UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The Alpine Lakes of Washington State : a case study of bureaucratic decision-making Hyde, Brian Reed 1975

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1975_A6_7 H93_4.pdf [ 93.58MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093402.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093402-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093402-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093402-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093402-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093402-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093402-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093402-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093402.ris

Full Text

THE  A L P I N E LAKES OF WASHINGTON STATE  A CASE STUDY OF BUREAUCRATIC DECISION-MAKING  by BRIAN REED HYDE B.A., D a r t m o u t h C o l l e g e , 1 9 7 0 B.Eng., Dartmouth C o l l e g e , 1 9 7 1  A T H E S I S SUBMITTED I N PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE  REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE  i n the School  o f Community and R e g i o n a l  We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s required standard  THE  Planning  as c o n f o r m i n g t o t h e  UNIVERSITY OF B R I T I S H COLUMBIA May,  1975  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s  thesis  an advanced degree at the L i b r a r y I  further  fulfilment  of  the  requirements  the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree  s h a l l make it  agree  in p a r t i a l  freely  available  for  this  thesis  f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head o f my Department  of  this  thesis for  It  financial  The  of  gain s h a l l not  COtvXrVyv 10 1T j  A hJ i)  U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia  2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5  or  i s understood that c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n be allowed without my  written permission.  Department  that  r e f e r e n c e and study.  t h a t p e r m i s s i o n for e x t e n s i v e copying o f  by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s .  for  f l t\\0O  At  l-HJ^'  L  Abstract T h i s t h e s i s has been a study o f the p l a n n i n g  and d e c i s i o n -  making p r o c e s s i n a h i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d b u r e a u c r a c y charged w i t h managing n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s .  The i n t e n t was t o l e a r n how  d e c i s i o n s are made by such a b u r e a u c r a c y i n a c o n t r o v e r s i a l s i t u a t i o n w i t h a h i g h degree o f involvement b y i n t e r e s t groups. The  U. S. F o r e s t  S e r v i c e has managed a l a r g e p o r t i o n  o f the A l p i n e Lakes a r e a o f the Washington Cascades as a L i m i t e d A r e a s i n c e 19^6, precludes  Since t h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , which  timber h a r v e s t i n g  administrative  and other development, i s  and not s t a t u t o r y , the r e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f  the L i m i t e d A r e a and some o f the adjacent a source o f c o n t r o v e r s y  lands has been  f o r many y e a r s .  I n J u l y o f 1972 a s p e c i a l study team was formed by the F o r e s t  S e r v i c e t o study the a r e a , develop a p u b l i c  involvement program, and prepare a l e g i s l a t i v e  proposal  f o r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f the a r e a o r p a r t o f i t as a ness A r e a .  The t h e s i s a s s e s s e d the f a c t o r s t h a t  Wilderdetermined  the n a t u r e o f t h e study team's recommendations f o r the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and management o f the a r e a . The of  model used t o f a c i l i t a t e t h i s a n a l y s i s was t h a t  an i n f o r m a t i o n  from o u t s i d e  processing  system.  