Backcountry areas have been suggested as recreation alternatives to wilderness. A problem with the concept is that areas which could be managed as backcountry are already used by recreationists. Visitors to a wilderness in Oregon and to a nondesignated roadless area in northern Idaho hem many of the same values and sought the same kind of experiences. Therefore, redistribution, as proposed by backcountry proponents, may be equivalent to shifting use form officially designated wilderness to de facto wilderness rather than from wilderness to a backcountry, recreation area.
Document Type: Journal Article
Wilderness Manager, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest
Publication date: June 1, 1982
More about this publication?
The Journal of Forestry is the most widely circulated scholarly forestry journal in the world. In print since 1902, the Journal has received several national awards for excellence. The mission of the Journal of Forestry is to advance the profession of forestry by keeping forest management professionals informed about significant developments and ideas in the many facets of forestry: economics, education and communication, entomology and pathology, fire, forest ecology, geospatial technologies, history, international forestry, measurements, policy, recreation, silviculture, social sciences, soils and hydrology, urban and community forestry, utilization and engineering, and wildlife management. The Journal is published bimonthly: January, March, May, July, September, and November.