. In many situations, impact increases more as a

result of new places being disturbed than from the

deterioration of places that have been disturbed for a

long time. This principle also emphasizes the need to be

attentive to relatively pristine places and to focus attention

on the spatial distribution of use. It suggests that periodic reinventories of all impacted sites are often more important

than monitoring change on a sample of established sites.

5. Magnitude of impact is a function of frequency of

use, type and behavior of use, season of use, environmental conditions, and spatial distribution of use.

Therefore, the primary management tools involve manipulation of these factors.

6. The relationship between amount of use and

amount of impact is curvilinear (asymptotic). Where

use is light, even small differences in amount of use can have

profound effects on amount of impact. Conversely, where use

is heavy, even substantial differences in amount of use have

little effect on amount of impact. This principle has numerous management implications and is also fundamental to

many Leave No Trace educational messages. It suggests

that it is best to concentrate use and impact in popular places

and to disperse use and impact in relatively pristine places.

Recommendations Based on

Lessons Learned________________

Over the past several decades, advances in the educational and management utility of recreation ecology research have been made. The progress that has been made is

largely a result of (1) researchers framing their issues in

terms of protected area management rather than more

traditional issues of ecological research and (2) researchers

being given the opportunity to conduct sustained research

programs that are accumulative. Progress would have been

even greater if (1) research spanned a broader array of

scales and (2) more disciplinary specialists were involved.

Therefore, my recommendations for a protected area research program in support of education and management

revolve around the following four points:

1. Researchers should be protected area researchers first, with their allegiance to an academic discipline of secondary importance. What is critical is that

the questions being addressed through research are framed

within the context of protected area management rather

than those of an academic discipline. For example, many of

the biologists who first studied the relationship between

amount of use and amount of impact, found that magnitude

of impact was linearly related to the logarithm of amount of

use (for example, Dale and Weaver 1974; Hylgaard and

Liddle 1981). The primary goal of their research was to

describe the relationship between use and impact. Trained

to present their results in as succinct and elegant a manner

as possible, they showed that their data fit a log-linear

relationship—providing the most parsimonious description

of the relationship—and they were done.

In contrast, I first studied the relationship between amount

of use and amount of impact—not for its own sake, but to

understand the relative effectiveness of concentrating versus dispersing use (Cole 1982). In my work, I have also

consistently found that a log-linear relationship can be fitted

to data relating use to impact. However, by describing the

relationship as curvilinear or asymptotic, rather than loglinear, the management implications of the relationship are

much more apparent. Research leads more directly to the

development of principles and to management application.

A protected area researcher is also more likely to work in an

interdisciplinary fashion and to seek opportunities to work

collaboratively with management. Many protected area issues require integration of both social and ecological science.

In addition, research can often contribute most to management if there is an iterative relationship between the two.

Clearly, scientists within traditional academic disciplines can

contribute to the knowledge base needed to manage protected

areas. However, I think that progress would be greater if

resources are allocated first to scientists whose self-identity is

highly associated with protected areas.

2. Researchers should be given the opportunity to

do accumulative work. Often research funding sources

are such that scientists must jump around from one shortterm, site-specific, low-budget project to another. Along with

the tendency of many scientists to be opportunistic and to

enjoy dabbling in many different areas, much research does

not accumulate into a well-established body of knowledge

that can be generalized into principles or applied to significant management issues. The limitations of earlier research

cannot be overcome unless scientists have the opportunity to

refine their techniques in subsequent projects. Ideas generated by earlier work are frequently lost when funding for

additional work is not there. The projects undertaken tend

to not be very ambitious or innovative.

For example, the opportunity I have been afforded to

pursue a career in recreation ecology has allowed me to

conduct long-term studies and to identify long-term trends in

the conditions of protected areas. I have been able to work at

multiple spatial scales and to use multiple methodologies as

a means of triangulation. I have been able to replicate studies

in different environments to assess the generality of earlier

findings and to gain insight into how to adapt monitoring

methods to different situations. I have been able to study all

the various factors that influence amount of impact, including

amount of use, type of use, and environmental conditions. All
216 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Cole Ecological Research and Educational Programs to Support Protected Area Management...

of these opportunities increase the ability to move from

research results to overarching principles and management

application, making transfer of knowledge through education

to managers much easier.

3. Research should be conducted at multiple scales.

Most scientists have focused on mesoscale phenomena, those

that are readily observed. They have tended to study individual animals and species, populations of plants and animals, and communities. As a result, we have generally done

a good job of describing the impacts that occur at the human

scale. However, lack of research at other scales hampers our

ability to restore damaged sites or to gain perspective on the

extent to which recreation impacts impair the integrity of

large protected areas.

Relatively little work has been done at the microscale,

looking at soil biota, for example, or at soil-plant interactions. Many protected area managers have closed damaged

sites and are attempting to restore them. But the physical,

chemical, and biotic properties of soils on these sites have

been altered. Physical impacts—such as soil compaction—

can be temporarily alleviated through scarification, but soils

are prone to being compacted again in the absence of vegetation and desirable soil biota. Vegetation can be planted on

damaged sites, but plant growth can be poor and mortality

high if soils are compacted and lack desirable soil biota.

Solving these problems is hampered by inadequate research

at microscales.

Inadequate research at large spatial scales is equally

problematic. Our current inability to develop general principles regarding recreation impacts on wildlife may largely

result from this inadequacy. Hundreds of short-term, siteand species-specific studies of behavioral responses to recreational disturbance have been conducted. However, the lack

of research at population or community scales makes it

impossible to know how significant these impacts are. Similarly, the intense impacts on vegetation and soil caused by

recreation at the scale of the site may be insignificant when

viewed at larger scales.

4. Researchers, with tools from a wide array of

disciplines, need to contribute to protected area research. Resources to be protected include air, water, animals, vegetation, soil, and rock, not to mention cultural

resources and human experiences. These resources are

threatened by a wide array of influences, of which recreation

is just one. A much wider array of scientific expertise needs

to be devoted to these issues than is currently the case.

Within recreation, for example, the preponderance of researchers with botanical training means that our understanding of impacts on vegetation is much greater than our

understanding of impacts on soils, animals, or water.

Conclusions____________________

Effective management of protected areas is dependent

on managers obtaining adequate training from educational

institutions, with both education and management

grounded in a solid research program. Both basic and

applied research is needed. Protected area research in the

United States has made some advances over the past few

decades, but is still woefully inadequate for dealing with

the array of issues that confront protected area managers.

It has been most successful where (1) researchers are

protected area researchers first and disciplinary specialists second, (2) research has been accumulative and longterm, (3) research has been conducted and integrated

across varied scales, and (4) a broad range of disciplinary

specialties have been involved and integrated.

References _____________________

Cole, David N. 1982. Wilderness campsite impacts: effect of amount

of use. Res. Pap. INT-284. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range

Experiment Station. 34 p.

Cole, David N. 1987. Research on soil and vegetation in wilderness: a state-of-knowledge review. In: Lucas, Robert C., comp.

Proceedings—national wilderness research conference: issues,

state-of-knowledge, future directions; 1985 July 23–26; Fort

Collins, CO. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-220. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research

Station: 135–177.

Cole, David N. 1989. Low-impact recreational practices for wilderness and backcountry. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-265. Ogden, UT: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 131 p.

Cole, David N. 1992. Modeling wilderness campsites: factors that

influence amount of impact. Environmental Management. 16:

255–264.

Cole, David N.; Landres, Peter B. 1996. Threats to wilderness

ecosystems: impacts and research needs. Ecological Applications.

6: 168–184.

Cole, David N.; Petersen, Margaret E.; Lucas, Robert C. 1987.

Managing wilderness recreation use: common problems and

potential solutions. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-259. Ogden, UT: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 60 p.

Dale, D.; Weaver, T. 1974. Trampling effects on vegetation of the

trail corridors of north Rocky Mountain forests. Journal of Applied Ecology. 11: 767–772.

Hammitt, William E.; Cole, David N. 1987. Wildland recreation:

ecology and management. New York: John Wiley and Sons. 341 p.

Hampton, Bruce; Cole, David. 1995. Soft paths. 2d ed. Mechanicsburg,

PA: Stackpole Books. 222 p.

Hendee, John C.; Stankey, George H.; Lucas, Robert C. 1990.

Wilderness management. 2d ed. Golden, CO: North American

Press. 546 p.

Hylgaard, T.; Liddle, M. J. 1981. The effect of human trampling on

a sand dune ecosystem dominated by Empetrum nigrum. Journal

of Applied Ecology. 18: 559–569.

Kuss, Fred R. 1986. A review of major factors influencing plant

responses to recreation impacts. Environmental Management.

10: 637–650.

Leung, Yu-Fai; Marion, Jeffrey L. 1996. Trail degradation as influenced by environmental factors: a state-of-the-knowledge review.

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 51: 130–136.

Leung, Yu-Fai; Marion, Jeffrey L. 2000. Recreation impacts and

management in wilderness: a state-of-knowledge review. In:

Cole, David N.; McCool, Stephen F.; Borrie, William T.; O’Loughlin,

Jennifer, comps. Wilderness science in a time of change conference—Volume 5: wilderness ecosystems, threats, and management; 1999 May 23–27; Missoula, MT. Proceedings

RMRS-P-15-VOL-5. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 23–48.

Liddle, Michael J. 1975. A selective review of the ecological effects

of human trampling on natural ecosystems. Biological Conservation. 7: 17–36.

Liddle, Michael J. 1991. Recreation ecology: effects of trampling on

plants and corals. Trends in Ecology, Evolution and Systematics.

6: 13–17.

Liddle, Michael J. 1997. Recreation ecology: the ecological impact of

outdoor recreation and ecotourism. London: Chapman and Hall.

664 p.

Marion, Jeffrey L. 1991. Developing a natural resource inventory

and monitoring program for visitor impacts on recreation sites: a

procedural manual. USDI National Park Service Natural Resources Report NPS/NRVT/NRR-91/06. 59 p.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 217

Ecological Research and Educational Programs to Support Protected Area Management... Cole

Marion, Jeffrey L.; Cole, David N. 1996. Spatial and temporal

variation in soil and vegetation impacts on campsites. Ecological

Applications. 6: 520–530.

Meinecke, E. P. 1928. The effect of excessive tourist travel on

California redwood parks. Sacramento: California Department of

Natural Resources, Division of Parks. 20 p.

Speight, M. C. D. 1973. Outdoor recreation and its ecological effects:

a bibliography and review. Discussion Papers in Conservation,

Number 4. London: University College. 35 p.

Stankey, George H.; Cole, David N.; Lucas, Robert C.; Petersen,

Margaret E.; Frissell, Sidney S. 1985. The limits of acceptable

change (LAC) system for wilderness planning. Gen. Tech. Rep.

INT-176. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Intermountain Research Station. 37 p.

Wall, Geoffrey; Wright, Cynthia. 1977. The environmental impact

of outdoor recreation. Department of Geography Publication

Series, Number 11. Waterloo, ON: University of Waterloo. 69 p.
218 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Stephen F. McCool is Professor of Wildland Recreation Management,

School of Forestry, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812, U.S.A.

E-mail: smccool@forestry.umt.edu

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—The special places that comprise our National Parks,

wildernesses, and protected areas represent a profound symbolic

commitment of society to protect the natural world from the excesses of human activity. Gazetting of these special places is accompanied by a social expectation that the values contained within

them will be sustained by the administrative agency charged with

their stewardship. In the United States, we have learned much

about managing wilderness and other similar areas. This paper

summarizes (1) elements of protected areas that make dissemination and application of social science particularly difficult, (2) some

of the learning about this application, and (3) potential strategies for

initiating wilderness research in Southern Africa, based on the

United States experience.

Introduction ____________________

The special places that comprise our National Parks,

wildernesses, and protected areas represent a profound

symbolic commitment of society to protect the natural world

from the excesses of human activity. These places also

provide opportunities for people to engage in the critical

recreational, learning, spiritual and inspirational experiences required for healthy humans and their communities.

Gazetting of these special places is accompanied by a social

expectation that the values contained within them will be

sustained by the administrative agency charged with their

stewardship.

Moreover, we have learned that simply designating boundaries around these exceptional landscapes is, by itself, insufficient to sustain the superlative values contained within

them. Natural processes occurring outside of their boundaries often influence wildernesses and protected areas. The

human activity—recreation, management actions, and communities—located within them also may pose significant

threats to these values. The economic, administrative, and

political policies frequently developed elsewhere often impact these special places. Good stewardship compels that

these activities and influences be addressed through research, education, and management, so they do not threaten

the values for which the areas were originally established.

From Scholarship to Stewardship:

Opportunities and Challenges in Wilderness

Research, Education, and Management

Stephen F. McCool

Wilderness stewardship requires a vigilant public to provide funds and oversight, a management organization that

applies its technical expertise to safeguard important values

and benefits, a research program that develops both basic

and applied knowledge, and a tertiary education system

that disseminates such knowledge to both professional managers and members of the public. Ideally, these components

operate in an integrated, or at least compatible, fashion to

ensure that these special places receive the competent attention they deserve. The research needed to sustain the qualities of these special places encompasses both the biophysical

and social sciences. Stewardship is as much about the

management organization, the visitor, and threats to wilderness integrity as it is about the landscape and its biophysical structure, composition, and function, and thus

requires different types of knowledge.

The social sciences—economics, anthropology, political

science, sociology, geography, and psychology—have long

been involved in research and development in, about, and

for wilderness in the United States (U.S.). These scientific

traditions, in combination with research in the biophysical

sciences, have led to important advances in wilderness stewardship. These advances are both conceptual, such as new

insights into the symbolic significance of wilderness or

innovative ways of defining the benefits of natural environments, and practical, such as the design of planning systems

that integrate various disciplines and types of knowledge in

planning and management.

Beginning in the 1960s, many U.S. universities had developed 4-year programs in recreation resources management,

and some offered focused study on wilderness and National

Parks. In many cases, faculty in these programs often

engaged in research on wilderness issues, frequently funded

by grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts supplied

by Federal Government agencies. The mandate within the

U.S. Wilderness Act of 1964, to provide “outstanding opportunities for solitude and a primitive and unconfined” experience, stimulated a great deal of research and debate over

how to best manage recreational use of wilderness. While

many social scientists have broadened their research interests beyond solitude and recreation over the last decade, this

research experience, and its consequent impacts on higher

education, provide important lessons for other countries

that have wilderness and protected areas and are developing

research and education programs on this topic.

I was asked to reflect on that experience while preparing

this paper. As a social scientist who has participated in both

research and higher education dealing with wilderness for

35 years, I have had the opportunity to conduct a variety of
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 219

McCool From Scholarship to Stewardship: Opportunities and Challenges in Wilderness Research, Education, and Management

research and to provide educational opportunities for some

of today’s wilderness managers. First, I will describe some of

the particular elements of wilderness and protected areas

that make development, dissemination, and application of

knowledge especially challenging. These elements provide a

context within which managers manage and scientists research. Second, I will briefly describe some of the learning

that has occurred in the pursuit of excellence in wilderness

scholarship and stewardship. In the concluding section, I

tread out onto thin ice, suggesting several strategies that

newly initiated wilderness research programs may want to

consider to advance the effectiveness of their scientific effort

and its relationship with not only broader society, but with

higher education as well. These observations are necessarily

impressionistic and based solely on my reflections as a

wilderness scientist engaged in scholarship, education, and

stewardship.

Characteristics of Wilderness and

Protected Areas That Make

Development and Dissemination of

Knowledge Challenging __________

Wilderness research and education occur within a poorly

understood, unpredictable, and volatile political and social

environment that influences what questions scientists explore, the methodologies scientists employ, how results are

interpreted, and the constraints and effectiveness of research applications. There are four particularly notable

elements of this environment that need to be recognized in

any research, education, and applications program.

Wildernesses Are Embedded in a Dynamic

Social and Biophysical Context

We are all familiar with the complexities and volatility of

social and political systems in an era of change, turbulence,

and transformation. The notion of congressionally established wilderness in the United States emerged during an

era of widespread social reform that marked the beginning

of many political, economic, and social changes, and thus

reflected changing social relationships with wild landscapes.

Also important are significant global changes in climate that

will likely lead to changes in biophysical conditions and

processes in wilderness.

The dynamic environments in which wilderness is embedded means that management goals often lack the agreement

among stakeholders necessary to provide the consent required for management organizations to find and organize

resources for stewardship. There is also frequent disagreement among scientists about cause-effect relationships. Such

disagreements lead to uncertainty about future conditions

and contexts, creating anxiety at the least, and often paralysis in decisionmaking.

Traditional, expert-driven, scientifically based planning

processes used alone (that assume a single decisionmaker,

operating in a closed setting, attempting to optimize attainment of a single goal, with unlimited time and information

available) are inadequate to deal with management challenges typified by these settings (Forester 1989; Stankey

and others 1999). These factors suggest that wilderness

planning must emphasize learning and adaptation to deal

with uncertainty, and collaboration and consensus building

to address conflict.

Wilderness Ecosystems Are Loosely—

Rather Than Tightly—Coupled

Within a wilderness area, cause-effect relationships are

often typified by temporal and spatial discontinuities, and

linkages frequently demonstrate a probabilistic rather than

a deterministic character. In these situations, the system is

termed “loosely-coupled.” Tightly coupled systems are those

with linkages that are highly time dependent and invariant

in terms of sequences of actions (Perrow 1999). They lack

capacity to tolerate delays and are rigidly structured in

terms of how objectives are achieved. Wilderness systems

tend to be of the former type: there are a variety of means of

achieving objectives, there are often temporal delays between actions and consequences (such as, tourism promotion and increases in visitation), and sequences for actions

are often unknown or make little difference in outcomes.

In loosely coupled systems, relationships between causes

and effects, for example, recreation-setting attributes and

visitor experiences, are only probabilistic. That is, managers

provide only the opportunity (through manipulation of settings) for visitors to experience certain outcomes; they do not

determine what those outcomes will be. The delays and the

second- and third-order effects make understanding system

processes and implementing effective management actions

difficult, simply because of the complex relationships existing between causes and effects.

Thus, loosely coupled systems are not only difficult to

understand, but challenging to manage. Learning about

them requires adaptive approaches; management will be

treating actions as experiments to understand outcomes.

Wilderness Ecosystems Tend to be

Nonlinearly Dynamic

Small events, floods, fires, or developments, often lead to

large effects. For example, we understand that relatively

small levels of recreation use can result in disproportionately

large biophysical and social consequences (Cole 1987). There

may be thresholds beyond which significant consequences

occur. This nonlinear characteristic requires managers to

identify potential thresholds and determine if exceeding

them leads to irreversible effects. It requires that we consider both the resistance of systems to impacts and their

resilience in response to disturbance. It may require more

conservative approaches to management actions that potentially lead to long-lasting effects. Understanding this characteristic is important in management, but it is also important for science to discover this relationship.
220 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

McCool From Scholarship to Stewardship: Opportunities and Challenges in Wilderness Research, Education, and Management

Combined Social-Biophysical Systems

Are Characterized by Uncertainty

Social-biophysical systems are not only complex, but because we do not fully understand how they function, or the

consequences of management interventions, decisionmaking

is characterized by uncertainty. Uncertainty may be defined

as not knowing all the effects that follow from decisions, nor

the probability distribution of those we are aware of. Adaptive, even experimental, approaches to management are

called for in these situations. Monitoring of consequences is

also an important component of management.

The combined effect of these characteristics makes both

the conduct of science and the consequential learning demanding. The implications for both science and education

are extraordinary, requiring a transformation in how issues

and challenges are framed, how science is conducted, and

how the public and potential managers are educated. In

these situations, collaborative, interactive approaches to

management and science may be effective. Such approaches

involve a variety of stakeholders, different forms of knowledge, and potentially different scales of analysis. The focus

of management in the dynamic environment characterizing

today’s wilderness may be learning. This means that hypotheses are indeed tentative statements, evolving as we

learn in response to new knowledge and changing models of

how systems function. For example, our experience with the

concept of carrying capacity suggests, after about three

decades of research, that the relationship between use level

and biophysical impact is far more complex than assumed by

this approach (Stankey and McCool 1984). By examining our

research findings through new lenses, we may discover

alternative and more useful approaches to managing visitors and their impacts.

Learning is a process where there is an accumulation of

knowledge, there is deliberation about the meaning of that

knowledge, new insights are gained about the interactions

between people and their environment, and we act upon that

knowledge. Because wilderness management is basically a

“messy” problem, the mental models (Senge 1990) we use to

organize and behave in the real world will not only have to

change, but must remain adaptive in response to social

change and new knowledge. In summary, protected area

management situations are rich in challenge, ripe for the

experimentation needed for learning, and fruitful locations

to enhance our understanding of how people can interact

with resources in a sustainable way. This learning occurs at

a variety of scales, and the lessons from it may serve as a

foundation for new research programs.

Lessons Learned From Social

Science Research in, About, and for

Wilderness _____________________

The United States has been blessed with a relative abundance of scientific and technical expertise, managerial experience, and a tertiary educational system that is well integrated. Currently, the Federal Government administers

nearly 650 designated wilderness areas covering about 47

million hectares (nearly 105 million acres) of land. This

experience is only about 40 years in length, and therefore

may still be thought of as in a formative stage. However, the

lessons learned in the United States experience may serve as

a foundation for other countries struggling to protect wilderness values. The learning that has occurred involves both

the content of research and the context within which management, education, and research occurs.

Content Lessons

Knowledge About Wilderness Experiences, While

Growing, Is Still Limited in Scope And Depth—We

have not discovered or understood the depth, quality, or

richness of the recreational, inspirational, spiritual, or learning experiences that occur within these special places. The

power of wilderness to create these experiences is well

known, at least anecdotally. For example, conservation

pioneer John Muir (1911: 110) argued:

Climb the mountains and get their good tidings, Nature’s

peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees. The

winds will blow their own freshness into you and the storms

their energy, while cares will drop off like autumn leaves. As

age comes on, one source of enjoyment after another is closed,

but nature’s sources never fail.

While Muir and others like him have long provided rich,

powerful, anecdotal, and emotional based descriptions of

wilderness experiences, science has taken a number of

empirical, and largely quantitatively based, approaches to

better understanding them (Borrie and Birzell 2001). These

approaches have evolved over time. As one approach has

been found wanting, we have learned, other models and

processes have been developed, applied, and evaluated.

While science has dramatically increased our knowledge

of the dimensionality of wilderness recreational experiences, the capacity of these places to inspire the human

spirit, provide the tranquility and serenity needed to maintain human health, lay a foundation for human progress,

and educate about natural processes has generally not

received the same level of attention. The anecdotal and

emotional based metaphors long used by conservation writers and naturalists do not necessarily match with the more

abstract empiricist descriptions of the scientist—at least the

empirical findings are not as rich. More importantly, our

ability to apply these findings in routine decisionmaking

about wilderness and visitors has been hampered by the lack

of articulate, yet salient, guidelines for incorporating these

values and benefits. Perhaps in our haste to protect the

biophysical aspects of wilderness, we have adopted an empirically based research and management paradigm for

practicing stewardship that is not necessarily appropriate

for wilderness experiences.

While the results of some research approaches may be

transferable from one wilderness to another, this has generally not occurred in the United States. Each wilderness is

often viewed as unique, implicitly requiring new studies of

biophysical and social processes and expectations. As a

result, management may not fully account for the fundamental power and capacity of wild places to affect human

beings in decisionmaking, leading not only to significant and
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 221

McCool From Scholarship to Stewardship: Opportunities and Challenges in Wilderness Research, Education, and Management

contentious conflicts but also to inadvertent marginalization of the power of wilderness in helping create not only

better people but also a better world.

We Have Learned That Human Behavior in Protected Areas Is Extremely Complex—The constellation

of motivations influencing choices to visit wilderness and

other protected areas results in human behaviors that are

difficult to understand and appreciate. Such understanding

is a necessary prerequisite to management of the people who

visit wilderness, not only in terms of implementing actions

that are effective, but also in sustaining opportunities that

are valuable and beneficial to participants. Understanding

what makes a visit to a wilderness a “quality” one has dogged

scientists since the Wilderness Act was passed in 1964.

While a considerable amount of this research has been

focused on use density and perceptions of crowding, Manning and Lime (1999) argue that research is needed to

identify other specific indicators of quality.

As a result of learning that human behavior is complex

and not necessarily predictable, there is a much greater

appreciation for models and approaches that are not as

reductionistic as the “hypodermic needle” approaches that

assumed that all that was needed to change peoples’ behavior was a dose of appropriate information. Such approaches

to management not only led to simplistic information campaigns but also have been largely ineffective (Cole and

others 1997; McCool and Cole 1999; Vander Stoep and

Roggenbuck 1996).

We Have Learned That It Is Critical That the Objectives for Protected Areas Be Specifically and Explicitly Stated—Objectives are needed to set the management

agenda and develop social consensus around our visions of

the future. How would we know we have accomplished what

we have set out to do without specific and explicit objectives?

However, broadly and vaguely stated objectives continue to

plague management of wilderness and protected areas.

Such broadly written objectives (such as, “protect the resource,” or “provide a diversity of recreation opportunities”)

serve as poor benchmarks against which to identify what

outcomes specific wildernesses should provide, determine

the acceptability particular management actions, and measure progress. Vaguely written objectives tend to hide disagreements that do not arise until different interpretations

occur.

Long ago, Shoemaker (1984) argued that objectives should

have five characteristics: (1) specific; (2) output oriented;

(3) quantifiable; (4) time bound; and (5) attainable. Unfortunately, many wilderness management objectives do not

meet any of these criteria, leading to a situation where

almost any management action can be judged successful

regardless of the anticipated and unanticipated consequences that result. Of course, administrators may oppose

objectives that meet these criteria because the specificity

forces them to become accountable for their achievement.

We Have Learned That the Producer and Consumer

of a Recreational Experience Is the Same Individual—

Recreationists seek certain values and benefits when they

choose a wilderness area to visit. The outcomes of these

benefits are influenced by the social, managerial, and biophysical conditions experienced during an engagement within

the area, and by expectations developed prior to the visit.

These propositions form the basis of such management

approaches as (1) the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum

(Driver and others 1987), which seeks to provide diversity in

setting attributes, and (2) normative approaches to wilderness quality (Manning and Lime 1999), which attempt to

define what indicators of wilderness managers need to identify. Both approaches implicitly recognize that managers

provide opportunities for certain outcomes, experiences, and

levels of quality. But both also implicitly assume that these

outcomes are produced and consumed by the individual

recreationist.

In a sense then, wilderness and protected area managers

provide a setting (“warehouse”) consisting of a variety of

attributes (“factors”) from which visitors create experiences

(“products”) of varying quality. Not all factors will be used by

all visitors to create any given experience. However, some

factors, or attributes, such as use density, may be used more

than others. Thus, we need to understand how visitors use

setting attributes.

Managers serve as important intermediaries in this production process, for it is they who provide the setting attributes, regulate access to them, monitor their condition,

and respond accordingly. Such a critical role in the production process requires research to further identify the character and intensity of linkages between setting attributes and

recreational experiences.

Context Lessons

We Have Learned That It Is Important to Employ

Time and Personnel Judiciously in Framing Wilderness Problems Appropriately—The wicked and messy

character of wilderness and protected area management

requires that problem framing take on special significance.

The dynamic and fluid character of wilderness management

situations, as well as the crisis-driven nature of many issues,

often leads to inadequate problem definition. As Bardwell

(1991) observes, in these conditions more resources are

needed to understand the problem. An example of inadequate problem definition concerns defining use impact

problems as that of exceeding a biophysical or social carrying

capacity. Such a problem definition is an exceedingly reductionistic way of conceiving how the multiple expectations of

visitors, the presence of competing management objectives,

and the complex relationships between use and impact

interact. As a result of defining use impact problems as

exceeding an area’s carrying capacity, we have engaged in

an often fruitless endeavor of establishing such “carrying

capacities” for protected areas. Rather than focusing limited

resources on determining the desired, appropriate, or acceptable conditions required in organic legislation or as

interpreted by visitors and administrators, the search has

often been for “magic numbers” reflecting an inherent capability to support recreational use.

We Have Learned That Protected Areas Occur

Within the Context of Regions or Systems of Areas,

and Management Actions in One Area Affect What

Happens in Another—Wildernesses and protected areas

exist within the context of a system of areas (McCool 2001;

McCool and Cole 2001): what happens in one area, in terms
222 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

McCool From Scholarship to Stewardship: Opportunities and Challenges in Wilderness Research, Education, and Management

of the condition of site attributes, management actions, and

use characteristics, affects what happens in other areas

within the region or system. For example, when a policy

limiting recreational use is implemented in one area, visitors may be displaced to other areas. These other areas may

then experience use impact problems, and they may or may

not have adequate managerial capacity to address these

problems.

Social science research has frequently focused on visitors

to specific sites. While this research is often helpful in

addressing site-specific questions, the lack of complementary regional scale research inadvertently leads to homogenization of opportunities over a region and eventually

suboptimization of recreational experiences, because current site users are preferenced in such studies. Other users

(visitors who are dissatisfied, people that prefer other types

of settings, and future visitors) are generally not represented in such studies. McCool and Cole (2001) argue that

management of wilderness must consider both regional and

local scales to avoid homogenization of experiences and

displacement of problems. Cooperation and coordinated

management have typified a number of transagency management efforts, and such effort has led to more streamlined

administration. Cooperation and coordination are necessary but not sufficient conditions for ensuring that a diversity of recreation opportunities exists at the regional level.

We Have Learned That to Make Progress in Understanding the Social Dynamics of Protected Areas, We

Need Research That Is Cohesive and Integrative Over

Time, Space, and Methodology—We have begun to understand how quickly and unpredictably things change.

What visitors once felt was desirable, may now be only

acceptable. What visitors now feel is unacceptable may in

the future be desirable. The current dominant research

paradigm is to conduct individual case studies of visitors to

specific areas at one point in time. Studies that examine

visitors over time, or research that investigates populations

and how they interact with wilderness over time, are scarce.

In Watson’s (1999) recent review of trends in wilderness

visitors, he could cite only a few studies in which visitors to

a specific wilderness had been repeatedly studied over time.

In the majority of these studies, such visitors had only been

sampled twice. In general, the period between sampling was

lengthy. For example, Lucas (1985) studied visitors to the

Bob Marshall Wilderness in the State of Montana, but the

period between sampling was 12 years.

Such studies sample visitors to the areas at two, or rarely,

three points in time, but such visitors are most likely

different individuals. Thus, these studies are not really

studies of trends in how specific visitors access, use, or feel

about a wilderness, but are more likely samples of different

people at different periods of time. Thus, scientists are

confronted with the plausible hypothesis that differences

found are a result of sampling different visitors rather than

changes in the visitor population.

While one-shot case study designs are interesting, their

results tend to reinforce the status quo. In the case of visitor

studies, they tend to privilege current users over past and

future users in decisionmaking. For example, studies of

visitors to an area will generally not sample those who find

current conditions unacceptable. Since these conditions are

unacceptable, these individuals do not visit the site, and

thus are not sampled.

