tors on public lands. Here, Gulliford adds an important ground layer to conservation history. He also illustrates connections to Aldo Leopold’s conservation ethic. Leopold, who started his career in national forests in northern Arizona and New Mexico (relatively close to southwestern Colorado), dealt first hand with overgrazing and other conservation issues (and, interestingly enough, married into a wealthy New Mexican sheepherding family). With Leopold’s influence, ecology and multiple use (such as recreation or timber harvesting alongside grazing) became integral to management and outdoor recreation values, particularly during the post-World War II era. The sheep industry contended with these changes, and at Colorado’s lower elevations, struggled with the Bureau of Land Management over its management of grazing lands. In response, frustrated sheepherders tried to privatize the public domain. Gulliford calls this postwar backlash the “Great Land Grab” (209). These early attempts only presaged later conflicts. As a whole, Gulliford provides an even-handed assessment of public grazing, which in recent years has been criticized for both continued environmental problems and for high costs. Federal agencies only receive a small fraction of their management costs back from grazing fees. Despite the lack of benefit to taxpayers, Gulliford remains supportive: “public lands ranching sustains historical custom and culture” (248), he says, with the qualification that many ranchers need to do more to help improve public range conditions. Given the timely nature of this debate, The Woolly West should find a wide readership among both Southwest historians and regional residents. This book is essential reading to anyone interested in public land issues in the West.

中文翻译：

---

一条弯曲的河流：1861–1877 年，下里奥格兰德河上的盗贼、游骑兵和正规军 作者：迈克尔·柯林斯

公共土地上的托尔。在这里，古利福德为保护历史增添了一个重要的地面层。他还说明了与奥尔多·利奥波德 (Aldo Leopold) 的保护伦理的联系。利奥波德的职业生涯始于亚利桑那州北部和新墨西哥州（相对靠近科罗拉多州西南部）的国家森林，他直接处理了过度放牧和其他保护问题（有趣的是，他嫁给了一个富裕的新墨西哥牧羊家庭）。在利奥波德的影响下，生态和多种用途（例如休闲或采伐木材和放牧）成为管理和户外休闲价值不可或缺的一部分，尤其是在二战后时代。养羊业与这些变化作斗争，在科罗拉多州的低海拔地区，与土地管理局在牧场管理方面进行了斗争。作为回应，沮丧的牧羊人试图将公共领域私有化。古利福德将这种战后反弹称为“大地抢夺”（209）。这些早期的尝试只是预示着后来的冲突。总的来说，Gulliford 对公共放牧提供了公平的评估，近年来公共放牧因持续存在的环境问题和高成本而受到批评。联邦机构仅从放牧费中收回一小部分管理成本。尽管缺乏纳税人的利益，古利福德仍然支持：“公共土地牧场维持历史习俗和文化”（248），他说，有资格许多牧场主需要做更多的事情来帮助改善公共牧场条件。鉴于这场辩论的及时性，《毛茸茸的西部》应该会在西南历史学家和地区居民中找到广泛的读者。