A New Form of Park Recreation, Nature Conservation

The Protected Lands Council (PLC) sat around an oblong table with the lesser known members sitting in the back corners of the room. Each of us looked around uneasily. Attempting to organize, we were equally divided between government officials and local citizens. According to the PLC web pages, at least fourteen different government agencies attended these meetings, including federal, state, county and town officials. At least fourteen different local groups attended, including local hunters, hikers, mountain bikers, ecologists, civic associations, dog trainers, equestrians, naturalists, and generally anyone else who enjoyed the great outdoors. And one other attended; it was a large corporate nonprofit, neither government nor local, but at times acting as if it were both, and it had global reach.

We meet five times a year, though in years past we met monthly. Not everyone attended all meetings, though at least two dozen of us attended any given meeting. Others kept informed by word of mouth or by reading published meeting minutes posted online. On the surface, the PLC shared goals of natural resource protection and continued public access for enjoyment of these natural resources - - common goals for many protected areas. However, the PLC was often divided in its opinions.

Locals challenged the way the Pine Barrens was cared for and sometimes took matters into their own hands. This prompted a state forester to say, "I don't want to be surprised." Thus, a common practice evolved. Locals juggled requests between agencies and the PLC in order to push individual park projects through. Each of our requests was as varied as the group and its interest and use of public land. Yet this juggling often undermined the effectiveness of the PLC as a team, and it was here where the large corporate nonprofit made its move.

In 2002, desiring "to get fire on the ground," the large corporate nonprofit listed local recreational interests as a possible hindrance, according to Long Island Central Pine Barrens: Modeling for Desired Future Conditions. Working more closely with PLC government agencies, its staff and affiliates took control, defining the Pine Barrens, its need to be burned, and how it should be monitored, according to Conceptual Ecological Models for the Long Island Pitch Pine Barrens: Implications for Managing Rare Plant Communities and Development of Field Monitoring Protocols For the Central Pine Barrens of Long Island, NY. Then by August 2005, the large nonprofit received a $230,000 federal grant to begin a prescribed burn demonstration project, according to Long Island Central Pine Barrens of New York: Forest Fuel Reduction Demonstration Project. The project was to be in the Sarnoff Preserve under partnership with the state forestry agency.

With signs posted along the road explaining the new partnership with the corporate nonprofit, the state forester considered signage to be a good thing. "The Pine Barrens is a fire-prone forest and it needs a prescribed fire program." According to Managing Fuels in Northeastern Barrens, the specific reasons for burning included: reducing canopy, ladder fuels and "decadent" vegetation in favor of new growth for food value to pine barrens species, and increasing prescribed fire training and education. "We don't have enough resources to do prescribed burns without their help," the state forester continued. And they bring a lot of money, staff time and expertise to the table, as well as help with land acquisitions. But we resist signage in general because there would too many signs posted from all the different groups who help us."

Meanwhile, a local dog training group representative apprehensively commented, "I have to renew our state forestry permit again." Background to his apprehension was his group's creation of a pond now populated by threatened tiger salamanders and an invasive pest plant, phragmities. Five attempts to partner with the state forestry agency to cooperatively manage the pond had failed. "They won't give us any monitoring data. We need to know if dog training really interferes with tiger salamanders." In a succinct reply, the state forestry agent had said of their desire to control phragmities, "Not on my property." Placed in a position to renegotiate the where and when of dog training during bird nesting season, the dog trainer's plight sharply contrasted with prescribed burn policies. Prescribed burning ran through April 30th, according to state forestry regulations. But in a similarly partnered program upstate, so as not to harm birds and their nests, prescribed burning wasn't done during the bird nesting season, according to Shawangunk Ridge Biodiversity Partnership Fire Management Program.

Another local citizen was frustrated with the lack of PLC influence over Sarnoff. He considered the initial prescribed burn plan, including its pre and post burn monitoring data, to be "in a state of utter chaos." With the Sarnoff demonstration project well underway, and not being privy to the where and when of burn locations, nor any compiled burn data, if any, nor the financial means to counter their scientific publications, he concluded, "They have free will." The ecologist continued, "There's nothing wrong with doing prescribed burns to reduce fuel load, but don't preach that we need to do it to maintain the Pine Barrens. In the discipline of ecology and management, it's proper for each side to argue and understand the other's point of view. That's the way it used to be." With nothing more to say, he grumbled, "Thanks for making my day."

"Collaboration is cumbersome, time consuming, and it's hard to find and contact all stakeholders," the state forester said. "Anyone can make their opinion known to us." Yet in seeing the dozens and dozens of pitch pine trees mechanically cut down at Sarnoff, a local hiker felt powerless. "They beat us up about our trails fragmenting the interior forests of the Pine Barrens. It's all going to grow back again and they'll keep on burning, won't they?" In follow up visits, he saw hiking trails widened, and "temporary" roads showing signs of erosion and compaction. But he had no means to influence how the prescribed burn program was designed, implemented or monitored. It was, after all, the large corporate nonprofit's project.

As more and more ordinary citizens show an interest in park management, improved opportunities for involvement should follow. Join us in Santa Fe, New Mexico, next. This upcoming article will explore a new form of park recreation - - that which includes environmental stewardship and nature conservation.