1,720,952 research outputs found
What Have Been the Major Trends in the Arena of Congressional Public Lands Legislation for Roughly the Last Five Years (1995-Early 2000)?
No full textThe political fate of America's public lands has been nearly a constant struggle between one or more political interests for the last 100 years. Roughly since the 1870s, forces advocating the development, exploitation, or increased public access to the public lands have fought on-and-off battles with those forces advocating for the protection, preservation, or conservation of these lands and the natural resources they foster. Many of the experts interviewed for this paper - both those advocating for the development and protection of the public lands - have stated that the bitter controversies over how best to manage the federal lands will extend well into the future, as it is an issue that is fundamentally tied to ever-changing social, economic, and political trends and values.
For roughly the last five years (1995 - early 2000), there has been a regular stream of bitter and complex battles between the United States Congress and President Bill Clinton's administration of over various public land issues. In general, the Republicans have been oriented towards increased development/exploitation of the public lands for the natural resources therein, while the Clinton administration has been more oriented towards protection and preservation of the public lands. Congress has the ability to affect long-term, permanent legislation that has a continuing impact on how the public lands will be managed in the future. Given this importance of Congress to the future of the public lands, this paper seeks to understand what major trends have dominated the arena of congressional public lands legislation for roughly the last five years (1995 - early 2000).Washington Semester Program
American University
Research Project
WHAT HA VE BEEN THE MAJOR TRENDS IN THE ARENA OF
CONGRESSIONAL PUBLIC LANDS LEGISLATION FOR
ROUGHLY THE LAST FIVE YEARS (199S - EARLY 2000)?
Submitted by
Alex N. Kopperud
(Gustavus Adolphus College)
In Fulfillment of the Requirements for
Course Number GOVT-412-002T: Washington Semester Research Project
Spring 2000
Also Submitted for Fulfillment of the Senior Thesis Requirement for Political Science
Majors at Gustavus Adolphus College, December 2000
Gustavus Student Repository
ABSTRACT
The political fate of America's public lands has been nearly a constant struggle
between one or more political interests for the last 100 years. Roughly since the 1870s,
forces advocating the development, exploitation, or increased public access to the public
lands have fought on-and-off battles with those forces advocating for the protection,
preservation, or conservation of these lands and the natural resources they foster. Many
of the experts interviewed for this paper - both those advocating for the development and
protection of the public lands - have stated that the bitter controversies over how best to
manage the federal lands will extend well into the future, as it is an issue that is
fundamentally tied to ever-changing social, economic, and political trends and values.
For roughly the last five years (1995 - early 2000), there has been a regular
stream of bitter and complex battles between the United States Congress and President
Bill Clinton's administration of over various public land issues. In general, the
Republicans have been oriented towards increased development/exploitation of the public
lands for the natural resources therein, while the Clinton administration has been more
oriented towards protection and preservation of the public lands. Congress has the ability
to affect long-term, permanent legislation that has a continuing impact on how the public
lands will be managed in the future. Given this importance of Congress to the future of
the public lands, this paper seeks to understand what major trends have dominated the
arena of congressional public lands legislation for roughly the last five years (1995 -
early 2000).
Gustavus Student Repository
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER I: Introduction ............................................... I
Discussion o f Three Factors to Be Used in Written Analysis ............. 6
CHAPTER 2: The History of America's Public Lands Policies ..... I 0
Acquisition and Disposal Era ................................................. I 1
Reservation Era ............................................. , ................... I 8
Environmentalism of the 1960s and 1970s Era ............................. 22
The Clinton Administration & Congress, 1993 -1998 Era ................ 28
Conclusion ....................................................................... 3 7
CHAPTER 3: A Snapshot of the Public Lands, 1999 -The Present
(Current Status) ............................................ 39
Congress and the Public Lands, 1999 - The Present .............. ....... 40
President Clinton and Public Lands, 1999 - The Present .................. 44
Conclusion ........ ............................................. ................ .49
CHAPTER 4: Analysis of the Written and Verbal Information ...... 51
Section I: Analysis of the Written Information/Raw Data ................. 52
Section II: Analysis of the Interview Information ............................ 65
Conclusion............................................................... . .. 78
CHAPTER 5: Significance of Paper and Future Directions .......... 82
Significance/ Larger Lessons To Be Learned From Paper . . . . . . . . . . 82
Future of This Issue and Its Implications ............................... .... 89
APPENDIX I: Methodology .............................................. 95
WORKS CITED/ BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................... IO I
Gustavus Student Repository
CHAPTER ONE:
INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
A nation may be said to consist of its territory, its people, and its laws. The territory is the only part which
is of certain durability. One generation passeth away and another generation cometh, but the earth
abideth forever. It is of the first importance to duly consider and estimate this ever-enduring part.