We Have Learned That While It Is Easy to Compartmentalize Management Actions and the Institutions

That Implement Them, Stewardship Requires More

Integration of Disciplines and Functions—Compartmentalization of functions is a common bureaucratic approach to ensuring that routine tasks are dealt with competently and efficiently. In wilderness and protected area

management, we often segregate wilderness functional areas (recreation, fire, wildlife management) into different

organizational components, or separate planning from management and management from science (Hof and Lime

1997). While this approach to governmental management

has some important benefits, it may result in duplication,

inconsistent or even conflicting actions, or in gaps in our

knowledge and application. As a result, we may be surprised

when management actions lead to unanticipated consequences, and find that the organization has limited capacity

to respond.

We have learned in this respect that agency environments

and cultures influence how problems are defined, priorities

set, and management is implemented. Often agency cultural norms are so much a part of what an agency does, they

are difficult to identify from within. Values, such as professionalism and empiricism of strongly held cultures, permeate decisions.

Conclusions____________________

Probably most fundamental of the lessons learned is the

importance of problem framing. How research questions and

management challenges are defined determine what solutions are identified. Often, this stage in the research process

gets short shrift as scientists attempt to respond to managerial crises, publication timetables, and tenure decisions.

Managers may define a problem in such a way that it is a

symptom of a more fundamental, systemic level challenge.

Research on the symptom may not lead to appropriate

managerial reforms, or may lead to research results that are

simply too abstract for definitive application.

The particular social and political environment in which

wilderness and protected area management occurs must be

more explicitly recognized in research programs. This is not

a call for the politicization of research. Rather, it is a

recognition that these special places and the actors that

shape and influence them are ultimately not only the clients

for research and education, but they also reflect and symbolize the social values that influence management, research,

and education priorities. Research, management, and education often take place in highly politicized environments,

where the test of their utility is often how well they serve

certain purposes that may not be directly relevant to wilderness management. This does not invalidate research. It only

makes its design, conduct, and application more demanding

and requires it to be responsive to social needs. Obviously,

these factors vary from nation to nation.

What research is conducted, how, and where it is applied

are major questions confronting development of any new

science program. There has been a tendency in the United
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 223

McCool From Scholarship to Stewardship: Opportunities and Challenges in Wilderness Research, Education, and Management

States for wilderness social science research, particularly in

higher education, to be opportunistic rather than programmatic. Given the highly decentralized nature of U.S. higher

education, wilderness, and protected area management,

this is to be expected. While we have learned a great deal

from wilderness research in the United States, one can only

speculate how a more structured investment in research

would have advanced the state of the art of both scientific

scholarship and managerial stewardship. Of course, there

must be opportunities to engage in research determined by

a cohesive plan of action, as well as research that is responsive to unforeseen issues and challenges.

Such goals can be achieved by following an approach that

contains several strategies. I suggest these strategies as if I

would have the opportunity to build a national wilderness

research program in a setting where little such work had

been conducted previously. These strategies represent no

particular agency philosophy or plan; they are my thoughts

alone. They are designed to address the need to build a

political constituency; develop ownership in research by

scientists, wilderness stewards, and affected publics; provide a financial footing; increase capacity; and ensure saliency and timeliness.

Strategy 1: Build a Strategic Plan

A strategic plan identifies a vision, mission, and way to the

future. It would be designed to allocate research funding to

problems and questions of national significance, as well as to

those that confront individual managers. By involving various stakeholders—scientists, managers, and interested

members of the public—a cohesive plan of research can be

developed in which the learning from various research

projects build upon each other. Part of this process would

consist of meetings with stakeholders to not only generate

issues, questions, and information needs, but also to build

ownership in the research process. Part of the strategic

planning process would be “situation assessments,” formalized documents that synthesize existing literature with

tentative propositions that direct individual research programs and projects. Done with the input of the public, the

outcome would be a set of problems framed to ensure social

and managerial relevancy. From this process, a series of

research programs could be developed, each of which focuses

on a question that is addressed over the long term, thus

ensuring a cohesive science process.

Strategy 2: Develop a Wilderness

Research Center Staffed by a Small

Complement of Scientists

This strategy is designed to provide focus and identity for

the wilderness research program, develop a centralized

source (initially) for credible information, and stimulate

research partnerships with university, governmental, and

nongovernmental entities. The center, if appropriately

funded, would have funding to spread its efforts to relevant

scientists, thus leveraging scarce research support. This

process then involves broader amounts of scientific expertise and allows managers from different units to participate

in research programs. By so doing, additional ownership in

wilderness research is developed. In addition, the credibility

and relevancy of research is expanded.

Strategy 3: Develop Teams of Scientists

to Investigate Research Questions, and

Partnerships to Apply and Evaluate

Results

Few questions and information needs are solely the domain of a single discipline. Many problems require scientists

from different disciplines to jointly frame questions, identify

methodologies, interpret findings, and apply results. Involving science teams, again, increases the breadth of involvement and provides the foundation for better results. Such a

team orientation will also help build the capacity of the

center to conduct research—which initially may be problematic if the scientific expertise is not available.

Partnerships can be developed in any number of ways, but

one method that might be particularly useful is through the

use of wilderness management and research demonstration

areas. In these situations, research is conducted, implemented, and evaluated in a public setting for a specific

resource in order to encourage learning and adaptation.

Such areas have only rarely been used in wilderness research in the United States, but where they have, knowledge

and science has been advanced.

Strategy 4: Ensure the Continuing

Financial and Technical Capacity to

Conduct Research and Apply Findings

The abundant and attractive physical resources often

existing within a country are often not matched by the

availability of long-term funding to support research. A

research program—versus individual questions—implies a

long-term commitment. One way of achieving this commitment is to build financial endowments from which the

interest can fund research. This method of financing insulates the research center from year-to-year differences in

political philosophies. Building an endowment does require

a considerable financial commitment—but through some

innovative financing and a politically active constituency, it

may be possible.

References _____________________

Bardwell, L. 1991. Problem framing: a perspective on environmental problem-solving. Environmental Management. 15(5):

603–612.

Borrie, W. T.; Birzell, R. M. 2001. Approaches to measuring quality

of the wilderness experience: visitor use density and wilderness

experience: In: Freimund, Wayne A.; Cole, David N., comps.

Visitor use density and wilderness experience: proceedings; 2000

June 1–3; Missoula, MT. Proc. RMRS-P-20. Ogden, UT: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain

Research Station: 29–38.

Cole, David N. 1987. Research on soil and vegetation in wilderness:

a state-of-knowledge review. In: Lucas, Robert C., comp. National

wilderness research conference: issues, state-of-knowledge, future directions: proceedings; 1985 July 23–26; Fort Collins, CO.
224 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

McCool From Scholarship to Stewardship: Opportunities and Challenges in Wilderness Research, Education, and Management

Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-220. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station [now

Rocky Mountain Research Station]: 135–177.

Cole, David N.; Hammond, Tim P.; McCool, Stephen F. 1997.

Information quantity and communication effectiveness: low

impact messages on wilderness trailside bulletin boards. Leisure

Sciences. 19(1): 59–72.

Driver, B. L.; Brown, Perry J.; Stankey, George H.; Gregoire,

Timothy G. 1987. The ROS planning system: evolution, basic

concepts, and research needed. Leisure Sciences. 9(3): 201–212.

Forester, J. 1989. Planning in the face of power. Berkeley: University of California Press. 264 p.

Hof, Marilyn; Lime, David W. 1997. Visitor experience and resource

protection framework in the National Park system: rationale,

current status, and future direction. In: McCool, Stephen F.; Cole,

David N., comps. Limits of acceptable change and related planning processes: progress and future directions: proceedings; 1997

May 20–22; Missoula, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-371. Ogden,

UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station [now Rocky Mountain Research Station]:

29–36.

Lucas, Robert C. 1985. Visitor characteristics, attitudes, and use

patterns in the Bob Marshall Wilderness Complex, 1970–1982.

Res. Pap. INT-345. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station [now Rocky

Mountain Research Station]. 32 p.

Manning, Robert E.; Lime, David W. 2000. Defining and managing

the quality of wilderness recreation experiences. In: Cole, David

N.; McCool, Stephen F.; Borrie, William T.; O’Loughlin, Jennifer,

comps. Wilderness science in a time of change conference—

volume 4: wilderness visitors, experiences, and visitor management; 1999 May 23–27; Missoula, MT. Proc. RMRS-P-15-Vol 4.

Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station: 13–52.

McCool, S. F. 2001. Limiting recreational use in wilderness: research issues and management challenges in appraising their

effectiveness. In: Freimund, Wayne A.; Cole, David N., comps.

Visitor use density and wilderness experience: proceedings; 2000

June 1–3; Missoula, MT. Proc. RMRS-P-20. Ogden, UT: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain

Research Station. 49-55.

McCool, Stephen F.; Cole, David N. 2000. Communicating minimum impact behavior with trailside bulletin boards: visitor

characteristics associated with effectiveness. In: Cole, David N.;

McCool, Stephen F.; Borrie, William T.; O’Loughlin, Jennifer,

comps. Wilderness science in a time of change conferenc —volume

4: wilderness visitors, experiences, and visitor management;

1999 May 23–27; Missoula, MT. Proc. RMRS-P-15-Vol 4. Ogden,

UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 208–216.

McCool, S. F.; Cole, D. N. 2001. Thinking and acting regionally:

toward better decisions about appropriate conditions, standards

and restrictions on recreation use. The George Wright Forum.

18(3): 85–98.

Muir, John. 1911. My first summer in the Sierra. Boston and New

York: Houghton Mifflin Company. 269 p.

Perrow, C. 1999. Normal accidents. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 386 p.

Senge, P. M. 1990. The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the

learning organization. New York: Doubleday/Currency. 413 p.

Shoemaker, J. 1984. Writing quantifiable river recreation management objectives. In: Popadic, J. S.; Butterfield, D. I.; Anderson, D.;

Popadic, M. R., comps. National river recreation symposium:

proceedings; 1984 October 31–November 3; Baton Rouge, LA:

Louisiana State University: 249–253.

Stankey, G. H.; McCool, S. F.; Clark, Roger N.; Brown, Perry J. 1999.

Institutional and organizational challenges to managing natural

resources for recreation: a social learning model. In: Jackson,

Edgar L.; Burton, Thomas L., eds. 1999. Leisure studies: prospects for the twenty-first century. State College, PA: Venture

Publishing: 435–450.

Stankey, George H.; McCool, Stephen F. 1984. Carrying capacity in

recreational settings: evolution, appraisal and application. Leisure Sciences. 6(4): 453–473.

Vander Stoep, G. A.; Roggenbuck, J. W. 1996. Is your park being

“loved to death?” Using communications and other indirect techniques to battle the park “love bug.” In: Lime, D. W., ed. Congestion and crowding in the National Park system: guidelines for

management and research. Misc. Publ. 86-1996. St. Paul, MN:

University of Minnesota, Department of Forest Resources, and

Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station: 85–132.

Watson, Alan E. 2000. Wilderness use in the year 2000: societal

changes that influence human relationships with wilderness. In:

Cole, David N.; McCool, Stephen F.; Borrie, William T.; O’Loughlin,

Jennifer, comps. Wilderness science in a time of change conference—volume 4: wilderness visitors, experiences, and visitor

management; 1999 May 23–27; Missoula, MT. Proc. RMRS-P-15-

Vol 4. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 53–60.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 225

Jan W. van Wagtendonk is a Research Forester, Yosemite Field Station,

Western Ecological Research Center, U.S. Geological Survey, P.O. Box 700,

El Portal, CA 95318, U.S.A. FAX: (209) 379-1116, E-mail: jan_van_

wagtendonk@usgs.gov

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Since its earliest occupation by Euro-Americans, scientific information has been instrumental in the designation and

management of Yosemite as a National Park and as Wilderness.

Descriptive at first, but increasingly sophisticated as theories and

methods evolved, science has been the underpinning of the protection and sustainable management of Yosemite National Park and

the Yosemite Wilderness. As visitor use increases, it will be critically important that the wilderness resource and the wilderness

experience be perpetuated unimpaired for future generations. This

paper traces the role science has played in the history of the Park,

in the current management of the Yosemite Wilderness, and the role

it might have in the future.

Introduction ____________________

Science has been instrumental in the management of

Yosemite since before its designation as a National Park in

1890. It has played a role in the various legislative acts that

designated the area as a National Park, and subsequently

as a unit of the National Wilderness Preservation System.

That role intensified as back-country use increased in the

1970s and wilderness was designated in Yosemite in 1984.

Since then, the wilderness management system there has

been adjusted and refined as research and management

methods have evolved. This trend should continue into the

future.

Historical Perspective: Yosemite

National Park and Yosemite

Wilderness _____________________

Yosemite has come full circle from when it was managed

by Native Americans for subsistence and shelter. It has

passed through a period of legislation that established and

adjusted the boundaries of the Park for visitor benefit and

enjoyment, and finally to designation of a majority of the

park as wilderness to preserve wilderness resources and

values.

Role of Science in Sustainable Management

of Yosemite Wilderness

Jan W. van Wagtendonk

Native American Management

Native Americans have been present in the Yosemite

region for over 3,000 years. During this time they did more

than inhabit the landscape, they also shaped its ecological

relationships (Anderson 1996). They tilled the soil for bulbs

and corms, burned meadows for basketry materials, hunted

for deer and other game, and gathered seeds and acorns. All

of these practices were based on an inherent scientific

knowledge of ecology. The wilderness that faced the first

European invaders was, in part, a landscape managed for

the needs of diversity and abundance (Anderson and Nabhan

1991).

Early Park Legislation

Early legislation relating to Yosemite includes:

• The1864 act that set aside Yosemite Valley and the

Mariposa Grove as a State Reservation.

• The 1890 act that established Yosemite National Park.

• The 1906 joint resolution that ceded the Yosemite

Valley and the Mariposa Grove back to the Federal

Government and changed the boundaries of the park.

• The 1916 act that established the National Park Service.

Each of these acts was based, to a greater or lesser degree,

on scientific information.

Yosemite Valley Grant Act of 1864—The act that

granted Yosemite Valley and the Mariposa Grove to the

State of California was the first act by a national government to establish a park. Huth (1948) considered the

Yosemite Valley Grant Act as the birth of the “National

Park” idea. The act specified that the purpose of the park

was for public use, resort, and recreation, and that it should

be inalienable for all time. Although the legislation was not

directly based on scientific studies, the impetus behind the

act was to prevent destruction of the scenic and natural

values of the Valley and the Grove.

Yosemite National Park Act of 1890—The nation’s

first preserve consciously designed to protect wilderness

values was established in 1890, when the mountains above

Yosemite Valley became a National Park (Nash 2001).

John Muir received much of the credit for bringing about

the establishment of Yosemite National Park. Although

not considered scientific writing by today’s standards,

Muir (1890a,b) wrote eloquently about the treasures and

features of the proposed park. These descriptions were

based on Muir’s detailed observations of natural phenomena of the area including meadows, rivers, mountains, and

glaciers (fig. 1). Nowhere is his scientific expertise more

evident than in the passages in which he describes the
226 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

van Wagtendonk Role of Science in Sustainable Management of Yosemite Wilderness

Figure 1—The area above Yosemite Valley is a

vast wilderness landscape of domes, mountains,

glaciers, rivers, and waterfalls.

value of protecting the wilderness above the Valley as an

integrated harmonious unit rather than protection of an

unsustainable fragment.

Joint Resolution of 1906—Preceded by the cessation

of Yosemite Valley and the Mariposa Grove by California to

the Federal Government, the Joint Resolution of 1906

accepted those lands as part of Yosemite National Park and

adjusted the boundaries of the new park. The cessation was

deemed necessary because development and commercialization were impacting scenic and natural values. The

boundary adjustments were based on a report by Chittenden

(1904) and included deletions and additions, with a net

result of a 30-percent reduction. He conducted a 2-week

study of the park and concluded that lands containing

substantial private claims, mineral-bearing ores, or commercial timber should be excluded from the park and added

to the forest reserves. The addition included the remainder

of the Tuolumne River drainage, making it possible to

manage the entire watershed.

National Park Service Organic Act of 1916—Fiftytwo years after the Yosemite Grant Act, 44 years after the

Yellowstone National Park Act, and 26 years after the

Yosemite National Park Act, the National Park Service was

finally established. The new bureau had the responsibility

for managing the National Parks to:

Conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects

and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of

the same in such manner and by such means as will leave

them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations

(Sellars 1997).

Science was not specifically mentioned in the act and could

not be inferred from the language in any of the sections

(Sellars 1997).

Wilderness Legislation

Two acts were instrumental in designating wilderness in

Yosemite:

• The Wilderness Act of 1964, which established the

National Wilderness Preservation System.

• The California Wilderness Act of 1984, which specifically designated the Yosemite Wilderness.

Wilderness Act of 1964—Although the Wilderness Act

originated out of dismay over trends affecting roadless areas

on National Forests, it also was applied to lands of the

National Park Service because of concerns about the erosion

of roadless blocks within units of the National Park system

(McCloskey 1994). The National Park Service was never an

active proponent of the Wilderness Act (Sellars 1997). For the

National Park Service, opposition to the Wilderness Act

centered on the question of discretion. The 1916 Organic Act

gave no clear guidance on the question of how much park

wilderness should be protected. The scenic, natural, and

cultural features were to be protected, while at the same time

providing for their use and enjoyment. As administratively

interpreted, the Organic Act gave discretion to the Park

Service to strike a balance between maintaining wilderness

and providing facilities that were accessible by modern means

of transportation. The Wilderness Act changed that by specifying that wilderness zones in parks would have added

protection from roads, commercial facilities, motorized vehicles, and mechanized equipment. The Act also specifically

mentioned science as one of the purposes of wilderness.

California Wilderness Act of 1984—Legislation to extend wilderness was introduced in every Congress between

1974 and 1982. Not until the debate concerning the adequacy of Forest Service recommendations for wilderness in

the State was resolved in 1984, did the California Wilderness Act finally become law. The Act designated 646,700

acres (261,710 ha) of Yosemite Park as Wilderness and 3,500

acres (1,416 ha) as potential wilderness additions. Congress

directed the Park Service to produce maps and descriptions

of the Wilderness area as soon as practicable after passage

of the Act. This task was assigned to the Park’s Science

Office and completed with input from all staff associated

with wilderness. A Geographic Information System (GIS)

analysis of the boundary, based on 7.5-minute quadrangle

maps, showed that there were 704,624 acres (285,151 ha) of

Wilderness and 927 acres (375 ha) of potential wilderness in

the Congressionally designated Yosemite Wilderness, comprising 94.2 and 0.1 percent of the park, respectively.

Science in Support of Management

of Yosemite Wilderness __________

During the late 1960s and the early 1970s, the proposed

wilderness areas of Yosemite experienced a dramatic increase in use (fig. 2). When a scientist was assigned to the

park in 1972, work began immediately on a program to

support management of the proposed wilderness. By the

time the California Wilderness Act passed in 1984, the
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 227

Role of Science in Sustainable Management of Yosemite Wilderness van Wagtendonk

results from this research had already been applied. Evolving use patterns and new research techniques prompted a

resurgence of research designed to refine and improve management of the Yosemite Wilderness.

Early Programs

For many years, use figures were determined from voluntary campfire permits from which subjective estimates of

total use could be made. Implementation of a mandatory

permit system in 1972 for all overnight users alerted managers of the magnitude of wilderness use and its rate of

increase. Within 1 week after the program was established

in Yosemite that year, the scientist was assigned the task of

inspecting conditions in the backcountry and assessing use.

From these initial observations, a plan was developed to

investigate impacts, determine use limits, and design a

system for controlling use through permits. In addition,

investigations into the role of fire in wilderness ecosystems

were to be initiated.

Visitor Impacts—Holmes and others (1972) inventoried

trails and campsites in the backcountry for human-caused

impacts and found hundreds of campsites around popular

lakes, trampled vegetation in heavily used areas, and eroded

and multiple trails throughout the proposed wilderness.

Guided by results of the survey, Parmeter (1976) conducted

studies of human impacts on vegetation, soil, water, and

microclimates. Experiments were also conducted to quantify direct impacts from trampling and urine (Holmes 1979).

These studies concluded that although impacts increased as

use increased, the relationship between use and impacts

was influenced by many other factors and that the determination of acceptable impacts was a subjective decision.

On the other hand, Keay and van Wagtendonk (1983)

found a positive relationship between use levels and incidents with black bears and recommended that use be reduced in areas of high conflict. Availability of food from

human sources, however, was believed to be the primary

cause of the conflict. Hastings and Gilbert (1987) also studied the interactions of bears and humans and offered a

Figure 2—Visitor use nights in the Yosemite Wilderness increased rapidly in the early 1970s and then

dropped to about 50 percent of the peak level.

250,000

200,000

150,000

100,000

50,000

0

Use Nights

Year

1967

1970

1973

1976

1979

1982

1985

1988

1991

1994

1997

2000

partial solution; a bear-resistant food canister that could be

carried by backpackers.

Social impact studies were also conducted to determine

the relationship between use levels and the wilderness

experience. Lee (1977) and Absher and Lee (1981) interviewed visitors about their attitudes toward crowding, resource impacts, and satisfaction. They also observed the

same visitors in the backcountry and concluded that there

was no relationship between expressed attitudes and behavior. Enjoyment was affected more by human behavior and

resource condition than by total number of people encountered (Absher and Lee 1981). For example, visitors were

willing to encounter more people if they were friendly than

if they were not.

Use Limits and Permits—Since use had obviously exceeded acceptable levels in some areas, interim use limits

were applied while the ecological and sociological studies

were being conducted. In 1973, overnight capacities were set

for travel zones within the proposed wilderness based on the

area of the zone, the number of miles of trails it contained,

and its ecological fragility (van Wagtendonk 1986). The

larger an area, the greater its ability to absorb use, and

because trails disburse use, more trails allow additional

visitors to be accommodated. Ecological fragility scores were

used to reduce the limit of a zone based on its rarity,

vulnerability, recuperability, and reparability.

Zone use limits were implemented through permits that

were issued to each backpacking party. If a proposed zone

had reached its capacity, the party was directed to camp in

another location. Adjustments were made to the use limits

based on data that showed that 8 percent of the parties did

not get permits and that, on average, trips were shortened

by one-half day (van Wagtendonk and Benedict 1980). The

use limits were effective in shifting use from peak summer

months and from heavily used travel zones without reducing overall visitation (van Wagtendonk 1981). Based on 4

years of data collected from the permits that related zone

to trailhead use, a trailhead quota system was implemented in 1977 (van Wagtendonk and Coho 1986). Trailhead

quotas allow visitors the maximum amount of freedom and

ensure that the wilderness resource and experience are

maintained.

Refined Programs

After the initial surge of research, management of the

Yosemite Wilderness proceeded with only minor adjustments made each year based on observations and feedback

from wilderness rangers. By the mid-1980s, however, longterm monitoring of trail and campsite impacts indicated

that conditions were changing and that efforts might be

necessary to restore certain areas (Sydoriak 1989). Restoration programs were followed by additional monitoring of

campsites and meadows that were being grazed by recreational packstock. New methods of sociological research also

made it possible to integrate resource, social, and managerial components into carrying capacity decisions.

Trail and Campsite Restoration—As a result of monitoring programs, campsite restoration programs were started

in 1987 at three subalpine lakes in the Yosemite Wilderness

(Hadley and Moritsch 1988). Moritsch and Muir (1993)
228 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

van Wagtendonk Role of Science in Sustainable Management of Yosemite Wilderness

evaluated the effectiveness of the revegetation efforts at

those lakes and found that transplanting locally collected

native plants contributed to vegetation recovery on some

sites. The effects on species richness were clearer than those

on species cover. Based on these results, the campsite

restoration was expanded to other areas of the wilderness.

Trail restoration efforts were also underway.

Severely eroded trails and trails with multiple ruts were

prevalent in many heavily used areas. Figure 3 shows an

area near Tuolumne Meadows as it appeared in 1973.

Restoration experiments were begun that year by Palmer

(1979) and were completed in 1988 (Alexander 1989).

Figure 4 shows the area as it appeared in 2001. Eagan and

others (2000) restored the natural hydrology and soils to a

similar 0.8-mile (1,300-m) section of abandoned trail that

had two to six 11.8-inch (0.3-m) deep ruts. Fill material

from nearby ephemeral drainages was used to bring the

ruts up to grade. Plants from locally collected seeds and

transplanted sod from between the ruts were used to

replant the trails. Both were equally effective, but the

transplants were less costly. These restoration projects

showed that it is possible to restore areas that had not

recovered naturally.

Campsite and Grazing Monitoring—The 1972 and

1986 surveys showed the value of repeated monitoring for

detecting changes. A third 10-year monitoring cycle was

completed in 1999 using a subset of sites and measurements (Boyers and others 2000). The initial results indicate an overall improvement in conditions due to the

restoration program, decreased use, and increased visitor

education. While the number of moderately and heavily

impacted sites decreased in comparison to the two previous

surveys, lightly impacted sites increased. Some of these

sites are probably new, although many are restored sites

that are still discernable. The monitoring program also

alerted managers to the fact that off-trail use is increasing.

Figure 3—Multiple ruts in a trail near Tuolumne

Meadows as it appeared just prior to restoration

experiments in 1973.

Figure 4—The same area near Toulumne Meadows as it appeared in 2001 after restoration

efforts were completed in1988.

Although recreational livestock grazing impact surveys

had been conducted in Yosemite in the 1930s through the

1960s, no systematic method of monitoring using standard

measurements existed. Moore and others (2000) began a

study in 1994 to establish a relationship between grazing

intensity and meadow response. They found a consistent

negative relationship between utilization and productivity,

and a variable response between utilization and species

composition. These findings will be incorporated into a

meadow monitoring plan for use by wilderness rangers.

Carrying Capacity Decisionmaking—As new sociological theories and tools became available, Yosemite managers decided to take a new look at carrying capacity issues.

Echoing the results by Lee (1977), Manning (2001) found

that visitors to Vernal Falls had an absolute tolerance for

four times as many people in the viewscape as their stated

preference (fig. 5). Specifically, they wanted to integrate

resource, social, and managerial considerations into their

deliberations. Although conceptualized by van Wagtendonk

(1979) as early as 1976, the managerial component of

carrying capacity had not been incorporated into previous

models. Newman and others (2001) are currently conducting a study that includes all three indicators of quality into

a decisionmaking framework. The first phase of the project

will inventory and map selected setting attributes of wilderness experiences using a Geographic Information System. Workshops with managers and scientists were held to

define indicators and standard of quality. The second

phase will ask visitors to evaluate tradeoffs among competing setting attributes or indicators using surveys and

conjoint analysis. This research will enable managers to

weigh the effects of use limits based not only on the effect

visitors will have on resources and each other, but also on

the effect the management action might have on either.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 229

Role of Science in Sustainable Management of Yosemite Wilderness van Wagtendonk

Figure 5—Although visitors to Vernal Falls preferred to have relatively few people in their view,

they were willing to tolerate many more.

Future Direction ________________

Science has been an integral part of the management of

the Yosemite Wilderness since before its designation. This

role is expected to continue as increasing population pressures increase demand for recreational experiences. Dramatic growth has occurred in communities within 2 hours

driving time of Yosemite National Park, much of it in

populations that have not been traditional users of wilderness. Science will be called upon to help managers meet the

challenges of a shifting cultural base. The appropriateness

of new technologies will have to be investigated from legal,

environmental, and sociological points of view. Perhaps

most importantly, the changing role of wilderness in society

will need exploring. Callicott (2000) suggests that wilderness areas might best be considered biodiversity reserves

where species that do not coexist well with humans could be

protected. Such designations would necessitate a science

program of both basic and applied research in the field of

conservation biology. If, on the other hand, the vision for

wilderness is more in line with Foreman’s (2000) view that

wilderness should continue to provide opportunities for

primitive recreation while at the same time protecting

biodiversity, the science program will have to also include a

sociological component. Either way, science will play an

essential role in the management of wilderness.

References _____________________

Absher, J. D.; Lee, R. G. 1981. Density as an incomplete cause of

crowding in backcountry settings. Leisure Science. 4(3): 231–248.

Alexander, B. 1989. Restoring Yosemite’s wildlands. Yosemite.

51(3): 4.

Anderson, M. K. 1996. Tending the wilderness. Restoration and

Management Notes. 14(2): 154–166.

Anderson, M. K.; Nabhan, G. P. 1991. Gardeners in Eden. Wilderness. 55(194): 27–30.

Boyers, L.; Fincher, M.; van Wagtendonk, J. W. 2000. Twentyeight years of wilderness campsite monitoring in Yosemite

National Park. In: Cole, D. N.; McCool, S. F.; Borrie, W. T.;

O’Loughlin, J., comps. 2000. Wilderness science in a time of

change conference—volume 5: wilderness ecosystems, threats,

and management; 1999 May 23–27; Missoula, MT. Proc. RMRSP-15-VOL-5. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 105–109.

Callicott, J. B. 2000. Contemporary criticisms of the received

wilderness idea. In: Cole, D. N.; McCool, S. F.; Borrie, W. T.;

O’Loughlin, J., comps. 2000. Wilderness science in a time of

change conference—volume 1: changing perspectives and future directions; 1999 May 23–27; Missoula, MT. Proc. RMRS-P15-VOL-1. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 24–31.

Chittenden, H. M. 1904. Report of the Yosemite Park Commission.

Fifty-eighth U.S. Congress. Document 34. 51 p.

Eagan, S.; Newman, P.; Fritzke, S.; Johnson, L. 2000. Restoration

of multiple-rut trails in the Tuolumne Meadows of Yosemite

National Park. In: Cole, D. N.; McCool, S. F.; Borrie, W. T.;

O’Loughlin, J., comps. 2000. Wilderness science in a time of

change conference—volume 5: wilderness ecosystems, threats,

and management; 1999 May 23–27; Missoula, MT. Proc. RMRSP-15-VOL-5. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 188–192.

Foreman, D. 2000. The real wilderness idea. In: Cole, D. N.; McCool,

S. F.; Borrie, W. T.; O’Loughlin, J., comps. 2000. Wilderness

science in a time of change conference—volume 1: changing

perspectives and future directions; 1999 May 23–27; Missoula,

MT. Proc. RMRS-P-15-VOL-1. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station:

32–38.

Hadley, R. L.; Moritsch, B. J. 1988. Subalpine and montane revegetation in Yosemite. Park Science. 8(4): 20–21.

Hastings, B. C.; Gilbert, B. K. 1987. Extent of human-bear interactions in the backcountry of Yosemite National Park. California

Fish and Game. 73(3): 188–191.

Holmes, D. O. 1979. Experiments on the effects of human urine and

trampling on subalpine plants. In: Ittner, R; Potter, D. R.; Agee,

J. K.; Anschell, S., eds. Recreational impact on wildlands. Conference proceedings; 1978 October 27–29; Seattle, WA. Proc. R-6-

001. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S, Department of the Interior, National Park Service:

79–88.

Holmes, D. O.; Akeson, S.; DeBenedetti, S. H.; Holmes, J. E.; Paine,

M.; Parker, A. Z.; Such, T. F. 1972. Yosemite backcountry inventory, summer 1972. Unpublished report on file at: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Yosemite National

Park, El Portal, CA. 2,295 p.

Huth, H. 1948. Yosemite—the story of an idea. Sierra Club Bulletin.

33(3): 47–78.

Keay, J. A.; van Wagtendonk, J. W. 1983. Effect of Yosemite

backcountry use levels on incidents with black bears. In: Meslow,

E. C., ed. Bears, their biology and management: 5th international

conference on bear research and management: proceedings; 1980

February 10–13; Madison, WI: 307–311.

