Robert B. Keiter’s research while affiliated with University of Utah and other places

When the national park system was first established in 1916, the goal "to conserve unimpaired" seemed straightforward. But Robert Keiter argues that parks have always served a variety of competing purposes, from wildlife protection and scientific discovery to tourism and commercial development. In this trenchant analysis, he explains how parks must be managed more effectively to meet increasing demands in the face of climate, environmental, and demographic changes.Taking a topical approach, Keiter traces the history of the national park idea from its inception to its uncertain future. Thematic chapters explore our changing conceptions of the parks as wilderness sanctuaries, playgrounds, educational facilities, and more. He also examines key controversies that have shaped the parks and our perception of them.Ultimately, Keiter demonstrates that parks cannot be treated as special islands, but must be managed as the critical cores of larger ecosystems. Only when the National Park Service works with surrounding areas can the parks meet critical habitat, large-scale connectivity, clean air and water needs, and also provide sanctuaries where people can experience nature. Today's mandate must remain to conserve unimpaired but Keiter shows how the national park idea can and must go much farther.Professionals, students, and scholars with an interest in environmental history, national parks, and federal land management, as well as scientists and managers working on adaptation to climate change should find the book useful and inspiring.

The American national park system consists of more than 390 units scattered over 49 states and spread across 82 million acres. Although legally referred to as a system, our national parks are actually a diverse collection of natural, recreational, historical, cultural, archeological, and other sites that have been melded together under the aegis of the National Park Service without any overarching vision or much forethought. Since its origin over 130 years ago, the national park idea has steadily evolved, reflecting changes in our society and economy. Traditionally, the national park has been viewed as a wilderness, tourist destination, playground, laboratory, wildlife reserve, and an economic engine for nearby communities. But with advances in scientific knowledge and our maturing sense of social justice, national parks can also be conceived as the vital core of larger ecosystems, as essential biodiversity reserves, and as important civic educational entities. Given this evolution, how might we expand and strengthen the national park system to meet tomorrow’s challenges? Several options merit consideration: expanding individual parks to embrace entire ecosystems, creating new national restoration areas, promoting park-focused ecosystem management arrangements, and developing new urban-based parks to address the needs of an increasingly diverse populace. It may be necessary, however, to revisit the “national significance” standard that has long guided expansion of the national park system. The ultimate goal must be to address and meet the needs of the future generations to whom our national parks are dedicated.

The 1990s saw the emergence of ecological sustainability as a new public land management policy along with the growth of a nascent collaborative conservation movement. The author chronicled these developments in Keeping Faith with Nature, arguing that the merger of these two concepts not only represented the next logical step in the evolution of federal conservation policy, but also squared with broader political, social, and economic trends. Since then, the Bush Administration assumed office and public land policy has shifted radically with new priorities and procedures being impressed on the responsible agencies. These new policies – best described as the 3 D's – have promoted delegalization, development, and devolution at the expense of environmental values. Although these policy changes, particularly the emphasis on energy development, have had undeniable on the ground impacts, the fundamental legal structure governing the public lands has not been altered, nor have the scientific or socioeconomic assumptions underlying the ecological management movement been challenged. Moreover, the federal courts have enjoined key Bush administration initiatives, blocking several of its efforts to rewrite federal natural resources policy. Over the long haul, the opportunity still exists to institutionalize ecological sustainability and collaborative conservation as the new resource management polestar. The Bush administration, in the end, may prove no more than a troublesome aberration on the longer journey toward a more ecologically rational public land policy.

This article explores the relationship between law, fire, and resource management policy on the public lands. It offers an overview of federal fire policy, describing the evolution of that policy and how the current forest health debate has shaped policy options. It reviews and analyzes the legal framework governing fire policy on public lands, focusing on relevant organic legislation and site-specific statutes, the interface between environmental law and fire management including recent Healthy Forests Initiative reforms, the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003, tort liability and other compensation doctrines, and the role of state law in shaping federal policy. It then places the fire policy debate in a broader public land policy context, arguing that the current legal framework is not fundamentally flawed though some reforms are necessary to better accommodate fire on the public domain. It concludes that clear legal standards and procedures are necessary to ensure legitimacy and promote accountability in the uncertain and risk-laden wildfire policy setting.