--- Abraham Lincoln, 1862 (Junker 1986, 13).
Today, in the year 2000, the 'ever-enduring territory' that Lincoln referred to in
1862 finds its best materialization in the various public lands owned by the U.S. federal
government. The nebulous terms 'public lands,' 'federal lands,' and 'public domain,' all
approximately refer to any and all of the federal civil and defense lands currently owned
and managed by the federal government throughout the United States (Junker 1986, 3).
As of 1998, no less than one-quarter (or 563,128,072.6 acres) of the entire land area of
the United States was owned by the federal government (Bureau of Land Management
1999, Online). These public lands are a vast collection of impressive landscapes
scattered throughout America - mountains, rivers, prairies, forests, desert canyons, and
rocky shorelines are just a few of these stunning natural areas (Junker 1986). The
majority of these lands are located in the American West - in the states of Alaska,
Hawaii, Washington, Oregon, California, Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado,
Arizona, and New Mexico (Junker 1986, 7). Approximately four federal agencies
manage the public lands: the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Forest Service. Table 1-1 on the next
page describes the general differences between these land management agencies, as well
as the amount of land each one controls.
Gustavus Student Repository
TABLE 1-1:
INTRODUCTION TO THE MAJOR U.S. FEDERAL LAND
MANAGEMENT AGENCIES
Bureau of Land Management BLM (Department of Interior)
Source: The Bureau of Land Management Webpage, www.blm.gov
• Established 1946, in an administrative merger of the old General Land Office and the
Grazing Service, which was an outgrowth of the 1934 Taylor Grazing Act.
• Total Acreage Managed: 264 Million Acres, located primarily in the Western
States (Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, Idaho, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New
Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, and Montana).
• Various designations under BLM jurisdiction: The BLM manages a variety of federal
lands that are not otherwise set aside into the National Forest, National Park, or National
Wildlife Refuge systems. These are a collection of natural resource management areas
such as National Petroleum Reserves, grazing districts, national monuments (most
notably the Grand Staircase - Escalante National Monument), mining lease areas, areas
managed for timber harvesting, wilderness/wilderness study areas, wild and scenic rivers,
as well as simple, undesignated BLM lands. The BLM is also in charge of managing a
host of programs and public services associated with its lands, such as managing
public/commercial mineral claims on its lands and running an adoption program for wild
horses/burros that roam on western BLM lands.
National Forest Service - NFS (Department of Agriculture)
Source: Culhane, Paul, Public Lands Politics. and National Forest Service Webpage,
www.fs.fed.us
• Established 1905, as a result of the 1905 Transfer Act.
• Total Acreage Managed: 191 Million Acres.
• Various designations under NFS jurisdiction: National Forests (155) and National
Grasslands(20), as well as other affiliated units, such as forest service wilderness areas.
National Forest Service also runs a large research center, the Forest Products Laboratory,
and state, private, and international science partnerships/programs.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service - U.S. FWS (Department of Interior)
Source: Junkin, Elizabeth , Lands of Brighter Destiny. and U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service Web Page, www.fws.gov
• Established 1939, although various forms of game refuges in America go back at least
to early 1900s.
