The entire proceedings of the workshop entitled "Limits of Acceptable Change and Related Planning Processes: Progress and Future Directions" can be ordered from the Leopold Institute. Some individual papers are available electronically.
McCool, Stephen F.; Cole, David N., comps. 1997. Proceedings--Limits of acceptable change and related planning processes: progress and future directions; 1997 May 20-22; Missoula, MT (Lubrecht Experimental Forest). Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-371. Ogden,UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 84 p.
Abstract:
Experience with Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) and related planning processes has accumulated since the mid-1980s. These processes were developed as a means of dealing with recreation carrying capacity issues in wilderness and national parks. These processes clearly also have application outside of protected areas and to issues other than recreation management. This proceedings represents an attempt to learn from that experience and suggest means of increasing the future utility of these processes.
Download - Leopold Publication Number 313
McCool, Stephen F.; Cole, David N. 1998. Experiencing Limits of Acceptable Change: Some Thoughts After a Decade of Implementation. In: McCool, Stephen F.; Cole, David N., comps. 1998. Proceedings: Limits of Acceptable Change and related planning processes: progress and future directions; 1997 May 20-22; Missoula, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-371. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 72-78.
Abstract:
Wilderness managers and researchers have experienced implementation of the Limits of Acceptable Change planning system for over a decade. In a sense, implementation of LAC has been a broad scale experiment in planning, with the hypothesis being that LAC processes are more effective approaches to deal with questions of recreation management in protected areas than the carrying capacity paradigm. Workshop participants identified a number of both positive and negative consequences resulting from their experience with LAC. This paper synthesizes these outcomes by discussing the positive results, describing the problems encountered, and outlining lessons learned.
Download - Leopold Publication Number 324 (66 K)
Cole, David N.; McCool, Stephen F. 1998. Limits of Acceptable Change and Natural Resources Planning: When is LAC Useful, When is it Not?. In: McCool, Stephen F.; Cole, David N., comps. 1998. Proceedings: Limits of Acceptable Change and related planning processes: progress and future directions; 1997 May 20-22; Missoula, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-371. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 69-71.
Abstract:
Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) was originally for-mulated to deal with the issue of recreation carrying capacity in wilderness. Enthusiasm for the process has led to questions about its applicability to a broad range of natural resource issues - both within and outside of protected areas. This paper uses a generic version of the LAC process to identify situations where LAC can usefully be applied and situations where it cannot. LAC's primary usefulness is in situations where management goals are in conflict, where it is possible to compromise all goals somewhat, and where planners are willing to establish a hierarchy among goals. In addition, it is necessary to write standards for the most important (constraining) goals - standards that are measurable, attainable, and useful for judging the acceptability of future conditions.
Download - Leopold Publication Number 323 (47 K)
Cole, David N.; McCool, Stephen F. 1998. The Limits of Acceptable Change Process: Modifications and Clarifications. In: McCool, Stephen F.; Cole, David N., comps. 1998. Proceedings: Limits of Acceptable Change and related planning processes: progress and future directions; 1997 May 20-22; Missoula, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-371. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 61-68.
Abstract:
There are ways to improve the LAC process and its implementational procedures. One significant procedural modification is the addition of a new step. This step - which becomes the first step in the process - involves more explicitly defining goals and desired conditions. For other steps in the process, clarifications of concept and terminology are advanced, as are numerous suggestions about how to implement LAC more effectively.
Download - Leopold Publication Number 322 (72 K)
Merigliano, Linda; Cole, David N.; Parsons, David J. 1998. Application of LAC-Type Processes and Concepts to Nonrecreation Management Issues in Protected Areas. In: McCool, Stephen F.; Cole, David N., comps. 1998. Proceedings: Limits of Acceptable Change and related planning processes: progress and future directions; 1997 May 20-22; Missoula, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-371. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 37-43.
Abstract:
When Limits of Acceptable Change concepts are applied to nonrecreational issues, two primary problems are encountered: (1) developing zoning schemes which are compatible when multiple issues are addressed, and (2) defining the desired condition and establishing measurable standards for ecosystem attributes which change in unpredictable ways. Approaches to overcome these two difficulties are described. We conclude that LAC can and should be used to address many impacts that are not related to recreational use. Where impacts are localized, nearby reference sites are often available, thus LAC standards can be developed for the amount of acceptable deviation from conditions at the reference site. However, effects-based, measurable standards may be impossible to define for landscape-scale impacts where no undisturbed reference sites exist. Substituting time as a reference, using system inputs rather than outcomes, and identifying the desired direction of desired change without specifying a standard are three approaches to overcome the problem with changeable ecosystem attributes but each approach has drawbacks.
Download - Leopold Publication Number 321 (64 K)
Cole, David N.; Stankey, George H. 1998. Historical development of Limits Of Acceptable Change: conceptual clarifications and possible extensions.. In: McCool, Stephen F.; Cole, David N., comps. 1998. Proceedings: Limits of Acceptable Change and related planning processes: progress and future directions; 1997 May 20-22; Missoula, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-371. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 5-9.
Abstract:
The Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) process was developed to deal with the issue of recreational carrying capacity. For that purpose, the LAC process sought to explicitly define a compromise between resource/visitor experience protection and recreation use goals. The most critical and unique element of the process is the specification of LAC standards that define minimally acceptable conditions. This paper identifies the antecedents of LAC, describes the rationale behind its formulation, and attempts to clarify LAC terminology and concepts. It assesses the extent to which a more generic LAC process might be applied to issues beyond recreation management in wilderness.
Download - Leopold Publication Number 320 (55 K)
BACK TO TOP
|