Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-x5cpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-27T23:03:40.289Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparing National Park and Related Reserve Policy in Hinterland Areas: Alaska, Northern Canada, and Northern Australia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

J. E. Gardner  and
J. G. Nelson
J. E. Gardner
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1, Canada
J. G. Nelson
Affiliation:
Professor of Geography and Dean, Faculty of Environmental Studies, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario N21 3G1, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This is a comparative study of national park and related reserve policies and institutional arrangements in three hinterland areas undergoing rising pressure from mineral projects. The areas are the Canadian Northern Territories and Alaska (where interest lies in oil and gas exploitation) and the Australian Northern Territory (where the focus is on uranium extraction). Five elements of policy and institutional arrangements—management field, comprehensive planning and management, system planning, public inquiries, and uses—have been closely studied, with the following conclusions:

1. With respect to the management field, a major problem has been division of responsibility among federal and state or territorial agencies.

2. Overall comprehensive planning has not been seriously attempted in Canada and Australia, and has not yet met with success in Alaska.

3. A system planning approach provides rationale in Alaska and Canada, but is lacking in Australia.

4. Local comprehensive planning has been undertaken in the Kakadu National Park area of Australia, and a start has been made in this direction in Canada's northern Yukon.

5. Two uses, mining and native activities, pose special problems for national parks and related reserve policy, which is ambiguous on these issues in all cases.

6. All three systems represented by these parks in different countries are changing rapidly, and more suitable adaptive arrangements may be made for them in the coming years.

Type
Main Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , Spring 1980 , pp. 43 - 50
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 1980

