The Mammoth-June Case Study

The Lake Tahoe Case Study

The Mediated Settlement Case Study

Ecosystems under Four Different Institutions

CONCLUDING NOTES ON THE CASE STUDIES

CURRENT PAGE:
22 of 22

It is self-evident to conclude that institutions must cooperate to manage ecosystems. This chapter illustrates different forms of cooperation with an understanding that most progress toward stewardship and sustainability involves a good deal of conflict. There are, in the Sierra, different scales of interest. Ecosystems like Lake Tahoe, the Mammoth-June region, and the giant sequoia region have a national and international constituency, yet the commitment of local institutions is required before progress toward sustainability can be made.
There is much to be said for local control over management, as illustrated by the efficiency of Mountain Home State Demonstration Forest. But at Lake Tahoe, Mammoth-June, and the giant sequoia region, the national interest expressed through federal agencies in those places has been critical to a long-term and comprehensive approach to planning and management. In Lake Tahoe and the giant sequoia region, state institutions have shown leadership and intelligent restoration and ecosystem management. These case studies have confirmed the importance of balance among local, state, and national interests.
The chapter has emphasized institutional arrangements. Yet the SNEP assessment team fully recognizes that where there are successes, there are committed individuals who have remained in an area long enough to develop sophisticated knowledge of the ecosystem and credibility throughout the community of institutions.