• Total Acreage Managed: 93 Million Acres
• Various designations under U.S. FWS jurisdiction: National Wildlife Refuges (more
than 520) and thousands of small wetlands and other special management areas. The
agency also operates 66 National Fish Hatcheries, 64 fishery resource offices, and 78
ecological field stations.
2
Gustavus Student Repository
National Park Service - NPS {Department of Interior)
Source: The National Park Service Web Page, www.nps.gov
• Established in 1916 under National Park Service Organic Act; General Authorities
Act of 1970 gave equal protection to all areas administered by NPS in creating the
nation-wide National Park System.
• Total Acreage Managed: 80.7 Million Acres
• Various designations under NPS jurisdiction: National Parks (54), National
Monuments (73), National Preserves (16), National Historic Sites (77), National Historic
Parks (38), National Memorials (28), National Battlefields (about 15), National
Cemeteries (14), National Recreation Areas (19), National Seashores (10), National
Lakeshores (4), National Wild and Scenic Rivers (9), National Parkways (4), National
Scenic Trails (3), and other NPS affiliated areas.
3
Gustavus Student Repository
The battle over the future of America's public lands - specifically in regards to
the question of how the federal government ought best to manage these areas - has been
a seemingly endless tussle between one or more interest groups for at least the last 130
years in American history. Mary Coulombe of the American Forest and Paper
Association (AF&PA) pointed out to the author in a recent interview that the battle over
how to manage the public lands is never ending, principally because of its fundamental
ties to social and political trends (Coulombe, AF&PA 4/3/00). Nonetheless, inside of this
on-going debate an extremely important factor has persisted in shaping how the public
lands are managed by administrative agencies: the public lands legislation developed by
Congress (Shanks 1984, 243). As pointed out by Senate Energy and Natural Resources
Committee staff member Mark Rey, enacted congressional public lands legislation acts as
the statutory "tools" which federal land management agencies use to guide and direct the
course of action they take when managing the public lands (Rey, Senate ENR Committee
2/25/00). Given that Congress has the special ability to guide the management of public
lands through various policies, and that on any one public land issue there may be three
competing interests (i.e. environmentalists vs. developers vs. recreational users) the
debate in Congress over how to best manage the public lands can be very heated and
complex. Junkin described this situation well, declaring that "to policy makers, the
public lands present continual legal conundrums, as the battle is fought out in the blurred
ideological differences between definitions of terms like stewardship, conservation or
preservation" (1986, 4).
The past five years of debate in Congress over public lands management/policies
has been particular! y intense. This is most likely due to at least several, overlapping
4
Gustavus Student Repository
factors, two of which are worth briefly mentioning here. The first is that most political
critics agree that the Clinton-Gore White House, since its inception in 1993, has taken on
a very environmentally-sensitive stance towards public lands management, and has
expressed this administratively through various aggressive rulemaking procedures and
executive orders, such as the president's recent use of the 1906 Antiquities Act in
designating the Giant Sequoia National Monument in California (White House 4/15/00,
Online). Second, since replacing the Democrat majority in 1995, Republicans have
controlled Congress and the various congressional committees charged with oversight of
the federal management of the public lands. Many observers have pointed out that the
Republican leadership of these committees has generally been more developmentoriented
towards the public lands than the White House (Congressional Quarterly
Almanac (COA) 1995, 5-4). The result of these two factors has been that Congress has
spent an enormous part of its time for the last five years locked in a ongoing feud with the
Clinton administration over how best to manage the public lands (Condit, House
Resources Committee 4/7/00).