Federal public land law and policy is in a transitional phase today that is setting the stage for further reform efforts. The article begins by recounting the evolution of public land policy and identifying the principal forces for change at work today. It then examines the various policy models that have periodically held sway over the public lands and assesses whether any of these models present viable reform options. These policy models encompass an array of competing resource management philosophies, including privatization, utilitarianism, preservation, devolution, legal planning, ecological sustainability, place-based, and hybrid models. The article concludes with observations on legal reform opportunities and pitfalls, potential strategies for moving the reform process forward, and the role another public land commission might play in this process.

Twenty years ago Glacier National Park was considered the park most at risk from external threats, such as mining and timber harvesting on adjacent lands. This finding led to an earlier Article that examined whether Glacier officials were effectively defending the park from these external threats. We concluded that the park’s non-confrontational strategies were tenuous at best, but that some protection had been achieved by strong laws enforced by environmental advocates. We also noted the park’s early efforts to promote a regional management vision. Since then, the concept of a regional ecosystem that must be protected across formal borders has progressed significantly, though still imperfectly. This Article, based on detailed interviews and documents, is a twenty-year reassessment of resource management in the Glacier region, revisiting controversies from our earlier study and examining several new ones too. It also evaluates the actual forces that drive – and that impede – efforts to manage land in accord with habitat and watershed realities, rather than boundary lines drawn on a map.

Excerpted from book jacket:As the twenty-first century dawns, public land policy is entering a new era. Alluring new ecological management ideas and collaborative conservation initiatives are taking hold, fostering a sea change in how we value and oversee our public lands. This timely book examines the historical, scientific, political, legal, and institutional developments that are changing management priorities developments that compel us to view the public lands as an integrated ecological entity and a key biodiversity stronghold.Once the background is set, each chapter opens with a specific natural resource controversy, ranging from the Pacific Northwest's spotted owl imbroglio and the Yellowstone wolf reintroduction showdown to the struggle over southern Utah's Colorado Plateau country and the Quincy Library Group's forest restoration initiative. Robert Keiter uses these case histories to analyze the ideas, forces, and institutions that re both fomenting and retarding change on the western landscape. Enhancements to the text include line drawings by Robert Seabeck and maps.Although Congress has the final say in how the public domain is managed, the public land agencies, federal courts, and western communities are each playing important roles in the transformation to an ecological management regime. At the same time, a newly emerging and homegrown collaborative process movement has given the diverse public land constituencies a greater role in administering these lands, helping to take the sharp edges off the changes afoot. Arguing that we must integrate the new imperatives of ecosystem science with our devolutionary political tendencies, the author outlines a coherent new approach to natural resource policy for this century.

American law, with its emphasis on boundary lines and property rights, does not reflect an advanced understanding of ecology. Nonetheless, on the federal public domain, the concept of ecosystem management has now been endorsed by all of the federal land-management agencies. Despite few explicit references to ecosystems or biodiversity, laws like the Endangered Species Act of 1973, National Forest Management Act of 1976, and National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 can and are being interpreted to support recent ecosystem-management initiatives. It is less clear that ecosystem-management principles can be readily transferred to private property. This shortcoming means that the law has not fully absorbed the lessons of ecology. I examine how the law promotes and hinders the movement toward an ecological management and ownership regime. I also suggest that recent ecosystem-management initiatives should provide useful lessons about how ecological principles can be further incorporated into the law.

American law, with its emphasis on boundary lines and property rights, does not reflect an advanced understanding of ecology. Nonetheless, on the federal public domain, the concept of ecosystem management has now been endorsed by all of the federal land-management agencies. Despite few explicit references to ecosystems or biodiversity, laws like the: Endangered Species Act of 1973, National Forest Management Act of 1976, and National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 can and are being interpreted to support recent ecosystem-management initiatives. It is less clear that ecosystem-management principles can be readily transferred to private property. This shortcoming means that the law has not fully absorbed the lessons of ecology. I examine how the law promotes and hinders the movement toward an ecological management and ownership regime. I also suggest that recent ecosystem-management initiatives should provide useful lessons about how ecological principles can be further incorporated into the law.