Lee, R. G. 1977. Alone with others: the paradox of privacy in

wilderness. Leisure Science. 1(1): 3–20.

Manning, R. E. 2001. Carrying capacity as “informed judgement”: the values of science and the science of values. In:

Freimund, W. A.; Cole, D. N., comps. 2001. Visitor use density

and wilderness experience: proceedings; 2000 June 1–3; Missoula, MT. Proc. RMRS-P-20. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 21–28.

McClosky, M. 1994. What the Wilderness Act accomplished with

reference to the National Park system. In: Sydoriak, C., comp.

1994. Wilderness, the spirit lives. Handbook of the 6th national

wilderness conference; 1994 November 14–18; Santa Fe, NM:

137–145.

Moore, P. E.; Cole, D. N.; van Wagtendonk, J. W.; McClaran, M. P.;

McDougald, N. K. 2000. Meadow response to packstock grazing in

the Yosemite Wilderness: integrating research and management. In: Cole, D. N.; McCool, S. F.; Borrie, W. T.; O’Loughlin, J.,

comps. 2000 Wilderness science in a time of change conference

volume 5: wilderness ecosystems, threats, and management;

1999 May 23–27; Missoula, MT. Proc. RMRS-P-15-VOL-5. Ogden,

UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Rocky Mountain Research Station: 160–164.
230 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

van Wagtendonk Role of Science in Sustainable Management of Yosemite Wilderness

Moritsch, B. J.; Muir, P. S. 1993. Subalpine revegetation in Yosemite

National Park, California: changes in vegetation after three

years. Natural Areas Journal. 13(3): 155–163.

Muir, J. 1890a. The treasures of the Yosemite. The Century. 40(4):

483–500.

Muir, J. 1890b. Features of the proposed Yosemite National Park.

The Century. 40(5): 656–667.

Nash, R. F. 2001 Wilderness and the American mind. New Haven,

CT: Yale University Press. 426 p.

Newman, Peter; Marion, Jeffrey L.; Cahill, Kerri. 2001. Integrating

resource, social, and managerial indicators of quality into carrying capacity decision-making. The George Wright Forum. 18(3):

28–40.

Palmer, R. 1979. A report on the wilderness impact study. In:

Stanley, J. T.; Harvey, H. T.; Hartesveldt, R. J., eds.1979. San

Francisco: Sierra Club: 193–196.

Parmeter, J. R. 1976. Ecological carrying capacity research:

Yosemite National Park. 4 Vol. Available from: National Training Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161. PB270954AS.

Sellars, R. W. 1997. Preserving nature in the National Parks. New

Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 380 p.

Sydoriak, C. A. 1989. Yosemite monitoring and mitigating wilderness impacts. Park Science. 9(5): 13.

van Wagtendonk, J. W. 1979. A conceptual backcountry carrying

capacity model. In: Linn, R. M., ed. 1979. Proceedings of the first

conference on scientific research in the National Parks, volume I;

1976 November 9–12; New Orleans, LA. Transactions and Proceedings Series 5. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the

Interior, National Park Service: 1033–1038.

van Wagtendonk, J. W. 1981. The effect of use limits on backcountry

visitation trends in Yosemite National Park. Leisure Science.

4(3): 311–323.

van Wagtendonk, J. W. 1986. The determination of carrying capacities for the Yosemite Wilderness. In: Lucas, R. C., comp. 1986.

Proceedings—National wilderness research conference: current

research; 1985 July 23–26; Fort Collins, CO. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT212. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Intermountain Research Station: 456–461.

van Wagtendonk, J. W.; Benedict, J. M. 1980. Wilderness permit

compliance and validity. Journal of Forestry. 78(1): 399–401.

van Wagtendonk, J. W.; Coho, P. R. 1986. Trailhead quotas: rationing use to keep wilderness wild. Journal of Forestry. 84(11): 22–24.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 231

Crewenna Dymond is a Ph.D. Student, School of Geography, University of

Leeds. Dr. Steve Carver and Dr. Oliver Phillips are her Research Supervisors

and Lecturers at the School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2

9JT, UK. Fax: +44 113 233 3308, E-mail: c.dymond@geog.leeds.ac.uk

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Environmental factors that affect the distributions of

wilderness character and the species richness of mammals, birds,

flowering plants (angiosperms), and conifers and cycads (seedbearing plants) were investigated at the global scale using national species richness data and a continuous wilderness quality

grid. Principle Component Analysis and Multiple Regression were

used to develop environmental characteristic models that are

straight forward to interpret. High elevation and high latitude

were key to the distribution of wilderness quality, conifers, and

cycads. The most important determinants of species richness,

however, were found to be low latitude and “good” climate (high

precipitation and constant warm temperature). Understanding

factors that influence presence of wilderness today will help plan

for its protection on a large scale. Appreciating how the same

factors affect the distribution of species richness will aid in conservation of biodiversity, particularly that in protected wilderness

requiring pristine habitat.

Introduction ____________________

Wilderness inventories and assessments frequently use

biophysical naturalness as an indicator of wilderness quality. For example, the Australian National Wilderness Inventory (ANWI) describes biophysical naturalness as “the degree to which the natural environment is free from biophysical

disturbance caused by the influence of modern technological

society” (Lesslie and Maslen 1995). However, it is proposed

that biophysical naturalness is not an adequate measure of

biodiversity and, consequently, can underestimate the true

biological value of environments with wilderness qualities.

Furthermore, within the study of wilderness science it is

contended that there is insufficient regard for biodiversity

issues although it is assumed that wilderness offers unique

biological protection opportunities. It is argued that more

accurate measures of biological values should be incorporated into wilderness assessments in addition to the apInvestigating the Environmental Cause of

Global Wilderness and Species Richness

Distributions

Crewenna Dymond

Steve Carver

Oliver Phillips

praisal of biophysical alteration. It is proposed that a reason

for the lack of incorporation is the paucity of available

biodiversity information, particularly at a large scale. Furthermore, this may be exacerbated by a lack of understanding of the contribution of wilderness environments to biodiversity and how certain environments are conducive to the

persistence of wilderness.

A research analysis strategy has been designed to determine the extent to which environmental factors explain

variation in the distribution of species richness and wilderness at the global scale. Also, this research explores whether

species richness makes a contribution to the distribution of

wilderness and vice versa. This research began with analysis at the global scale, and so it was considered important to

determine precisely which environmental factors might be

responsible for the distributions of wilderness and species

richness. There has been considerable research into the

causes of species richness variation, for example, latitudinal gradients (Rohde 1992) and water energy dynamics

(O’Brien 1998), and although theories are still being debated there is at least some consensus about the main causes

in this variation. In the field of wilderness science we have

not attempted to explain the patterns of wilderness distribution, although we may be able to intuitively describe the

characteristics of the environments in which it currently

exists. It is important to distinguish between factors responsible solely for wilderness, such as remoteness, and those

related to species richness, such as soil type, and those that

may serve to affect both. These key variables have been

isolated and are shown in the conceptual model (fig. 1).

Figure 1—Conceptual model: factors identified as

important for the distribution of biodiversity and

wilderness.

Soil

BIODIVERSITY

WILDERNESS

Solar energy

Naturalness Remoteness

Aspect

Latitude Altitude Evapotranspiration Precipitation Temperature Population
232 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Dymond, Carver, and Philips Investigating the Environmental Cause of Global Wilderness and Species Richness Distributions

Global Hypotheses ______________

Using the global biodiversity and wilderness conceptual

interaction model (fig. 1) as a starting point, it was possible

to define a series of research hypotheses and these are

summarized in table 1. These hypotheses have determined

the content of this analysis. However, because it is not clear

which factors are most important, the process has been

inductive, allowing the data to shape the conclusions without being confined by the hypotheses.

Method for Global Analysis _______

Table 2 lists the data used for the global analysis. While

nationwide or even continental databases of species richness doubtless exist, for example the North American

Breeding Bird Survey, such information is rarely available

from a single source for the whole World. The national data

from Groombridge (1994) proved to be the most appropriate source of global species richness data for this analysis.

We considered it important to use taxa that have been

relatively well inventoried, and for this reason mammals

and birds were chosen. However, some indicator of

phytodiversity needed to be incorporated because case studies at smaller scales included tree and plant diversity. As a

result, the flowering plant (angiosperms) and conifer and

cycad (seed-bearing plants) groups were also incorporated

from the Groombridge (1994) data set.

The use of national species richness data necessitates

some consideration of the relationship between species and

area. While there are grounds for presuming a linear relationship between species richness and area on a logarithmic

scale (MacArthur and Wilson 1969), there has also been

considerable debate about nonlinear relationships between

the richness of individual groups and area (for example,

Rahbek 1997). In this work, however, the log10 of species

richness has been regressed against the log10 of country

area, as an independent variable. Thus, we can quantify the

extent that species richness depends on area for these

groups. The residual values produced from the regression

models indicate how far removed from expected each of the

Table 1—The basic research hypotheses generated from the conceptual

model.

Species richness Wilderness quality

is high in areas with: is high in area with:

Low latitude High latitude

Low altitude High altitude

Low water deficit (AET = PET) High water deficit

High precipitation Low precipitation

Moderate to high temperature Extremes of high and low

 temperature

Moderate to high population Low human population

Table 2—Data type and source for the global analysis of environmental factors influencing the distribution of wilderness and species richness.

Environmental

factors Data requirements Data source

Wilderness Global wilderness inventory Polygon coverage, McCloskey and Spalding (1989);

Continuous wilderness grid 22 category wilderness grid, WCMC (2000); Lesslie (2000,

 personal communication)

Species richness Global species richness for flora and fauna Mammals, birds, flowering plants, and conifer and cycads national

 species richness data, Groombridge (1994)

Population National population statistics 1995 mid-year population estimates, Census Bureau of the U.S.

 (1995);

Rural:urban population proportions per country Urbanization estimates, United Nations Population Division (1998);

Urban area per country Global Land Cover Characterization, U.S. Geological Survey and

 others (2000)

Latitude 0.5 decimal degree resolution grid Created in Arc Grid

Elevation High resolution global digital elevation model 5-minute resolution DTM5, Skellern (1999) derived from ETOP05,

 NGDC (1988)

Climate Global precipitation grid 30-minute monthly means, Leemans and Cramer (1991);

Global temperature grid 30-minute monthly means, Leemans and Cramer (1991);

Global potential evapotranspiration grid 30-minute monthly means, Ahn and Tateishi (1994a);

Global actual evapotranspiration grid 30-minute monthly means, Ahn and Tateishi (1994b);

Global water deficit Calculated from Ahn and Tateishi (1994a,b)
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 233

Dymond, Carver, and Philips Investigating the Environmental Cause of Global Wilderness and Species Richness Distributions

national richness values are. In further analyses, these

residual values have been used as the measure of species

richness.

Only one global wilderness database has been published

(McCloskey and Spalding 1989) (fig. 2). However, its classification criteria are very strict, as clearly seen by the absence

of wilderness in the contiguous 48 States of the United

States, although there are many protected wilderness areas

there. Individual nations that protect wilderness define

allocation criteria that are applicable to their country. For

example, some countries enable cultural issues to be incorporated. This process means that there is a wide difference

between the real nature of wilderness in each of the countries that have protected it. A worldwide wilderness assessment, such as McCloskey and Spalding (1989), is useful

because it applies the same criteria ubiquitously. However,

this inventory does not facilitate the identification of areas

with wilderness qualities that are less remote from human

features. To be able to identify wildernesslike environments

in every country, a “sliding scale” of wilderness, or decreasing levels of wilderness quality, need to be determined. In

conjunction with the World Conservation Monitoring Centre (now UNEP-WCMC), Lesslie (personal communication)

has replicated the procedures for the Australian National

Wilderness Inventory (Lesslie and Maslen 1995) using the

Digital Chart of the World as the major data source (Defense

Mapping Agency 1992). The product is a grid-based continuous wilderness database that defines 22 wilderness quality

classes and can be seen in figure 3. Unlike the ANWI, the

global wilderness grid was not constructed using biophysical

naturalness as one of its four criteria, as there is a lack of

global data of this type.

Data for each of the environmental factors are available

from grid-based maps, commonly at a resolution of 0.5

decimal degrees (dd) or 30-minute interval. The species

richness data are only available nationally, which means

analysis must occur at this scale. To compensate, a series of

summary data have been compiled for each climatic and

geographical factor in order to account for the wide variation

in conditions experienced within the countries. The summary statistics of mean, minimum, maximum, and range

were calculated for each variable. For the population data,

density and rural population density were calculated using

the Global Land Cover Characterization (USGS and others

2000) and rural to urban population proportion data (United

Nations Population Division 1998).

Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was applied to each

of the groups of summary variables to reduce the total

number of variables to be tested. For example, mean, range,

maximum, and minimum elevation data were reduced to a

single axis or factor. This new axis accounts for the variation

found within the four summary statistics. In this way, the

variation is integral to the analysis and not unnecessarily

oversimplified. Because the climatic variables of temperature, precipitation, and evapotranspiration (actual and potential evapotranspiration and water deficit) are closely

related, we decided that they should all be entered into a

PCA model to derive one axis that summarizes all of these

variables. In this way, the assumption of linear regression

that the predictor variables are independent is upheld. The

new axes from the PCA were used in a series of backward

stepwise multiple regression models to investigate the contribution of each environmental factor (independent) on

species richness and wilderness (dependent factors). This

facilitates the analysis of whether species richness directly

affects wilderness and vice versa. Furthermore, the regression coefficients (B) from the models indicate by how much

and in what direction (positive or negative) the independent

factor is influential.

Figure 2—Reconnaissance inventory of the amount of wilderness remaining in the world

(McCloskey and Spalding 1989). Each wilderness polygon must be 400,000 ha (1 million

acres) in size and at least 6 km from features such as roads or other development (reprinted

with permission of AMBIO, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences).
234 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Dymond, Carver, and Philips Investigating the Environmental Cause of Global Wilderness and Species Richness Distributions

Results of Global Analysis ________

Results From Analysis With all Climate

Variables Combined

Table 3 summarizes the results of the regression models

by showing the dependent variable, the predictor variables

remaining after the final step of the model, and the adjusted

R2

, which indicates how much variation is explained by the

predictor variables. The results indicate that climate is

important for the distributions of mammalian, avian, and

angiosperm species richness. Latitude is identified as a

predictor for the pattern of mammalian, avian, and seedbearing plant species richness. We could argue that climate

and latitude are the most important determinants of species

richness, as they are identified most frequently in these

models. The results indicate that the models are much better

at predicting the causes of mammalian and avian species

richness (variation explained is 42.0 percent and 36.2 percent, respectively) than of phytodiversity (flowering plants,

and conifers and cycads, 16.7 percent and 16.6 percent,

respectively). This may be due to the quality of the data

used for these groups, as both the mammal and bird groups

are proportionately better inventoried than the other two

groups.

The normal probability plot of the residuals from the

angiosperm regression revealed that this group does not

share a linear relationship with area, as assumed. Without

this relationship with area, the regression procedure will not

be able to explain this group well. Conifers (seed- bearers),

unlike the other groups, have a particular geographic distribution, with species richness being higher at low latitudes

and very few of their form found in the tropics. For cycad

richness the reverse is true, but there are few species in this

subgroup. The group is therefore biased toward temperate

locations, and again the procedure used here is not good at

dealing with this pattern.

For wilderness, an interesting trend in the determinants

emerges through this analysis. At high levels of wilderness

quality, both from the McCloskey and Spalding inventory

(1989) and Lesslie’s continuum (2000), a combination of

climate, elevation, and population are significant predictors. For categories 1 and 2, latitude is also identified as an

important determinant. Consultation of maps of the various

wilderness quality classifications indicates that Lesslie’s

categories 1 and 2 are higher in wilderness quality than

McCloskey and Spalding’s polygon wilderness. The maps

also reveal that quality category 3 most closely approximates the polygon inventory. At this level, latitude ceases to

become important, and predictors of the Lesslie continuum

once again match the McCloskey and Spalding predictors.

Climate, elevation, and population continue to drive the

distribution of the quality categories of 7 and 11. At category 15, the explanatory power of the model peaks at 37.9

percent, and latitude replaces climate as a predictor variable. For the lowest quality wilderness (17–21), elevation is

the only predictor that significantly shapes the distribution, indicating that this also determines the nature and

extent of human activity that is the basis for this evaluation of wilderness.

Results From Analysis With Climate

Variables Included Independently

The use of a single-climate axis does not facilitate the

identification of the individual facets of climate included in

the research hypotheses. In addition to the first model run,

the results of which are shown in table 3, a second run of the

regression models was carried out where each of the climate

variables were entered separately. Instead of combining

temperature, precipitation, and evapotranspiration into one

PCA axis, each of these factors, consisting of their respective

summary variables, were inputted into their own PCA run

Figure 3—Global grid-based wilderness continuum at a resolution of 0.5 decimal degree

(30 minute) (Lesslie 2000, personal communication). High quality wilderness is in black,

with grey representing low quality wilderness—urban and developed areas (printed here

with kind permission of Rob Lesslie).
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 235

Dymond, Carver, and Philips Investigating the Environmental Cause of Global Wilderness and Species Richness Distributions

to define three new axes. Although this method does not

ensure that the independent variables are truly independent,

it does facilitate the identification of the individual climatic

variables that are contributory to the distributions of the

dependent species richness and wilderness variables. The

results of this analysis can be found in table 4 in the same

format as table 3. This analysis reveals that the climatic

Table 3—Results from the stepwise multiple regression of environment factors against species

richness residuals for four major groups and wilderness from the McCloskey and

Spalding (1989) polygon inventoryb and various wilderness qualities from Lesslie

(2000, personal communication), where Quality 1 is high and Quality 21 is lowc. Each

quality category consists of the proportion of land of that quality, in each country, plus all

that at higher levels (cumulative). LAT = latitude axis, ELEV = elevation axis, CLIM =

climate axis (sum of temperature, precipitation, and evapotranspiration), and POP =

human population axis. + and – symbols indicate whether the predictor contributes

positively or negatively to the dependent variable. aAdjusted R2 equals the amount of

variation explained by the model.

Dependent variable Predictors in final model Adjusted R2

Mammal richness LAT–, CLIM+ 0.420 (42.0%a)

Bird richness LAT–, CLIM+, POP+ .362

Flowering plant richness CLIM+ .167

Conifer and cycad richness LAT+, ELEV+ .166

Polygon wildernessb CLIM+, ELEV+, POP+ .371

Quality 1 wildernessc LAT+, CLIM-, ELEV+, POP– .121

Quality 2 wilderness LAT+, CLIM-

, ELEV+, POP– .187

Quality 3 wilderness CLIM+, ELEV+, POP– .206

Quality 7 wilderness CLIM+, ELEV+, POP– .297

Quality 11 wilderness CLIM+, ELEV+, POP– .363

Quality 15 wilderness LAT+, ELEV+, POP– .379

Quality 17 wilderness ELEV+ .210

Quality 19 wilderness ELEV+ .174

Quality 21 wilderness ELEV+ .153

variables most responsible for the distributions of species

richness are in fact precipitation, and for the plant groups of

flowering plants and conifers and cycads, temperature is

also important. Precipitation is also identified as important

for all of the wilderness categories with the addition of

evapotranspiration, and for wilderness quality categories 11

and 15, temperature also contributes.

Table 4—Results from the stepwise multiple regression of environment factors against species

richness residuals for four major groups and wilderness quality where the climatic

factors have been included individually; these factors are indicated in italics. LAT =

latitude axis, ELEV = elevation axis, POP = human population axis, EVAP =

evapotranspiration axis, PPT = precipitation axis, and TEMP = temperature axis, + and –

symbols indicate whether the predictor contributes positively or negatively to the

dependent variable. a

Adjusted R2 equals the amount of variation explained by the

model.

Dependent variable Predictors in final model Adjusted R2

Mammal richness LAT–, PPT+ 0.479 (47.9%)

Bird richness LAT–

, PPT+ .381

Flowering plant richness TEMP-, PPT+ .284

Conifer and cycad richness LAT+, PPT+, TEMP- .284

Polygon wilderness ELEV+, EVAP+, PPT-, POP– .446

Quality 1 wilderness ELEV+, EVAP+, PPT-

, POP– .189

Quality 2 wilderness ELEV+, EVAP+, PPT-, POP– .274

Quality 3 wilderness ELEV+, EVAP+, PPT-, POP– .313

Quality 7 wilderness ELEV+, EVAP+, PPT-, POP– .400

Quality 11 wilderness ELEV+, EVAP+, PPT+, POP–, TEMP+ .527

Quality 15 wilderness ELEV+, EVAP+, PPT-, POP–, TEMP+ .523

Quality 17 wilderness ELEV+, EVAP+, PPT- .283

Quality 19 wilderness ELEV+, EVAP+, PPT- .233

Quality 21 wilderness ELEV+, EVAP+, PPT- .207
236 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Dymond, Carver, and Philips Investigating the Environmental Cause of Global Wilderness and Species Richness Distributions

Does Wilderness Contribute to the

Distribution of Species Richness

and Vice Versa?

To test whether wilderness quality can actually explain

any of the variation in the distribution of species richness

and vice versa, each must be incorporated as independent

variables into the regression process. To do this, the models

where climate is represented by one independent axis were

rerun with the addition of species richness in the dependent

wilderness models and wilderness in the dependent species

richness models. The results indicate that high quality

wilderness (category 3) does explain a small percentage of

the variation in species richness of the mammal, flowering

plant, and conifer and cycad groups, respectively. An additional 5.9 percent, 4.8 percent, and 2.5 percent of the variation is explained.

We might expect an environmental state, like wilderness,

to influence the patterns of species richness in the same way

that temperature makes a contribution. However, it is

difficult to be sure of any contribution of species richness to

wilderness. It is perhaps only through the analysis of different groups of species that this might become meaningful.

However, the results indicate that for high levels of wilderness quality, mammalian and angiosperm species richness,

in particular, do explain some of the variation in the proportion of wilderness at these qualities. For example, mammalian richness adds 10.9 percent to the success of the model to

predict the variation in the distribution of wilderness quality category 2. The situation is reversed when the conifer and

cycad group is used as an independent predictor of wilderness because it only adds to the explanatory success of

models of low wilderness quality. Here, it contributes a

further 17.6 percent to the success of the wilderness quality

17 category.

Discussion _____________________

The results reveal that different factors are responsible

for the distribution of each of the species groups, and some

groups are better explained than others. For wilderness

quality there is also a fluctuation in the ability of the models

to explain the distributions. As quality changes, so do the

factors that are considered contributory. The second run of

models, where climate variables are entered individually,

reveal that only certain aspects of climate contribute to the

explanatory power of the models. It is hard to ascertain

which of the hypotheses set at the beginning of the research

are appropriate without considering the direction of the

relationships between the predictor and dependent variables. Included in tables 3 and 4 are an indication of whether

each of the predictor variables contribute positively or negatively to the distributions.

The models show that latitude negatively contributes to

the distribution of mammalian and avian species richness;

low latitude is important for these groups. Latitude does not

seem to be important for angiosperm richness, whereas

“good” climate, and in particular high precipitation, is important. The model revealed that temperature negatively

contributed to angiosperm richness, which is unexpected,

but the B coefficient was very low (B = 0.0062). Climate was

also important for mammals and birds, and high precipitation was confirmed as important. The pattern is reversed for

the conifer and cycad group; latitude positively contributes

to richness, high elevation, high precipitation, and low

temperatures.

At high levels of wilderness quality (categories 1 and 2),

high elevation, high latitude, low precipitation, and low

population all contribute to variation. By definition, wilderness is devoid of human features and, therefore, of resident

population, so it is to be expected that low population is

important in the models. As wilderness quality decreases,

high elevation and low precipitation continue to be important contributors to the distributions. For models with

climate variables entered together, the lowest wilderness

quality categories (17–21) are only explained by elevation.

We can conclude that mammalian, avian, and angiosperm

richness prefer low latitudes, whereas high wilderness quality is associated with high latitudes. Altitude was not found

to affect the patterns of species richness for these three

groups but was an important predictor variable for all of the

wilderness categories. Evapotranspiration (actual and potential axis) was not found to be influential to the variation

in species richness groups but was repeatedly recognized as

important for wilderness. Further interpretation is needed

here to elucidate the real meaning of the PCA axis that

summarizes this complex interaction. High temperature

was found to influence patterns of angiosperm richness but

not mammalian or avian richness. In general, temperature

was not found to affect the distribution of wilderness. In

contrast to the other species richness groups, the seedbearing plants (conifers and cycads) were positively influenced by latitude and elevation and prefer low temperatures, indicating an affiliation for poor climate. It is possible,

therefore, that optimal conditions for this group are characteristics akin to those for high wilderness quality.

Different environmental characteristics appear to shape

the distribution of wilderness and the species richness of the

groups investigated. At the onset, it was hypothesized that

approximately opposing characteristics were responsible for

patterns of wilderness and species richness, and it has been

shown that to some extent this is true. It has also been found

that wilderness environments contribute in a small way to

the variation in species richness for some groups. Counterintuitively, species richness also plays a part in the distribution of wilderness, but we suggest that this may be more

correlation than causation. The fluctuation in environmental conditions preferred by the different taxa examined is to

be expected and illustrates how important the use of more

than one group is to this investigation. National species

richness data has constrained this work, and it is expected

that should grid-based biodiversity information become

available, it will enhance the accuracy of research of this

kind. A grid-based wilderness continuum has been useful in

improving the quality of global wilderness distribution data.

Further Research _______________

The next step in this research is to identify factors that

influence the relationships between species richness and

wilderness quality at smaller scales. Access to the 1998,

United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 237

Dymond, Carver, and Philips Investigating the Environmental Cause of Global Wilderness and Species Richness Distributions

Southeast Alaska Inventory, has facilitated analysis of the

effect of distance from human features on species richness

on Prince of Wales Island, Tongass National Forest. More

indepth field data have been collected to investigate the

impact of recreation trails, as a common wilderness impact,

on species richness.

Acknowledgments ______________

This Ph.D. research is sponsored by the Natural Environment Research Council, Grant Number GT04/98/130. Attendance at the 7th World Wilderness Congress by C. Dymond

was kindly sponsored by the Anglo American Corporation

and was organized by the Wilderness Trust. I am extremely

grateful to both for their support. Thanks to my supervisors,

Dr. Steve Carver and Dr. Oliver Phillips, for their editorial

comments.

References _____________________

Ahn, C. R.; Tateishi, R. 1994a. Development of a 30 minute grid

potential evapotranspiration data set. Journal of the Japan

Society Photogrammetry Remote Sensing. 33(2): 12–21.

Ahn, C. R.; Tateishi, R. 1994b. Development of global land surface

evapotranspiration and water balance data sets. Journal of the

Japan Society Photogrammetry Remote Sensing. 33(5): 48–61.

Defense Mapping Agency (DMA). 1992. Digital chart of the World.

Fairfax, VA: Defense Mapping Agency. 4 CD-ROMs.

Groombridge, B., ed. 1994. Biodiversity data sourcebook. Compiled

by the World Conservation and Monitoring Centre. Cambridge:

World Conservation Press. 155 p.

Leemans, R.; Cramer, W. P. 1991. The International Institute for

Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) database for mean monthly

values of temperature, precipitation and cloudiness in a global

terrestrial grid. Res. Rep. 18. Laxenburg, Austria: IIASA. 65 p.

Lesslie, R. 2000. [E-mail correspondence to Crewenna Dymond].

June 14. On file with author.

Lesslie, R. G.; Maslen, M. 1995. National wilderness inventory,

Australia: handbook of procedures, content and usage, 2d ed.

Canberra: Australian Heritage Commission. 98 p.

MacArthur, R. H.; Wilson, E. O. 1969. The theory of island biogeography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 203 p.

McCloskey, J. M.; Spalding, H. 1989. A reconnaissance-level inventory of the amount of wilderness remaining in the world. Ambio.

18(4): 221–227.

National Geophysical Data Center. 1988. Digital relief of the surface of the Earth. NOAA National Geophysical Data Center Data

Announcement 88-MGG-02. Boulder, CO: National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration, National Geophysical Data Center.

O’Brien, E. M. 1998. Water-energy-dynamics, climate and prediction of woody plant species richness: and interim general model.

Journal of Biogeography. 25: 379–398.

Rahbek, C. 1997. The relationship among area, elevation and

regional species richness of Neotropical birds. The American

Naturalist. 149(5): 875–902.

Rohde, K. 1992. Latitudinal gradients in species richness: the

search for the primary cause. Oikos. 65: 514–527.

Skellern, A. R. 1999. Development of an ecohydrological model to

predict peat distribution and potential depth at the global scale.

Leeds, UK: University of Leeds, School of Geography. 287 p.

Thesis.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1995. International database online

demographic aggregation mid-year population estimates for 1995.

International Programmes Center. [Online]. Available: http://

www.census.gov/ipc/www/idbagg.html. [2001, October 10].

U.S. Geological Survey; University of Nebraska-Lincoln; European

Commission’s Joint Research Centre. 2000. Global land cover

characterization. [Online]. Version 1.2. Available: http://edcdaac.

usgs.gov/glcc/glcc.html. [2001, October 10].

United Nations Population Division. 1998. World urbanization

prospects, estimates and projections of urban and rural populations and of urban agglomerations. 1996 Revision. New York:

United Nations. 839 p.
238 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Till M. Meyer is an Environmental Journalist, 81549 Munich, Balanstr.

211. 8, 81549 München, Germany. FAX: 0049 89 68072351, E-mail: till@

natur.de

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Aldo Leopold (1887–1948) was one of America’s most

renowned ecologists and nature writers. His family’s weekend home,

“the Shack,” provides the narrative backdrop for describing Leopold’s

perceptions of wilderness. This paper traces the evolution of Leopold’s

wilderness concepts through natural history, contemporary history,

and cultural history. It also describes his influence on conservation

jurisdiction and the globalization of wilderness concepts.

By examining both the natural history of the Shack vicinity and the

pivotal historic periods Leopold lived in and stemmed from, many of

his insights into conservation can be better understood. Two factors

stick out that affected his attitudes the most: Leopold came from a

culturally rich European-American background (Flader 1994), and

was tremendously influenced by his journeys. Illuminating the larger

contexts of Leopold backgrounds, it becomes evident that the history

of the conservation movement in America cannot be told without

looking beyond the nation’s geographical and cultural borders.

As I will show in my paper, quite a few of the motives behind

wilderness conservation developed in Europe as a part of the

Romantic Movement. Along with the mass immigration from Europe, many of these motives were exported to the United States

where they matured and became “America’s best idea” (Lötsch

2001). Aldo Leopold was one of the leading figures to carry this idea

into effect by way of wildlife management, restoration ecology, and

wilderness conservation.

Method ________________________

I traveled to the Aldo Leopold Memorial Reserve (LMR)

many times between 1989 to 1999 and also visited the

Shack and the University of Wisconsin Arboretum. My

initial reason for visiting involved the publication of the

German translation of A Sand County Almanac. As I

researched some of the foundations of this book I became

interested in the history of conservation. Subsequently,

Leopold, his quotes, insights, and teachings funneled into

my growing awareness of the interconnectedness of history, culture, and ecology. This became the subject of

numerous articles of mine between 1989 and 2001. As a

staff editor and freelance writer for the magazines Natur

and Natur & Kosmos, I often report on the development and

practical consequences of various concepts of wilderness in

The Shack Revisited: Aldo Leopold’s

Perceptions of Wilderness From a Historic,

Legal, and International Perspective

Till M. Meyer

Germany and abroad. In this paper, I am also summarizing

many of those details and correlations that I found through

my journalistic investigations.