In light of this apparent collision between two opposite forces, then, the author
presents the essential question of this research paper: what have been the relevant trends
in the arena of congressional public lands legislation for roughly the last five years (1995
- early 2000)? To be certain, this is an enormous question, which does not render itself
to easy summarization. However, the possible answer to this question, as the reader will
see, is two-part, and lies in two different sets of information. The first part of the answer
to the question is, in fact, the author's original query - asking what the shape of actually
enacted congressional public lands legislation has been for the last five years. This
5
Gustavus Student Repository
analysis of major, enacted congressional public lands legislation seeks to understand
whether or not such legislation has been aimed at development and increased public
access to public lands - such as new mining and logging initiatives - or whether
Congress has taken on a more environmental/conservationist tack, opting to protect and
conserve the public lands through various policy measures. Each major piece of
legislation to be examined in Chapter Four of this paper will be evaluated for three
factors, which will be enumerated below. The second part of the answer to the question
of trends in congressional public lands legislation lies in the interviews of actual public
lands experts/professionals who regularly work with public lands issues. These experts
have indicated that there is a secondary trend to merely the shape of a few enacted pieces
of legislation. Many of these experts have described a larger trend - a lack of enacted
congressional public lands legislation, which has generally been caused by a lack of
cooperation between Congress and the Clinton administration. Views on why there has
been this lack of cooperation are extremely divergent, as will be seen in Chapter Four.
Some of the experts make compelling arguments that the blame for the lack of
cooperation lies with Congress, while others make equally strong arguments that the fault
has been with the Clinton administration. In any case, it will be seen by the end of
Chapter Four that there are good arguments for both sides of this debate.
As indicated previously, each major piece of legislation to be examined in Chapter
Four of this paper will be assessed for the three factors. Further description will be given
early in Chapter Four as to why those specific pieces of legislation have been chosen for
analysis. The following three factors will be applied to the selected pieces of legislation:
• Status of the public lands in question - Because the current scope of this paper has
6
Gustavus Student Repository
taken into account all U.S. federal lands, it is important to clearly indicate what type of
public lands a particular bill is centered around. This is necessary because some federal
lands are subject to much more stricter regulation than others (i.e. Yellowstone National
Park vs. vacant BLM grazing land). The essential question of this 'status' factor will be
ascertaining what federal land management agency has jurisdiction over the lands in
question. It is necessary to establish what agency has jurisdiction over the lands in
question because each agency has its own regulatory stance. For instance, the BLM is
legally bound to promote a multiple-use management strategy, while the NPS tends to be
much more strict in its land use regulations. Please refer to Table 1-1 for further
description of the various federal land management agencies.
• Issue typology the public lands legislation is dealing with - A brief sampling
of the public lands issues and legislation debated by Congress in the past year alone
provides a researcher with plenty of evidence that there is a wide variety in the types of
public lands issues facing Congress. Hence, when looking at the past five years of
congressional public lands legislation passed by both houses of Congress and signed into
law by the president, it is very important to identify and explain what types of issues were
being addressed in the law and generally why those issues were significant, if indeed they
were.
• Underlying management philosophy of the public lands legislation - This
criteria seeks to understand whether or not an enacted piece of congressional public lands
legislation calls for a public lands policy that is more favorable towards increased
protection and conservation of a given area of federal land, or is more focused at
increasing access and development of such land. For the purposes of this paper, a piece
7
Gustavus Student Repository
of legislation will be coded as pro-development/access if it is favorable towards increased
resource development, manual or motorized access, and general deregulation of public
lands. Congressional legislation will be coded as leaning towards conservation if it
shows a tendency towards calling for increased protection, natural enhancement,
restoration, decreased motorized access, or increased federal regulation of public lands.
Clearly, the term 'conservation' still has debated meanings in hard-core public lands
policy debate circles, but for the purposes of this paper, the term will apply to a piece of
legislation that places the protection of land before development/exploitation of land,
despite the fact that the classic definition of land 'conservation' includes notions of land
protection and careful development of resources (Cawley 1993, 17).