Information received  the o r g a n i z a t i o n and i n f o r m a t i o n  generated  w i t h i n i t i s p r o c e s s e d and f e d i n t o the d e c i s i o n . of the  t h e l i t e r a t u r e on t h i s s u b j e c t  A review  l e d t o the f o r m u l a t i o n o f  f o l l o w i n g b a s i c p r o p o s i t i o n s which guided t h e a n a l y s i s :  Abstract (cont'd) Proposition 1 ; The study team',s output, i t s recommendation concerning the Alpine Lakes area, was determined by the objectives of the study team and the influence of the information received and considered by the study team. Proposition 2 : The study team's objectives were determined by the rules constraining i t and the attitudes and perceptions of the members of the study team. Proposition 3? The information which affected the output of the study team consisted of a) information which was received from outside and screened and interpreted by the study team i n accord with the values of the study team members and b) information generated by the study team. Proposition hi The information generated by the study team and the screening and interpretation of information from outside were determined by a) the rules constraining the study team, b) the attitudes and perceptions of study team members, and c) the resources available to the study team. The c r i t e r i a for a Wilderness prescribed by,the Wilderness Act together with Forest Service policy limited i n important respects the area the study team could include i n a proposed Wilderness.  Similarly Forest Service policy  with regard to National Recreation Areas precluded the team from recommending that a portion of the region be made into a National Recreation Area.  Within these constraints the  study team had a great deal of f l e x i b i l i t y and i t s conclusions were the result of i t s interpretation of information i n accord with i t s attitudes and perceptions.  In this  connection two attitudes and perceptions were of paramount importance, namely: 1.  The desires of conservation groups must be sufficiently well satisfied that there would not be a repetition of the North Cascades episode i n which the Forest Service lost several hundred thousand acres to the National Park Service.  iv Abstract  (cont'd)  2,  A s much l a n d as p o s s i b l e s h o u l d b e r e t a i n e d i n a m u l t i p l e use status f o r timber h a r v e s t i n g , motorized r e c r e a t i o n , and o t h e r nonWilderness uses.  The  foregoing constraints, attitudes,  together with  others  team t o g e n e r a t e both  inside  and p e r c e p t i o n s ,  examined i n t h e t h e s i s  and i n t e r p r e t  caused  the study  i n f o r m a t i o n r e c e i v e d from  and o u t s i d e o f t h e F o r e s t  S e r v i c e so as t o  p r o d u c e a r e c o m m e n d a t i o n w h i c h d i d n o t go q u i t e a s f a r a s the than  c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s w i s h e d b u t w h i c h went much f u r t h e r those  allocated The inputs  who  sought  to minimize the s i z e  to Wilderness thesis  wanted.  demonstrates the importance  and t h e a t t i t u d e s and p e r c e p t i o n s  personnel  of the area  to the planning process,  of planning  and i t p r o v i d e s  framework f o r examining t h e d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s situations.  of political  a  i n other  V  CONTENTS Page Abstract  i i  List  of Tables  List  o f Maps  ix x  Acknowledgement Part  Part  I.  xi  Introduction  1  A.  History  1  B.  Area o f Study  3  C.  Significance f o rPlanning  6  I I , Institutional A,  Terms  and H i s t o r i c a l  8  Setting  o f Reference o f the Forest 8  Service 1)  G e n e r a l O r i e n t a t i o n and L e g i s l a t i v e Mandate  2)  W i l d e r n e s s and t h e F o r e s t  3)  National  h)  R e l a t i o n s h i p t o Other F e d e r a l L a n d Management A g e n c i e s  15  The C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Owned P u b l i c L a n d  20  5)  B,  C,  Recreation  The A d m i n i s t r a t i o n  8 Service  10 13  Areas  of Federally-  and B e h a v i o r o f  the  Forest  Service  25  1)  Administration  25  2)  Behavior o f the Forest  History o f the Alpine 1)  Prior  Service  29 kk  Lakes  t o t h e North Cascades  Study  o f 1965  **k  2)  The N o r t h Cascades  3)  A f t e r t h e North Cascades  47  Study Study  56  vi Page D. Part  III.  