Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-7xsfk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-02T06:41:35.899Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Improving forest management through participatory monitoring: a comparative case study of four community-based forestry organizations in the Western United States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 December 2010

By
Heidi L. Ballard ,
Victoria Sturtevant  and
Maria E. Fernandez-Gimenez
Edited by
Anna Lawrence
Anna Lawrence
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Community-based forestry (CBF) in the United States (USA) has taken a variety of forms, as resource-dependent communities attempt to balance local social, ecological and economic needs with the preferences of stakeholders outside the community. Although CBF is about more than biodiversity, stakeholders value it for different reasons. This has inspired some community-based organizations to use participatory biodiversity monitoring to assess the impacts of alternative forest restoration activities, address conflicting goals among stakeholders, restore trust and build community in rural areas undergoing rapid demographic and economic changes.

In this chapter we examine such projects in four CBF organizations (CBFOs) that participated in the Ford Community-Based Forestry Demonstration Program. First, we provide background information on community-based forestry in the USA, and some of the theories that informed this research. Then we present the ecological and social contexts and stewardship strategies of our four case study sites, followed by a detailed account of one participatory monitoring project undertaken by each group and the ecological and social outcomes. Finally, we discuss key challenges including the sustainability and replicability of these efforts.

Community-based forestry in the USA

The sustained yield model was the dominant forest management model in the twentieth century, focused on maximizing timber yields in perpetuity (Cortner and Moote, 1994). However, forestry has undergone a profound transformation since the 1980s. In the western states, where much forested land is owned by the federal government, well-publicized environmental conflicts have effectively shut down timber production on federal lands.

Type
Chapter
Information
Taking Stock of Nature
Participatory Biodiversity Assessment for Policy, Planning and Practice
 , pp. 266 - 287
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Agee, J. K. and Skinner, C. N. (2005). Basic principles of forest fuel reduction treatments. Forest Ecology and Management 211, 83–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arabis, K. and Bowersox, J. (2004). Forest Futures: Science, Politics, and Policy for the Next Century. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Arno, S. F. and Fiedler, C. E. (2005). Mimicking Nature's Fire. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.Google Scholar
,Aspen Institute (2005). Growth Rings: Communities and Trees. Washington, D.C.: Aspen Insitute.Google Scholar
Baker, M. and Kusel, J. (2003). Community Forestry in the United States: Past Practice, Crafting the Future. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.Google Scholar
Beschta, R. L., Rhodes, J. R., Kauggman, J. B.et al. (2004). Postfire management on the forested public lands of the westernUnited States. Conservation Biology 18(4), 957–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bliss, J., Aplet, G., Hartzell, C.et al. (2001). Community-based ecosystem monitoring. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 12(3–4), 143–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carr, A. J. L. (2004). Why do we all need community science. Society and Natural Resources 17, 841–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheng, A. S., Fernandez-Gimenez, M. E., Ballard, H. L.et al. (2006). Ford Foundation Community-Based Forestry Demonstration Program Research Component Final Report. New York: Ford Foundation.Google Scholar
Child, B. and Lyman, M. W. (2005). Introduction: natural resources as community assets. In Natural Resources as Community Assets: Lessons from Two Continents, eds. Child, B. and Lyman, M. W.. Madison, WI: Sand County Foundation.Google Scholar
Coggins, G. C. (1999). Regulating federal natural resources: a summary case against devolved collaboration. Ecology Law Quarterly 25, 602–610.Google Scholar
Cortner, H. J. and Moote, M. A. (1994). Trends and issues in land and water resources management: Setting the agenda for change. Environmental Management 18(2), 167–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danks, C. (2000). Community forestry initiatives for the creation of sustainable rural livelihoods: a case from North America. Unasylva 51(202), 53–63.Google Scholar
Fernandez-Gimenez, M. E., Huntington, H. P. and Frost, K. J. (2006). Integration or cooptation? Traditional knowledge and science in the Alaska Beluga whale committee. Environmental Conservation 33(4), 306–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, A. J., Rasker, R., Maxwell, B.et al. (2002). Ecological causes and consequences of demographic change in the New West. BioScience 52(2), 151–162.CrossRef
,The Heinz Center (2002). The State of the Nation's Ecosystems. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hessburg, P. F., Agee, J. K. and Franklin, J. F. (2005). Dry forests and wildland fires of the inland Northwest USA: contrasting the landscape ecology of the pre-settlement and modern eras. Forest Ecology and Management 211, 117–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kusel, J. and Adler, E. (eds.) (2003). Forest Communities, Community Forests: Struggles and Successes in Rebuilding Communities and Forests. Landham, MD: Rowman andLittlefield.
Lee, K. N. (1993). Compass and Gyroscope, Integrating Science and Politics for the Environment. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.Google Scholar
McCloskey, M. (1999). Local communities and the management of public forests. Ecology Law Quarterly 25(4), 624–629.Google Scholar
Moir, W. H. and Block, W. M. (2001). Adaptive management on public lands in the United States: commitment or rhetoric. Environmental Management 28(2), 141–148.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moller, H., Berkes, F., O'Brian Lyver, P. and Kislalioglu, M., eds. (2004). Combining science and traditional ecological knowledge: monitoring populations for co-management. Ecology and Society, 9.CrossRef
Nadasdy, P. (1999). The politics of TEK: power and the integration of knowledge. Arctic Anthropology 36, 1–18.Google Scholar
Nicholson, E., Ryan, J. and Hodgkins, D. (2002). Community data – where does the value lie? Assessing confidence limits of community collected water quality data. Water Science and Technology 45, 193–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noss, R. F., Franklin, J. F., Baker, W. L., Schoennagel, T. and Moyle, P. B. (2006). Managing fire-prone forests in the western United States. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 4(9), 481–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pyne, S. J. (2004). Tending Fire: Coping with Americia's Wildland Fires. Washington D.C.: Island Press.Google Scholar
Shannon, M. A. and Antypas, A. R. (1996). Civic science is democracy in action. Northwest Science 70(1), 66–69.Google Scholar
Sturtevant, V. E. and Donoghue, E. M. (2007). Forest community connections: continuity and change. In Forest Community Connections, eds. Sturtevant, V. E. and Donoghue, E. M.. Washington D.C.: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
Taylor, A. H. and Skinner, C. N. (2003). Spatial patterns and controls on historical fire regimes and forest structure in the Klamath Mountains. Ecological Applications 13(3), 704–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,UNEP (1999). Global Environment Outlook 2000. New York: United Nations Environment Programme.Google Scholar
Weber, E. P. (2003). Bringing Society Back In. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, D. C., Raakjaer, J.et al. (2006). Local ecological knowledge and practical fisheries management in the tropics: a policy brief. Marine Policy 30, 794–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wondolleck, J. M. and Yaffee, S. L. (2000). Making Collaboration Work: Lessons from Innovation in Natural Resource Management. Washington, D.C.: Island PressGoogle Scholar
,World Forest Institute (2003). Who Will Own the Forest? Origins and Implications of Changing Ownership. Portland, OR: World Forest Institute.Google Scholar
,World Forest Institute (2004). Who Will Own the Forest? Globalization and Consolidation Effects on Forests. Portland, OR: World Forestry Institute.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×