Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T19:49:25.276Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Principles of New Park-area Planning as Applied to the Wrangell-St Elias Region of Alaska

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

R. Gerald Wright
R. Gerald Wright
Affiliation:
Research Biologist, US National Park Service, and Associate Professor, Department of Wildflife Resources, College of Forestry, Wildlife and Range Sciences, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho 83843, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In an era of increasing land-use demands, it is getting ever-more-difficult to set aside lands for parks or equivalent units where protection rather than (multiple) use of the resource is the goal. Developing a sufficient justification for establishing an area of parkland is directly related to the proper use of well-recognized ecological principles—particularly to the fact that the area included should encompass a unique or nationally significant resource (Polunin & Eidsvik, 1979).

This paper discusses four basic criteria that were used to evaluate potential boundary and resource-management alternatives for a seven-million-ha region in south-central Alaska, much of which was eventually included in the Wrangell-St Elias National Park and Preserve. The necessity or basing the planning decisions on sound data cannot be overemphasized. The paper discusses the different data-types used in the planning process. It was the feeling of all involved in the planning process that more was known about the natural and social resources of the new Alaskan parks than had been known about any other new areas that had been added to the system. The need for good data is particularly acute when the establishment of the parks involves considerable controversy and opposition, as was the case here.

Type
Main Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , Spring 1985 , pp. 59 - 66
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 1985

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Benson, C.S. (1968). Glaciological studies on Mt.Wrangell, Alaska, 1961. Arctic, 21, pp. 127–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, L.J. (1978). Alaska lands: Senate panel tilts more towards development. Science, 201, pp. 96–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chubb, M. & Chubb, H.R. (1981). One Third of Our Time? John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA: xxiv + 742 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Darling, F.F. & Eichhorn, N.D. (1967). Man and Nature in the National Parks. Conservation Foundation, Washington, DC, USA: 80 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Dasmann, R.F. (1972). Towards a system for classifying natural regions of the world and their representation by national parks and reserves. Biol. Consent., 4, pp. 247–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diamond, J.N. (1975). The island dilemma: Lessons of modern geographical studies for the design of Nature preserves. Biol. Conserv., 7, pp. 129–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flemming, M. & Wright, R.G. (1981). The Use of Different Seasonal LANDSAT Scenes to Delineate Dall Sheep Habitat in the Chitina Valley, Wrangell Mountains. Research Rep. Coop. Park Studies Unit, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, USA: 10 pp.Google Scholar
Gardner, J.E. & Nelson, J.G. (1980). Comparing national park and related reserve policy in hinterland areas: Alaska, Northern Canada, and Northern Australia. Environmental Conservation, 7, pp. 43–50, 3 figs.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heimer, W. & Smith, A. (1975). Ram Horn Growth and Population Quality: Their Significance to Dall Sheep Management in Alaska. Alaska Dept of Fish and Game, Wildlife Tech. Bull. 5, iii + 41 pp.Google Scholar
Helliwell, D.R. (1976). The extent and location of Nature conservation areas. Environmental Conservation, 3, pp. 255–8, fig.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitchener, D.J., Chapman, A. & Mum, B.G. (1980). The conservation value for mammals of reserves in the Western Australian wheatbelt. Biol. Conserv., 18, pp. 179–207, 6 figs.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leopold, A.S., Cain, S.A., Cottam, C., Gabrielson, I.N. & Kimball, T.L. (1963). Wildlife management in the national parks. Trans. N. Amer. Wildl. and Nat. Res. Conf., 28, pp. 29–42.Google Scholar
MacKevett, E.N., Albert, N., Barnes, D., Case, J.P., Robinson, K. & Singer, D. (1977). The Alaska Mineral Resource Assessment Program: Background Information to Accompany Folio of Geologic and Mineral Resource Maps of the McCarthy Quadrangle, Alaska. US Geological Survey Circular 739, 48 pp., + maps.Google Scholar
McNeary, S.A. (1977). Subsistence Usein Coastal Areas of Wrangell-St. Elias National Park. Anthropology Department Report, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA: 34 pp., + map.Google Scholar
May, R.N. (1975). Island biogeography and the design of wildlife preserves. Nature (London), 257, pp. 177–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, R.I. (1978). Applying island biogeographic theory to an East African reserve. Environmental Conservation, 5, pp. 191–5, 3 figs.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, E.C. & Dean, S.C. (1978). Hunting Activity and Harvest in the Wrangell-St Elias Region, Alaska. (Final Report: CX-9000-6-0154.) National Park Service, Coop. Park Studies Unit, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA: x + 203 pp.Google Scholar
National Park Service (cited as ‘NPS’) (1972). Part Two of the National Park System Plan: Natural History. (National Park Service, USDI.) US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, USA: 140 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
National Park Service (cited as ‘NPS’) (1980). State of the Parks 1980: A Report to the Congress. Office of Science & Technology, National Park Service, USDI, 57 pp.Google Scholar
Odum, E.P. (1969). The strategy of ecosystem development. Science, 164, pp. 262–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Polunin, N. & Eidsvik, H.K. (1979). Ecological principles for the establishment and management of national parks and equivalent reserves. Environmental Conservation, 6 (1), pp. 21–6, 2 figs.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richter, D.H., Singer, D.A. & Cos, D.P. (1975). The Alaska Mineral Resource Assessment Program: Background Information to Accompany Folio of Geographic and Mineral Resource Maps of the Nabesna Quadrangle, Alaska. US Geological Survey Circular 718, 52 pp. + maps.Google Scholar
Runte, A. (1972). Yellowstone, it's useless so why not a park? National Parks and Conserv., 46 (3), pp. 4–7.Google Scholar
Wright, R.G. (1979). The use of spatial simulation models in projecting potential visitation to new national parks in Alaska. Pp. 1077–80 in Processing of First Conference on Scientific Research in the National Parks, 9–13 11 1976, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA: xxxiv + 1325 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Wright, R.G. (1981 a). Wrangell-St. Elias: international mountain wilderness. Alaska Geog., 8 (1), 144 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Wright, R.G. (1981 b). A Guide to the Hiking Trails in the Wrangell-St Elias National Park. Res. Rep. B 81–4, Coop. Park Studies Unit, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, USA: 12 pp.Google Scholar
Wright, R.G. (1984). Wildlife resources in creating the new Alaskan parks and preserves. Environmental Management, 8, pp. 12–4, fig.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zentilli, B. (1976). Determining national park boundaries. Parks, 1 (4), pp. 7–10, illustr.Google Scholar