| Abstract: | In the summer of 1988, television viewers across the United States and Canada were transfixed by images of Yellowstone National Park seemingly consumed by flames as wildfires burned almost one million acres of land within the Greater Yellowstone Area. In the wake of the fires, the governments of the United States and Canada both reassessed their policy approaches to fire management and came to two very different conclusions. The purpose of this study is to explore how the wildfire problem was defined in Canada and the United States in the wake of the Yellowstone wildfires, why these definitions were so different, and what effects these different definitions have had on fire policy. As a subtext, this research also highlights the challenges inherent in science‐based decision making. |
