Legislated collaboration in a conservation conflict: a case study of the Quincy Library Group in California, USA

Gutiéerrez, R. J.; Cheng, Antony S.; Becker, Dennis R.; Cashen, Scott; Ganz, David; Gunn, John; Liquori, Michael; Merrill, Amy E.; Saah, D. S.; Price, William E.

doi:10.1017/cbo9781139084574.020

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Proposals to increase the pace and scale of fuel reduction in frequent‐fire forests, however, have been controversial for three main reasons. First, some stakeholders view such “forest restoration” activities as a euphemism for logging remnant large trees (Gutiérrez et al 2015), and decades of logging throughout western forests have already created a deficit of large, old trees with undesirable ecological consequences (Safford and Stevens 2017, Jones et al 2018). Second, some stakeholders have expressed concern that scientific or ecological justification for management activities intended to reduce fuel buildup is limited, stating that (1) current wildfire activity (including the patch size and proportional composition of high‐severity fire) in frequent‐fire forests is within the natural range of variation (Baker 2015) and (2) fuel treatments will be ineffective in reducing severe fire extent in a warming/drying climate (Schoennagel et al 2017).…”

Section: General Description† Summary Why This Is a Problem Implicatimentioning

confidence: 99%

Spotted owls and forest fire: Comment

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: General Description† Summary Why This Is a Problem Implicatimentioning

confidence: 99%

Spotted owls and forest fire: Comment

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a result, there is a serious risk that endless negotiation and protracted litigation will result in gridlock (e.g. Gutiérrez et al 2015) and thus a continuation of the status quo towards a nearly universally undesirable future.…”

Section: Ecosystem Type Conversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing management of social-ecological systems in terms of the cost of failure: the Sierra Nevada, USA as a case study

Wood

Jones

2019

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Managing complex social-ecological systems in an era of rapid climate change and changing human pressures represents a major challenge in sustainability science. The Sierra Nevada, USA is a large social-ecological system facing a tipping point that could result in major ecosystem changes. A century of fire suppression and climate change have set the stage for mega-disturbances that threaten biodiversity, human life and values, ecosystem services, and forest persistence. Stakeholders face multidimensional and often contentious trade-offs with costs and benefits that can be mismatched in space and time. If compromises cannot be reached, the status quo is likely to continue, resulting in the conversion of large portions of a 100 000 km 2 predominately mixed-conifer forest ecosystem to a chaparral-dominated ecosystem. We describe the outcomes of a continuation of the ecological status quo on biodiversity, cultural history, fire management, recreational value, and climate control, including indirect effects on water and food security and recreation. The social-ecological ramifications of such a future are undesirable for most stakeholders. Therefore, we contend that forest management conflicts should be framed in terms of the cost of failure of negotiations among stakeholders. Specifically, negotiations may benefit from (1) stakeholders quantifying their definitions of success and failure, (2) quantification of trade-offs and recognition of their multidimensionality, and (3) allowing for solutions that are heterogeneous in space and time. This approach may help stakeholders navigate the wicked problem of managing Sierra Nevada forests and other complex social-ecological systems.

show abstract