PRIORITIES 

 IM PRACTICE 



» 



In considering the weight setting that takes 

 place in Forest Service practice, we will be 

 concerned with the indications of priorities, 

 both stated and implicit. Like the legislation 

 that has been reviewed, management practice 

 in the Forest Service has taken an evolution- 

 ary course. 



In the formative years of Forest Service ad- 

 ministration, the significant task was protec- 

 tion. Very often the forester was working in 

 isolation, separated by time and distance from 

 the forces at work in other segments of the 

 economy. People still in the Service recall, in 

 the early years of their careers as assistants to 

 District Rangers, going out during the early 

 spring with little more than an ax, a string of 

 mules, a saw, a horse, and a rifle (fig. 11). 

 They might spend the entire summer away 

 from the district office, and return in the late 

 fall, if they were fortunate, ahead of that first 

 big snowfall that had kept others like them- 

 selves stranded for the winter. Two- and 

 three-week excursions were often undertaken 

 with only a verbal order to "check things out 

 in the northwest corner." 



Management direction was minimal. Fire 

 detection and suppression, and prevention of 

 timber trespass, were the key elements of the 

 ranger's job. The change from resource pro- 

 tection to resource management was a slow, 

 evolutionary process reflecting the changes in 

 the economic complex of which the forests 

 were a part. Demand for forest products rose 

 as industry expanded. 



Similarly, demand for the recreational op- 

 portunities offered by the forested land rose 

 rapidly as the population grew, migrated, and 

 reached a level of affluence that allowed for 



more leisure time. All these changes were ac- 

 companied by a shrinking of the resource base 

 in relation to the growing pressures for utiliza- 

 tion, and for the first time America was faced 

 with a scarcity of land, timber, and water. 

 Economists could no longer speak of "free 

 air" and "free water," and were forced to 

 change the direction of their analysis. More 

 and more during the late 1940's and early fif- 

 ties, concern over land management was evi- 

 dent in the literature. 



The shift toward intensive management of 

 the National Forests had begun quite early, 

 with emphasis on aiding private and State for- 

 esters to improve their technical awareness 

 and competence. Not surprisingly, such ef- 

 forts were first made in the direction of forest 

 products, particularly timber, forage, and 

 water. As the review of early legislation indi- 

 cates, the major emphasis was on timber man- 

 agement. This meant that patterns of organi- 

 zational structure were established in the For- 

 est Service and became firmly fixed. Time was 

 essential to effect the necessary transition to 

 broadly based land management. Although 

 there has been a massive effort by the entire 

 agency to adjust to the changing resource 

 needs of the nation, it has not been fully ef- 

 fective. Patterns of functional thinking still 

 exist. In-service studies have pointed out the 

 immense distance yet to be traveled. Reward 

 systems based on such functional achieve- 

 ments as effectiveness in timber sale opera- 

 tions are being modified. As time passes, the 

 multiple use approach called for in the legisla- 

 tion may become an actual fact. What we 

 need to do now is to examine where we are 

 on the road to that goal. 



45 