WHAT LIES AHEAD
In subsequent chapters, this paper will step-by-step give a reader a general
understanding of U.S. public lands issues past and present, and what role Congress has
played in addressing these issues. Chapter Two will lay out the history of major public
lands developments - roughly from the birth of the national parks with the establishment
of Yellowstone, to the backlash against President Clinton's Grand Staircase -Escalante
National Monument. Chapter Three will survey the major public lands legislation and
issues currently facing the 106th Congress, as well as describe the important public lands
initiatives/activities being carried out by President Clinton. Chapter Four is the essential
crux of this paper - it will describe the two, interconnected trends in the arena of
congressional public lands legislation as ascertained first from the written information,
and then from the oral/interview information. Chapter Five will conclude the paper by
8
Gustavus Student Repository
attempting to give predictions about the future of congressional public lands
issues/legislation, given what the author has learned in trying to ascertain the trends of
congressional public lands legislation for the past five years.
9
Gustavus Student Repository
CHAPTER TWO:
THE HISTORY OF AMERICA'S PUBLIC LANDS POLICIES
INTRODUCTION
The difficulty of discussing public lands policies first requires some general
understanding of the history of America's federal lands and, more importantly, the major
policies that have gradually shaped their existence. Without a brief historical context, not
only are the impacts of recent congressional public lands policies misperceived, but also
the general shape of what modem American public lands are and how they are managed
is lost on the reader.
One slight problem, however, is that the history of America' s public lands is very
extensive, and according to past BLM Director and public lands researcher Marrion
Clawson, the history has "scores of special laws, unique situations, and other aspects
which are not easily summarized" (Clawson 1983, 15). In light of this, the author has
attempted to streamline the otherwise complex history of American public lands into a
handful of specific eras, insi
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Get PDFWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
No full textAuthor-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
Author Under Sail The Imagination of Jack London, 1893-1902
No full textIn Author Under Sail, Jay Williams offers the first complete literary biography of Jack London as a professional writer engaged in the labor of writing. It examines the authorial imagination in London's work, the use of imagination in both his fiction and nonfiction, and the ways he defined imagination in the creative process in his business dealings with his publishers, editors, and agents. In this first volume of a two-volume biography, Williams traverses the years 1893 to 1902, from London's "Story of a Typhoon" to The People of the Abyss. The Jack London who emerges in the pages of Author Under Sail is a writer whose partnership with publishers, most notably his productive alliance with George Brett of Macmillan, was one of the most formative in American literary history. London pioneered many author models during the heyday of realism and naturalism, blurring the boundaries of these popular genres by focusing on absorption and theatricality and the representation of the seen and unseen. London created an impassioned, sincere, and extremely personal realism unlike that of other American writers of the time. Author Under Sail is a literary tour de force that reveals the full range of London as writer, creative citizen, and entrepreneur at the same time it sheds light on the maverick side of machine-age literature.Intro -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Dedication -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- 1. Spirit Truth -- 2. From Absorption to Theatricality and Back Again -- 3. "I Will Build a New Present" -- 4. Sons as Authors -- 5. Fathers as Publishers -- 6. The Daughter as Author -- 7. Lovers as Authors -- 8. At Sea with the Family -- 9. Yellow News, Yellow Stories -- 10. The Return Home -- Notes -- Bibliography -- Index -- About Jay WilliamsIn Author Under Sail, Jay Williams offers the first complete literary biography of Jack London as a professional writer engaged in the labor of writing. It examines the authorial imagination in London's work, the use of imagination in both his fiction and nonfiction, and the ways he defined imagination in the creative process in his business dealings with his publishers, editors, and agents. In this first volume of a two-volume biography, Williams traverses the years 1893 to 1902, from London's "Story of a Typhoon" to The People of the Abyss. The Jack London who emerges in the pages of Author Under Sail is a writer whose partnership with publishers, most notably his productive alliance with George Brett of Macmillan, was one of the most formative in American literary history. London pioneered many author models during the heyday of realism and naturalism, blurring the boundaries of these popular genres by focusing on absorption and theatricality and the representation of the seen and unseen. London created an impassioned, sincere, and extremely personal realism unlike that of other American writers of the time. Author Under Sail is a literary tour de force that reveals the full range of London as writer, creative citizen, and entrepreneur at the same time it sheds light on the maverick side of machine-age literature.Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, YYYY. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries
- …
