Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
ten-year restoration project were it not for the existing networks of local busi-
nesses, nonprofit intermediary organizations, and constructive social forums in forest-
proximate communities. Neither would the contract have been possible without sig-
nificant community engagement, as well as a fair amount of risk taking, on the part of
Forest Service staff at the local and regional levels.
Policy changes associated with stewardship contracting and “healthy forests” are
necessary, but by themselves insufficient, elements of fostering community-based res-
toration on public lands. To the extent to which policies such as these represent a new
direction for national forests, they also highlight a number of challenges that lay
ahead for rural communities in the midst of the transition from commodity extraction
to restoration and stewardship. Communities currently lacking the capacity to craft a
zone of agreement and add value to restoration by-products will likely have to give sus-
tained attention to these aspects before large-scale restoration is a possibility, and even
those with high levels of capacity will have to navigate the challenges of rebuilding
both social and physical infrastructure, the sometimes conflicting directions set by
overlapping resource policies, and an atmosphere of declining public funding for res-
toration on public lands.
Afterword
The Wallow Fire, exceeding the 2002 Rodeo-Chediski Fire in terms of acres
burned, is raging through much of the terrain included in the WMSC as this topic
goes to press. While it is too early to say with any certainty how contract-related treat-
ments affected fire behavior or prevented the loss of houses and other structures, the
Wallow Fire is certain to cast a spotlight on restoration projects already completed and
on the unmet potential of the contract.
Note
1. Methods for this case study included semistructured interviews with twenty-one key in-
formants (agency staff, representatives of nongovernmental organizations, wood products busi-
nesspeople, etc.), discussions with the WMSCmultiparty monitoring board, reviews of internal
and public documents, and participation in/observation of collaborative processes and restora-
tion work. See Abrams and Burns (2007) for more detail on methodology.
References
Abrams, J., and S. Burns. 2007.
Case Study of a Community Stewardship Success: The White
Mountain Stewardship Contract
. Flagstaff, AZ: Ecological Restoration Institute.
Allen, C. D., M. Savage, D. A. Falk, K. F. Suckling, T. W. Swetnam, T. Schulke, P. B. Stacey, P.
Morgan, M. Hoffman, and J. T. Klingel. 2002. “Ecological Restoration of Southwestern
Ponderosa Pine Ecosystems: A Broad Perspective.”
Ecological Applications
12 (5): 1418-33.
Baker, M., and Kusel, J. 2003.
Community Forestry in the United States: Learning from the Past,
Crafting the Future
. Washington, DC: Island Press.
