Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
order to accommodate the anthropocentric and biocentric dimensions of wilderness
(S.G.Taylor 1990; Lesslie 1991). In Australia, the methodology of Lesslie and Taylor
(1983), modified in the 1987 Victorian inventory (Lesslie et al. 1987; Preece and Lesslie
1987), comes closest to achieving this goal and has served as the model for other studies
within the Australian Heritage Commission's National Wilderness Inventory (see below).
Furthermore, Lesslie et al.'s (1987) methodology is able to indicate low-quality
wilderness areas which are not indicated in an inventory along the lines of Helman et al.
(1976), but which may nevertheless be of significant conservation and recreation value
(Hall 1987).
In 1987 the Australian government, through the Australian Heritage Commission,
initiated a National Wilderness Inventory (NWI) to provide information in order to
improve decisions about wilderness conservation (Lesslie et al. 1991b). This action was
a result of its concern over the rapid decline in area and quality of
relatively remote and natural lands in Australia and in recognition that an
inventory of the remaining resource was the necessary first step in
formulating appropriate measures for conservation and management.
(Lesslie et al. 1991a:1)
The NWI had three main emphases (Lesslie et al. 1988a): to compile a national
wilderness database; to refine database maintenance procedures and analytical techniques;
and to produce information relevant to policy and management issues. Several inventories
were conducted under the auspices of the National Wilderness Inventory, including
surveys of Victoria (Lesslie et al. 1987; Preece and Lesslie 1987), Tasmania (Lesslie et al.
1988a), South Australia (Lesslie et al. 1991b) and Queensland (Lesslie et al. 1991a). In
1990 the NWI was accelerated to provide a comprehensive coverage for the whole of
Australia.
'The evaluation of wilderness in the National Wilderness Inventory is based upon the
notion of wilderness quality as a continuum of remote and natural conditions from
pristine to urban' (Lesslie et al. 1991b:6). A spatial framework utilising the techniques of
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) is used to sample variation in values of the four
wilderness quality indicators. There are two major advantages in using a GIS to formulate
wilderness evaluation databases. First, the approach is open-ended: new data may
be added and current data modified. Indeed, in Australia,
information about access and landuse is often poorly recorded and lacking
in currency. Even the most recently available information may be
inaccurate and out of date. This makes the compilation of a reliable
database difficult, particularly because of the necessary dependence on
published sources for much of the required information.
(Lesslie et al. 1991b:13)
Second, the process is spatially flexible, enabling scale to be matched to purpose.
Furthermore maps showing the distribution of wilderness identified in the inventory can