Introduction ____________________

“If there are cracks in time, Aldo Leopold fell through

one,” a book reviewer wrote in the journal American Forests

(Kaufman 1991). Indeed, Leopold began his journey through

time in the historic realm of the “Wild West” (fig. 1). Then,

strongly influenced by conservation politics and attitudes

of the 1930s and 1940s in America and Europe, he proceeded

to leave his imprint by creating the conceptual foundations

of wildlife management and restoration ecology.

Aldo Leopold’s most challenging visions were the ideas that

environmental degradation and local loss of species do not

necessarily present a one-way street, and that wilderness and

civilization need not antagonize each other. The major tools to

change the course—wilderness conservation, restoration ecology, and wildlife management—were pioneered by him.

Figure 1—Leopold poses in full cowboy regalia,

in Springerville, Arizona, age 22. He arrived here

by stagecoach on July 18, 1909, bringing his

notion of the West as a wild wonderland, as well

as a set of acute senses, a restless curiosity, and

an ample young ego (Meine 1988) (photo courtesy of the Aldo Leopold Foundation archives).
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 239

The Shack Revisited: Aldo Leopold’s Perceptions... Meyer

Whereas wildlife management is a widely practiced art and

science in many countries today, restoration ecology is not.

Leopold’s perhaps most influential achievements came

after his untimely death in 1948. His classic, A Sand

County Almanac, was first published in 1949. This book

had considerable influence on conservation, environmental awareness, and institutional policies during the 1970s,

1980s, and 1990s. Finally, with the turn of the millennium,

Leopold evolved into a leadership figure of postmodern

resource management, not only in the United States but in

many other countries as well. For instance, Germany’s first

International Master of Science Program in Sustainable

Resource Management opened as recently as October 2001,

at the Technical University of Munich. The course work

includes wildlife management and restoration ecology. The

program owes its existence partly to the initiative of United

States-educated wildlife biologist and Leopold scholar,

Wolfgang Schröder (2001, personal communication). This

new program presents but one example of the long-lasting

transatlantic traffic of conservation ideas.

Natural History _________________

“Wilderness is a resource which can shrink but never grow,”

wrote Leopold (1949: 199) in A Sand County Almanac. Although this remark is widely cited by many wilderness

enthusiasts, it should be noted that later in life, Leopold did

everything in his power to invalidate this axiom. By spearheading the art and science of environmental restoration, he

attempted no less than to prove that environmental destruction could be reversed and, consequently, lost wilderness

could be rehabilitated.

The Shack and the land on which it stood had belonged to

a bootlegger, who, according to Leopold (1949: viii), “hated

the farm, skinned it of residual fertility.... We try to rebuild

with shovel and axe what we are losing elsewhere.” This and

the following sentence summarize what later would become

the central thesis of ecological restoration: “The time has

come for science to busy itself with the earth itself. The first

step is to reconstruct a sample of what we had to start with”

(in Flader and Callicott 1991: 211). To initiate these processes of healing the land, Leopold suggested that it would

be necessary to retain representative samples of intact

ecosystems as a sample of normality. Leopold acknowledged

the ecological-scientific value of wilderness as places of

reverence for ecological restoration and that one could not

study the physiology of Montana in the Amazon, as each

biotic province needs its own wilderness for comparison of

used land to unused land. Today, the concept of “place of

reference” is a backbone to modern restoration ecology, as it

presents a genetic resource base for restocking, a place to

gain understanding of ecological processes, and a measuring

rod for restoration success.

In 1935, Leopold purchased 80 acres (32 ha) of derelict

farmland on the Wisconsin River. This land included the

burned remnants of a farm building and an old chicken

coop, which later would become “the Shack” (fig. 2). The

same year he began to work as director of the University of

Wisconsin Arboretum. In this position, he strove for a

reconstruction of the original Wisconsin rather than a

collection of imported trees (Meine and Knight 1999). Both

projects, the farm restoration and the University Arboretum (fig. 3), marked the beginning and signal moment of

the conservation movement and the first systematic attempt to reassemble disturbed ecosystems (Jordan 1990;

Jordan and others 1987). With the purchase by Leopold

began a new attitude toward the land, whereby landowners

started to reverse the process of land deterioration and to

build it back to something like presettlement condition.

Leopold would hardly recognize his farm today. It is a

diverse landscape with woodland, oak savanna, prairie, and

wetland, managed as the 1,400-acre (566.5-ha) Aldo Leopold

Memorial Reserve (LMR). Following is a partial list of plants

that can currently be seen on the LMR. They were not

recorded by Leopold, who kept meticulous notes, so they

were probably not there during his occupancy: Indian paint

brush (Castilleja coccinea), wild iris (Iris Virginica), wild

quinine (Parthenium inegrifolium), purple coneflower

(Echinacea purpurea), gayfeather (Liatris pycnostachya),

Figure 2—Aldo and Estella Leopold in front of

the Shack, 1942, showing the added bunk wing

(photo by A. Carl Leopold).

Figure 3—Charles Bradley, Nina’s husband,

examines prairie plants raised to supply seeds for

restoration (photo by Till Meyer).
240 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Meyer The Shack Revisited: Aldo Leopold’s Perceptions...

gerardia (Gerardia tenuifolia), turtle head (Chelone glabra),

and fringed gentian (Gentiana crinita). Birds and mammals

that can be seen more frequently within the boundaries of

the LMR are: the great horned owl (Bubo virginianus),

ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus), sandhill crane (Grus

canadensis), beaver (Castor canadensis), and river otter

(Lutra canadensis) (Ross and Ross 1998).

Such successes in conservation and restoration ecology

can be easily attributed to Aldo Leopold and his ecological

insights and foresights. They also represent the results of

the continuing efforts of his children, especially his daughter

Nina (fig. 4) and her family and friends, as well as many

members and affiliates of the Aldo Leopold Foundation. I

want to reflect throughout most parts of this paper on some

of the historical and cultural (nonecological) roots of these

conservation successes. Sometimes I find myself musing

about the possibility that the wild irises, indian paintbrushes, and cranes found at the LMR might represent more

than what we had thought up to now. Acts of divine creation—yes, very likely. Examples of the great American

natural and national heritage—yes, for sure. Increasingly

however, I feel that they also may owe their existence to the

rich cultural heritage that America shares with the “Old

Country.”

Aldo Leopold probably would have had some sympathy

with the interdisciplinary approach which I’m about to take

on the following pages. During his trip to Germany in 1935

(fig. 5), at a quiet moment in his hotel in Berlin, he jotted

down the following words under the heading of “Wilderness”

(Meine 1988: 359):

One of the anomalies of modern ecology is that it is the

creation of two groups each of which seems barely aware of

the existence of the other. The one studies the human

community almost as if it were a separate entity, and calls

its findings sociology, economics, and history, the other

studies the plant and animal community, [and] comfortably

relegates the hodge-podge of politics to ‘the liberal arts.’ The

inevitable fusion of these two lines of thought will, perhaps,

constitute the outstanding advance of the present century.

Contemporary and Cultural

Figure 4—Nina in her backyard prairie garden

(photo by Till Meyer).

Figure 5—Leopold in Berlin, 1935, where he visited

the renowned School of Forestry in Tharandt near

Dresden (photo courtesy of the Aldo Leopold Foundation archives).

History ________________________

The year 1935 was a busy one for Aldo Leopold. He helped

to organize the Wilderness Society, worked as the Director

of the Wisconsin Arboretum, and traveled to Germany for

more than 3 months (Meine 1988). As the Leopolds renovated the chicken coop and created a weekend home, they

called it “the elums,” then “Jagdschloss” (hunting chalet),

and finally “the Shack” (Meine 1988). The outhouse was

referred to as “the parthenon.” These humorous namegivings

not only illustrate the gay family atmosphere of the Leopolds

but also show that they were (and still are) a culturally

sensitive bunch, open to influences from the Old Country.

“This sand farm in Wisconsin,” Leopold (1949: ix) wrote in

A Sand County Almanac, was “worn out and then abandoned by our bigger-and-better society.” These words are a

concise, almost poetic comment on the roaring twenties, to

which he also referred to as being heedless and arrogant.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 241

The Shack Revisited: Aldo Leopold’s Perceptions... Meyer

Ecoculturally, this period was characterized by the first

assault on land by mechanized agriculture. In the United

States, the Dust Bowl, and to some degree the Great Depression, can be considered historic consequences of the attitudes and practices that Leopold criticized.

After his trip to Germany in 1935, Leopold noted that one

of the most insistent impressions received from traveling in

Germany was the lack of wilderness in the landscape

(Flader and Callicott 1991). Meine writes, “This realization

haunted Leopold and strengthened his determination to

avoid the same fate in America” (Flader and Callicott 1991:

226). Leopold wrote,

I hope that we may begin to realize a truth already written

bold and clear on the German landscape: that success in most

over-artificialized land uses is bought at the expense of the

public interest (Flader and Callicott 1991: 228).

In A Sand County Almanac, he referred to his German

experience:

Ability to see the cultural value of wilderness boils down,

in the last analysis, to a question of intellectual humility. The

shallow-minded modern who has lost his rootage in the land

assumes that he has already discovered what is important; it

is such who prate of empires, political or economic, that will

last a thousand years (Leopold 1949: 200).

And:

In human history, we have learned (I hope) that the

conqueror role is eventually self-defeating. Why? Because it

is implicit in such a role that the conqueror knows, ex cathedra, just what makes the community clock tick, and just what

and who is valuable, and what and who is worthless in

community life. It always turns out that he knows neither,

and this is why his conquests eventually defeat themselves

(Leopold 1949: 204).

Leopold wrote these sentences shortly after WWII, thus not

only remarking on the cultural roots of ecological degradation but also on the attitudes of the political leaders of Nazi

Germany.

Meine even suggests, however subtly, that the prevalent

political attitudes in Germany of 1935 furnished a strong

metaphor to Leopold’s own political and ecological attitudes:

For him, a further ‘lesson in naturalism’ was the ties that

bind together our communities—human and natural—are

often poorly recognized, understood, or appreciated, and that

they are severed at our own risk. Turned around, that meant

that when we conserve our communities, we conserve ourselves as well. It is a lesson we still struggle to heed (Meine

1994: 9).

Leopold’s sensitivity regarding the cultural arrogance of

man vis-a-vis the land emerged neither in Wisconsin nor in

Germany, but while he was in New Mexico and Arizona,

where he began his career as a forester in 1909. Leopold’s

concern about soil erosion developed while he was in the

Southwest and later found focus in Wisconsin. He returned

to the United States determined to avoid the overly artificial

management of land and wildlife that so profoundly unsettled him in Germany (Flader and Callicott 1991). Apparently, Leopold applied to one region that which he had

learned from another.

Even though he romanticized the American Wild West to

a degree early in his career, he also criticized the ignorance

of this era that led to unwise land use. He did this at a time

when conservation was practically unheard of in America,

and when the Wild West’s classical heroes, the cowboys, the

loggers, the forty-niners, the hunters, and the trappers,

were mystified in many parts of North America and Europe.

That these characters of the Wild West more often than not

acted as agents of environmental destruction had escaped

most Wild West aficionados. In fact, large-scale mining,

grazing, hunting, and logging at the turn of the century had

already left many a mark on the land. Sadly, Leopold (1949:

148–149) wrote:

Man always kills the things he loves, and so we the pioneers

have killed our wilderness. Some say, we had to. Be that as it

may. I’m glad I shall never be young without wild country to

be young in.

It can be safely said that Leopold’s wilderness attitudes

were also a result of the historic periods that occurred

decades before his lifetime. When he graduated from Yale in

1909, National Parks such as Yellowstone (1872), Yosemite

(1890), Mount Rainier (1899), Crater Lake (1902), and Wind

Cave (1903) had already been established. Conservation

was “in the air,” and legal protection of wild nature was

supported by a considerable part of American society. During the presidency of Theodore Roosevelt (1901–1909), for

instance, more than 312,500 miles2 (809,371 km2

) of National Forests, National Monuments, National Parks, and

wildlife refuges were proclaimed as public domain. Roosevelt

also appointed several prominent commissions, through

which he shaped a coherent national conservation policy

(Meine 1988). From abroad, these conservation successes

were seen with envy. In 1913, James Bryce, Historian and

British Ambassador to the United States, called National

Parks, “America’s best idea” (Lötsch 2001).

Much of the motivating force behind “America’s greatest

idea” came from inside America, from the rapid exploitation

of American landscapes and resources by European settlers

in the 1800s, as well as the rise of industry and the automobile culture in the late 1910s and 1920s (Meine 2001, personal

communication). Leopold (Flader and Callicott 1991: 131)

wrote,

Do not forget that the good roads mania, and all forms of

unthinking boosterism that go with it, constitute a steamroller the like of which has seldom been seen in the history of

mankind...and unless the wilderness idea represents the

mandate of an organized fighting and voting body of farseeing Americans, the steamroller will win.

“America’s greatest idea,” however, also had distinct foreign components to it. On the following pages, I want to talk

mostly about some of the motivating forces for the Wilderness Movement that came from outside America. The story

of the American Conservation Movement would only be half

told if it were examined just by looking within the boundaries of the United States. The picture becomes more complete when the evolution of conservation in America is also

regarded as the outcome of a transatlantic mixed bag of

ideas, historical forces, and cultural frictions.

Leopold’s ancestors came to the United States from Germany between 1834 and 1848 (Meine 1988). Historically,

these journeys were a part of a greater immigration pattern

from Europe; between 1820 and 1929, 32,129,908 Europeans immigrated to the United States, 5,881,032 of these

were of German nationality. They, in fact, comprised the
242 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Meyer The Shack Revisited: Aldo Leopold’s Perceptions...

largest national group (Helbich 1985; Wittke 1939). Sauk

County, Wisconsin, which now harbors the LMR, had a

particularly high immigration rate from Germany. By 1890,

over 60 percent of the population of this County were

German born (Zeitlin 1977). It should be noted here that

Leopold’s ancestors first settled in Iowa.

The reasons behind this immigration were manifold. During the late 18th and early 19th century, immigrants often left

to escape political suppression and economic injustice—

societal obstructions, such as virtually impenetrable class

distinctions, paralyzed thoughts, speech, and movement.

Even at the end of the 19th century, Germany still consisted

of a loose conglomeration of several dozen distinct territories

ranging from free cities and dwarf duchies to giant states

such as Prussia. There were plenty of Kings, Dukes, Earls,

and Lord Mayors to impose restrictions. Pastimes such as

hunting, fishing, or even walking leisurely in the woods

often were highly punishable as trespassing acts of traditional feudal rights. These humiliations and deprivations of

physical and intellectual freedom in the Old Country resulted in the establishment of a great many “free thinking

societies” in the “New Country,” which were often associated

with the Turnverein (gymnastic societies). Its objective was

to stress physical and social improvement (Wittke 1939;

Zeitlin 1977).

It would be misleading to think that 19th and early 20th

century nature lovers in Europe were kept from enjoying

nature altogether. Some more advanced cultural centers

had begun to build metropolitan parks such as the “English

Garden” in Munich, which was completed around 1816.

These English Landscape Gardens were especially designed

for the enjoyment of all the people and not just the old guard,

thus marking the societal changeover of the period (Freyberg

2000). Janson (1977) writes that the English Landscape

Gardens were carefully planned to look unplanned, with

winding path, irregular spaced clumps of trees, and little

lakes and rivers instead of symmetrical basins and canals.

They were designed to seem as unbounded, and full of

surprise and variety, as nature itself. In many ways, English

Landscape Gardens anticipated the aesthetic and democratic appeal of what would later become part of wilderness

conservation and restoration ecology in America.

It should also be noted that English Landscape Gardens

increasingly became regarded as a sort of aesthetic antidote to

the “over-artificialized” landscapes. Leopold acknowledged:

And this calls to mind what is perhaps the first element in

the German deficit: their former passion for unnecessary

outdoor geometry... Most German forests, for example, though

laid out over a hundred years ago, would do credit to any

cubist.... I also saw many a creek and rivulet laid out as a dead

snake, and with masonry banks to boot. I’m depressed by such

indignities, and I have black misgivings over the swarm of

new bureaus now out to improve the American countryside

(Flader and Callicott 1991: 227–228).

The passion for unnecessary outdoor geometry is very

much a part of German forestry tradition. Lowood (Harrison

1992: 123) states:

The German forest became an archetype for imposing on

disorderly nature the neatly arranged constructs of science.

Witness the forest Cotta chose as an example of his new science:

over the decades, his plan transformed a ragged patchwork into

a neat chessboard. Practical goals had encouraged mathematical

utilitarianism, which seemed, in turn, to promote geometric

perfection as the outward sign of the well managed forest; in

turn, the rationally ordered arrangement of trees offered new

possibilities for controlling nature.

Heinrich Cotta (1763–1844), parenthetically, was a forest

scientist and founder of the School of Forestry in Tharandt

near Dresden, which Leopold had visited in 1935.

“Mathematical utilitarianism” and the “rationally ordered”

naturally presented pet peeves for many romantics of the

same period in which Cotta lived. This dualism comes out

very well in the lamentations of the poet Caroline von

Günderode (1780–1806). In her poem Former Times, New

Times, she writes:

A rough and narrow path that crossed the earth,/overseen

by mountains and the gleaming skies above,/A gorge on its

side was hell,/and many a path would deviate into abyss and

into heaven.//All this has changed now,/The skies have fallen,/

the gorge is filled up, and covered with reason.//The highs of

faith have been demolished./Purpose is walking on the flattened earth,/And it is measuring the universe in feet and

yards (Wolf 1981: 10).

Even though aesthetic, intellectual and physical frustrations were a continuing motive behind immigration, toward

the end of the 19th century, it became overlaid more and more

by mass unemployment, poverty, and social upheaval, which

resulted from the Industrial Revolution. The shadier aspects of the Industrial Revolution, sometimes referred to as

the “Machine Age,” also presented considerable motivating

power for the Romantic Movement. In Europe and later in

the United States, with the rapid spread of cities, factories,

and their attendant social dislocations, people came to

question whether the Industrial Revolution really represented progress. Locked in the drudgery and grime of manufacturing communities, more and more people followed poets and philosophers in embracing nature as an avenue of

escape. The Romantic Movement, for example, in its praise

for the strange and mysterious in nature, by definition

preferred landscapes only suggestive of human occupation

(Runte 1987).

Caroline Günderode’s English contemporary, George Gordon, alias Lord Byron (1788–1824) writes in similar, yet less

metaphorical verse than Günderode:

There is a rapture on the lonely shore,/There is society,

where none intrudes,/By the deep sea, and music in its roar/

I love not man the less, but Nature more,/From these our

interviews, in which I steal/From all I may be, or have been

before,/To mingle with the Universe, and feel/What I can

ne’er express, yet cannot all conceal (from the poem Childe

Harold’s Pilgrimage Canto iv, verse 178, quoted in James

Fenimore Cooper’s The Deerslayer [1963: 9]).

This neatly illustrates the mutual crosspollination of wilderness attitudes—a European romantic’s (Byron’s) poetic attitude toward wilderness was used to describe the wilderness

longing of (Cooper’s) American legendary frontiersmen,

Leatherstocking. This legend is then later re-imported to

Europe, where Leopold noticed that, “the Germans are still

reading Cooper’s Leatherstocking and Parkman’s Oregon

Trailand still flock to wild-west movies” (Flader and Callicott

1991: 227). He wondered why this fascination with wilderness did not have practical consequences, and “why people

did not flock to [the] forest to camp out, as in America”

(Flader and Callicott 1991: 227).
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 243

The Shack Revisited: Aldo Leopold’s Perceptions... Meyer

This predisposition to admire nature originated in the

Romantic era. Fernández-Armesto (1995) noted that Europeans who traveled to America during earlier periods were

hardly inclined to awe at landscapes, and that only after

transformation by the sentimental cult of the 18th century

did the American landscape find its place in romantic imagination. This change of attitude from the rationalistic and

detached to the passionate and enraptured was notably

excited by the 1789 French Revolution and its “marvelous

promise of freedom” (Cardinal 1975). It tremendously influenced a wide variety of fields such as literature, art, science,

and politics, and lasted well over one hundred years before

it disintegrated with the “Stahlgewitter,” (the Steel-Storm

of WWI) (Fernández-Armesto 1995).

Incidentally, the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th

centuries also saw the publishing of the Encyclopedia of the

German Language by Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm (1960) in 16

Volumes (1838–1960). Most of it was published and compiled

posthumously. Volume 14 features a seven-column entry on

the meaning and usage of “Wildnis” (which is the German

translation of “Wilderness”) and quotes more then 160 examples and sources. In the history of literature, the Grimms

are considered representatives of the “Hochromantik” (High

Romantic). More widely of course they were renowned for

their fairytales (published 1812–1815). Much less known is

the fact that they both also cared for the conservation of

wilderness for national identity. In 1812, the brothers published a journal entitled Altdeutsche Wälder, or Old German

Forests, which explicitly linked German forests to the genesis

and continuity of authentic German culture (Harrison 1992).

The entry for wilderness in the Grimm’s encyclopedia was

compiled in 1913, just 1 year before politics brought an end

to the Romantic era. A closer investigation of this entry

reveals that many of the quoted authors such as Heinrich

Heine, Gottfried Herder, Friedrich Hölderlin, Bettine von

Brentano, and Richard Wagner are considered representatives of the Romantic era. The fact that many authors have

noted that it is virtually impossible to think of German

fairytales without thinking of a forest (Schama 1996) further suggests that a vague, perhaps even subconscious,

longing for wilderness preoccupied many Europeans when

they finally decided to immigrate to the United States. The

exodus from Europe was slowed down significantly in 1924

when America introduced an immigration quota for Europeans (Henningsen 1974).

The composer Richard Wagner (1813–1883), mentioned

above, was considered both a revolutionary (for partaking in

the German Revolution of 1848) and archetypal representative of the Romantic era. He also was a wilderness buff and

an avid mountaineer. In 1853, during a lengthy trip through

the mountains of Switzerland, Wagner talked enthusiastically about the “sacredness of wild country.” His opera

Rhinegold (premiering 1873), for instance, bemoans the

deflowering of pristine and untouched nature by materialism and an unrelenting lust for gold (Palm-Beulich 2002,

personal communication). Wagner was also characteristic of

the romantics’ inclination to somewhat idealize America.

His strong and enduring interest in the seductions of the

New World, emigration to the United States, and the gold

rush is easily demonstrated (Hörisch 2001) and not particularly original. Wagner had a thorough knowledge of the

works of a number of authors, such as Goethe, Achim von

Arnim, Johann Gottfried Herder, Nikolaus Lenau, Jean

Paul and Ludwig Börne, Heinrich Heine, Heinrich Zschokke,

Karl Gutzkow, and Gottfried Keller, who were fascinated by

America before the gold rush, and independently of it. That

America had it better in many respects than the tired old

continent of Europe became an often quoted maxim of

Wagner’s youth thanks to the following verses of Goethe

(1749–1832) from 1831 (Hörisch 2001: 58):

To the United States: America you have it better/Than our

continent so old./You have no ruined castles,/No basalt hard

and cold.//Within nothing daunts you/In the prime of life;/No

useless memories haunt you,/nor any futile strife.//Enjoy—

and use—the present!/And if your progeny writes,/May their

tales not tell of ghouls,/or damsels, thieves, or knights!

To sum up, the Wilderness Movement in the United States

was in part fired up by the same motivating forces that acted

earlier on the Romantic Movement in Europe (Meyer 2001).

Both the movements were expressions of heartfelt deficits

and frustrations born out of the Industrial Revolution and

an overload of old tie-down-traditions. Both were the product of a growing sense of alienation from nature and a loss of

authenticity; and both finally, presented an “avenue of

escape” from the various dire aspects of society. In curious

ways, both the Romantic and the Wilderness Movements

were reacting against a society that was changing too slowly

and at the same time changing too fast.

Through letters from immigrants that reached the Old

Country (Helbich 1985; Wittke 1939), news spread rapidly

that America was indeed a great place to live. Societal values

such as democracy and freedom (also fostered by many

romantics) were in a promising fledgling state in many parts

of the New World. Also, stories that told of spectacular

scenery and the promise of bountiful natural resources

added to the sense that a veritable paradise lies just across

the ocean.

It is easily understood that many a frustrated soul of the

Romantic Movement longed to sail to America, which presented a “projection screen” (Naumann 2001) for ideals and

desires that could not be fulfilled in Europe. This makes the

Romantic Movement in Europe a contributory branch to the

American Wilderness Movement, as Nash (1982) suggests.

But there is one major difference between the American

Wilderness Movement and the European Romantic Movement, which should be noted: The latter traditionally consisted of longing, but not quite arriving. Cardinal (1975)

notes that Romanticism is rooted in a sense of rift between

the actual and the ideal. Romantic painting, poetry, literature, music, and dance were all, in a sense, expressions of

unmet desires, practicing the cult of the unreachable, which

was so characteristic of the Romantic Movement (FernándezArmesto 1995).

The Wilderness Movement, in stark contrast to this, was and

still is, aimed at identifying, protecting, and recreating real

places and not imaginary ones, however sophisticated. This is

what makes the Wilderness Movement so uniquely American

after all: Americans just don’t have a tradition of enduring

centuries of frustrated longings without doing anything about

it! The constitutional right to the Pursuit of Happiness is

ingrained in the movement to preserve Wilderness.

This almost, but not quite, answers the question why

National Parks, and consequently wilderness, evolved to be

“America’s best idea.” There was more: Runte (1987) notes
244 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Meyer The Shack Revisited: Aldo Leopold’s Perceptions...

that unlike established European countries, which traced

their origins far back into antiquity, the United States

lacked a long artistic and literary heritage. The absence of

reminders of the human past, including castles, ancient

ruins, and cathedrals on the landscape, further alienated

American intellectuals from a cultural identity. By the

1860s, in response to the constant barbs about these deficiencies from Old World critics and New World American

apologists, many thoughtful Americans had embraced the

wonderlands of the West as replacements for manmade

marks of achievement. The agelessness of monumental

scenery instead of past accomplishments of Western Civilization was to become the visible symbol of continuity and

stability in the new nation. The constant barbs were almost

a trademark for many German newcomers. Many Americans took offense that amongst them (the immigrants) were

many Catholics, some socialists, and no few cultural chauvinists (Helbich 1985).

In other words, the alleged and perceived lack of culture in

America partook in giving rise to the culture of wilderness

preservation. Leopold (1949) felt that the ability to see the

cultural value of wilderness boiled down, in the last analysis,

to a question of intellectual humility. One cannot help but

speculate that Leopold too must have been aware of European cultural chauvinism.

Legal Aspects __________________

Among many wilderness enthusiasts, Leopold is known

for initiating administrative protection for the world’s first

designated wilderness area, the Gila Wilderness Area in

New Mexico, established June 3, 1924. As much as Leopold

believed in the scientific and ecological value of wilderness,

he had a special interest in wilderness for recreation. This

partiality is evident not only in Leopold’s writings but also

in the Wilderness Act, the legislation which established the

National Wilderness Preservation System in 1964. The

Wilderness Society, of which Leopold was a founding member, played an important role in the creation of this act.

In 1984, the World Conservation Union (IUCN) adopted

some of the phrasing and contents from the Wilderness Act

as a model for creating a new subcategory for protected

areas: Wilderness Area, IUCN category 1b (IUCN 1984).

This not only illustrates a breakthrough in international

conservation thinking, it also shows that the social assets of

wilderness finally became recognized on an international

level. Today, this recognition of the value of wilderness for

societal reasons very often adds the needed impetus to

protect wilderness, since moralistic or scientific argumentation alone often does not present ample enough reason for

lawmakers to support wilderness (Easley and others 1990).

According to Leopold (1949: 194), some of the basic

criteria for an outstanding wilderness recreation experience were the exclusion of mechanized tools, motorized

vehicles, and good roads. He explained why this was important: “Recreation is valuable in proportion to the intensity

of its experiences, and to the degree to which it differs from

and contrasts with workaday life. By these criteria, mechanized outings are at best a milk-and-water affair” (italics

are Leopold’s). About gadgets he said: “I’m not such a purist

as to disdain all of them, but I do claim, that the presence or

absence of gadget inhibitions is a delicate test of any man’s

outdoor education” (Meine and Knight 1999: 44).

Indications of Leopold’s bias against gadgets can readily

be seen at the Shack today (fig. 6), where electricity and

plumbing are still absent. Leopold (1949: viii) would often

refer to the Shack as “the weekend-refuge from too much

modernity.” Though he readily used many modern conveniences during his everyday life, Leopold valued equally the

ability to go without them, and fostered a “healthy contempt

for the plethora of material blessings” (Leopold 1949: ix).

The special psychological and physiological faculties that

enable humans not only to endure but also to enjoy wild

places make wilderness conservation a social asset. Leopold

wrote:

Wilderness is a resource, not only in the physical sense of

the raw materials it contains, but also in the sense of a

distinctive environment which may, if rightly used, yield

certain societal values (Meine and Knight 1999: 107).

Kellert (1996) describes nine basic values of nature: (1) utilitarian, (2) naturalistic, (3) ecological-scientific, (4) aesthetic,

(5) symbolic, (6) dominionistic, (7) humanistic,(8) moralistic,

and (9) negativistic. Two of these, dominionistic and negativistic, deserve some attention here because they are double

edged and easy to misunderstand. Nevertheless, I find that

they especially pertain to Leopold’s perceptions of wilderness.

About the negatavistic value Kellert (1996: 26) writes:

Dreading certain aspects of nature may be essential in

developing a sense of awe, respect, and even reverence for the

natural world. For nature has the power to humble, overwhelm and even destroy human life. People would hardly

manifest a healthy deference for the natural world if it lacked

the capacity to frighten or intimidate. Has there ever been a

god who did not possess the power to terrify as much as

express love and compassion?

In regard to the dominionistic value Kellert (1996: 20)

states:

Survival, even in the modern era, is still a tenuous enterprise necessitating some degree of human capacity for endurance and mastery. The ability to subdue, and the skill and

Figure 6—The Shack in 1991. Although modern

conveniences such as electricity cannot be found at

the Shack, many species of plants and wildlife that

were absent in Leopold’s time can be discovered in

the surrounding landscape (photo by Till Meyer).
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 245

The Shack Revisited: Aldo Leopold’s Perceptions... Meyer

prowess honed by an occasionally adversarial relationship

with nature, remain essential ingredients in developing the

human capability to survive. Perhaps this may explain why

people often feel compelled to keep this aspect of the human

spirit alive even when it seems superfluous.”

Leopold (1949) thought that public wilderness areas were

primarily a means of perpetuating, in sport form, the more

virile and primitive skills in pioneering and subsistence. The

cultivation of these primitive skills did not have much

tradition in Germany.

The current legal definitions of wilderness reflect most, if

not all of the nine basic values described by Kellert. Leopold’s

original attempt to define wilderness emphasized negativistic and dominionistic values. Comparing this with the legal

definition of wilderness in the U.S. Wilderness Act, as well

as with the IUCN Wilderness Category, certain similarities

emerge. Also, the phrase “should offer outstanding opportunities for solitude” was used in both the U.S. Wilderness Act

and the IUCN category, suggesting that there must have

been some legislative cross-fertilization.

