No description available.

No description available.

The purpose of this study has been an investigation of citizen participation in USDA Forest Service land management planning for the Coronado National Forest (CNF) in southeastern Arizona. Using an interdisciplinary approach, this research combined concepts from the fields of sociology, political science, natural resource planning and management to develop methods for obtaining citizen input, promoting ethnic minority participation, and following Forest Service use of public comment in the planning process. Data from existing questionnaires and a short questionnaire developed specifically for planning forums were used to investigate forms of participation, determine which publics participate and ascertain levels of interest in natural resource planning. Participation on the CNF core planning team provided observations on use of the publics' input. Despite a 20 percent Mexican-American population surrounding the CNF, there was essentially no ethnic minority participation in planning forums designed to gather public issues. Data support the thesis that minorities did not participate because they did not generally think that natural resource questions were important and did not support land planning. Ethnic minorities will come to meetings when they are directly affected, despite a low sense of efficacy. Ethnic minorities had equal access to information about planning forums; however, very few were on the mailing list because they did not respond to a letter inviting them to be on the CNF mailing and generally did not answer requests for public comment. The Forest Service used the public comments received as the basis for writing issue statements which set the parameters for integrating land and resource planning. Results were reported back to the public for review and issue statements were subsequently revised as a result of citizen and other agency comment. Citizen participation is one way to overcome skepticism of the Forest Service resource management performed in the name of the public interest. Different syles of decision-making imply different roles for citizen participation. Elections are decided by voting and legislative votes are influenced by lobbying. In a bureaucracy, incremental decision-making suggests citizen participation in order to map the political terrain, satisficing encourages interest group negotiation, and the synoptic approach wants facts from the publics. To count votes when decisions are being made to satisfice adds irrelevant data that frustrates both decision-maker and public. Comprehensive and useful public comment can be obtained from a structured process that is appropriate to the decision-making style the agency is using. Citizen views are part of the decision, but so also are economics, legal requirements, and resource constraints. Only in elections do a majority of citizens who vote, win. Bureaucratic decisions are not so neat in terms of popular will. But that is inherent in a government run by three branches, the legislative, executive, and judicial, in a complex society.

This qualitative study of representative bureaucracy examines the extension and limitations of liberal democratic rights by connecting environmental and social history with policy, individual decision making, gender, race, and class in American history. It documents major cultural shifts in a homogeneous patriarchal organization, constraints, advancement, and the historical agency of women and minorities. "Creating a Multicultural Forest Service" identifies a relationship between natural and human resources and tells a story of expanding and contracting civil liberties that shifted over time from women and people of color to include the differently-abled and LGBT communities. It includes oral history as a key to uncovering individual decision points, relational networks, organizational activism, and human/nature relations to shape meaningful explanations of historical institutional change. With gender and race as primary categories, this inquiry forms a history that is critical to understanding federal bureaucratic efforts to meet workforce diversity goals in natural resource organizations.

There are two prevailing views today about our forests and natural resources. Both views are considered the "right" view, each position comprising a set of values by which we make decisions and choices about using our natural resources. The "dominant world view," is anthropocentric and agriculturally based, with a strong belief that we can "fix" environmental problems through the use of technology. The key result of this view is a belief in the efficiency of economic expansion and its continued growth. The second view maintains we are part of nature, not masters of it, and that we have developed an arrogant attitude toward nature, believing we have the right to do as we wish regardless of the consequences. The result of this view is a belief in the interconnectedness of all life, thus all life has rights. This work argues that the "dominant" worldview shaped the policies of the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). Consistent with this worldview, the USFS management. paradigm was to provide the greatest return, a commodity-driven focus. However, when public values changed towards a more ecocentric view, the USFS should have reevaluated its method of doing business. Instead, it remained entrenched in its management objective- timber production. After the courts enjoined the USFS against cutting in the Pacific Northwest, aftet struggling with confrontational environmentalists and increased activism within the agency, the USFS attempted to re-write its management paradigm. However even though the policy sounds eco-friendly, the USFS is still mandated by Congress, and forced by appropriations approved by Congress, to cut trees. Different ideologies are accommodated only when they do not conflict with economics. Thus, in spite of changing values, it is still business as usual.

Over the past half century, the USDA Forest Service has increasingly faced diverse and often competing demands for forest resources, ranging from recreation, to ecosystem services, and timber supply. Building positive community-agency relationships has become increasingly important. Such relationships can improve community support for forest planning and management activities, ultimately making the agency more efficient and effective, while also providing economic and social benefit to local communities. The development of social capital may play an important role in promoting positive agency-community relationships. Broadly defined, the term refers to the social networks between individuals and groups that create a willingness and ability to act collectively toward a common goal. This study focuses on the impact that a partnership between the Colville National Forest and Northeast Washington Forestry Coalition has had on rural Northeast Washington communities. Overall, our study suggests the partnership has positively impacted networks among community members and networks between the community and the Forest Service. However, there is room for improvement. Many study participants were not familiar with important details about the Coalition's membership and objectives, or how its work may impact them or their community. Targeted outreach efforts will likely lead to greater support for the partnership. Such efforts could also strengthen networks among community members and community-agency networks as individuals learn how the partnership can benefit them and issues they care about. / Graduation date: 2012