College of the Environment, University of Washington, Box 352100, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Environ Manage. 2012 Jan;49(1):192-206. doi: 10.1007/s00267-011-9756-7. Epub 2011 Oct 9.
Management of all-terrain vehicle (ATV) use on Minnesota state forest lands has a contentious history and land managers are caught between ATV riders, non-motorized recreationists, private landowners, and environmental advocates. In this paper, we demonstrate the usefulness of framing distinct perspectives about ATV management on Minnesota state public forests, understand the structure of these management perspectives, identify areas of consensus and disagreement, specify which stakeholders hold the various perspectives, clarify stakeholder perceptions of other stakeholders, and explore the implications for ATV planning and management. Using Q methodology, three distinct perspectives about how we should or should not manage ATVs resulted from our analysis, labeled Expert Management, Multiple Use, and Enforcement and Balance. A surprising degree of unanimity among the three management perspectives was found. Although some of the areas of agreement would be difficult to implement, others would be relatively simple to put into place. We suggest that land managers focus on widely accepted management actions to ameliorate commonly recognized problems, which may ease tensions between stakeholders and make tackling the tougher issues easier.
明尼苏达州国有森林土地上全地形车（ATV）使用的管理具有争议性，土地管理者夹在 ATV 骑手、非机动娱乐者、私人土地所有者和环境倡导者之间。在本文中，我们展示了在明尼苏达州国有公共森林土地上对 ATV 管理形成不同观点的有用性，了解这些管理观点的结构，确定共识和分歧的领域，指定持有各种观点的利益相关者，澄清利益相关者对其他利益相关者的看法，并探讨 ATV 规划和管理的影响。使用 Q 方法，我们的分析得出了三种关于我们应该或不应该管理 ATV 的不同观点，分别标记为专家管理、多用途和执法与平衡。在这三种管理观点中，我们发现了惊人的一致程度。尽管一些达成共识的领域难以实施，但其他领域相对容易实施。我们建议土地管理者专注于广泛接受的管理行动，以改善普遍认识到的问题，这可能会缓解利益相关者之间的紧张关系，使解决更棘手的问题变得更容易。