The societal value of wilderness becomes more evident

because the Wilderness Act requires that visitor freedom

should be a management goal (The Wilderness Society

1984). This reminds us once more of the romantic roots of the

Wilderness Movement. The ideas that human beings should

not be alienated from nature (public access) and that personal freedom should be valued were ingrained in the Romantic Movement as well. Here we should recall that the

Romantic Movement, together with the immigration wave of

the late 19th and early 20th centuries, were both efforts to

escape mentally, as well as physically, unbearable conditions such as crowded cities and streets and restricted

freedom to move about.

The idea that a respite from crowds, cities, streets, and

restricted living conditions could be earned by declining

certain conveniences of civilization is very much a part of the

American Wilderness Movement. Many Americans recognize that wilderness stands for self-restraint (Freimund

2001, personal communication), but it does not stand for

restriction. While self-restraint has definite societal value,

restrictions exerted by power of authority do not carry much

ethical value. This difference is important to notice. Even

though the IUCN categories universally recognize wilderness as a place to offer “outstanding opportunities,” most

countries do not yet do this (Martin and Sarathy 2001).

Germany is one such country. It has resisted repeated efforts

to make wilderness a part of its legal conservation framework (Voss 2001, personal communication). Reichholf

(Stampf 2000) points out that many conservationists in

Germany even harbor misanthropic motives, as they regard

conservation as a tool to protect nature from the people and

not for the people. Reichholf also suggests that there is a

latent tendency for devotion to authority in many German

conservationists. Kellert (1996) noted that many Germans

expressed an unusual willingness to subordinate the practical needs of people to maintain pristine nature or to protect

wildlife.

Thus, quite inadvertently, many German conservationists fell back into the Romantic “cult of the unreachable,”

mentioned previously, and the pre-Romantic and prerevolutionary subservience to authority. At the same time, they

fail to recognize some of the more important humanistic

aspects of their Romantic heritage. The hard-gained freedom to move about, the intensely romantic notion that man

should not be alienated from nature, is jeopardized by

relentless conservation jurisdiction and attitudes, as is the

great ideal of the age of enlightenment—that people should

be treated as responsible citizens. The currently revised

Federal Act of Nature Conservation is attempting to do away

with this anachronism by paying more attention to recreational use of protected natural areas. Yet it still does not

recognize wilderness as a management category for protected areas (Deutscher Bundestag 2001). This jurisdictional deficit was also noted at the 7th World Wilderness

Congress and ultimately publicized as Resolution #25 on

November 8, 2001 (Sarathy and others 2001).

Acknowledgments ______________

Aldo Leopold was first brought to my attention in 1977, by

my instructor, Bill Perine, during a course in wildlife management at Hocking Technical College, Nelsonville, Ohio. At that

time, however, I did not yet know about A Sand County

Almanac. That book was pointed out to me in 1983 by

Wolfgang Schröder, a professor of wildlife management at the

University of Munich. Leopold biographer, Curt Meine, then

helped me get in touch with Brend Haglund from the Sand

County Foundation in Madison, Wisconsin, who in turn

helped me to establish contact with the Leopold family in

Baraboo. To all of the above people, I owe my sincere gratitude.

I extend my warmest thanks to Nina Leopold Bradley and

the late Charles Bradley, who let me spend many nights at

the Shack and let me use their guestroom and shower

whenever I had had enough of fiddling with the fireplace in

the Shack. I also sincerely appreciate the financial support

of Natur & Kosmos magazine and the Deutsche Verlags

Anstalt (DVA). Without their support, my trip to the 7th

World Wilderness Congress in South Africa would hardly

have been possible. I thank my colleague and friend Vivienne

Klimke for first bringing my attention to the IUCN Wilderness Category in 1997 and Gerhard Trommer (University of

Frankfurt) for his suggestion that I should approach my

studies on Leopold and on wilderness more systematically

and less journalistically.

For their final comments and suggestions before completion of my paper, I thank especially Curt Meine (International Crane Foundation), Buddy Huffacker (Leopold Foundation), and Wolfgang Schröder, Technical University of

Munich. The bulk of patience and help was given to me by

my Ohio friend Julianne Matsko during her visit to my

home in Munich just a few weeks prior to the 7thWorld

Wilderness Congress. Also I thank my friends, Hermann

and Stefanie Siebers-Gfaller, who provided some helpful

critical advice on German history. They also assisted me on

several other instances during my quest of backtracking

Aldo Leopold’s footsteps and bringing ecology into context

with the liberal arts and humanities. I would also like to

thank Janet Sproull (U.S. Forest Service/Aldo Leopold

Wilderness Research Institute) for her initiative, cooperation, and patience that made this paper possible.

Finally, I should mention that my initial visits to the

United States and my prolonged exposure to the many

different “American Ways of Life” would not have been

possible without the generosity of my parents, Linde and
246 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Meyer The Shack Revisited: Aldo Leopold’s Perceptions...

Werner Meyer, and the hospitality of my Ohio relatives,

Jean and George Luechauer. One of their ancestors,

Katharina Luechauer, arrived in the United States in 1923

from Donndorf, Germany. This was the year before United

States borders were tightened to European immigration and

was also the year before Aldo Leopold finally succeeded in

persuading the U.S. Forest Service to designate the world’s

first legally protected wilderness area.

References _____________________

Cardinal, Roger. 1975. German romantics in context. London:

Studio Vista, Cassell & Collier Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 160 p.

Cooper, James Fenimore. 1963. The deerslayer. New York: New

American Library of World Literature, Inc. 544 p.

Deutscher, Bundestag. 2001. Wahlperiode—Drucksache (Electoral

period—Print) 14/7469, 14.11.2001. Entwurf eines gesetzes zur

neuregelung des rechts des naturschutzes und der landschaftspflege und zur anpassung anderer rechtsvorschriften [Draft

of a law for the reorganization of the right for nature protection

and landscape conservation and for the adjustment of other

legislation]. (BNatSchGNeu-regG). Section 1, § 1, November 14.

Easley, A. T.; Driver. B. L.; Passineau, Joseph F. 1990. The use of

wilderness for personal growth, therapy, and education. Gen.

Tech. Rep. RM-193. Fort Collins, CO: United States Department

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range

Experiment Station. 197 p.

Fernández-Armesto, Felipe. 1995. Millennium, die weltgeschichte

unseres jahrtausends [Millenium, the world history of our millennium]. Munich, Germany: Bertelsmann Publishing House. 909 p.

Flader, Susan. 1994. Lug ins land: Aldo Leopold’s German roots.

Taped recording of unpublished paper presented at : International symposium; Aldo Leopold: his land ethic and influence in

Germany and the U.S.; The Max Kade Institute for GermanAmerican Studies; 1994 October 26–30; Madison, WI: University

of Wisconsin-Madison.

Flader, S.; Callicott, B. 1991. The River of the Mother of God.

Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. 383 p.

Freimund, Wayne. 2001. [Conversation at the 7thWorld Wilderness

Congress]. November 2.

Freyberg, Pankaz Frhr v. 2000. Der Englische garten in München,

Bayerische verwaltung der staatlichen schlösser gärten und seen

[The English garden in Munich. Bavarian administration of the

national locks gardens and lakes]. Munich, Germany: GmbH

Publishing House. 303 p.

Grimm, Jacob; Grimm, Wilhelm. 1960. Wörterbuch Deutsches [German dictionary]. Leibzig, Germany: S. Hirzel. 1,289 p.

Harrison, Robert Pogue. 1992. Forests—the shadow of civilization.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 288 p.

Helbich, Wolfgang. 1985. Amerika ist ein freies land, auswanderer

schreiben nach Deutschland [America is a free country—emigrant letters to Germany]. Darmstadt, Germany: Luchterhand

Publishers. 223 p.

Henningsen, Manfred. 1974. Der fall Amerika [The American case].

Munich, Germany: Paul List Publishing House. 275 p.

Hörisch, Jochen. 2001. Weibes Wonne und Wert [Rhinegold and

gold rush]. In: Borchmeyer, D.; Hörisch, J.; Kienzle, U.; Müller,

U.; Panaggl, O. Bayreuther Festspiele 2001 [Bayreuth native

festivals 2001]. Bayreuth: Wolfgang Wagner. 224 p.

IUCN. 1984. Guidelines for protected area management categories.

Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: IUCN. 261 p.

Janson, Horst Woldemar. 1977. History of art. New York: Harry N.

Abrams, Incorporated. 767 p.

Jordan, W. R., III. 1990. Restoration: shaping the land, transforming the human spirit. Whole Earth Review. 66: 22(2).

Jordan, W. R., III. Gilpin M. E.; Aber, J. D. 1987. Restoration

ecology: a synthetic approach to ecological research. New York:

Cambridge University Press. 342 p.

Kaufman, Wallace. 1991. Aldo Leopold’s wilderness: selected early

writings. American Forests. 97(5–6): 63(1).

Kellert, Stephen R. 1996. The value of life—biological diversity and

human society. Washington, DC: a Shearwater Book, Island

Press. 263 p.

Leopold, Aldo. 1949. A Sand County almanac. New York: Oxford

University Press. 288 p.

Lötsch, Bernd. 2001. Lockruf der wildnis: geschichten, mythen,

pioniere [Call of the wilderness: stories, myths, pioneers]. Unpublished paper presented at: Wilderness symposium; Society

for Nature Protection of Bavaria (BN); 2001 October 12–14;

Wiesenfelden, Germany. On file with author.

Martin, Vance G.; Sarathy, Partha M.A. 2001. eds. Wilderness &

humanity, the global issue, 6th World Wilderness Congress, The

International Wilderness Leadership (WILD) Foundation. Golden,

CO: Fulcrum Publishing. 320 p.

Meine, Curt. 1988. Aldo Leopold, his life and work. Madison:

University of Wisconsin Press. 638 p.

Meine, Curt. 1994. A lesson in naturalism: Leopold in Germany

1935. Unpublished paper presented at: International symposium; Aldo Leopold: his land ethic and influence in Germany and

the U.S.; The Max Kade Institute for German-American Studies;

1994 October 26–30; Madison, WI: University of WisconsinMadison. On file with author. 11 p.

Meine, Curt. 2001. [E-mail comment to author]. December 23.

Meine, C.; Knight, R. 1999. eds. The essential Leopold: quotations

and commentaries. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

363 p.

Meyer, Till. 2001. Europäische romantiker erfinden die wildnis

[European romantics invent the wilderness]. Natur & Kosmos.

June: 12–21.

Nash, Roderick. 1982. Wilderness and the American mind. New

Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 367 p.

Naumann, Ursula. 2001. Pribers paradies, ein Deutscher utopist in

der amerikanischen wildnis [Priber’s paradise: a German utopian in the American wilderness]. Frankfurt/Main: Calibration

Fount Publishing House. 425 p.

Palm-Beulich. 2002. [Seminar: Premiere “Das Rheingold,”at the

Münchner Volkshochschule]. March 2.

Ross, John; Ross, Beth. 1998. Prairie time: the Leopold Reserve

revisited. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. 230 p.

Runte, Alfred. 1987. National Parks: the American experience.

Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. 335 p.

Sarathy, Partha; Dickenson, Bill; Doerner, Ulf. 2001. 7th World

Wilderness Congress, Resolution #25: Protection of wilderness

under German law. [Online]. Available: www.worldwilderness.org/

7th-resolutions/final25.html

Schama. Simon. 1996. Der traum von wildnis—natur als imagination [The dream of wilderness: nature as imagination]. Munich,

Germany: Kindler Publishing House. 709 p.

Schröder, Wolfgang. 2001. [E-mail interview]. August 5. On file

with author.

Stampf, Olaf. 2000. Ende der aussperrung [End of the lockout]. Der

Spiegel Magazine. 50/2000: 256–259.

The Wilderness Society. 1984. The Wilderness Act handbook. Washington, DC. 64 p.

Voss, Sylvia. 2001. [Phone interview]. April 3–5. Notes on file with

author.

Wittke, Carl. 1939. We who built America: the saga of the immigrant. Cleveland, OH: Case Western Reserve University Press.

550 p.

Wolf, Christa, ed. 1981. Caroline von Güünderode, Der schatten

eines traumes. Gedichte, prosa, briefe, zeugnisse von zeitgenossen

[Caroline von Güünderode, the shade of a dream. Poems, prose,

letters, certifications of contemporaries]. Darmstadt, Germany:

Sammlung Luchterhand. 276 p.

Zeitlin, Richard H. 1977. Germans in Wisconsin. Madison: The

State Historical Society of Wisconsin. 30 p.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 247

Børge Dahle is Assistant Professor, Norwegian University of Sport and

Physical Education, Institute for Social Studies, Postboks 4014 Ullevåå

Stadion, 0806 Oslo, E-mail: borge.dahle@nih.no

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—The term “friluftsliv,” coined by Henrik Ibsen, refers to

the outdoor life which has characterized Norwegian culture. This

paper considers the role of friluftsliv in maintaining traditional

cultural relationships with the Norwegian landscape, in the light of

more recent developments, particularly international adventure

sports (such as snowboarding) and the adoption of friluftsliv in

schools. This paper uses examples to illustrate how friluftsliv

traditions find diverse expression in nature-based experiences based

on informal social relations and the family, and how it is shaped by

everyday access to the natural and cultural landscape. This is

contrasted with contemporary trends to institutionalize friluftsliv

and contemporary outdoor recreation-based equipment and expensive travel. The comparison suggests that attention should be paid

to how institutional and commercial forms of friluftsliv may erode

the role of tradition in maintaining a strong connection between

cultural identity and environmental sustainability, and provides

some insights into how environmental education can be considered

as a lifelong, communal process rather than something concentrated in the school.

Introduction ____________________

For me, contact with nature and participation in sports

and friluftsliv (open-air life) were a natural part of growing

up. I first learned to see friluftsliv as something to be taught

through my studies at the Norges Idrettshogskole (Norwegian University of Sports). There I met my advisor, Nils

Faarlund, and as a result of our initial meeting I saw for the

first time the link between friluftsliv and nature protection.

I have tried, through teaching friluftsliv in tertiary colleges and the Trondheim Tourist Association, to foster

interest in friluftsliv. My studies in biology helped me to

understand some of the negative ecological effects of outdoor

recreation and left me determined to find ways to prevent

them. From time to time, I have found it difficult to balance

the use of the outdoors in an ecophilosophical way (best

described as “the way is the goal,” where the way is to

maintain harmony with nature) against my misgivings

about exposing plant life to more damage and increasing

disturbance to wildlife as a result of this increased traffic.

Because I recognize that humans are part of nature, and

also because I have come to understand that there is a

connection between taking action to protect nature and

experiencing the joy of being in nature, I remain committed

to using education as a means for socialization into friluftsliv and to encourage active protection of nature.

Taking a historical view of the factors which influence an

individual’s involvement in friluftsliv and of the opportunities for socialization into friluftsliv, we find that things are

very different from even one generation ago. The simplicity

of friluftsliv is challenged by a higher standard of living and

by the amusement parklike repertoire of outdoor offerings.

Socialization into friluftsliv as a normal part of everyday life

can no longer be taken for granted. We can no longer assume,

for example, that families go on walks on Sundays, as was

the case during my childhood—today there are many alternative leisure activities.

Friluftsliv can be reinforced in these changed circumstances through the realization that these changes have

gone too far. More and more of those now living apart from

nature have a sense that something is missing in their lives,

as if life without nature is meaningless. In this situation the

greatest challenge is to find and implement effective ways to

socialize children into friluftsliv.

What Is Learning? _______________

Life-long-learning—humans are in a continual learning

process. Experiencing is the basis for learning—one learns

through experiencing surroundings and through experiencing the cooperation between the environment and oneself.

The basis of the internal learning process is reflection. The

result of learning is an acknowledgment that is exhibited in

experiencing the mastering of the surroundings and the

ability to think in new ways and to behave in new ways.

Organizational development—the learning organization is

an organization that is able to change based on self-acquired

knowledge and experience (Senge 1990).

Humanity, seen as a variety of organizations that live

under different life conditions, has developed a variety of

cultures because it has always had the ability to function as

a learning organization. Meetings between cultures have

opened ways for exchange of knowledge and experience.

This development has acquired new inspiration.

Culture changes have principally been shown to be irreversible. This also applies to cases where attempts have

been made to stop or reverse the development to an earlier

stage. This, therefore, puts much responsibility on those

who are in a position to lead the change processes. They must

be able to see the short- and long-term consequences of their

change tactics.

Norwegian “Friluftsliv”—“Environmental

Education” as a Lifelong Communal

Process

Børge Dahle
248 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Dahle Norwegian “Friluftsliv”—“Environmental Education” as a Lifelong Communal Process

If we focus on the long lines of the “history of learning” we,

here in the year 2001, are perhaps returning to an understanding of learning where the essential basic principles in

the learning process can be reflected in the history of humankind. With the exception of a short period in human history,

where organizations’ responsibility for self-learning was

replaced with the introduction of institutions that had separate responsibility for knowledge administration, groups of

people have taken a general responsibility for learning.

Humans have sought knowledge and have had knowledge

delivered in order to survive and to further develop society,

their own cultures, and themselves.

Learning has been a strong and necessary force for individuals and for a “self-subsistence society ” (Kvaløy 1975). In

modern times, learning has been disconnected from the

natural knowledge-seeking situation. The learning situation is constructed and “the teacher” has responsibility for

teaching the students “knowledge and ways” taken from the

teacher’s own understanding of reality. What is correct and

what is acceptable, sound general knowledge, and what is

“the custom”?

In extreme situations this understanding of learning led

to missionaries traveling to other continents, to towns and

outlying areas in order to first unlearn established knowledge and thereafter to force learn vigorous cultures—a

foreign knowledge.

The Norwegian Prime Minister Bondevik, in his 2000 New

Year’s speech, certainly asked the Sami people for forgiveness. But does Bondevik understand what he was really

asking forgiveness for? Behind the “Norwegianification” of

the Samis is a way of thinking about learning and development that has permeated the modern world for many generations and that shows its best failures in the most extreme

circumstances.

With this apology, Bondevik recognizes, not only an injustice against a people, but also a way of thinking about

development and learning that has entailed injustices and

the deterioration of the life quality of the individual and

peoples in all parts of the world. I believe that learning is an

important life skill for humans, when learning is based on

the individual’s power to create their own life and to give this

life quality based on their own understanding and with a

background in their own resources.

Of course in a modern society there must be institutionalized learning of knowledge and skills. It is a misunderstanding, however, to believe that an institution such as a school

can take responsibility for people’s development and training in all areas. Friluftsliv, for example, is a cultural phenomenon where the school can hardly be the central arena

for socialization. The connection is simple, friluftsliv first

and foremost in arenas outside the school.

What Is Friluftsliv? ______________

The mystery of music.

Rhythm, melody, harmony. People need language in order

to receive information. Music for feelings. Rhythm steers our

life. People have a need to take part in something, to share

experiences. Rhythm lies in our heartbeat—the rhythm of life.

Rhythm imitates what we hear around us. The sound of

nature. Relief in experiencing wide horizons in nature. Nature

sounds—orchestrating nature. Music is the difference between

life and death.

The melody we are all touched by.

Music comes from the heart. Before, the experience of music

(before it could be recorded) was only here and there. Music

must be simple, it must be remembered in order to be sung by

everyone. Music gives identity. Music is the language of the

soul. In music we hear the song of life, nature’s song.

Consonance-dissonance in the meeting between people.

Through music we experience earlier events. Without being

able to sing or play we understand the language of music. We

learn music as we learn language. Music resonates with

hormonal power and sexuality. Harmony brings forth passion. There is a connection between the response to music and

the life we live. Modern music does not let us forget the core of

music—rhythm. Music soothes people as a part of nature.

Life’s rhythm (Martin, personal communication).

In his hunt for the mystery of music, Martin is searching

to understand human nature and its relationship with

nature. It perhaps should be obvious to a group working with

friluftsliv that the explanation of the mystery of friluftsliv

probably lies in humans and their relationship with nature.

Music therefore has some things in common with friluftsliv—

friluftsliv being understood as an expression of people’s joy

of being in nature and that the experience can be expressed

and shared with others as part of an international common

culture.

A master’s student defending his thesis closed the defense

by asking, “Why has 20 years of research in friluftsliv not

managed to capture the essence of the phenomenon of

friluftsliv?” Perhaps the student is right, or perhaps he has

not found the right sources. But the question at least is

interesting. What is the essence of the cultural phenomenon—friluftsliv?

I believe that friluftsliv, first and foremost, is about feeling

the joy of being out in nature, alone or with others, feeling

pleasure and experiencing harmony with the surroundings—only being in nature and doing something that is

meaningful for me—here and now.

What Is the Essence of Norwegian

Friluftsliv? _____________________

A description of people’s practice of friluftsliv can be

structured in the following way: The clearly dominant form

of Norwegian friluftsliv is that people, starting from their

own home or cabin, go out into nature on walks alone or

together with others, family and friends, in order to come

back later in the day to their own home or cabin. The motives

for these walks are often many and complex—to experience

nature, to be sociable, physical activity, and so forth (Dahle

1989). The walks are often longest on Saturdays or Sundays,

but are often taken during the week. This is “daily walk

friluftsliv.”

When the typical Norwegian friluftsliv person goes out,

they are often on foot or, in winter, on skis. A small group

bicycle, and even fewer use other means of transportation

such as boats, canoes, and skates. In addition to the nature

wanderer satisfying the previously mentioned motives, a

relatively large group, as a part of their walk, want to
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 249

Norwegian “Friluftsliv”—“Environmental Education” as a Lifelong Communal Process Dahle

practice other interests such as fishing, hunting, berry

picking, mushroom gathering, photography, looking at plants

and birds, and so on.

Another important part of the practice of Norwegian

friluftsliv is a tour over several days, staying overnight in

tents or cabins. These trips are during the weekends and

vacations, “vacation friluftsliv.” The motives are the same as

for “daily walk friluftsliv.”

The Norwegian tour culture has been passed on from

generation to generation, and it has its own rituals, which

must be learned. Following are some examples of the Norwegian friluftsliv tradition:

Day trip 1: Breakfast together on Sunday morning.

Everyone knows that the family is soon on its way to the

woods. The thermoses are filled with coffee or tea for the

adults and, with hot chocolate for the children. The necessary clothing and equipment for the temperature and weather

are found. Some extra clothes are put in the backpack. In a

short time, without any particular discussion or planning,

the family is out walking in the forest. We meet neighbors

and acquaintances, stop for a chat. We look at and talk about

phenomena in nature and the cultural landscape. We take

off and put on clothes. Then comes the social high point of the

trip: we sit down, take out the thermoses and lunch, perhaps

light a fire, and talk in friendly tones about things that have

happened, future plans and dreams. Then the trip home

starts. We have become warm and sweaty. It is good to get

home, to take a shower, and to have dinner together, followed by “lounging” on the sofas or on the throw rugs.

Friluftsliv needs the family to continue to be a living

cultural phenomenon and the family needs friluftsliv to

ensure good forms of being together (Børge Dahle).

Day trip 2: In Tuesday’s newspaper there was an article

on where “Wednesday’s exercise” would meet. This is this

week’s tour. Most of the group are single retirees. For most,

“Wednesday’s exercise” is perhaps their most important

social network. Every Wednesday at 10:30, throughout the

year, 40 to 70 happy walkers meet. The tour goes to one of the

cabins in the forest. The path varies from time to time. These

are people who have practiced friluftsliv throughout a long

life, and friluftsliv is the basis for their experience of the

quality of their life, also in this last phase.

Overnight tour 1: A group of women teachers have

talked for a long time about taking a common tour in the

mountains. They have used many work breaks to plan, they

have looked forward to it, but have also considered the

challenges. They have to find a time that suits leaving their

children and husbands. They ask themselves, am I in good

enough condition—do I need to train a little bit before the

trip?

Now the day is here. The backpack is carefully packed.

Some experienced mountain backpackers still have their old

“pink” anorak (wind jacket)—this makes the group feel confident. But some have a new multicolored anorak and are

pretty excited about how the tour will be. They get on the

train. At last they are on their way to the first DNT (Norwegian Tourist Association) cabin. They walk and talk excitedly.

They worry about their husbands and children, stop often, eat

and talk, look at the magnificent landscape. Now they feel

free, they manage to forget children, husbands, and the

worries from a long and tiring school year. They get a fourperson room in the cabin, where the conversation continues.

They put on clean sweaters they have knitted on their breaks

and go down to be served dinner, coffee, and cake in front of

the fireplace, massage their sore thighs, and are ready for the

next day.

Friluftsliv gives us breathing room in a busy world.

Friluftsliv gives us an experience of freedom (Børge Dahle).

Overnight trip 2: He has read books about hunting and

fishing during the entire winter. He has tied some flies. He

doesn’t meet his old school friend very often, but the yearly

fishing trip holds them together. They can talk for a long

time on the telephone. The conversations have to do with last

summer’s fishing trip and mostly about the big one that got

away. What will next summer’s fishing trip be like?

The day is here. This year both take their sons with them.

They drive a long way to get to this year’s spot. They buy food

on the road. With heavy bags they arrive at the “fishing

water.” They set up camp. It doesn’t take long before all of

them are at the water with their fishing poles in hand. It has

been 30 years since they met at elementary school, but now

it is as if time has stood still. Family, colleagues, economic

problems, and stocks are forgotten. There is only one thing

important in the world. The situation is here and now—the

boys that need to be taught, the friend from school, the

fishing pole, and the trout that will soon take the fly.

Friluftsliv gives us excitement. Friluftsliv gives us dreams.

Friluftsliv is a gift from me to my children (Børge Dahle).

Norwegian friluftsliv tradition can be characterized

through many such stories, but there are common elements

in the stories. What characterizes this cultural phenomenon

and what separates it from an international leisure time

culture in nature is, among other things:

• Experiencing nature is key.

• Practicing friluftsliv is not dependent on large costs for

traveling and equipment.

• The natural and cultural landscape used is easily accessible from permanent residences and cabins.

• The passing on tradition is strongly anchored in natural

social groups such as family and friends (Dahle 1989).

• Friluftsliv is not dependant on organizations—it is

possible for individuals to choose their own time and

place for practicing it.

In addition to the Norwegian tradition of friluftsliv, we

also see that the international leisure activity culture in

nature has spread in Norway. The international “outdoors

activities” are first and foremost activity motivated and tied

to facilities in nature. The activities are most often organized

through commercial interests or institutions that run educational programs or short courses. The leisure activity culture

is often a part of the commercial travel industry and is

organized as long trips, expeditions, or “adventures.” They

sell an experience package.

The international activity culture has gained much of its

inspiration from well-known persons who have made expeditions. Central in Norway are the role models of Nansen

and Amundsen on their Polar expeditions, climbing expeditions to Mount Everest, Åsheim, Ausland, Ulvang and Dæhli.

They have also gained inspiration from military survival
250 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Dahle Norwegian “Friluftsliv”—“Environmental Education” as a Lifelong Communal Process

and from travel writings of canoe expeditions through, for

example, Canada’s deep wilderness areas.

It is unfortunate, but understandable, that universities

and colleges that have a special responsibility for arranging

individual Norwegian day trips and for celebrating friluftsliv

have let themselves be inspired by the international leisure

activity culture. Leisure activity culture and “expeditions”

through the education of teachers has been further taken

into the state school system. Under the theme friluftsliv, ski

days are arranged with Telemark and snowboards, along

with canoe expeditions and surviving/overnighting in snow

caves in the mountains. Is this the way to learn the key

elements of Norwegian friluftsliv tradition?

What is worrying the institutions protecting friluftsliv is

that young people to a greater degree than earlier are

missing traditional friluftsliv, and they are participating

more in the international leisure activity culture. To what

degree this concern is based on qualified research results or

only on a feeling of a situation is somewhat unclear. The

leisure time patterns of youth must be mapped. Many

function to different extents in different cultures.

The adult’s view of what is the dominant youth culture

varies in relation to which arenas the adults look to for

themselves. It is not possible to ignore the fact that some

leisure activity leaders and friluftsliv leaders, because of

their own interest areas, “stay put” in arenas that are

dominated by activity trends. The forms of activity for the

selected arenas for these leaders become very visible. There

are often large groups of people who gather at such places.

Other arenas, such as traditional friluftsliv, for these leaders can be much more visible. Remember that traditional

friluftsliv is unorganized and is practiced in small local

nature areas spread over the whole country.

What is possible to assert is that childen socialized in the

Norwegian friluftsliv return to this tradition when they

themselves establish families (Dahle 1989). The same phenomenon can be seen in sports. Sports culture is a youth

culture where the largest group of “sports youth” are those

who have quit sports when they turn 19 (Center for Children’s

Research, UNIT). Young people who are active in sports in

their youth often return to their childhood friluftsliv after

they finish their sports career.

Perhaps, therefore, there is no basis for much worry about

the leisure time patterns of young people seen in relation to

maintaining our friluftsliv. This can be described as a

pedagogic error of linkage if we mean that friluftsliv must

adjust to the modern youth culture such that the basic

values for these cultures are to be recognized in new variations of the Norwegian friluftsliv. The effect of such a

strategy will most likely be the opposite of what is desired—

the Norwegian friluftsliv tradition will be weakened.

In order to maintain Norwegian friluftsliv tradition, the

most effective way will be to ensure that children are

socialized within traditional friluftsliv while they are at an

age when their leisure time is spent together with their

parents. Traditional friluftsliv is open for all and can be

practiced throughout one’s lifetime. Seen from health, quality of life, and economic perspectives, it makes economic

sense that the public sector should first and foremost invest

in initiatives that give families with children good opportunities for enjoying traditional friluftsliv.

Meanwhile, it is important to differentiate between primary socialization arenas and arenas that support a socialization process around friluftsliv. The primary socialization

arena, in this connection, will be practicing of traditional

friluftsliv in a family connection. Important initiatives can be:

• Those that stimulate families with children to practice

“daily walk friluftsliv.”

• Those that stimulate families with children to practice

“vacation friluftsliv.”

An important initiative will be to help parents to be good

“guides” for their children. This can be done by, among other

things:

• Inviting parent groups to courses in tour guiding (for

their children, families, and friends).

• Arranging tours where family is invited.

• Having child care centers and schools arrange tours

where the family is involved.

• Preferring areas that stimulate families with children

to go on tours (such as Children’s World of Nature in

Rennebu) (Dahle 1989).

• Giving special prices for families with children who are

taking trips between cabins in the mountains (perhaps

heavily reduced prices for children at DNT’s cabins, as

now we have free fishing licenses for children under 16).

• Developing programs especially for single parents.

• Arranging for courses in photography, mushroom gathering, and so on.

Arenas that support the socialization process for friluftsliv

could be:

• All forms of physical activity, especially done outdoors.

• All forms of physical activity that improve children’s

coordination so that their ability to go out into nature is

improved.

• All forms of activity that increase knowledge and the

experience of being out in nature (for example, play in

“hundred meter forest” will increase physical capacity,

improve coordination, and increase a child’s knowledge

about and experience of being out in nature) (Fjørtoft

2000).

• “Outdoor pursuits.”

Important institutions that could participate in such work

are:

• Child care centers and schools.

• Friluftsliv organizations.

The authorities must direct the use of resources at the

most effective initiatives to ensure that the traditional

friluftsliv tour is available to most people. The authorities

must also direct their resources at the organizations that are

able to develop effective programs that maintain or increase

the practice of friluftsliv in the population.

