When an agency outlasts its time: A reflection

Journal of Forestry

Volumn 103, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 264-267

  Fairfax, Sally K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FOREST MANAGEMENT; INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK;

EID: 26244462461     PISSN: 00221201     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Ballard, H. 2003. Harvester knowledge and science: A case of involving mobile forest workers in ecological research in the Olympic peninsula, Washington. Paper presented at the Rural Sociolog. Soc. Annu. Mtg., Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 24 p.
2. Burnham, P. 2000. Indian country, God's country: Native Americans and the national parks. Island Press, Washington DC.
3. Calef, W. 1960. Private grazing and public lands: Studies of the local management of the Taylor Grazing Act. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
4. Catton, T. 1996. Wonderland: An administrative history of Mount Rainier National Park. Available online at www.nps.gov/mora/adhi/adhi/htm; last accessed December 14, 2004.
5. Fairfax, S.K. L. Gwin, M.A. King, L. Raymond, and L.A. Watt. 2005. Buying nature: The limits of land acquisition as a conservation strategy. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. (in press) 330 p.
6. Keller, R.H., and M.F. Turek. 1998. American Indians and national parks. University Press of Arizona, Tucson, AZ. 319 p.
7. Langston, N. 1996. Forest dreams, forest nightmares: The paradox of old growth in the inland west. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA. 368 p.
8. Laitos, J. 1999. The transformation on public lands. Ecol, Law Quart. 26:140-226.
9. Marsh, G.P. 1864. Man and nature, or, physical geography as modified by human action. Charles Scribner, New York. 577 p.
10. Nelson, R.H. 1995. Public lands and private rights: The failure of scientific management. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD. 373 p.
11. Peluso, N.L., and P. Vandergeest. 2001. Genealogies of the political forest and customary rights in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand. J. Asian Studies 60(3):761-812.
12. Raymond, L. 2003. Private rights in public resources: Equity and property allocation in market-based environmental policy. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC. 253 p.
13. Raymond, L., and S.K. Fairfax. 2000. Fragmentation of public domain law and policy: an alternative to the "shift to retention" thesis. Nat. Resources J. 39:649-753.
14. Robbins, W.G. 1994. Colony and empire: The capitalist transformation of the American West. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence, KS. 255 p.
15. Rothman, H.K. 1997. "A regular ding-dong fight": the dynamics of Park Service-Forest Service controversy during the 1920s and 1930s. P. 109-124 in American forests: Nature, culture and politics. Miller, C. (ed.). University Press of Kansas, Lawrence, KS.
16. Sarathy, B. 2005. Lost in the understory. Draft Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley.
17. Sellers, R.W. 1997. Preserving nature in the national parks: A History. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
18. Spence, M.D. 1999. Dispossessing the wilderness: Indian removal and the making of the national parks. Oxford University Press, New York.
19. Tucker, R.P. 2000. Insatiable appetite: The United States and the ecological degradation of the tropical world. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
20. Twight, B.W. 1983. Organizational values and political power: The Forest Service versus the Olympic National Park. Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, PA.