Grassy balds of the Great Smoky Mountains: Their history and flora in relation to potential management

The origin of the grassy balds of the Great Smoky Mountains is examined. Some of the areas were cleared by settlers. Grazing by sheep and cattle and the cutting of trees were probably the most important factors in maintaining the grass sward; fire apparently was not used.Vegetation survey plots indicated that little of the original balds' area was still grassy and that most of the invading trees and shrubs could be expected to sprout if cut or burned. Areas presently trampled or mowed had a flora similar to a bald that was still grazed. High-elevation burn scars had many species in common with the grassy balds but had dissimilar community structures; therefore, a policy favoring natural fires would be unlikely to encourage maintanence or formation of grassy balds.The management of open grassy areas on National Forest lands was investigated. Burning was the favored technique, although hand cutting, mowing, and grazing were used. The results of testing various management practices on Gregory Bald are reviewed in terms of cost, impact, and historical authenticity. Implications for park management are discussed.     

A Framework for Understanding and Improving Environmental Decision Making

This paper presents a framework for understanding and improving public sector environmental decision making. Within the framework, four interrelated components are discussed: (1) the environmental and cultural context-understanding this context includes understanding what people consider to be environmental problems, the goals and values that they bring to environmental problems and decision processes, specialized and common knowledge about environmental problems, and the institutional settings within which problems are addressed; (2) planning and appraisal activitiesthese activities include forecasting and monitoring exercises, evaluations of past decisions, and decisions that processes ought to be launched to solve specific environmental problems; (3) decision-making modes-these include six typical ways of conducting an environmental problem-solving process, modes which, in the framework, are called emergency action, routine procedures, analysis-centred, elite corps, conflict management and collaborative learning; (4) decision actions-these include five generic steps that are undertaken, formally or intuitively, in virtually any decision-making situation: issue familiarization; criteria setting; option construction; option assessment; and reaching a decision. In the course of describing the framework, we show a decision-making process can be adapted to incorporate sustainability concerns, including fostering sustainable environmental and social systems, meeting obligations to future generations, and searching for robust and reasonable (rather than rigidly optimal) decisions. The framework also helps to illuminate intriguing questions regarding institutional responsibility, decision process complexity and paradigms for environmental decision making.