We will probably see in the future that there is potential

for increasing “vacation friluftsliv.” It would then be important to stimulate the Tourist Association to work with

creating tour opportunities for families with children. The

leisure activity culture will increasingly present new trends,

and commercial interests will keep these activities alive.

Public resources must be directed at broad groups of people
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 251

Norwegian “Friluftsliv”—“Environmental Education” as a Lifelong Communal Process Dahle

and the groups that have a weak position in the fight for

leisure resources. (Swedish surveys from the end of the

1980s show that the Swedish Social Democratic Government used about 90 percent of their resources on leisure

sector activities that were used by about 10 percent of the

population.) It will always be the case that strong groups

push forward with their special interests.

An important side of the Norwegian friluftsliv tradition is

that all social groups participate. Of course, high status

groups in some special arenas also dominate friluftsliv, but

traditional friluftsliv is one of the few arenas for physical

activity with participation from a broad base of the population. Traditional friluftsliv does not need physical facilities;

everyone can practice it close to home, at the time they want,

and with the equipment they feel most comfortable with.

What Is “Knowledge Status” for

Norwegian Friluftsliv? ___________

A great deal of work has been carried out to try to

understand Norwegian friluftsliv in a historical perspective,

particularly when it comes to an understanding of friluftsliv

in relation to the Romantics, friluftsliv as a part of the

Norwegian identity, Nansen’s meaning of friluftsliv, and so

forth.

I believe that historically we have put too little weight on

the Norwegian people’s general close relationship to nature

throughout time—perhaps especially country people’s relationship. The understanding of this “people of nature’s”

closeness to nature is a pretty good basis for understanding

what happened in the building of the Norwegian identity

related to friluftsliv and Norwegian nature, for the position

Nansen gained and has as an ideal by the Norwegian people,

but perhaps most importantly, for the weight friluftsliv had

and still has in Norway.

That friluftsliv still has a large following in Norway can

first and foremost be explained by the fact that friluftsliv is

a deeply established common culture, where the practice of

friluftsliv “tacit knowledge” is still passed on from generation to generation.

Additionally, our settlement structure is decisive. At the

beginning of this new century, all Norwegians still have a

very short distance to nature and cultural landscapes where

friluftsliv can be practiced. The patterns of friluftsliv by the

Norwegian people have been constant and are still relatively

stable. It is still the simple foot tour and ski trip based on

motives of enjoying nature, health, and camaraderie, and on

developing nature interests that are strongly dominant. The

“people’s friluftsliv” is still highly alive, but a lifestyle with

stress has meant that some people’s practice of friluftsliv is

substantially reduced.

Pressure on the traditional patterns of friluftsliv has been

great in past decades. The general development of society

and new and varied leisure time are some of the more

important reasons for this. But pedagogic institutions have

also worked to create new forms of friluftsliv activities. A

“sportification” of friluftsliv has occurred. In the competition

for students, colleges, folk colleges, and sports institutes

have needed to target themselves at youth groups, and they

have chosen to emphasize trends in outdoor activities and

“adventure” tours, even to foreign countries.

Throughout, the pattern of friluftsliv has shown itself to

be relatively stable. This can be explained by the fact that

youth groups have never been and are not currently a

decisive factor for Norwegian friluftsliv. It is the age groups

before and after adolescence that are dominant and decisive

in friluftsliv. Friluftsliv is an activity form that is practiced

from birth to the grave.

Teenagers try out many new leisure time opportunities,

either in sport or other leisure activities. Some youth groups,

in spite of everything, are very active in the traditional

friluftsliv, but they are disorganized and are not very evident. Some youth groups are partly active in friluftsliv, and

some are occasionally active. But this pattern is normal and

should not be worrying to those who protect Norwegian

traditional friluftsliv.

It can also seem as if the pattern of friluftsliv is changing

more than it really is. This can be a result of the media’s need

to focus on the extreme “elite” friluftsliv. It is also probably

not too bold to assert that the “celebrity culture,” especially

within the media, is also “stuck” in the modern youth

culture.

We have accumulated a great deal of experience in

pedagogic work with friluftsliv over the last 30 years. Different pedagogic methods have been tried. “Conwaying” has

become a term and in many ways its own culture within

friluftsliv. It represents its own “school” in friluftsliv pedagogy that has been shown to function very well in certain

pedagogic situations. Perhaps the use of conwaying should

be differentiated to a greater degree for different target

groups. (Note: “Conwaying” is defined as sharing the experiences of free nature in accord with the patterns of thought/

paradigm and values of the Norwegian tradition of friluftsliv

in smaller groups for the joy of identification, as well as for

inspiring route-finding in modernity toward lifestyles where

nature is the home of culture.)

The “conwayers” position in too many instances has been

too dominant in the learning situation. Participation in the

practice of friluftsliv demands a fundamental education, a

resonance for nature, that requires a free and independent

development over time. The core of this development as a

sounding board for nature is the experience of being in a rich

natural and cultural landscape. We must create a good

“learning room” for friluftsliv.

“Advice” for Further Work With

Friluftsliv ______________________

It will not succeed and will result in a dead end if, through

administrative strategies and pedagogic activities, we try to

change the traditional friluftsliv patterns by adapting them

to values that have their basis in some of the most conspicious

parts of modern youth culture. Teenagers have their “sagging pants” and snowboards, but they also go on skiing and

fishing trips.

When it comes to people’s health and quality of life, it is

positive that new activities and forms of play will increasingly pop up. But some forms of activities that have nature

as an arena must, when it comes to nature and the environment, be concentrated to limited areas.

There will be continually increasing fights for access to

nature and cultural landscape areas. The pressure will be a
252 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Dahle Norwegian “Friluftsliv”—“Environmental Education” as a Lifelong Communal Process

result of increased leisure time, increased wealth in the

Norwegian population, and increased tourist traffic based

on the use of nature. The leisure use of nature areas in the

future must, therefore, be limited when it comes to forms of

use. General rights must be limited to certain uses of nature.

Established uses of nature that have a gentle effect on

nature and that have broad roots in the people must be

prioritized. Remember that changes in culture are irreversible. A strongly rooted culture that is too weakened or is

given a new content will take a long time to build up again

to a “self-sustaining” culture, such as Norwegian friluftsliv

is today.

Friluftsliv should continue to be available to all. The

individual’s physical condition and personal wealth should

not be deciding factors for participating in friluftsliv. With

the development of sport in mind, all attempts that could

threaten the “daily walk friluftsliv” or “vacation friluftsliv”

should be opposed. Friluftsliv must not be for the elite. A

“sportification” of friluftsliv will be destructive. Let friluftsliv

avoid becoming a spectators sport.

Additionally, an international and ecological perspective

should be taken regarding the social and ecological consequences of friluftsliv that is based on extensive travel

activities, use of nature areas, and consequent unfortunate

assaults on local cultures. Places of teaching, administrative institutions, and organizations that are supposed to

take care of friluftsliv should make their responsibility

evident and focus on the Norwegian friluftsliv tradition. It

is natural that persons who work especially in the field of

friluftsliv (colleges, sports institutes, or research and administrative environment) often consist of people who have

a particular interest in friluftsliv. They often have special

physical abilities and possibilities to practice a broad spectrum of forms of friluftsliv, including some that are extreme or very resource demanding. These people often

appear in professional and social situations that support

their way of thinking and behaving. Their understanding

and analysis of the friluftsliv phenomenon can be different

from what, therefore, is the reality. Dogmatic opinion and

self interest is taken to some degree into their professional

work, and certain opinions, values, and ways of behaving

are carried over to the recruitment process.

It is important to undertake frequent critical evaluations

of our own activities within administrative, organizational,

and pedagogic institutions that work with friluftsliv. There

should be a continual dialogue about what is the core of

traditional friluftsliv and examination of this core in relation to our own activity. Without a clear understanding of

friluftsliv’s core content, it will be difficult to develop effective socialization and recruiting strategies and learning

programs for a friluftsliv that is to adapt to the new challenges that will always result in a changing society.

References _____________________

Dahle, B. 1989. Naturforvaltning og friluftsliv i lokale samfunn.

Sosialisering til friluftsliv. Nora. 93. Norges idrettshøgskole.

Fjørtoft, I. 2000. Doctorgradsavhandling, ikke avsluttet. Artikkel i

Fjell og Vidde. 1/00.

Kvaløy, S. 1975. Økokrise, natur og menneske. I: Økologi, økofilosofi,

red. Hofseth, P. og Vinje, A. Gyldendal Norsk Forlag.

Martin, George. 1999. Interview on Norwegian television, NRK 1.

Senge, P. M. 1990. The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the

learning organization. Norsk utgave Hjemmet bokforlag. 386 p.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 253

Nicholas King is Director, BioNET-INTERNATIONAL, Bakeham Lane,

Egham, Surrey TW20 9TY, UK, phone: +44 1491 829036/7/8, FAX: +44 1491

829082/100, E-mail: n.king@cabi.org, Web site: http://www.bionet-intl.org

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—BioNET-INTERNATIONAL is the Global Network for

capacity building in taxonomy for sustainable development. Taxonomy (or biosystematics) is the basic underpinning science of all

biology—and thus of all environmental management. Without sound

taxonomy, no knowledge is available on living organisms, and if you

don’t know what you have, you cannot determine how to manage,

conserve, or sustainably use biological resources. The Global Network is comprised of a number of interlinked regional Locally

Organized and Operated Partnerships (LOOPs) of developing country institutions, supported by a consortium of developed country

institutions. Its purpose, through South-South cooperation and

North-South partnerships for institutional strengthening and human resource development, is to enable developing countries to

achieve self-reliance in taxonomy to support regional and national

programs for eradication of poverty, via sustainable agricultural

development and use of natural resources, and by full implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

The network’s success is attributable to two key components. The

first is local ownership of the process, including governmental

endorsement of the need for such a capacity-building network,

whereby needs are identified and prioritized by member countries

themselves. The second is a tried and tested mechanism whereby a

lack of individual country capacity is overcome by pooling, optimizing, and sharing regional capacity on a reciprocal basis between

member countries. It provides a very useful model for other capacity-building initiatives in developing countries, as well as for NorthSouth and South-South collaborative partnerships for capacity

building.

Introduction ____________________

Whether it is called taxonomy, systematics, or biosystematics, this branch of science is dedicated to discovering,

identifying, naming, and classifying organisms and elucidating their relationships. As such, the discipline is fundamental

Overcoming the Taxonomic Impediment to

Sustainable Development: BioNETINTERNATIONAL, the Global Network for

Taxonomy—A Successful Networking Model

for Capacity Building in Developing

Countries

Nicholas King

to our attempts to understand biodiversity, and the sustainable use thereof, and assess the impacts of any form of

activity involving, or using, natural resources.

What began at the Stockholm Conference on Man and the

Environment (1972), as a mildly keener appetite for taxonomy, was transformed at the Earth Summit in Rio (1992)

into an insatiable hunger, just as the scientific resources to

satisfy it began to become scarce. Today, it is doubtful if

there are any scientists within the realms of zoology, botany,

ecology, agriculture, or impact assessment who do not have

some taxonomic requirements. Identifications in particular

are urgently needed in ever-increasing quantities worldwide by natural scientists of every inclination—not the least

of those in the biodiversity-rich but resource-poor countries

of the developing world. Without correct identification, all

access to knowledge pertaining to that organism is denied.

In these nations, whose biodiversity is seen to be vital to

the world’s well-being and constitutes the Earth’s richest

genetic resource, there is little, and in some cases no, taxonomic capability. This is largely a consequence of history and

of recent financial policies of developed countries. From early

colonial days, and especially from the turn of the century

until very recently, the taxonomic needs of these developing

countries had been met by free taxonomic services provided

by the major world centers of expertise. These services, with

particular emphasis on providing authoritative identifications and related advice, continued uninterrupted as colonialism fell away and countries gained their independence.

While these services lasted, there was no cause or motivation for developing countries to invest their scarce, highlevel manpower and financial resources in developing expensive taxonomic capabilities. It would have been economic

folly, perhaps, in view of competing demands on national

budgets, to attempt to create sufficient local capabilities in

this very specialized field while such services were freely

available elsewhere.

Sadly, this comfortable arrangement was not to last. In

1993 to 1994, as a result of a worldwide recession and the

advent of new financial policies that required developed

country institutions to become income earning and selfsupporting, the free services of the expert centers were withdrawn. They were replaced by a system of graduated charges

for identifications and for all other services rendered, which,

while favoring developing countries and being modest relative to the actual costs of providing them, proved to be

beyond the means of developing countries.
254 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

King Overcoming the Taxonomic Impediment to Sustainable Development: BioNET-INTERNATIONAL...

As a result, developing countries found themselves to

varying degrees devoid of taxonomic services at the very

time when they most needed them, that is, when they, as

adherents to Agenda 21 of Rio, and as signatories to the

Convention on Biological Diversity, were attempting to meet

their international obligations as well as national needs for

development. They were faced with a taxonomic crisis, and

a taxonomic impediment was created to the pursuit of national programs for food security, sustainable agricultural

development, conservation and sustainable use of natural

resources and biodiversity, human health and control of

disease, and impact assessment.

This was not unexpected. It had been foreseen in the late

1980s when donor assistance had been sought in vain to

subsidize the services needed. It was indeed out of growing

concern for a solution to the forthcoming crisis that in 1991

an answer that proved acceptable to donors, expert centers,

and developing countries alike was devised in the form of a

global network for taxonomy. This was launched in June

1993 in the form of BioNET-INTERNATIONAL, an initiative for enabling developing countries to establish and sustain realistic self-reliance in taxonomic services, and to do so

in the technically best and most cost-effective way.

Purpose _______________________

The Global Network for Taxonomy, in the form of BioNETINTERNATIONAL, is focused on assisting developing countries to acquire and maintain the scientific skills, the collections of organisms and their related knowledge, and the

technologies needed to provide the vital taxonomic support

for national programs for conservation and sustainable use

of their natural resources and biodiversity and sustainable

agricultural development. The Global Network is also a

facilitating mechanism for the broader interventions

needed to assist developing countries to achieve full implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

The Global Network is a mechanism based first on subregional self-help, that is, South-South cooperation, to mobilize, pool, and optimize the use of existing resources, and

second, on North-South Cooperation to transfer knowledge,

skills, and technologies to developing subregions. The Global Network concept also envisages the provision of essential taxonomic services to developing countries during

their transition to self-reliance, with donor support being

provided to the LOOPs as integral parts of national sustainable development programs.

Structure ______________________

The Global Network is comprised of a series of interlinked

subregional networks (Locally Organized and Operated

Partnerships [LOOPs]) of developing country institutions,

supported by a consortium of developed country expert

institutions (known as BIOCON) and managed by the

BioNET-INTERNATIONAL Consultative Group (BICG) and

its Technical Secretariat (TecSec) (fig. 1).

Organization ___________________

Locally Organized and Operated

Partnerships (LOOPs)

The LOOPs are the very core of the Global Network. They

are based on the United Nations concept of Technical Cooperation Networks (TCNs) and are dedicated, through SouthSouth cooperation, to mobilizing, pooling, and optimizing

the use of existing taxonomic skills and resources within the

subregions for the benefit of all LOOP members. The Global

Network subregions accord closely to those prescribed by the

United Nations. Management of LOOPs is founded on four

functional levels:

1. National Institutes (NIs) are the relevant bodies within

individual countries that work together as a national network and implement work programs.

2. National Coordinating Institutes (NACIs) are the single

institutes in member countries designated to coordinate the

activities of the National Institutes (NIs).

3. The LOOP Coordinating Committee (LCC) is the governing body of the LOOP and is comprised of the NACIs

together with any other invited bodies.

4. Network Coordinating Institutes (NECIs) are the single

member institutes of the LCC, elected to coordinate and

manage the affairs and work of the LOOP.

Consortium for North-South Technical

Support (BIOCON)

This consortium (BIOCON) of the world’s major centers of

taxonomic expertise and resources is designed to provide the

information, skills, materials, and technologies needed by

developing country subregions to achieve realistic self-reliance in taxonomy. It is the source of technical support for

donor-funded programs for capacity building and human

resource development in the BioNET-INTERNATIONAL

LOOPs of the developing world ( North-South cooperation.

This consortium is being created worldwide as developed

country institutions begin to collaborate to make their diverse resources available. The first subregional consortium,

EuroLOOP, with some 100 institutions spread throughout

25 countries was established in 1994 and is now expanding

as it embarks on the task of inventorying the resources it has

to offer to developing country LOOPs. A second BIOCON

LOOP is contemplated in the Australasia region to serve the

needs of the Pacific and Asian LOOPs of the Global Network.

Figure 1—Conceptual model of the global network.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 255

King Overcoming the Taxonomic Impediment to Sustainable Development: BioNET-INTERNATIONAL...

LOOPS Work Programs __________

The subregional LOOPs are initiated with four priority

work programs:

Establishment and Enhancement of

Information and Communication Services

The need often exists to update and expand hard copy

library resources at designated centers of excellence (CEs) of

LOOPs (such as with major reference works, taxonomic

monographs, and relevant serial journals), and information

technology infrastructure may need to be provided to these

CEs for intercenter networking and linkages with the Network Coordinating Institutes (NECI) and TecSec. Databases and database access arrangements with major world

centers need to be established, and Internet access, including e-mail facilities, are often required.

Broadly speaking, an efficient information service providing all relevant new and existing knowledge is needed

covering traditional taxonomy, molecular techniques, new

records, current biodiversity distribution maps, quarantine

pest lists, incidence and threats of alien invasive introductions, and relevant information on natural enemies and

biological control. To facilitate this, TecSec has recently

formed a strategic partnership with the United Nations

Food and Agricultural Organization based ECOPORT initiative (http://www.ecoport.org) as the primary future tool

for capture, management, and dissemination of taxonomic

information and knowledge for all levels of user groups.

Taxonomists and Technicians Training

This, the most substantial program of the LOOPs for the

foreseeable future, will involve:

• Updating and upgrading of existing expertise through

appropriate training of the present subregional specialists at local subregional academic and scientific centers

and/or at overseas universities and institutions. Also,

supplementary training is needed in specialized taxonomic areas, such as specific groups of economic importance, agricultural pests, invasives, natural biocontrol

agents, and endangered species. In particular, invasives

are by definition a transboundary problem, and require

multilateral collaboration for proactive solutions. Such

solutions are a classic “weakest link” problem, being at

the mercy of the lowest national capacity to implement

agreed activities on control of invasives’ movements and

establishment.

• Training of technical support staff in preparatory techniques and curatorial practices, collection management,

database management and information retrieval systems, illustrative techniques, and development of electronic products. Electronic teaching courses and training material need to be provided to the CEs, and TecSec

has recently commissioned production of training manuals on CD-ROM in order to facilitate this.

Rehabilitation of Collections and

Establishment of New Resources

These major programs address the inadequacies and needs

of existing preserved and living reference collections and

facilities, including buildings, storage units, working amenities, security, curatorial techniques, and the sustainability

of the physical condition of collections and their attendant

records. These programs also address the taxonomic needs

of collections to optimize their value as working resources for

LOOPs.

Development and Application of New

Technologies

These programs aim to make new and existing userfriendly taxonomic tools, for example, electronic aids to

identifications, and compendia, available to LOOP specialists, and to enable LOOPs to commission and/or develop

products that are tailor made for their own requirements.

More electronic and paper-based identification aids need to

be commissioned, and new tailormade products need to be

developed jointly by overseas specialists and subregional

taxonomists for their own requirements.

The achievement of BioNET-INTERNATIONAL’s objectives within the 10-year time horizon can only be contemplated because of, and through, the use of new technologies —

not the least electronic aids to identifications. These require

first and foremost the availability of keys written by world

experts for the groups of organisms concerned, which can

then be converted into electronic forms suitable for a whole

spectrum of users—from the upstream researchers and taxonomists to more downstream practitioners in areas such as

human and animal health and disease services, conservation biology, plant protection and biological control, quarantine, control of invasives, and development planning.

These technologies make taxonomy more available to, and

more useable by, a much larger community of scientists and

technicians, and enable them to become competent in identifying the organisms of relevance. Experience has shown

that as such keys become available their impact leads to a

demand for others, and as these keys ultimately depend on

the skills of the traditional taxonomist, the demand for these

experts is also increasing. The need for taxonomists has

never been greater, and their role in improving the welfare

of humankind and of future generations has never been as

well perceived as it is today.

Progress_______________________

Locally Organized and Operated Partnerships have been

or are being established in the following sequence:

1. Caribbean CARINET (22 countries) 1993

2. Europe EuroLOOP (25 countries) 1994

3. Southern Africa SAFRINET (15 countries) 1995

4. South East Asia ASEANET (10 countries) 1996

5. East Africa EAFRINET (6 countries) 1998

6. West Africa WAFRINET (18 countries) 1999

7. East Asia LOOP EASIANET (5 countries) 2001

8. Northern South ANDINONET (5 countries) 2002

America
256 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

King Overcoming the Taxonomic Impediment to Sustainable Development: BioNET-INTERNATIONAL...

9. South Asia LOOP SACNET (9 countries) 2002

10. South Pacific PACINET (26 countries) 2002

11. North Eurasia LOOP NEURASIANET 2003

with others to follow.

By the end of 2002, BioNET-INTERNATIONAL LOOPs

will have been established or activated by governments in

the Caribbean, Africa, Asia, the South Pacific, and Latin

America, embracing some 140 countries.

Funding and the Future __________

A very supportive group of donors, including the United

Nations Development Program (UNDP TC/DC) and the

bilateral agencies of Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden,

Switzerland, and the United Kingdom, plus the intergovernmental agencies of the Commonwealth Secretariat, have

enabled the Feasibility Studies and LOOP Formulation

Workshops needed to establish subregional LOOPs. In this

way, these LOOPs have been created with full and formal

support by the governments concerned. They are thus accorded some priority in the national development plans of

those who own them. Donor funds are now forthcoming from

such agencies as the Swiss Development and Cooperation

Agency (SDC), the Department for International Development (DFID) of the United Kingdom, and the European

Union’s Center for Technical and Rural Cooperation (CTA)

to enable the implementation of the work programs of

established LOOPs. In addition, a contribution of SFr 2.9

million by the SDC to the BioNET-INTERNATIONAL FUND

has enabled the initiation of a BioNET-INTERNATIONAL

Fellowship Scheme, an Information Support Service, and

has assisted the operations of the Technical Secretariat and

Network Coordinating Institutes.

The response of the international donor community to

further substantial funding proposals suggest that the basic

Global Network could be in place within the next 3 years,

and full development may be completed by 2005. By that

time, there should be established within the subregions of

the developing world a substantial taxonomic resource to

support national and regional programs of sustainable

development.

Finally, in the last few years, a number of related international initiatives have developed as recognition of the taxonomic impediment has spread. The Conference of the Parties (CoP) on the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)

has formulated the concept of a Global Taxonomy Initiative

(GTI) to promote a concerted effort between international

funding agencies, national governments, and NGOs to link

taxonomic capacity building to the effective implementation

of the CBD. BioNET-INTERNATIONAL is working closely

with such initiatives to harness synergies and prevent

duplication of efforts in building the required taxonomic

capacity. Together such international initiatives may be

able to overcome the Taxonomic Impediment.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 257

Teresa C. Magro is a Professor of Wilderness Management, Department

of Forest Science, University of São Paulo, 13418-900, Piracicaba, Sao

Paulo, Brasil. Phone: (19) 3436-8650, FAX: (19) 3436-8601, E- mail: tecmagro

@esalq.usp.br

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—A 22-km (13.6-mile) trail in Itatiaia National Park

(INP), Brazil, was closed for restoration in 1990 due to severe

environmental impact. Park experts considered temporary trail

closure the most suitable measure to allow recovery of the excessively damaged area. Nevertheless, during periodic visits to the

trail, it was clear that the expected recovery had not taken place. To

the contrary, problems became even more severe at the most

affected sites even after 10 years of restricted access. The problem

appears to be a lack of financial resources, the constant change in

park management, and insufficient INP staff training.

During the previous 10 years it was difficult to convince the public

that trail closure was necessary. This area attracts many visitors.

Large-scale erosion has been a serious management problem. Temporary trail closure to protect it from visitor impacts was in reality

a substitute for more labor-intensive, effective actions that would

conserve natural resources while also permitting public use.

Introduction ____________________

Among the recreation management strategies to minimize impact, access restriction has been the most popular

measure among Brazilian park administrators. Usually

these actions have been adopted as emergency measures

before the actual causes of the problem have been identified.

However, conditional closing of large park areas has often

prevented other strategies from being adopted. Alternative

actions, including those more appropriate for recovery of

wild areas, have not usually been considered. Lack of human

and financial resources has aggravated the protection of

natural areas.

The justification for area closures is more often that these

impacts are generated from public use. When an area is

opened for visitation, environmental alterations are foreseen and are inevitable. Many times the only alternative

considered has been complete closure, often including campsites. Hammitt and Cole (1998), however, specified that

permanent area closures should occur only where this drastic measure is the only option for recovery.

Before public use of natural areas became intense, trail,

campsite, or area closures within some National Parks did

Closure of Trails: A Restoration Strategy

or Lack of Management?

Teresa C. Magro

not generate public reaction or discussion. Currently, significant increases in public use of parks and recreation areas have

generated pressure, and public access is often reestablished

quickly. Public pressure to expand access to new areas and

new activities, often from those involved in “radical” sports,

has also increased.

There was once a certain public lethargy regarding public

use of National Parks, but now the situation is far more

dynamic, with greater public participation. Public displeasure is commonly expressed when certain restrictive restoration measures are established, especially if they become

permanent. Examples of this displeasure include electronic

“chat groups” such as the São Paulo Excursion Center

(céu@yahoogroups.com) and the São Paulo State Mountaineering Federation (femesp@yahoogroups.com).

At Itatiaia National Park (INP), restriction on long-distance trail access was implemented in 1990 for some of the

more popular trails. However, those users with access permission (researchers, conservationists) noted that recovery

was extremely slow, and in some places the erosion problems

had increased. Methodologies for public use management,

such as Limits of Acceptable Change (Stankey and others

1985) or Visitor Impact Management (Graefe and others

1990), have clearly shown that the most efficient way to

solve the problem is to identify the root causes before

methods are adopted for environmental restoration.

In the case of INP, failure to understand contributors to

trail degradation on the Rebouças-Headquarter Trail resulted in the selection of a less efficient and unpopular

solution (Magro 1999). Trail closure failed to demonstrate

significant trail recovery, as this report will illustrate.

Study Area _____________________

From Initial Settlement to a National Park

The Federal Government acquired the lands of INP in 1908

for the creation of two colonial towns. These towns were composed mainly of European immigrants, most commonly from

Finland. Due to steep hillsides, these towns were not successful, and the land was returned to the Ministry of Agriculture. In 1929, a Biological Research Station was created that

was administered by the Botanical Garden of Rio de Janeiro

(IBDF 1982). In 1937, this land became the first Brazilian

National Park, Itatiaia National Park (INP). It is located in

southeast Rio de Janeiro State, directly south of Minas

Gerais (22nd 15’S and 22nd 25’S and 44th 35' W - 44th 45' W),

and the Park covers an area of 30,000 ha (116 miles).

The Rebouças-Headquarter Trail, where the study was

performed, was open for about 100 years, and initially

represented the only way to INP Administrative Headquarters (altitude about 700 m or 2,297 ft) and to the Park plateau
258 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Magro Closure of Trails: A Restoration Strategy or Lack of management?

(maximum altitude of 2,787 m or 9,144 ft). This trail was

used initially by those who moved to the town of Mauá, and

was used by visitors who hiked or scaled one of the highest

peaks in Brazil, Agulhas Negras. Later, cattle that invaded

the high altitude pastures and the military that used it for

training exercises degraded this trail. Most of the time, INP

administrative maintenance practices amounted to weeding

and cleaning of trails. Improvements, such as opening and

cleaning of drainage channels, were rare events. Such activities, when they occurred, were more frequent before the

opening of BR-485, an alternative road that would eventually

become the main access to the plateau.

The specific objectives of INP, established in the 1982

management plan (IBDF 1982) were: (1) to protect fragments of the Atlantic Rainforest, (2) to provide opportunities for recreation and tourism in a natural way, (3) to protect

ecological diversity, (4) to provide opportunities for environmental education, (5) to control erosion and conserve water

and air resources, (6) to conserve natural scenic beauties,

(7) to provide opportunities for scientific research, (8) to

protect animal species in the area, and (9) to make possible

public use activities linked directly to area resources, as

compatible with other objectives mentioned above.

By 1990, the trail had suffered serious erosion problems,

with some travel being very risky. The management solution

adopted by INP administration was to close the trail to

visitor use. Garcia and Pereira’s technical report (1990) was

used as justification for this action. These specialists in soils

considered the main problem with the Rebouças-Headquarter Trail to be furrow erosion that caused severe gouging.

According to these authors, the largest erosion caused along

this trail was 7 m (23 ft) in depth and started from a point

that was not drained properly. Until 2001, the RebouçasHeadquarter Trail could be used only with special permission from INP.

Another backcountry area was temporarily closed to the

public in 2001 after a fire consumed about 600 ha (2.3 miles2

)

of natural vegetation. Again, a technical report on this fire

was used as justification for area closure. According to

Ribeiro (2001), closing the burnt area to visitation was a

crucial measure to guarantee recovery until an action plan

was developed. The report recognized that closure had

impacts on the local economy, such as with hotels and

specialized guides, and suggested that this strategy be used

only temporarily. This recent closure, as well as closure of

the Rebouças-Headquarter Trail, generated a lot of criticism

and protests from excursionists and mountaineers.

Methodology ___________________

Institutional Capacity to Administer

the Area

We considered the administrative or institutional capacities as the ability of INP to successfully solve challenges

related to the Park mission. The fundamental maintenance

objectives for Brazilian National Parks, according to the

National System of Parks and Conservation Units (MMA

2000) are: preserving natural ecosystems of great ecological relevance and scenic beauty, facilitating scientific research, developing educational activities and environmental

interpretation, and increasing public contact with nature,

which includes ecotourism.

Once the INP mission was defined during park creation in

1937, management actions should respect these goals. However, considering the current situation in restricted areas,

INP administration has not been successful. We observed

that the lack of Park financial resources, constant administrative changes, and insufficient training of Park staff have

contributed to this failure. Administrative documents were

analyzed to identify Park management activities that could

have contributed to attaining their mission.

Thirty-four annual reports were consulted, which contained details of management actions executed from 1937 to

1983. In addition to these documents, three former Park

Directors were interviewed: Mr. Wanderbilt Duarte de Barros

(1940 to 1956), Mr. Pedro Eymard Camelo Melo (1991 to

1995), and Carlos Fernando Pires of Souza (April to September, 1995). Visitor registrations at the “Apple Tree Shelter”

were used to estimate trail users from 1928 to 1934, and from

1936 to 1950, and information related to the frequency and

form of use of the Rebouças- Headquarter trail was obtained.

In these books, INP service and trail maintenance activities

were also noted.

Results and Discussion __________

Park Maintenance and Administration

The first INP administrators presented annual reports to

the Forest Service. These documents contain information

that shows changes in management and the historical development of public use in this area, including current conditions. These documents establish approximate dates for

construction of existing trails, shelter construction, and area

maintenance. Using this data, we were able to correlate

some problems with the Annual Maintenance Reports

(AMRs).

