Abstract
Abstract It is unlikely, given the often-contentious history of the national forests, that incremental change in their administration can resolve fundamental differences in values. So concludes a task force appointed by the Society of American Foresters (SAF) to review federal forest management; its analysis and recommendations have been published in Forest of Discord: Options for Governing Our National Forests and Federal Public Lands. Whereas the Committee of Scientists was asked to stay within the framework of current laws and regulations, the SAF analysts were not so constrained. The following excerpts from Forest of Discord summarize the reasons that fundamental legislative and regulatory change is warranted and consider the purpose of having national forests and public lands.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
