The George Wright Forum

Articles

• Table of Contents, Vol. 3, No. 4

  • The George Wright Forum Editors, The

• Editorial

  • Linn, Bob

  A reflection from the GWS co-founder and former National Park Service chief scientist on how the key recommendation from the Leopold Report was interpreted.

• Biological Research and Management in the National Park Service: A History

  • Sumner, Lowell

  Lowell Sumner's retrospective traces the ebb and flow of biological research and management in the U.S. National Park Service from its early ecological surveys in the 1930s through mid-century decline and recent revival. He highlights the pioneering influence of Joseph Grinnell and Aldo Leopold in establishing non-interference and active stewardship principles, George M. Wright's groundbreaking Wildlife Division and its formative Fauna publications, and the disruptive impacts of World War II and postwar neglect. Sumner documents efforts to reinvigorate park biology—via the Leopold Report, National Academy of Sciences review, and the establishment of dedicated research budgets and offices—and argues that only sustained, well-funded ecological inquiry can prevent irreversible degradation of park ecosystems.

• Get the Facts, and Put Them to Work: Comprehensive Natural History Research Program for the National Parks

  • Stagner, Howard R.

  Howard R. Stagner emphasizes that America's national parks—our largest, best-preserved remnants of original landscapes—cannot fulfill their roles as wilderness havens, research laboratories, and educational theaters unless underpinned by a robust, continuous program of natural-history research. He warns that parks are increasingly isolated "islands" besieged by upstream, boundary, and visitor-borne pressures, and that without precise knowledge of park ecosystems, their processes, and visitor interactions, subtle but irreversible degradation will continue. To address this, Stagner proposes a five-year, system-wide research framework: develop park-specific master plans in collaboration with universities and agencies; sequence targeted studies that build on one another; administer and coordinate via a dedicated National Park Service research staff; translate findings into management actions and public interpretation; and encourage independent basic research. By treating parks as living laboratories and aggressively applying and disseminating scientific insight, the Service can both safeguard these natural communities and fulfill parks' broader value to science and society.

• Research in the National Parks

  • Albright, Horace M.

  In this article, which was published in 1933 and reprinted here, Horace M. Albright outlines the evolution and significance of scientific research within the U.S. National Park System, which began with Yellowstone in 1872. Initially focused on preserving scenic beauty for public enjoyment, the parks soon became vital laboratories for scientific and historical study, leading to a broader mission that emphasized both conservation and education. Albright describes how parks such as Yosemite, Mesa Verde, and Grand Canyon offer unique geological, biological, and anthropological features that attract researchers and visitors alike. Over time, research expanded from basic protection and interpretation to include complex wildlife management and ecological restoration efforts, such as restocking buffalo and antelope herds and combating diseases and invasive species. He highlights how collaborative studies, especially those initiated by George M. Wright and others, became essential to maintaining the parks' ecological integrity against the pressures of modern civilization. Ultimately, Albright argues that in order to preserve the parks' natural and cultural treasures "unimpaired for future generations," scientific inquiry must be central to park management.

• Rationalizing Management of Natural Areas in National Parks

  • Graber, David M.

  David M. Graber argues that national-park management policies must evolve as ecological science advances and societal values change, tracing this shift from the Yellowstone Act of 1872 through the Leopold Report of 1963 to contemporary fire and wildlife strategies. He shows how early "spectacle" era practices—protecting scenic features and accommodating tourism—gave way to resource management informed by systematic study, such as the Leopold Committee's call to restore "primitive America" scenes via population controls, exotic-species removal, and prescribed fire. Graber critiques the scene-management paradigm for its anthropogenic artifacts and proposes instead an "ecological reserve" principle: parks' natural areas should prioritize unhindered interactions among native processes (like fire, succession, and predator–prey cycles) and structural elements (plants, animals, soils) except when intervention is required to reverse human impacts, protect key resources, or safeguard human life and property. By framing parks as indispensable living laboratories—where baseline ecosystem functions can be studied and monitored—he calls on the Park Service to embrace a management ethic that maximizes scientific value and preserves dynamic natural processes for future generations.

• Non-ecological Principles for Park Management

  • Smith, Rick

  Rick Smith argues that effective park stewardship often hinges less on ecological science than on understanding and navigating human—and especially political—realities. Drawing on Everglades National Park's history, he distills five "non-ecological" principles: (1) every park's creation rests on explicit and implicit promises to secure support, with newer parks bearing more complex deals; (2) stakeholders will only agree to modify those deals when they see their own interests served, not simply because it benefits the resources; (3) decisions still can—and sometimes must—be driven by philosophical or political considerations rather than pure science (though this demands transparency, readiness for challenge, and ideally a strong research program); (4) ostensibly "settled" environmental issues can erupt into political battlegrounds, requiring the park's political allies to engage; and (5) no elected official can long resist overwhelming public sentiment, so advocacy must be grounded in genuine resource concerns, not partisan agendas. Throughout, he reminds rangers that in these "sanctuaries," they serve not just as caretakers but as "ministers" who must shepherd both the land and its politics.

• A Few Convictions

  • Jarvis, T. Destry

  T. Destry Jarvis insists that America's national parks—our "single most important collection of national heritage”—stand at a crossroads, threatened by boundary encroachment, understaffing, insufficient scientific expertise, unchecked visitor impacts, and political interference. He argues that the Park Service's morale and professionalism are inseparable from its ability to steward these "crown jewels," and warns against a culture of "tolerance" that allows incremental development and degradation. Urging park managers to adopt a long-term perspective—centuries rather than days—he calls for bolstering resource-science capacity, rigorously evaluating every proposed concession, and safeguarding parks' ecosystem integrity and spiritual value so that future generations may inherit landscapes "primeval and pristine" and historic sites "dignified" for posterity.