Annual Maintenance Reports from 1937 to 1983 were

consulted. From 1940 to 1960 there was a certain regularity

and uniformity for the presentation of information. Unfortunately, the regular reports stopped in 1970. Documents for

1953, 1961, 1972 to 1978, and 1980 to 1982 were not present

in the official files. To obtain complementary information,

we consulted other documents, such as requested services,

employee problems, or visitor complaints, in addition to

spreadsheets with visitor numbers. Less simple than AMR

analysis, but indispensable for our conclusions, was information about institutional parameters.

In the first years of INP, emphasis was on areas near the

administrative building, such as the gardens, surrounding

reforestation and general maintenance. This was probably

due to two factors: the need for headquarter establishment

and the agricultural focus of the previous immigrant colony.

Area recovery occupied much time; besides planting arboreal species, the gardens, filled with rosebushes, had to be

maintained. Seedlings produced in the Park nursery for

restoration and horticulture, including many exotic species,

were donated to local institutions and to the Forest Service

Administration in Rio de Janeiro. These activities demanded

time and consumed many resources.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 259

Magro Closure of Trails: A Restoration Strategy or Lack of management?

The need to maintain the administrative headquarters

and permanent infrastructure in good condition was also

important. The Vargas Presidency (from 1930 to 1945) used

the Park as a showplace for diplomats who visited Brazil.

When the Federal Capital was in Rio de Janeiro, INP and

Serra dos Órgãos National Park represented an excellent

view of wild Brazil. Many authorities and diplomats entered

the Park while visiting Rio de Janeiro, as verified by reports

and the visitor registration books.

Other community services were also noted, such as an

elementary school, church, electric and phone facility maintenance, internal roads, and access to the city of Itatiaia.

Horses and mules were used in Park maintenance and

surveillance, and feeding of these animals was often by

natural foraging as well as by raising corn. The garden,

whose maintenance was time and labor intensive, was

reformed in 1943, to simplify and conserve operations.

On the other hand, few maintenance activities on the

plateau were required, and those that were focused mainly

on the studied trail. When this trail was the fastest way to

the plateau, it was maintained with certain regularity.

However, when the highway was opened with access to the

Agulhas Negras, the importance of the trail decreased.

Employee records indicated that maintenance of the

Rebouças-Headquarter trail was sporadic after BR-485, the

new road to the plateau, was opened.

Severe erosion, especially the 7-m (23-ft) gully that had

motivated trail closing happened by 1979, according to an

employee annual report. Beginning in 1971, the AMRs do

not mention trail maintenance activities. Employees probably cleared vegetation, mainly in forest areas, but the

activity was not constant. Contributing to erosion were fires

that hindered vegetation recovery.

Is Visitation in Itatiaia National Park Really

a Problem?

Serrano (1993) found a series of historical documents

regarding the first Park users. Using Park registrations,

about 2,700 people entered INP from 1925 to 1947. Unfortunately, this number does not accurately represent visitations because many people did not sign the visitor books. In

addition, several documents that contained this type of

information have been lost. Within Park registrations, origin or nationality was possible to verify, and most visitors at

that time were foreigners (70 percent).

Between 1937 and 1947, INP AMRs showed an average of

30,049 visitors annually. There were only 4,523 visitors in

1946, but there was a jump of 10,000 visitors in 1947. As

observed by Wanderbilt Duarte de Barros, a former INP

administrator, soon after the Second World War visitation of

INP increased markedly.

From registrations and other documents, we estimated

visitation from the creation of INP (fig. 1). The data corresponding to 1951, 1961, 1966, 1971, 1972, and from 1976 to

1985, however, were not found in INP files. Visitation values

from 1990 to 1997 are more reliable (fig. 2) due to better

control at the main Park entrances. However, the values

reflect people that paid to enter INP and not the total

number of visitors. Those under 10 years old, adults above 70

years, school excursions, researchers, and authorities are

exempt from paying the entrance fee.

People who hiked the Itatiaia plateau represented about

10 percent of total Park visitors. This is due not only to the

attractiveness (waterfalls) of the surroundings of the headquarters, but also the limited infrastructure for receiving

visitors and the difficulty of access to the plateau. Access can

be better in autumn and winter with the onset of rain.

The Itatiaia National Park is strategically located between Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, and Belo Horizonte, and

attracts a larger number of tourists than the Park can

handle. But visitation can be considered low when compared

with other Brazilian Parks, such as Iguaçu or Tijuca National Parks that receive about a million visitors annually.

However, the visitation in Itatiaia is limited to few sites, on

weekends, holidays, and school vacations. Part of the low

capacity of INP is due to the small staff and limited financial

resources.

Military Training and Cattle

There are controversies regarding the effects of military

training on current conditions on the Rebouças-Headquarter Trail. The Agulhas Negras Military Academy has been

Figure 1—Total visitation in Itatiaia National Park from

1937 to 2000. Registrations corresponding 1951, 1961,

1966, 1971, 1972, and 1976 to 1985 were not found

(source: INP Administration).

Figure 2—Visitation to Itatiaia National Park from 1990

to 1997. Total number refers to visitors who paid to

enter in the park (source: INP Administration).

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

19371942194719521957196219671972197719821987199219972002

Year 

Visitors

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

19901991199219931994199519961997

Year

Visitors

Main Entrance

Plateau
260 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Magro Closure of Trails: A Restoration Strategy or Lack of management?

the most frequent trail user since 1956. Park employee

depositions have indicated that many impacts were caused

by troops, numbering more than 500 men at a time, who used

the plateau for military training. A colonel interviewed for

this research argued that the training did not happen on

trails, but was dispersed and occurred mainly in the Rebouças

Shelter. However, we found old artillery pieces, such as rifle

cartridges and a cannon reducer, on the trail, indicating that

some activity happened on the trail and its environs.

Use of heavy boots, bulky equipment, and food by the

military during training has aggravated problems here.

Certainly the continuous use of the trail contributed to soil

compaction and trailbed damage in the most susceptible

passages, where it is steep with high soil clay content.

The use of the area as a natural cattle pasture and the

constant fires that happened during the drought also contributed to the damage in some less resilient sites. In

addition, frost also exists here, leaving the vegetation more

drought and fire susceptible, and less resistant to trampling

by cattle. Dusen (1955) studied the flora of Itatiaia in 1902,

and indicated that fire was used as a technique for maintaining cattle pastures. The researcher observed the effect that

fires had on vegetation, and he noted that the common frosts

usually dried and damaged local flora. Some plants occurred

in great abundance in burned areas, while in the areas

without burning, there were only two sterile species. Dusen

considered that plant development favored the burned areas

because the black soil would absorb larger amounts of heat,

in comparison with areas that were not burnt.

Successive trampling and soil compaction by cattle, along

with decreased trail maintenance, were probably responsible for soil structure destruction and increased susceptibility to erosion. Cattle tracks concentrated water toward the

main trail, reducing drainage. Another factor linked to trail

damage was mule and horse use for transport in the area.

Besides the use of horses to carry luggage, construction

materials were also transported. According to the 1949

AMR, mules made 1,460 trips to transport the construction

material required to build the Massena Shelter, located on

the INP plateau.

Political Changes and Park Administration

Finally, we considered the Park as a whole—its history,

use, management, and politics, including political administrative changes during the last decade. The Itatiaia National Park had been endowed with a representative infrastructure, employee houses, well-equipped hiking shelters,

a restaurant for the staff, laundry, museum, and a set of

roads and trails to permit multiple use. When Rio de Janeiro

was the Federal capital, more attention was given to INP,

and it was easier to obtain the necessary financial resources.

In 1964, the Federal capital was moved to Brasília, and

the importance of INP decreased markedly. Once the capital

was no longer Rio de Janeiro, the Park stopped attracting

national and international attention. Park administration

began to receive fewer resources, and had less political

weight with politicians in Brasília.

According to reports by former employees, the situation in

INP worsened during the Military Regime (1964 to 1985)

because many bureaucratic positions, such as in the Brazilian

Institute of Forest Development (IBDF, now the Brazilian

Environment and Renewable Natural Resources Institute,

IBAMA), were held by generals or military officers with no

training or understanding of the environment. With no

sensitivity to conservation of natural resources and without

the necessary technical knowledge required to manage a

park, problems began to multiply. There was no fuel money

for park surveillance vehicles, no new employees were recruited after older employees retired, and there was no

money for maintenance. In addition, park vandalism increased due to lack of surveillance and the increase of

unemployment.

During this period, 12 new National Parks were created,

and it was necessary to divide the maintenance resources

between the new National Parks and 15 Parks already in

existence. Employee recruitment was centralized and only

performed in Brasília. This estrangement between Federal

bureaucrats and the INP administration (who previously

answered only to their superiors in Rio de Janeiro) prevented efficient INP management.

Federal Government bureaucratic growth during the Military Regime caused IBDF to become swollen with many

employees, complicating simple decisions. This meant that

while INP lacked active employees, many supervisors and

administrators remained in Brasília or Rio de Janeiro,

decreasing park efficiency. Money collected from entrance

and parking fees went to Brasília and was effectively lost—

few of these fees were returned to INP for improvement and

maintenance of existing infrastructure.

Budget cuts were more drastic during the New Republic,

starting in 1985. Even with the increased concern by the

Federal Government for the environment, there were large

budget cuts, with “bureaucratic downsizing,” necessitated

after the excesses of the Military Regime. Employee numbers were reduced so that today there are only 33 permanent

employees to take care of 30,000 ha (116 miles2

), and most of

these are administrative employees. In addition, there has

been very little investment in employee training and ongoing education, which has also harmed the efficiency of area

maintenance. Happily, this situation is reversing currently.

Conclusions____________________

There was not a substantial recovery in the RebouçasHeadquarter Trailbed following its closing in 1990, and in

some places problems were accentuated. We consider two

main reasons for lack of success: (1) no attempts were made

to increase vegetation recovery, and (2) the trail was never

really closed, remaining open for special groups and military

training. Analysis of documents and administrative reports

revealed events that allowed continuous trail use and poor

decisions made by INP administrators. Besides physical

limitations, institutional parameters are necessary for the

evaluation of public use impact in natural areas. These

factors, planning, and maintenance techniques are essential

if correct decisions and appropriate practices are to be

established.

Acknowledgments ______________

This research was funded by the Boticario Foundation for

Protection of Nature (FBPN), the MacArthur Foundation,
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 261

Magro Closure of Trails: A Restoration Strategy or Lack of management?

and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) as part of the

Project “Recreational Impact of INP.” We wish to thank

several people who helped with the field work: employees of

Itatiaia National Park; members of the Agulhas Negras

Excursionist Group; Foresters Alexandre Afonso Binelli,

Cristina Suarez Copa Velasquez, Flávia Regina Mazziero,

and Silvia Yochie Kataoka; and Agronomists Alexandre

Mendes Pinho and Fábio Raimo de Oliveira.

References _____________________

Dusen, P. K. H. 1955. Contribuições para a flora do Itatiaia.

[Contributions of the flora of the Itatiaia.] Rio De Janeiro: Forest

Service. 91 p.

Garcia, J. M. P.; Pereira, L. E. C. L. 1990. Relatório de visita ao

Parque Nacional do Itatiaia—Dezembro/1990. [Visitation Reports of Itatiaia National Park—December/1990.] Rio de Janeiro:

Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro [Federal University of

Rio de Janeiro].

Graefe, A. R.; Kuss, F. R.; Vaske, J. J. 1990. Visitor impact management. The planning framework. Volume 2. Washington, DC:

National Parks and Conservation Association. 105 p.

Hammitt, W. E.; Cole, D. N. 1998. Wildland recreation. Ecology and

management. 2d ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 361 p.

Brazilian Institute of Forest Development (IBDF). 1982. Plano de

Manejo do Parque Nacional do Itatiaia. M.A.-Instituto Brasileiro

de Desenvolvimento Florestal. [Management plan of Itatiaia

National Park. Brazilian M.A.- Institute of Forest Development.]

Brazilian Institute of Forest Development/Fundação Brasileira

para a Conservação da Naturesa [Brazilian Foundation for Nature Conservation]. Brasília. 207 p.

Magro, T. C. 1999. Avaliação dos impactos do uso público em uma

trilha no planalto do Parque Nacional do Itatiaia. [Evaluation of

the impacts of public use on one trail on the plateaus of Itatiaia

National Park.] São Paulo: São Carlos Engineering College, São

Paulo University. 97 p. Thesis.

Ministery of Environment (MMA). 2000. Sistema Nacional de

Unidades de Conservação da Natureza. Lei No. 9.985, de 18 de

julho de 2000. [National system of units of nature conservation.

Law No. 9,985, July 18, 2000.] Brasília: MMA/SBF. 32 p.

Ribeiro, K. T. 2001. Incêndio no Planalto do Itatiaia: Parecer técnico

sobre o Uso Público do Planalto do Itatiaia imediatamente após

o Incêndio. [Fire in the plateaus of the Itatiaia: a technical look at

public use of the plateaus of Itatiaia after fire.] Unpublished

report on file at: Itatiaia National Park. 11 p.

Serrano, C. M. T. 1993. A Invenção do Itatiaia. [The creation of the

Itatiaia.] Campinas, Brazil: University of Campinas. 180 p.

Thesis.

Stankey, G. H.; Cole, D. N.; Lucas, R. C.; Petersen, M. E.; Frissel, S. S.

1985. The Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) system for wilderness planning. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-176. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and

Range Experimental Station. 37 p.
262 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Teresa Cristina Magro and José Leonardo de Moraes Gonçalves are

Professors at the Department of Forest Science, University of São Paulo,

13418-900, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil, Phone: 0055 19 4308650, FAX: 0055 19

4308601, E-mails: tecmagro@esalq.usp.br and jlmgonca@carpa.ciagri.usp.br

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Many trails in the Brazilian National Parks system

have been closed due to the impact caused by increasing and

continuous use. Some of the trails will take a long time to recover,

and some may even show worse conditions after a few years. The

ability to choose the best strategy to restore vegetation and soil

quality will help managers save scarce financial resources that can

then be used in other conservation actions. A seedbank test, together with soil analysis, seems to be helpful in this task. Most

currently used management actions are not specific to different

sites on the same trail. In this study, results of a seedbank test

showed the sites that recovered best were those with soils containing a high concentration of organic material and nutrients. Sometimes only the presence of organic material was enough to enable

recovery, showing that fertilization is not always necessary. We also

identified areas where more active restoration was needed, including soil transplanting. Considering all the results, we were able to

recommend the best management strategy for each site, and which

we expect to achieve the best results in trail recovery.

Introduction ____________________

Closure of trails and camping sites are used to help recovery of highly impacted sites where continued use would be

limiting to the success of recovery management practices.

Despite the use of specific techniques, which may range from

soil quality enhancement to seedling transplanting and

irrigation, the results vary considerably from area to area.

In general, restoration techniques, other than simply

closing areas, are costly. These expenses vary from high

costs, such as the establishment of an irrigation system to

promote plant growth, to low costs, such as fence or barrier

construction (Hammitt and Cole 1998). When management

practices are based on evidences of their success, the recovery of impacted sites can be faster and more efficient. During

the past few years, several scientists have investigated how

the factors inherent to an area respond to management

practices. This knowledge can provide useful indicators for

the selection process of the most adequate recovery technique for individual sites.

Seedbank as a Tool for Choosing the Better

Strategy for Trail Recovery

Teresa Cristina Magro

José Leonardo de Moraes Gonçalves

Zabinski and Cole (2000) addressed this question in a

study that identified the limiting factors to revegetation

success in impacted recreation sites. They selected high

altitude sites, with characteristics of moderate to high stress,

short growth period, and poor soils that could be limiting to

all revegetation stages. Results showed that revegetation

was limited by a combination of several factors. One factor

was availability of propagules, since there was an increase

in seedling numbers when seeds were added. There were

noticeable limitations during seed germination and seedling

initial establishment, suggesting that environmental conditions are important to this stage’s success. Soil treatments

had no significant effect on seedling numbers and growth,

indicating that microclimatic differences, including light

patterns and water drainage, may be the primary limiting

factor.

Cole and Spildie (2000) also provided additional information about factors limiting natural recovery rates and the

efficacy of selected techniques in accelerating recovery.

They evaluated the influence of specific techniques: (1) soil

amendment through organic matter use, specifically sewage and soil inoculation; (2) transplanting and seeding using

native local species; and (3) application of a superficial litter

layer on the establishment, survival, and growth of the

vegetation. Campsites investigated were closed and signed,

and no apparent indication of use was observed during the

study period. The results obtained indicated that, in general,

adopted recovery techniques were highly effective. The superficial litter layer did not have a clear effect and varied

with plant growth seasons. According to the authors, climatic conditions could have influenced the results obtained.

Hammitt and Cole (1998) suggested that recovery periods

are highly variable. The recovery period includes vegetation

reestablishment, and in some cases, even recovery of the soil’s

physical conditions, such as elimination of soil compaction.

The results from the studies above, in conjunction with

our field observations, lead us to believe that local conditions

strongly determine the success or failure of restoration

techniques. In addition to local conditions, the intensity of

which soil characteristics are modified may also yield different results. In all restoration projects in mining areas or

trails, the preliminary and foremost step to guarantee plant

establishment is the recovery or enhancement of the soil’s

physical and chemical conditions.

Generally, soils of severely impacted areas have low organic matter and high soil compaction, which restrict plant

development. Furthermore, a poor or nonexistent seedbank

will influence the results of recovery strategies. Campsites

and trails that are closed with no other improvement measures taken can exhibit a negative result and a longer recovery time.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 263

Magro and Goncalves Seedbank as a Tool for Choosing the Better Strategy for Trail Recovery

Study Area _____________________

In 1937, Itatiaia National Park (INP) was the first park

created in Brazil. It is located southeast of Rio de Janeiro

State and directly south of Minas Gerais (22∞ 15’S and 22∞

25’S and 44∞ 35’W - 44∞ 45’W); the Park covers an area of

30,000 ha (116 miles2).

The study was conducted in the Itatiaia plateau, which

presents an annual average temperature of 11.4 ∞C (53 ∞F),

a maximum temperature of 21.4 ∞C (71 ∞F) in February, and

a minimum temperature of –6.4 ∞C (20 ∞F) in July. Intense

frosts are common during the winter season, often with hail

and rare brief snowfalls (IBDF 1982). The average precipitation is approximately 2,400 mm (94 inches). The region’s

original vegetation has been under intense human influence, mainly between 1908 and 1918, when there was an

agrarian colony where the INP area is today. Meadows in the

plateau region have been successively burned to improve

cattle pasture (IBAMA 1994).

Vegetation in the uplands is typical of the meadow ecosystem, considered a fragile ecosystem for anthropogenic uses.

Its floristic composition varies according to ecological conditions, consisting predominately of grasses but also containing

a great number of bromeliads, cactuses, and orchids (IBAMA

1994). There are some endemic species, such as the bromeliad Fernseca itatiaia, a threatened species, and a monotypic

endemic genus Itatiaia cleistopetala. Other important species are Chusquea pinifolia, Cortaderia modesta, Cladium

eusifolium, Baccharis discolor, Roupala impressiuscula,

Rapanea gardneriana, Viscuia micentra e Buddleia

presciosissima, Pepalanthus polyanthus, a heavily collected

species for dry flower arrangements, Baccharis platypoda,

and Hydrocotyle quinqueloba (IBDF 1992; IBAMA 1994).

This study was conducted at Rebouças-Headquarter trail,

which was opened approximately 100 years ago and was the

only access from INP administrative headquarters (altitude

about 700 m [2,297 ft]) to the park plateau (a maximum

altitude of 2,787 m [9,144 ft]). Horses were used to carry

luggage, equipment, and materials for shelter construction.

Researchers and the first alpinists in search of one of the

highest peaks in Brazil, Pico das Agulhas Negras, most

intensively used the trail. Trail maintenance was achieved

through weeding and construction of rainwater drainage

channels. Also, military operations were stationed in the

area for decades, with up to 500 troops. Nowadays, these

activities are restricted to few troops. Trail use by tourists

has been prohibited since 1990 due to its degradation.

Besides the factors listed above, the use of the area for

cattle ranching and the constant fires during the dry season

have contributed to environmental impacts in less resistant

areas. In addition, the occurrence of natural frosts in the

region causes vegetation to be dry and more susceptible to

fire and cattle trampling (Magro 1999).

Methodology ___________________

Field surveys were carried out during 1995 and 1996 at

Itatiaia National Park. Seedbank germination tests and soil

analysis were conducted at Escola Superior de Agricultura

Luiz de Queiroz in Piracicaba, SP, Brazil. Transects were

installed along a 6,500-m (4-mile) section, selected from the

total 22 km (13.6 miles) Rebouças-Headquarters trail.

Trailbed Characteristics

Part of the soil samples collected for the seedbank trials

were used in the physical and chemical analyses. Several

soil characteristics were evaluated: pH in CaCl2, organic

matter, available P(2) (P-resin), exchangeable base-forming

cations (K, Ca, and Mg), exchangeable H and Al, sum of

bases(2), cation exchange capacity (T(4)), base saturation

(V(5)), Al saturation, particle size analysis, bulk and particle

soil densities, and total soil pore spaces.

Soil textural classes were classified by percentages of

sand, silt, and clay found (Curi 1993). The identified classes

were described as (a) sandy clay loam: soil with 20 to 35

percent clay, less than 28 percent silt and 45 percent or more

sand; (b) clay loam: soil with 27 to 40 percent clay and 20 to

45 percent sand; (c) sandy clay: soil with 35 percent or more

clay and 45 percent or more sand; and (d) clay: soil with 40

percent or more clay, less than 45 percent sand, and less

than 40 percent silt.

To measure the topsoil’s mechanical resistance, a Lang

penetrometer was used. The penetrometer is a standard,

cone-tipped rod that is pushed into the soil. A ring is

displaced while the rod is driven into the soil and a scale at

the top of the rod gives the measurement. Numbers 1 to 19

indicate the resistance level to penetration. The higher the

number, the harder the topsoil (1–4 or 0–14.4 Kgf/cm2 = soft;

4–7 or 14.4–25.09 Kgf/cm2 = moderately soft; 7–16 or 25.09–

57.37 Kgf/cm2 = medium; 16–18 or 57.3–64.5 Kgf/cm2 =

moderately hard; and 18–20 or 64.5–71.7 Kgf/cm2 = hard).

The average of five measurements in each sampling unit was

calculated. Measurements of soil compaction were not taken

in vegetation sampling areas to avoid damage or disturbance to plants being used in monitoring studies.

Parallel declivity was measured in degrees along the trail,

following a walking direction. Declivity was measured by

placing an Abney level on top of a piece of wood parallel to the trail.

Perpendicular declivity was taken transversely to the trail’s

walking direction, also in degrees.

Seedbank

To evaluate the vegetation’s regeneration capacity along

the bed trail, germination tests were conducted using seedbank samples collected in permanent sampling units during

1996. In each plot there were three samples in a 20 x 20 x 5

cm area. The topsoil layer was scraped in case branches;

stones and live or dead plants were found. Part of the

collected seedbank soil was submitted to physical and chemical analyses. The resulting data were then compared to the

seedbank germination results.

Samples were submitted to germination tests and kept in

rectangular aluminum trays (15 x 27.5 cm [6 x 11 inches]),

totaling 39 plots (13 treatments x 3 repetitions). Trays were

air exposed and sprinkler irrigated twice a day. The number

of germinated plants in each tray were counted weekly and

classified as: (1) monocotyledonous, (2) dicotyledonous, or

(3) moss. Observations lasted 14 weeks and were concluded

as soon as the number of plants per tray began stabilizing or

decreasing.

Contamination in the nursery was prevented by periodically monitoring three control trays containing washed and

sterilized sand, distributed among the samples.
264 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Magro and Goncalves Seedbank as a Tool for Choosing the Better Strategy for Trail Recovery

Results and Discussion __________

Trailbed Characteristics

Compaction, topsoil erosion, and the decline of vegetation

cover along trailbeds contributed to a substantial reduction

of organic matter content in the soil. In high declivity areas,

the establishment of new plants was difficult, in part, due to

removal of seeds and plantlets by the rain. The few seedlings

able to survive could not find favorable establishment conditions because of low water and nutrient availability, caused

by soil erosion and compaction, which in turn, reduced the

water infiltration rate.

Table 1 shows that samples with the least bare soil tended

to be less steep areas and also have less superficial soil compaction. Physical characteristics are shown in table 2. These relationships will be discussed later with the results obtained in

the seedbank analysis.

Settergreen and Cole (1970) observed that recreational

use pressure affects soil characteristics differently; these

differences will define certain limitations to normal vegetation growth and development. The most significant differences were soil compaction and the elimination of vegetation

cover that protects the soil surface. Soil compaction and

stone buildup in heavily visited areas have characteristics

similar to those of impervious surfaces, therefore reducing

water infiltration capacity and increasing erosion caused by

runoff. These authors believe that topsoil compaction has a

greater effect on smaller grasses and herbaceous species

than on trees and shrubs.

Results obtained by Takahashi (1998) indicated that soil

resistance to penetration 5 to 10 cm (2 x 4 inches) deep in Salto

Morato Natural Reserve, in the State of Paraná, was the

variable that best distinguished the trail from an area with no

use. This result corroborates other findings demonstrating

that soil’s resistance to penetration is a sound and valuable

indicator for monitoring soil conditions.

Table 1—Trail conditions on Rebouças-Headquarters trail measured in 1996.

Penetration

Sample Trail Penetration resistance—out

number width Bare soil Slope along Slope across resistance—trail of trail

- - - - - - - cm - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - degree - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Kgf/cm2 - - - - - - - - - - 

1 140 75 0 1 35.85 24.74

2 183 50 0 0 64.90 29.40

3 340 22 11 20 54.50 32.99

4 181 80 0 1 56.65 23.66

5 480 70 0 0 62.03 34.42

6 405 0 8 9 46.25 22.95

7 163 61 1 4 44.82 34.06

8 125 0 0 8 40.16 30.48

9 292 52 .5 2 48.76 21.87

10 396 47 2 11 58.08 41.59

11 1,030 270 14 25 58.80 52.35

12 323 87 20 24 51.27 32.27

13 297 0 1 3 39.80 18.29

Table 2—Physical characteristics of soil on the Rebouças-Headquarter

trail in Itatiaia National Park in 1996.

Sample Density Total porosity

number Soil fabric Soil Particle Value Levela

- - g/cm3 - - 

1 Sandy loam 1.1 2.4 54 A

2 Sandy loam 1.4 2.7 48 A

3 Sandy loam 1.0 2.6 61 H

4 Sandy clay 1.1 2.6 57 H

5 Sandy clay loam 1.1 2.5 56 H

6 Sandy clay .8 2.2 63 H

7 Sandy clay loam 1.0 2.5 60 H

8 Sandy clay loam .8 2.2 63 H

9 Sandy clay loam 1.3 2.9 55 H

10 Sandy clay loam 1.0 2.6 61 H

11 Clay 1.1 2.6 57 H

12 Sandy loam 1.0 2.6 61 H

13 Loam .9 2.5 64 H

aClasses of total soil porosity: VL = very low, less than 35 percent; L = low, 36

to 45 percent; A = average, 46 to 55 percent; H = high.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 265

Magro and Goncalves Seedbank as a Tool for Choosing the Better Strategy for Trail Recovery

Even though decreases in water infiltration capacity will

likely increase erosion in high declivity areas, we consider

bed trail compaction an unavoidable consequence of heavily

used trails. Trail management practices will also determine

whether continuous use may cause an undesirable level of

impact for specific site conditions. Management options

include construction of rainwater drainage channels, periodic maintenance, construction of ramps in flood-prone clay

soils, as well as others.

The intensity of compaction can also be a good indicator of

management practices in an area. Despite constant use on

the Rebouças-Headquarters trail, some areas presented

serious erosion problems, whereas others were perfectly

conserved. This is due to the trail’s large soil spatial variability and to declivity.

Seedbank

Identified species are listed in table 3; some of them were

identified only at the family level. Germination test results

confirmed field observations regarding the trail’s regeneration potential. In sites where runoff removed topsoil, germination was not significant (point 9) because it also removed

seeds and nutrients essential to plant development and

growth. On the other hand, large soil surfaces were covered

by vegetation in sample points 6, 7, 8, and 13 (table 4).

Because the germination of Phyllantus tenellus and

Chanaesyce hirta was detected in the sterilized sand control

tray, the possibility of soil contamination with seeds from

adjacent areas exists.

The majority of species in the seedbank germination test

grew either in clusters or parallel to the soil, a strategy that

favors their development in the trailbed. These strategies

allow some plants to better survive trampling, as noted by

Liddle (1991) and Cole (1993), and could explain the higher

frequency of Plantago and Guaphalium spathulatum Lam.

in the center of the trail. The following species belonging to

the Plantaginaceae Family were identified: Plantagodielsiana

Pilger, Plantago guilleminiana Decaisne, Plantago hirtella

Kunth, and Plantago tomentosa Lam.

Tables 5 and 6 show that at locations with higher germination success, the chemical analysis revealed soils with

medium and high P, K, Ca, and organic matter contents

essential to good plant development. Also, soil organic matter and nutrients were not carried by runoff in these three

points because of the low parallel declivity of the trail: 0, 1,

0, and 1, respectively (table 1).

Table 7 shows the results of the analysis of correlation

between the number of plants in the seedbank and the most

important physical and chemical soil characteristics for

plant growth. Parameters were analyzed using Spearman’s

coefficient of rank correlation. There was a positive correlation between (1) seedling density and organic matter content

and (2) P availability in the soil. The correlation between the

number of plants and soil compaction was not evident in this

analysis probably due to other more limiting soil characteristics. Chappell and others (1971) verified that N and P

contents were not significant in three zones under different

trampling intensities. Similarly, the pH, C/N ratio, iron

content, and ammonium-nitrate balance were not significant in these areas.

Takahashi (1998) verified a high correlation between the

natural regeneration of vegetation and carbon content and

soil density. On the other hand, the author did not find a

strong correlation between regeneration and soil compaction intensity. According to her, it is likely this factor has not

yet caused a noticeable regeneration decline in the studied

area.

One management practice used in compacted and low

regeneration areas is topsoil scarification to stimulate a

rapid plant cover development. In dry areas, a water increase has a beneficial effect on plants in compacted soils;

however, compacted soils may continue to be a limiting

factor to seedling establishment (Liddle and Greig-Smith

1975). These authors recommend lessening the tension in

the trail’s topsoil layers as a recuperation technique, even

though the subsoil might still be compacted.

Table 3—Seedling occurrence in the nursery experiment.

Family Species Sample

Asteraceae Baccharis cf. caprariaefolia 2,6

 (Composta) A.P.DC.

Asteraceae Guaphalium 7

Cyperaceae Fynbristylis 8

Convolvulaceae Dichrondra sericea 7

Euphorbiaceae Phyllantus tenellus 1,2

Euphorbiaceae Chanaesyce hirta (L.) Lillsp. 1

Iridaceae Iris 6

Poaceae Eragrostis 8

 (Graminea)

Poaceae (sp1) 7,8

Poaceae (sp2) 12,13

Poaceae (sp3) 6

Polygalaceae Polygala glochidata H.B.K. 13

Rubiaceae 13

Scrophulariaceae Linderia crustacea (L.) F. Müll 6

Not identified 7

Table 4—Seedling density (m2

) in the nursery experiment after 14

weeks.

