The History of Sequoia National Park, 1876-1926: Part I: The Movement to Establish a Park

1966 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-167
Author(s):  
DOUGLAS H. STRONG
Fire Ecology ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 120-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas W. Swetnam ◽  
Christopher H. Baisan ◽  
Anthony C. Caprio ◽  
Peter M. Brown ◽  
Ramzi Touchan ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Terence Young ◽  
Alan MacEachern ◽  
Lary Dilsaver

This essay explores the evolving international relationship of the two national park agencies that in 1968 began to offer joint training classes for protected-area managers from around the world. Within the British settler societies that dominated nineteenth century park-making, the United States’ National Park Service (NPS) and Canada’s National Parks Branch were the most closely linked and most frequently cooperative. Contrary to campfire myths and nationalist narratives, however, the relationship was not a one-way flow of information and motivation from the US to Canada. Indeed, the latter boasted a park bureaucracy before the NPS was established. The relationship of the two nations’ park leaders in the half century leading up to 1968 demonstrates the complexity of defining the influences on park management and its diffusion from one country to another.


Author(s):  
Alan D. Roe

Into Russian Nature examines the history of the Russian national park movement. Russian biologists and geographers had been intrigued with the idea of establishing national parks before the Great October Revolution but pushed the Soviet government successfully to establish nature reserves (zapovedniki) during the USSR’s first decades. However, as the state pushed scientists to make zapovedniki more “useful” during the 1930s, some of the system’s staunchest defenders started supporting tourism in them. In the decades after World War II, the USSR experienced a tourism boom and faced a chronic shortage of tourism facilities. Also during these years, Soviet scientists took active part in Western-dominated international environmental protection organizations, where they became more familiar with national parks. In turn, they enthusiastically promoted parks for the USSR as a means to reconcile environmental protection and economic development goals, bring international respect to Soviet nature protection efforts, and help instill a love for the country’s nature and a desire to protect it in Russian/Soviet citizens. By the late 1980s, their supporters pushed transformative, and in some cases quixotic, park proposals. At the same time, national park opponents presented them as an unaffordable luxury during a time of economic struggle, especially after the USSR’s collapse. Despite unprecedented collaboration with international organizations, Russian national parks received little governmental support as they became mired in land-use conflicts with local populations. While the history of Russia’s national parks illustrates a bold attempt at reform, the state’s failure’s to support them has left Russian park supporters deeply disillusioned.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document