71 



provided for the reservation of over half of the existing old-growth forests within 

 the National Forest System. 



Subsequently, we completed habitat assessments for a number of species associat- 

 ed with old growth, such as the northern, California, and Mexican spotted owls, gos- 

 hawk, red-cockaded woodpecker, and some stocks of salmon and steelhead. We 

 adopted the recommendations of our scientists and managers from these assess- 

 ments, which has resulted in greater amounts of old growth being reserved (at least 

 two-thirds on the northern owl forests). We should note that the court (Judge 

 Dwyer) has never ruled on the adequacy of our owl management strategy, only on 

 NEPA claims related to procedures used in initially adopting it and to additional 

 information that needed to be discussed (which our scientists later found did not 

 alter their strategy). Subsequently, we have done further assessments of the needs 

 of other old-growth-related species in the Northwest, which has led to the recom- 

 mended management strategy contained in President Clinton's Forest Plan. 



Furthermore, in 1992, Chief Robertson announced the adoption of ecosystem man- 

 agement as the guiding philosophy for management of the National Forests on 

 sound ecological principles and in consideration of society's needs. All regions have 

 adopted implementation strategies for ecosystem management. Greater involvement 

 of the public in decisionmaking and greater consideration of the human dimension 

 are very important elements of these. We believe the adoption of ecosystem manage- 

 ment is an extremely important step in the evolution of national forest manage- 

 ment; it is the right thing to do and should also enhance public trust and confidence 

 in the Forest Sevice as the public sees the results of this management approach. 



Conclusion 



Question 2 states that a significant number of people believe that the "public for- 

 ests are not managed for the greatest public interest," and asks "Why has the 

 public confidence in the Forest Service eroded, and how do you intend to rebuild 

 that confidence?" 



One of the problems is that there is often no clear measure of what is the public 

 interest. The public has a legitimate interest in protecting old-growth forests. It also 

 has an interest in affordable shelter. Most groups wrap themselves in the cloak of 

 the "public interest," even while arguing for conflicting outcomes. An agency with 

 as broad a statutory mandate as the Forest Service has an inherently difficult time, 

 not only because there is no one "public interest," but what may be proper in one 

 location may be inappropriate in another. In addition, as described above, consensus 

 as to what is in the "public interest," where it can be discerned, often changes over 

 time — sometimes relatively short periods of time. Any organization as large as the 

 Forest Service will have some inertia — which can be both a strength and weakness. 



The pattern that has emerged since the 1960's is an increasingly vocal, largely 

 urban-based constituency advocating the preservation side of the conservation spec- 

 trum (e.g., expanding wilderness, reducing timber harvesting, livestock grazing, 

 etc.). These interests have come into increasing conflict with primarily rural con- 

 stituencies dependent upon traditional commodity outputs from the Federal lands. 

 The old-growth debate is a prime example of the difficulty of developing a policy 

 that best serves the broad public interest. There are very powerful and vocal groups 

 that want all old growth reserved, and other large constituencies that say we have 

 enough reserved already and must manage the rest to sustain jobs and communi- 

 ties. And the debate as seen in the media is often based more on emotion and hyper- 

 bole than on facts and science. 



The Forest Service has sometimes been accused of being more sympathetic to the 

 commodity side of the conservation spectrum, and thus has suffered a loss in 

 "public confidence" in some sectors. To the extent this was true in the past before 

 the changes that have occurred in recent years, it may have been the result of its 

 history and culture, and to the fact that many Forest Service employees live and 

 work in the rural communities that are adversely affected by reductions in commod- 

 ity production. 



There are no easy answers either to clearly identifying the public interest or to 

 maintaining or rebuilding public confidence. However, some basic elements in the 

 equation include the following: 



• Seek to be completely honest with the public about the implications of the 

 choices available to them in the management of natural resources. 



• Seek to frame natural resource issues in a broad context. 



• Involve the public constructively in decisions affecting the National Forests. 

 Seek their input and active participation. When decisions are made, explain clearly 

 how their views were used in arriving at that decision. 