Seedling/m2

Sample Monocotyledon Dicotyledonous Moss Total

1 12.79 101.01 — 113.80

2 91.58 58.86 — 150.44

3 8.08 27.48 25.87 73.87

4 8.08 18.18 16.16 42.42

5 41.55 145.52 24.23 211.30

6 233.11 712.05 16.20 961.36

7 95.76 343.47 36.92 476.15

8 95.18 357.61 49.66 502.45

9 8.08 8.08 8.08 24.24

10 8.08 66.40 8.08 82.56

11 16.20 48.45 — 64.25

12 24.22 46.88 — 71.10

13 58.14 227.08 — 285.22
266 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Magro and Goncalves Seedbank as a Tool for Choosing the Better Strategy for Trail Recovery

Table 5—Chemical characteristicsa of the soil samples (0–5 cm layer) collected along the Rebouças-Headquarters trail in Itatiaia National Park in

1996.

Sample Plant Exchangeable

number density pH CaCl2 SOMb Available Pc K Ca Mg Al CECd

Pl/m2 g dm–3 mg dm–3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - mmolc dm–3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

9 24 4.2 9.2 3 0.8 0.6 1.0 12.2 77.4

4 42 4.3 0.0 3 1.9 1.0 1.0 37.8 135.9

3 61 4.3 0.0 4 2.2 .3 1.0 25.0 80.5

11 65 4.4 2.3 3 .8 .5 1.0 2.4 42.3

12 71 4.6 3.5 3 .5 .2 1.0 0.6 29.7

10 82 4.2 6.9 4 1.2 .5 2.0 18.4 96.7

1 114 4.3 57.8 3 1.0 1.0 1.0 29.0 140.0

2 150 4.3 13.9 3 .8 .2 1.0 18.8 86.0

5 211 4.3 11.6 3 1.0 .1 1.0 27.0 123.1

13 285 4.3 46.2 3 2.2 1.0 1.0 7.6 92.2

7 476 4.1 13.9 4 1.3 3.0 3.0 47.8 192.3

8 502 4.0 73.9 8 1.4 5.0 2.0 37.2 193.4

6 961 4.2 57.8 9 3.2 6.0 4.0 29.2 60.2

a Following methods described by Raij and others (1987).

b SOM = Soil organic matter.

c P = P-resin.

d CEC = Cation exchangeable capacity.

Table 6—Plant number and interpretationa of the chemical characteristics of the soil (0–5 soil layer) in the Rebouças-Headquarter trail in Itatiaia

National Park, sampled in 1996.

Sample Plant Acidity Exchangeable

number number (pH) SOMb Available P K Ca Mg Al CECc

Pl/m2

9 24 VH L L A VL VL H H

4 42 VH L L H VL VL H H

3 61 VH L L H VL VL H H

11 65 H L L A VL VL L A

12 71 VH L L L VL VL L L

10 82 VH L L A VL L H H

1 114 VH H L A VL VL H H

2 150 VH L L A VL VL H H

5 211 VH L L A VL VL H H

13 285 VH H L H VL VL A H

7 476 VH L L A L A H H

8 502 VH H A A A L H H

6 961 VH H H H A A H H

a VL = very low; L = low; A = average; H = high; VH = very high.

b SOM = Soil organic matter.

c CEC = Cation exchangeable capacity.

Table 7—Relationship between seedling density in the greenhouse experiment and soil characteristics.

Compaction Bulk density Organic material P K Ca

g dm–3 mg dm–3 mmolc dm–3 mmolc dm–3

Seedling density –0.3626 0.4293 0.8220 0.5237 0.3961 0.4626

(Significance) (0.2233) (0.1431) (0.0006) (0.0662) (0.1803) (0.1114)
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 267

Magro and Goncalves Seedbank as a Tool for Choosing the Better Strategy for Trail Recovery

Conclusions and

Recommendations ______________

The low presence of vegetation along Rebouças-Headquarters trailbed is due to a poor seedbank (nonexistent in

some parts) and to a soil poor in nutrients and organic

matter. The fact that seeds did not germinate in some trail

parts, even though they germinated in trays, is probably

associated with highly compacted soils and a nutrientimpoverished environment. Topsoil removal in the germination tests decreased trailbed compaction, which in turn, might

have favored germination of some plants. To recover vegetation in trails with little or no seedbank present, we recommend direct seeding or planting of seedlings collected in

nearby areas, following topsoil scarification (approximately

20 cm [8 inches]). Planting should be conducted with good soil

temperature and humidity conditions. Establishment of monitoring plots to evaluate vegetation recovery is recommended.

Management and Future Use ______

For trail recovery and maintenance we recommend these

practical suggestions:

Bed relocation at problematic sites—Even with trail

use evenly spread on trails, there are sites in good

condition and sites in critical shape. Some trail sites

should simply be abandoned, while others should be

opened, avoiding, however, high declivity areas sometimes prone to erosion. Runoff should be diverted away

from the trailbed, thereby reducing eventual soil losses

and providing better conditions for vegetation recovery.

Trail and bifurcations’ recovery—Some trail and bifurcation recovery practices include monitoring revegetation, soil scarification, seeding, fertilizing, and transplanting. In addition, barriers or burlap installed on

seeded or transplanted areas can increase recovery

success and at the same time discourage area use.

Acknowledgments ______________

This research was funded by The Boticario Foundation for

Protection of Nature (FBPN), the MacArthur Foundation,

and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) as part of the Project

“Recreational Impact of INP.” We would like to thank the

following sources for valuable assistance during field work

and germination tests: Itatiaia National Park personnel;

members of Grupo Excursionista Agulhas Negras—Agnaldo

Luis Costa, Antônio José Batista Ribeiro, and Gottfried

Engelbert Wolgient, Jr.; foresters—Alexandre Afonso Binelli,

Cristina Suarez Copa Velasquez, Flávia Regina Mazziero,

and Silvia Yochie Kataoka; agronomists—Alexandre Mendes

Pinho and Fábio Raimo de Oliveira; botanists—João Marcelo

de Alvarenga Braga and Sebastião José da Silva Neto; and

Professor Vinícius Castro Souza.

References _____________________

Chappell, H. G.; Ainsworth, J. F.; Cameron, R. A. D.; Redfern, M.

1971. The effect of trampling on a chalk grassland ecosystem.

Journal of Applied Ecology. 8: 869–882.

Cole, D. N. 1993. Minimizing conflict between recreation and nature

conservation. In: Smith, D. S.; Hellmund, P. C., eds. Ecology of

greenways. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press: 105–122.

Cole, David N.; Spildie, David R. 2000. Soil amendments and

planting techniques: campsite restoration in the Eagle Cap Wilderness, Oregon. In: Cole, David N.; McCool, Stephen F.; Borrie,

William T.; O’Loughlin, Jennifer, comps. 2000. Wilderness science in a time of change conference—Volume 5: wilderness

ecosystems, threats, and management; 1999 May 23–27; Missoula,

MT. Proc. RMRS-P-15-VOL-5. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station:

181–187.

Curi, N., ed. 1993. Vocabulário de Ciência do Solo [Vocabulary of soil

science]. Campinas, Brazil: Sociedade Brasileira de Ciência do

Solo [Brazilian Society of Soil Science]. 89 p.

Hammitt, William E.; Cole, David N. 1998. Wildland recreation:

ecology and management. 2d ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &

Sons. 361 p.

IBAMA. 1994. Ministério do Meio Ambiente. Instituto Brasileiro do

Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis-IBAMA.

Plano de Ação Emergencial para o Parque Nacional do Itatiai.

[Environment Ministry. Brazilian Institute of the Environment

and Natural Resource Renovation-IBAMA. Plan of Emergency

Action for the National Park of the Itatiaia]. 91 p.

IBDF [Brazilian Institute of Forest Development]. 1982. Plano de

Manejo do Parque Nacional do Itatiaia. M. A.- Instituto Brasileiro

de Desenvolvimento Florestal [Management plan of Itatiaia

National Park. Brazilian M. A.- Institute of Forest Development].

IBDF/Brazilian Foundation for Nature Conservation. Brasília.

207 p.

Lemos, R. C.; Santos, R. D. 1996. Manual de descrição e coleta de solo

no campo [Field manual for soil description and collection]. 3d ed.

Campinas, Brazil: Sociedade Brasileira de Ciência do Solo [Brazilian Society of Soil Science]. 84 p.

Liddle, M. J. 1991. Recreation ecology: effects of trampling on plants

and corals. Tree. 6: 13–17.

Liddle, M. J.; Greig-Smith, P. 1975. A survey of tracks and paths in

a sand dune ecosystem. I. Soils. Journal of Applied Ecology. 12:

893–908.

Magro, Teresa C. 1999. Impactos do Uso Público em uma Trilha no

Planalto do Parque Nacional do Itatiaia [Evaluation of the impacts of public use on one trail on the plateaus of Itatiaia National

Park]. São Paulo: São Carlos Engineering College, São Paulo

University. 135 p. Thesis.

Raij, B. van; Cantarella, H.; Ferreira, M. E. Lopes; Bataglia, O. C.

1987. Análise química de solos para fins de fertilidade [Chemical

analysis of soil fertility]. Campinas, Brazil: Cargil Foundation.

170 p.

Settergreen, C. D.; Cole David N. 1970. Recreation effects on soil and

vegetation in the Missouri Ozarks. Journal of Forestry. 68(4):

231–233.

Takahashi, Leide Y. 1998. Caracterização dos visitantes, suas

preferências e percepções e avaliação dos impactos da visitação

pública em duas Unidades de Conservação do Estado do Paraná

[Characterization of visitor preferences and perceptions, and

evaluation of the impacts of public visitation in two Units of

Conservation in the State of Paran]. Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil:

College of Agrarian Sciences, Federal University of the Paraná.

129 p. Thesis.

Zabinski, Catherine; Cole, David. 2000. Understanding the factors

that limit restoration success on a recreation-impacted subalpine

site. In: Cole, David N.; McCool, Stephen F.; Borrie, William T.;

O’Loughlin, Jennifer, comps. 2000. Wilderness science in a time

of change conference—Volume 5: wilderness ecosystems, threats,

and management; 1999 May 23–27; Missoula, MT. Proc. RMRSP-15-VOL-5. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 216–221.
268 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Charles Besancon is curently working toward his Ph.D. in Southern

Africa, E-mail: charlesbesancon@yahoo.com, cell phone: +27 084 869 2124.

Wayne A. Freimund is Arkwright Associate Professor of Wilderness Studies

and Director of the Wilderness Institute at the University of Montana,

Missoula, MT 59812, U.S.A., FAX: (406) 243-6657, E-mail: waf@forestry.

umt.edu

In: Watson, Alan; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2003. Science and stewardship

to protect and sustain wilderness values: Seventh World Wilderness Congress symposium; 2001 November 2–8; Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Proc.

RMRS-P-27. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Abstract—Wilderness information on the World Wide Web has

developed considerably in the past 5 years. What was once dominated by the equivalent of electronic brochures has developed into

interactive information resources that together provide a wide

range of useful information. Web sites specific to the concept of

“wilderness” are dominated by United States organizations. The

term “protected areas” is better suited to find the sites of the major

global organizations that influence the conservation of wilderness.

While there are many good sites on the Web, it is still challenging

for a person to find relevant topical information at a global or

regional level. Search results also suggest that the technical network developing around the terms “wilderness” and “protected

areas” remain separate. We evaluate several scenarios for the

development of a more coherent global presence of protected areas

and wilderness on the Web. We also suggest the development of a

global clearinghouse that approaches the global supply of information about wilderness and protected areas from the user perspective

rather than from the agenda of the organizations that are producing

the information.

Introduction ____________________

Freimund and Queen (1996) argued that Web-based mass

communication could have a profound effect upon developing a wilderness constituency and culture. After reviewing

many wilderness related Web sites on the World Wide Web

(WWW), they called for an integrated online strategy to

facilitate communication across the Internet. The end result

of this strategizing was the creation of the Wilderness

Information Network (http://www.wilderness.net). This Web

site has been very effective in bringing information about

wilderness areas to the World. With over 6,000 hits per day,

the Web site has provided an important niche to people

interested in wilderness information.

In this paper, we wish to reexamine the presence of

wilderness on the WWW. Our goal is to identify which sites

are being used and what the purpose of these sites are,

including mission, audience, and financial support.

Where in the World Wide Web

Is Wilderness?

Charles Besancon

Wayne A. Freimund

In 1996, there was a sense that many people needed to be

persuaded of the benefits of the Web. Given the success of the

Wilderness.Net project and the proliferation of wildernessoriented Web sites, we no longer feel that need.

Resources _____________________

Searching for Wilderness on the World

Wide Web

It is no surprise that the resources on the WWW have

proliferated at an amazing rate. Human behavior, on the

other hand, has not dramatically changed, and most Web

visitors are only willing to scan a couple of pages of results

from a search when seeking information. Given the increasingly commercialized use of the Web, Webmasters have

become increasingly savvy on techniques to improve the

chance of being rated toward the top of a search. In other

words, the sites that appear at the top of a search engine do

not necessarily reflect the value of the site.

To address these issues, researchers at Stanford University have developed Google.com. Google uses a rating system

that is based on the number of times a site is linked to and

the popularity of the sites doing the linking. For example,

the Wilderness.Net site rates very high because it is linked

to by many well-established wilderness organizations or

agencies. Likewise, it provides links to other sites that are

highly used and rated. Google has remained detached from

the influence of advertising or other commercial interests to

provide a site that is a high-integrity research tool. Thus, a

search on Google, while not perfect, often returns a set of

discrete sites that are specifically related to the topic and are

highly used.

Wilderness Sites—Our first search was simply on the

word “wilderness.” The top site returned was from the

Wilderness Society. The second was Wilderness.Net, which

provides access to a consortium of wilderness organizations,

including the Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute,

the Arthur Carhart Wilderness Training Center, and the

University of Montana’s wilderness programs. The next two

sites were not related to wilderness in terms of land designation. The remainder of the sites in the top 10 included: the

Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, Wilderness Inquiry,

the Chicago Wilderness Page, the Wild Wilderness Home

Page, and two non-American sites—the Wilderness Society

of Australia, and the Canadian Park and Wilderness Society. Included in the top 10, therefore, were a host of interests

(federal and university) represented by Wilderness.Net, six

advocacy organizations—with two of those being non-United

States, an adventure travel organization, and two sites

totally unrelated to wilderness as a land use.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 269

Where in the World Wide Web Is Wilderness? Besancon and Freimund

International Wilderness Sites—To add context to

these initial results, we searched on the words “international wilderness.” The first site retrieved was the WILD

foundation, followed by the International Journal of Wilderness, Wilderness.Net, and the Wilderness Society’s Global

page. These sites were followed by Sunrise Expeditions to

Arctic Canada, the Word of Life Fellowship International

Wilderness Ministries, International Wilderness First Aid,

North Carolina Outward Bound, and the Listening Point

Foundation. Again, the top results were dominated by United

States organizations that represent a wide variety of interests in wilderness.

Protected Areas Searches—Recognizing that many

other large international players in wilderness conservation

did not surface near the top of these searches, we decided to

narrow our lexicon from “wilderness” to “protected areas.”

Through this term we accessed a very different set of results.

At the top of the list was the array of resources offered by the

World Conservation Union (IUCN) World Commission on

Protected Areas. The Marine Protected Areas site provided

by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

(NOAA) followed. Next was the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) World Conservation Monitoring

Centre and the Protected Areas Conservation Trust of Belize,

Central America. This initial search was filled out by the

Science and Management of Protected Areas Association,

which is based in eastern Canada. Searching on the term

“protected areas,” therefore, provided a list of sites more focused on protection mechanisms than the wilderness concept.

Review of Selected Protected Area Web

Sites

To better understand the design and range of content

now available on the Web, we conducted a review of selected sites. The sites were chosen based on the large

amount of information to be found there and the relative

importance of the organization or coalition that compiled

the information. The sites reviewed here represent the best

global Web sites the authors could find for detailed information about protected areas (including wilderness). The

specific Web sites listed should not be considered the only

resources available or the best. They simply reflect sites

that ranked highly using the Google search engine and

some we discovered by following links on other Web sites.

The sites selected for review were the World Commission

on Protected Areas (WCPA), Wilderness.Net, World Heritage Information Network (WHIN), EarthTrends from

World Resources Institute, and the UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC).

As a first step in our review, we tried to answer the following questions:

• What is the mission of the sponsoring organization?

• What is the function of the site?

• How is the site organized?

• Who is/are the audience(s)?

• Who funds the organization/Web site?

• How can we categorize the site?

World Commission on Protected Areas (http://

wcpa.iucn.org)—This site is sponsored by the World

Commission on Protected Areas, part of the IUCN. The

mission of the commission is to:

...promote the establishment and effective management of

a worldwide representative network of terrestrial and marine

protected areas, as an integral contribution to the IUCN

mission.

Members of the WCPA are the audience for this site, and the

site includes many documents for download, including guidelines for creating and managing protected areas, funding

them, and evaluating the effectiveness of management. This

site details plans for increased interactivity, but in its

current form, acts as an online brochure for WCPA.

Wilderness.Net (http://www.wilderness.net)—This

site is managed by the Wilderness Institute at the University of Montana, U.S.A., with support from the four Federal

agencies that manage congressionally designated wilderness in the United States, and their training (Arthur Carhart

Wilderness Training Center) and research (Aldo Leopold

Wilderness Research Institute) organizations. The mission

of the site is to “heighten the wilderness dialog worldwide.”

The Web site is organized by content areas, including education, research, and the National Wilderness Preservation

System. Audiences include managers, scientists, educators,

students, legislators, and the general public. Many interactive features can be found here, including a library of fulltext research publications, lesson plans for students and

teachers about wilderness, wilderness news, and discussion

forums.

World Heritage Information Network (http://www.

unep-wcmc.org/whin/index.html)—This site is sponsored by the World Heritage Convention through the United

Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

(UNESCO). The mission of the site is to act as:

...a clearing-house for information about the natural and

cultural sites identified as being of “outstanding universal

value” and inscribed on the World Heritage List by the

Intergovernmental World Heritage Committee.

The clearinghouse is set up as a searchable index of partner

Web sites that house information about World Heritage

sites. Interactive features on the site include the ability to

add your resource to the searchable index of World Heritage

sites and to search other partner sites.

EarthTrends (http://earthtrends.wri.org)—This site

is sponsored by the World Resources Institute (WRI), “an

environmental think tank that goes beyond research to

find practical ways to protect the Earth and improve

peoples’ lives,” and acts as an environmental information

portal. The content is organized around themes including

coastal and marine ecosystems, climate and atmosphere,

and biodiversity, and protected areas. For each theme

there is a searchable database, data tables, country profiles, maps, and features.

UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre

(WCMC) (http://www.unep-wcmc.org)—The WCMC Web

site was another ambitious undertaking involving many

interactive features including databases and online mapping, as well as many static Web pages with supporting

information. The content is organized around resources,

habitats, species, regions, climate change, protected areas,
270 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Besancon and Freimund Where in the World Wide Web Is Wilderness?

conventions, and agreements. This site also hosts the Protected Areas Virtual Library. This library is a database of

information about all areas that meet the guidelines put

forth by the IUCN in 1994. This database does not currently

operate as intended, but comes with a disclaimer explaining

its shortcomings and plans for the future. The interactive

maps on this site are of high quality and utilize the latest in

online map browser technology: ARCIMS.

Looking at the matrix of Web sites we reviewed (table 1),

it is evident that the era of “brochure” Web sites is over. All

of the Web sites reviewed contain a great deal of information

and most utilize built-in search engines, enabling Web site

visitors to quickly find what they are looking for. The

intended audiences for these sites range from the organization members (WCPA) to the WCMC that hosts very specialized content for technical audiences, including avian biologists. EarthTrends and Wilderness.Net contain information

for many different audiences. Two of the sites listed offer the

added feature of Web pages and documents in languages

other than English.

Three of the sites have interactive resources that help to

build community among Web site visitors (Wilderness.Net,

EarthTrends, and WCMC). These community-building resources include discussion forums, Listservs, and news

delivered through e-mail. Other interactive resources we

found were online databases and geographic mapping engines (WCMC).

In general, we found good resources containing information on many topics. However, the fact that so many resources exist creates in itself a problem. Fulfilling specific

information needs from within such an array of possibilities

can be frustrating or impossible. It is now like walking into

a library that has no librarian.

Wilderness Versus Protected Areas

Disconnect

As mentioned earlier, there seems to be two discrete sets

of results when using Google to search for “wilderness” and

“protected areas.” While the term “wilderness” refers to

more than land-based protected areas, “protected areas” is

more likely to lead to sites explaining protection mechanisms.

Individuals seeking high-quality information about mechanisms for protection of wilderness, policy documents, and so

forth, may not understand this distinction.

Toward a Strategy of Protected Area

Information Coordination

The libraries of documents on these sites reflect the

affiliations and work being conducted by the host organizations. While the content is often excellent, and in many cases

is supplemented by Web links to other organizations with

similar content, the onus of responsibility for finding good

information is put on the Web site visitor, the very person for

whom the information was put online in the first place.

What is missing is a coherent, searchable global resource

or some other form of guide to the galaxy of wild lands and

the Internet. The WHIN project comes the closest to making

this need a reality, at least for World Heritage sites. By

collecting information about World Heritage resources on

the Internet, and indexing those sites, the WHIN project

allows Web visitors to search through one interface—many

hundreds of external Web pages and documents.

A coherent, searchable global resource could take resources from any content source, gather those resources in

one location, and organize the content based on content type,

audience, and level of intended specificity. In addition, such

a resource could help to simplify and indeed blur the lines

between the institutions and organizations that produced

the information. This is especially important to the uninitiated who may not be familiar with all of the jargon inherent

in a complex concept like wilderness.

The current challenge is to develop an efficient structure

for the many types of wilderness or protected area Web sites

that exist. Such a structure would organize and add value to

individual sites. The demand is there; currently the onus is

on the suppliers to provide a more efficient resource that will

be visitor centered and contribute to the global community

engaged in the conservation of wilderness and protected

areas worldwide.

Investing in a Global Resource

A discussion of the development of a global protected

area and wilderness network must include attention to the

institutional capacity, demands, and commitment it would

require. Communicating with a global audience must be

central to the institution’s mission. The technical sophistication to understand what kind of commitment they are

engaging in is also needed. Channeling scarce resources

Table 1—Protected area Web site content matrix.

General resources Interactivity Community building

Downloadable Links to Online Multiple Search Searchable Interactive Discussion Listservs,

documents external sites maps languages engine databases mapping forums e-mail news

World Commission X X X

 on Protected Areas

Wilderness.Net X X X X X X X

World Heritage X X X X

 Information Network

EarthTrends from World X X X X X X

 Reources Institute

UNEP World Conservation X X XXXX X X

 Monitoring Centre
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 271

Where in the World Wide Web Is Wilderness? Besancon and Freimund

toward a global audience may appear at first glance to be

a nice thing to do but not a central necessity for many

organizations, especially when budgets are tight. Committing to the development of a Web-based information resource also requires a substantial commitment to ongoing

maintenance. For whom is there an incentive for such

activity? Each of the Web resources reviewed above would

meet these institutional capacity criteria.

Each year, participants in protected areas seminars call

for improved access to the information and creative ideas to

problem solving that are generated around the World. Issues related to inventory, monitoring, planning, the use of

science, visitor management, and education are among the

types of issues that there is a global bank of knowledge to

tap. Unfortunately, people have a difficult time accessing

the information. Developing countries, even those with Web

access, are often hampered by slow connections and an

overwhelming amount of data to sift through.

Technical Capacity

Assuming that institutional support for a global protected

area information network could be established, there are

then a series of technical constraints that would need to be

evaluated before deciding how such an information resource

could be practically developed. These are the nuts-and-bolts

issues that mediate the interaction between the user (information demand) and the technicians and institution who

become the providers of the supply. The developer of the

supply must consider cost, infrastructure, human resources,

and the ever-changing hardware and software. From a user

perspective, issues of speed, applicability, and comprehensiveness are critical to making a site meaningful.

Overall Cost: Initial and Long Term—These criteria

refer to how much money it would take to operate a Web site.

Initial costs are usually higher than long-term maintenance

costs.

Infrastructure—Refers to the capacity of the institution

to work in the electronic age. Questions asked here include:

• Does the institution operate networked computers?

• Do they currently operate a Web site?

• Does the building where the institution is housed have

a high-speed internet connection?

Human Resources—This is potentially one of the greatest expenses in Web site operation. As the level of complexity

of the Web site grows, so too does the need for more highly

specialized persons (both in number of employees and skill

level) to develop and manage the site.

Hardware and Software—As the complexity of the site

grows, more specialized hardware and software is necessary

to maintain operations. This includes additional Web servers, database servers, backup systems, and all the affiliated

software, both to operate the hardware and develop the Web

content.

Usability

Speed—Refers to the speed of the Web site. It tells how

fast users can find information they are looking for.

Applicability—Refers to how useful the information is

for the audience. The assumed audience for this column is

individuals seeking information at a regional or national

level.

Comprehensiveness—Refers to the depth of information one may find at the Web site. Again, the assumed

audience for this category is individuals seeking information

at a regional or national level.

Possible Scenarios

Following are a series of scenarios (table 2), listed in terms

of their complexity, that will be used to illustrate those

practical considerations associated with building Web-based

resources:

• The first scenario (links Web site) is a Web site composed of many Web site links in the form of a comprehensive categorized list of links to international protected

area Web sites and other related resources. The overall

cost of creating a Web site of this type is very low, with

greater initial costs at startup (that is, purchasing Web

server, initial development time) and lower long-term

costs. The infrastructure, human resources necessary,

and hardware/software needs would be moderately low

for this type of project. In terms of usability, the site

would produce fast results for end users and would have

a great deal of applicability, but because of the single

resource found here (links only), the overall value of this

type of resource, in the absence of any additional resources, is negligible.

• The second scenario (searchable index of other sites) is

the development of a Web site that allows the end user

to search the entire contents of other protected area

Table 2—Evaluation of four approaches to organize wilderness and protected area data worldwide.

Technical capacity Usabilitya

Overall cost Infra- Human Hardware/ Applica- ComprehenWeb site scenariosb Initial Long term structure resources software Speed bility siveness

Links Webs site 2 1 2 2 1 54 2

Searchable index of other sites 3 2 3 3 2 31 2

Regional protected area networks 5 4 5 5 5 35 5

Master protected areas database and site 5 5 5 5 5 34 5

a

Numbers denote Web site scenario practical considerations, ranging from very low (1) to very high (5).

b

Scenarios are listed in order of complexity with links Web site being the least complex.
272 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003

Besancon and Freimund Where in the World Wide Web Is Wilderness?

Web sites. The site acts as a search engine that, instead

of searching the entire WWW, only searches protected

area Web sites chosen by the Web site administrator.

The overall costs of this site are slightly higher than the

links Web site, but far less than the following scenarios

that involve interactive databases.

• The third scenario (regional protected area networks) is

the development of a comprehensive, database-driven,

dynamic Web site with protected area information of all

types for a given region, country, or continent. The best

existing example for what this might look like is the

Wilderness Information Network (Wilderness.Net). The

overall costs for this scenario are high because considerable hardware, software, and human resources are

necessary to complete it. The only criteria that receives

a lower score for this scenario is “speed” because of the

intensive use of database queries to provide information. Somewhat slower speed is to be expected of Web

sites with this level of comprehensiveness. This type of

Web site is envisioned as part of a larger strategy to

provide these “regional” sites that would eventually

encompass protected areas throughout the World. Some

of the higher costs can be offset because considerable

work has already been completed for Wilderness.Net

(wilderness areas in the United States), and this work

can be adapted and made to fit situations in other

regions and countries.

• The last scenario (master protected areas database and

site) encompasses all of the other scenarios together

under one “master” Web site as an entry point. Under

this scenario, the system of regional protected area Web

sites is assumed to be in place and functionally working

together through shared databases and close cooperation among all institutions and government entities. In

addition to what has already been mentioned in the

above scenarios, language translations would be available for Web site visitors to utilize. The one factor in this

scenario that received a somewhat lower score (besides

“speed” for the same reasons as in scenario three) is

“applicability,” because many users of this site may only

need information from one geographic region rather

than the entire system of worldwide protected areas. In

other words, this site may provide too much information

for some users, thus making it too unwieldy for them.

Conclusion_____________________

It is now possible and practical to routinely view wilderness and protected area conservation in a global context.

Resources are currently being developed to provide growing

access to information resources at regional and organizational levels. A global resource would assist in integrating

the communication communities that are currently centered on Wilderness, Protected Areas, and other land use

designations. It would also promote discussion and understanding of the finite scope of the Earth and the role of land

conservation within it. Offered here are four scenarios for

potential action, each requiring varied amounts of institutional support and technical capacity. We urge the global

conservation communities to engage into a dialog that could

promote one of these or a similar scenario. There is a growing

demand for informed decisionmaking. In many cases, the

information is available but inaccessible. It is now time to

begin organizing that information and efficiently putting it

into the hands of the people who need it on a daily basis.

Reference ______________________

Freimund, W.; Queen, L. 1996. Wilderness @ Internet—Enhancing

the potential for wilderness electronic communication. International Journal of Wilderness. 2(1): 33–36.
CAUTION:

PESTICIDES

Pesticide Precautionary Statement

This publication reports research involving pesticides. It does not

contain recommendations for their use, nor does it imply that the uses

discussed here have been registered. All uses of pesticides must be

registered by appropriate State and/or Federal agencies before they can

be recommended.

CAUTION: Pesticides can be injurious to humans, domestic animals,

desirable plants, and fish or other wildlife—if they are not handled or

applied properly. Use all pesticides selectively and carefully. Follow

recommended practices for the disposal of surplus pesticides and

pesticide containers.

The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information and does not

imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or service.

You may order additional copies of this publication by sending your

mailing information in label form through one of the following media.

Please specify the publication title and number.

Telephone (970) 498-1392

FAX (970) 498-1396

E-mail rschneider@fs.fed.us

Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/rm

Mailing Address Publications Distribution

Rocky Mountain Research Station

240 West Prospect Road

Fort Collins, CO 80526
Federal Recycling Program Printed on Recycled Paper

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its

programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion,

age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not

all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require

alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,

audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice

and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights,

Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington,

DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal

opportunity provider and employer.

ROCKY MOUNTAIN RESEARCH STATION

RMRS

The Rocky Mountain Research Station develops scientific information and technology to improve management, protection, and use of

the forests and rangelands. Research is designed to meet the needs

of National Forest managers, Federal and State agencies, public and

private organizations, academic institutions, industry, and individuals.

Studies accelerate solutions to problems involving ecosystems,

range, forests, water, recreation, fire, resource inventory, land reclamation, community sustainability, forest engineering technology,

multiple use economics, wildlife and fish habitat, and forest insects

and diseases. Studies are conducted cooperatively, and applications

may be found worldwide.

Research Locations

Flagstaff, Arizona Reno, Nevada

Fort Collins, Colorado* Albuquerque, New Mexico

Boise, Idaho Rapid City, South Dakota

Moscow, Idaho Logan, Utah

Bozeman, Montana Ogden, Utah

Missoula, Montana Provo, Utah

Lincoln, Nebraska Laramie, Wyoming

*Station Headquarters, Natural Resources Research Center,

2150 Centre Avenue, Building A, Fort Collins, CO 80526