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

Adams, A. B. (1962). First World Conference on National Parks. U.S. Department of Interior National Park Service, Washington, D.C.: xxxiv + 471 pp.Google Scholar
Armstrong, G. (1977). A comparison of Australian and Canadian approaches to national park planning. Pp. 220–8 in Leisure and Recreation in Australia (Ed. Mercer, D.). Garrett, Australia: 256 pp.Google Scholar
Bailey, C. (1975). An Analysis of Environmental and Land Use Legislation in the Yukon Territory. Prepared for the Nature Conservancy of Canada, 69 pp., mimeogr.Google Scholar
Berger, T. R. (1977). Northern Frontier, Northern Homeland: The Report of the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry. Minister of Supply and Services, Ottawa, Ontario: Vol. I, xxvii + 213 pp., illustr.; Vol. II, xxii + 268 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Canadian National Parks: Today and Tomorrow, Conference II: Ten Years Later, Banff, Canada, 9–13 10 1978.Google Scholar
Carter, L. J. (1978). Alaska lands: Senate panel tilts more toward development. Science, 201, 09 15, pp. 96–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheffins, W. (1978). Personal Interview as Coordinator, Planning Division, Agreements for Recreation and Conservation Branch, Parks Canada.Google Scholar
Committee of Inquiry into the National Estate (1974). National Estate, Report of the Committee of Inquiry. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, ACT: [not available for checking].Google Scholar
Conservation Foundation (1977). National Parks for the Future. The Conservation Foundation, Washington, D.C.: viii + 254 pp.Google Scholar
DOI [U.S. Department of the Interior] (undated). Alaska National Parks, Refuges and Wild Rivers: Some Questions and Answers. Washington, D.C.: 16 pp., mimeogr.Google Scholar
SirElliott, Hugh (Ed.) (1974). Second World Conference on National Parks. IUCN, Morges, Switzerland: 504 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Fox, D. W., Kelleher, G. B. & Kerr, C. B. (1977). Ranger Uranium Environmental Inquiry: Second Report. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, ACT: Vol. I, viii + 206 pp., illustr.; Vol. II, ix + 415 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Gardner, J. E. (1978). An International Comparison of Policies and Institutional Arrangements for National Parks and Related Reserves in Hinterland Areas. University of Waterloo President's Committee on Northern Studies Working Paper No. 2, Waterloo, Ontario: ix + 79 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Hunt, C. D. (1979) Legislative alternatives for the establishment of a wilderness area. Northern Perspectives, VII (2), pp. 2–6.Google Scholar
Lysyk, K., Bohmer, E. E. & Philps, W. L. (1977). Alaska Highway Pipeline Inquiry. Minister of Supply and Services, Ottawa: xvi + 171 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Mosley, J. (1976 a). Canberra dumps parks. Newsletter (Conservation Foundation, Australia), VIII(9), p. 1.Google Scholar
Mosley, J. (1976 b). Northern Territory parks must not fall into wrong hands. Newsletter (Conservation Foundation, Australia), VII(3), p. 3.Google Scholar
National Parks Authority (1975). Proceedings of the South Pacific Conference on National Parks and Reserves. Department of Lands and Survey, Wellington, New Zealand: v + 299 pp.Google Scholar
National Park Service (1978). Management Policies. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.: 10 chapters separately paged.Google Scholar
Nelson, J. G. (1976). The future role of conservation reserves in the Arctic. Contact, VIII(4), pp. 76–116.Google Scholar
Nelson, J. G. (1979). Canada's Wildlands. School of Urban and Regional Planning, Working Paper No. 4, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario: 124 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Nelson, J. G., Needham, R. D. & Mann, D. L. (Eds) (1979). International Experience with National Parks. University of Waterloo Geography Publication Series No. 12, Waterloo, Ontario: xi + 624 pp.Google Scholar
Nelson, J. G. & Scace, R. C. (Eds) (© 1968, publ. 1969). The Canadian National Parks: Today and Tomorrow. University of Calgary and National and Provincial Parks Association of Canada, Calgary, Alberta: xv + 1027 pp., illustr. [our copy is indicated as ‘© 1968’ and ‘Published 1969’.—Ed.]Google Scholar
Nelson, J. G., Needham, R. D., Nelson, S. H. & Scace, R. C. (Eds) (in press) The Canadian National Parks Today and Tomorrow: Conference II, Ten Years Later. University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario: Vol. I, 548 pp., illustr., Vol. II, 334 pp., Ulustr.Google Scholar
Newman, , Hon. Kevin (undated). Uranium—Australia's Decision: Statement by the Honourable Kevin Newman—Minister for Environment, Housing and Community Development. Australian Government, Canberra, Australia: 8 pp.Google Scholar
Northern Territory Reserves Board (cited as NTRB) (1977). Twenty-first Annual Report. Alice Springs, Australia: 17 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Ottawa Citizen (1978). Decision on Yukon oil described as arrogant. 7 07, p. 9.Google Scholar
Parks Canada (1978). Parks Canada Policy (draft). Parks Canada Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, Ottawa, Ontario: 118 pp.Google Scholar
Parks Canada (1979). Parks Canada Policy. Parks Canada Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, Ottawa, Ontario: 79 pp.Google Scholar
Piesse, R. D. (1974). Response to Sylvia Crowe. P. 179 in Second World Conference on National Parks (Ed. Sir Hugh Elliott). IUCN, 1110 Morges, Switzerland: 504 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
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, illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, A. (1978). Comment on Commonwealth/State Interactions in the National Park Field in Australia. U.S. National Park Service, Denver, Colorado: 2 pp.Google Scholar
Scace, R. C. (1976). Western Canadian antecedents to northern conservation reserves. Contact, VIII(3), pp. 3–29.Google Scholar
Shoenbaum, F. J. (1976). Natural area preservation in the Soviet Union and the U.S.: A comparative perspective. Am. J. Comparative Law, XXIV(3), pp. 521–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Summer, D. (1973). Wilderness and the mining law. The Living Wilderness, XXXVII(121), pp. 12–3.Google Scholar
Viner, , Hon. Ian (undated). Uranium—Australia's Decision: Statement by the Honourable Ian Viner, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Minister Assisting the Treasurer. Australian Government, Canberra A.C.T.: 6 pp.Google Scholar