Old-growth Policy

Most federal legislation and policies (e.g., the Wilderness Act, Endangered Species Act, National Forest Management Act) fail to speak directly to the need for old-growth protection, recruitment, and restoration on federal lands. Various policy and attitudinal barriers must be changed to move beyond the current situation. For example, in order to achieve the goal of healthy old growth in frequent-fire forests, the public must be educated regarding the evolutionary nature of these ecosystems and persuaded that collaborative action rather than preservation and litigation is the best course for the future of these forests. Land managers and policy makers must be encouraged to look beyond the single-species management paradigm toward managing natural processes, such as fire, so that ecosystems fall within the natural range of variability. They must also see that, given their recent evidence of catastrophic fires, management must take place outside the wildland—urban interface in order to protect old-growth forest attributes and human infrastructure. This means that, in some wilderness areas, management may be required. Land managers, researchers, and policy makers will also have to agree on a definition of old growth in frequent-fire landscapes; simply adopting a definition from the mesic Pacific Northwest will not work. Moreover, the culture within the federal agencies needs revamping to allow for more innovation, especially in terms of tree thinning and wildland fire use. Funding for comprehensive restoration treatments needs to be increased, and monitoring of the Healthy Forest Initiative and Healthy Forest Restoration Act must be undertaken

The Trouble with Tourism

The hegemonic view of tourism is as a global panacea for struggling peoples, environments and economies (Smith and Brent 2001). This article begins by arguing that increasing worldwide risks from human-induced climate change fundamentally alter the veracity of this prediction claim. As one of the world’s largest industries, tourism is also one of the largest emitters of carbon, primarily from air transport. Far from standing apart from our carbon-dependent economy, tourism is quite profoundly a creation of that economy and cannot be an antidote to the very stuff of which it is made. Further, to the extent that tourism functions as escape from the ills of petroleum-driven life, it detracts critical attention and investment from home places and communities. The article concludes with a proposition for an alternative futures forecast based on bioregional tourism, or locavism. Characteristics of a locavist approach include the de-growth of the high-carbon, distant travel model of tourism and replacement with a low-carbon model that emphasizes local destinations, short distances, lower-carbon transport modes, and capital investment (both financial and social) in local communities

Better Kid Care Program Improves the Quality of Child Care: Results from an Interview Study

More high quality child care is needed in the United States. This article evaluates the Better Kid Care (BKC) program produced by Pennsylvania State University Extension. Child care staff in Wisconsin were interviewed about changes they had made in their early childhood programs following participation in the BKC program. Findings show that 2 months post-program, most participants could name specific skills or knowledge they learned and improvements they made in their early childhood programs as a result of BKC. The BKC program improves child care quality, and increasing program participation is recommended

The End Of Wilderness: Conflict And Defeat Of Wilderness In The Grand Canyon

In the early 1970s, Grand Canyon National Park intended to designate its land to Wilderness, including the controversial Colorado River corridor. However, by the end of the 1970s the potential for Wilderness designation was off the table, and would never seriously return for genuine consideration. Using Schattschneider\u27s model of conflict, we explain how the organization of this conflict privileges the causal story of Wilderness opponents, and therefore why the canyon is not designated. It is our contention that members of Congress will not stand forward to support Wilderness designations without simultaneously providing benefits for extractive land use because (1) congressional representatives are more penalized for supporting than opposing Wilderness designations, (2) Wilderness advocacy groups do not pressure congressional delegates as firmly as opposition groups, and (3) key local congressional members are not likely to see Wilderness as a salient issue worth the risk of negative exposure. If these findings hold, the implication is that we may have reached the end of significant Wilderness designations in highly visible areas, unless critical aspects in land use conflict change. © 2006 by The Policy Studies Organization