Competing Scales of Environmental Governance: The Contested Terrain of Extractive Development in the Methow Valley, Washington
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mazama, Washington is a small community, with a population of 230 residents, nestled in the Methow Valley near the North Cascades mountain range. Mazama is home to delicate ecosystems, thriving wildlife, a river integral to salmon recovery, and a local economy that is largely dependent on outdoor recreation. Also home to Mazama is an environmental campaign, brought forth by community-wide resistance to industrial mining proposals in the valley. The campaign, called the Methow Headwaters Campaign, is advocating for the protection of 340,079 acres of federal land from mineral withdraws. The campaign mobilized following an exploratory drilling proposal by a Canadian industrial-scale mining company, Blue River Resources Ltd, to mine on Flagg Mountain—a mountain located less than two miles from the town of Mazama. Because of the Mining Act of 1872, Blue River Resources Ltd. can earn one-hundred-percent interest from the Flagg Mountain project, while the Mazama community—largely based on a local recreational economy—bears the social, environmental, and economic burdens brought with these mining operations. This thesis examines how natural resource governance has been shaped in the Methow Valley at various scales, ultimately resulting in the social contestation of extractive development in Mazama in the early 21st century. This thesis argues that the community-led campaign to withdraw land from mineral withdraws attempts to “re-scale” environmental governance through a democratizing shift in political and ecological control.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".