Forest Service Change

1724 Words4 Pages

Introduction The United States Forest Service experienced many changes after the end of the Second World War. Resulting from the environmental movement of the Sixties and more interest in preserving natural resources, the Forest Service started to expand the scope of their activities and to receive increased feedback into their decision-making processes from a myriad of diverse stakeholder groups. Many stakeholder groups lobbied for changes to the way the Forestry makes decisions and advocated for even more changes in Forestry missions and goals. Dynamic federal laws, the Wilderness Act of 1964 and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, “increased the visibility and complexity of decision-making” at the Forest Service. (Wilkinson, …show more content…

In order to develop a way for the Forestry to prioritize who makes what kind of input to their direction, it will be important to understand how different stakeholder groups communicate with one another and with local Forestry offices. Applying systems thinking to support decision makers and capture best practices born at the local Forestry offices with the goal of transferring learning to the organization at the institutional level, while maintaining the capacity for innovation and imagination across the Forest Service will provide a process for continuous improvement. I recommend the Forest Service implement Bryson’s ten-step Strategy Change Cycle in order to identify and implement feasible change and evaluate outcomes toward that continuous improvement. Bryson offers that the Strategy Change Cycle may be viewed in several ways. I propose we apply a “processual model for decision making” in order to implement change by baking the model in to the processes used by decision makers and learners across the agency. (Bryson, …show more content…

Besides the few formal public hearings to gather input required by law, guidelines state, "... the decisions as to which proposals or projects will require public involvement and its extent will rest with the Forest Service officer." (Devall, 1973) Forest Supervisors should be encouraged to use a variety of techniques, including informal gatherings and social media interaction to receive public inputs. Social media interactions live in public spaces and could be considered a prime output by concurrently informing all stakeholders of the positions of their peers, adversaries, and the Forestry. We have also discussed and should relay to the Forestry the importance of dialog and discussion differences and encourage more than listening to individuals and groups that provide input. It means keeping fully informed as well as being mindful of individual officials biases through development of personal mastery. It means seeking out and listening to stakeholders and groups that usually opposed certain structures of management at the Forest

Open Document