doi: 10.1093/jof/97.5.z1pmid: N/A
This content is only available as a PDF. © 1999 Society of American Foresters
doi: 10.1093/jof/97.5.z12pmid: N/A
This content is only available as a PDF. © 1999 Society of American Foresters
doi: 10.1093/jof/97.5.1apmid: N/A
This content is only available as a PDF. © 1999 Society of American Foresters
doi: 10.1093/jof/97.5.1pmid: N/A
This content is only available as a PDF. © 1999 Society of American Foresters
doi: 10.1093/jof/97.5.5pmid: N/A
This content is only available as a PDF. © 1999 Society of American Foresters
Johnson, K. Norman; Agee, James; Beschta, Robert; Dale, Virginia; Hardesty, Linda; Long, James; Nielsen, Larry; Noon, Barry; Sedjo, Roger; Shannon, Margaret; Trosper, Ronald; Wilkinson, Charles; Wondolleck, Julia
doi: 10.1093/jof/97.5.13pmid: N/A
A member of the Committee of Scientists sees in its report a new mandate for the Forest Service—a mission that conflicts with existing statutory objectives. If such a change is warranted, he argues, it should reflect the judgment of the American people rather than the values of the appointed scientists. In any case, he believes, without basic reform of the budget process, the planning process recommended by the committee will do little to improve the outcome. And the chance that Congress will fully fund implementation of the committee’s proposals is remote.
doi: 10.1093/jof/97.5.16pmid: N/A
The author, who chaired the first Committee of Scientists, appointed in 1977, finds that Sustaining the People’s Lands offers thoughtful recommendations about the issues that are central to public acceptance of forest management. Perhaps more valuable than any of its proposed revisions to the planning process, however, is its call for clarification of policy. At some point, and the author hopes it will be soon, Congress and the pressure groups representing environmental and industry interests must together ask, What is the best thing for the country?
doi: 10.1093/jof/97.5.23pmid: N/A
In the eyes of Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, the Forest Service has contravened the spirit of the National Forest Management Act by harping on the costs of environmental protection and biodiversity values. With its emphasis on ecological sustainability, the Committee of Scientists may at least change the issue, from the price of timber to the cost to our natural heritage.
doi: 10.1093/jof/97.5.24pmid: N/A
The Northwest Forestry Association, whose mission is to ensure a favorable operating environment and a reliable timber supply for the forest industry in Oregon and Washington, sees flaws in the Committee of Scientists’ report. In its own efforts to promote sustainable management of the region’s forests, the association has found that the current plans, based on multiple use as required by law, adequately protect the sustainability of the resource. The committee’s call for "ecological sustainability" to become the new mission of the Forest Service is therefore unwarranted. At the very least, the report should have been peer reviewed.
Showing 1 to 10 of 21 Articles
doi: 10.1093/jof/97.5.6pmid: N/A
In December 1997, Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman convened an interdisciplinary committee of 13 scientists to provide scientific and technical advice on the Forest Service’s land and resource management planning process. The committee was asked to recommend how best to accomplish resource planning within the existing environmental laws and statutory mission of the Forest Service; to provide technical advice on planning and provide material for the agency to consider in revising planning regulations; to recommend improvements in coordination with other federal agencies, state and local government agencies, and tribal governments; and to suggest a new planning framework that could last a generation. The committee took field trips and met in cities and towns around the country to hear from Forest Service employees, representatives of tribes, state and local governments, related federal natural resource agencies, and members of the public. Drawing on many of the approaches and improvements to planning it observed, the committee has made its recommendations.