The  Analytical  Review,  Methodology  65  A.  The  A n a l y t i c a l Model  65  1)  The M o d e l D e f i n e d i n G e n e r a l Terms a) The M o d e l A b s t r a c t l y Expressed  B.  The A b s t r a c t M o d e l R e l a t e d to the A l p i n e Lakes Situation  2)  E l a b o r a t i o n o f the Model  The  Methodology Used to Apply  1)  Documents  2)  Interviews with Ind i v i duals  3) IV.  Model, L i t e r a t u r e  and  b)  Part  63  P r o b l e m i n Summary  65 65  67 70  the Model  9k 9h  Informed 95 101  Data A n a l y s i s  Findings  103  A.  Introduction  103  B.  Proposition 2  10^  1)  The  Rules  104  a)  Laws  105  b)  General P o l i c y Regulations  c)  d)  Specific Policy Regulations  and 110 and  Understandings  2)  A t t i t u d e s and  3)  Objectives  Perceptions  121 12^ 131 1^0  vii Page Proposition 3 1)  2)  S o u r c e s o f and C h a n n e l s f o r Information  147  Substantive Information  152  a)  The ALPS P r o p o s a l  152  b)  The A l p i n e L a k e s CWCST P r o p o s a l  Coalition156  c)  The F o r e s t S e r v i c e A l t e r n a t i v e s  158  d)  Reaction to the Forest Service Alternatives  l6l  The C o a l i t i o n o f C o n s e r v a t i o n Groups P r o p o s a l  l6k  The F o r e s t S e r v i c e P r o p o s a l  166  e) f) 3)  1^7  Information Expressing Preferences  170  a)  Alternatives  170  b)  Preferences  Expressed  c)  Expressions  of Preference  Had  Little  Discussed  175 Which  Effect  182 186  Proposition k 1)  Resources A v a i l a b l e  2)  Upon I n f o r m a t i o n G e n e r a t e d Perceptions Limiting Information Generated  192  E f f e c t s o f Rules Information  19^  3)  h)  and E f f e c t s  on R e c e p t i o n o f .  186  E f f e c t s o f A t t i t u d e s and P e r c e p t i o n s on R e c e p t i o n o f I n f o r m a t i o n 198 a)  R e j e c t i o n and A c c e p t a n c e o f Substantive Information  198  b)  Processing of Expressions of Preference  202  viii Page E. Part  V.  Proposition  1  Conclusion  I  215 227  BibliographyAppendix  205  The  Wilderness Act  233  A l l o c a t i o n s and A u t h o r i z a t i o n s f o r the P a c i f i c Northwest Region, U.S.F.S., F i s c a l Y e a r 197^  2kh  Appendix I I I  22 Management O b j e c t i v e s f r o m " A l p i n e L a k e s L a n d Use A l t e r n a t i v e s "  251  Appendix IV  22 Management O b j e c t i v e s f r o m " A l p i n e L a k e s Management U n i t D i r e c t i o n and W i l d e r n e s s P r o p o s a l "  256  Appendix V  Correspondence R e l a t i n g t o the Jack C r e e k - V a n E p p s P a s s Road  261  Appendix VI  Maps o f t h e I n t e r e s t G r o u p a n d Forest Service Proposals  267  Appendix I I  ix  L I S T OF TABLES Page 171  Table  1  Approximate  Table  2  C e n t r a l Washington Cascades Study Team (CWCST) E s t i m a t e s o f E c o n o m i c Impacts o f Three A l t e r n a t i v e s J u l y 3 0 , 1973  172  U.S.F.S. E s t i m a t e s o f E c o n o m i c I m p a c t s of Three Forest S e r v i c e A l t e r n a t i v e s  173  U.S.F.S. E s t i m a t e s o f E c o n o m i c f o r U.S.F.S. P r o p o s a l  173  Table 3 Table  4  Acreages f o r A l t e r n a t i v e s  Impacts  Table  5  Substantive Information Received t h e S t u d y Team  Table  6  Expressions  Additional Table  of Preference  i n Appendix I I  by  174 184 244  L I S T OF MAPS Page Map 1  The P a c i f i c  Map 2  The N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e North Cascades Study  Map 3 Map k  Map 5  Northwest  h$  Regions Proposal,  50  The F o r e s t S e r v i c e P r o p o s a l , N o r t h Cascades Study  52  T h e S t u d y Team P r o p o s a l , North Cascades Study  53  The L e g i s l a t i o n P a s s e d f o r t h e  Map 6  North Cascades A r e a  55  The A l p i n e  57  Lakes A r e a  A d d i t i o n a l Maps i n c l u d e d ALPS  i n feefe-P-w^cet ehvfi'opt  Proposal  Alpine  Lakes  Coalition  Coalition  Proposal  o f Conservation  Groups  Proposal  Forest  S e r v i c e A l t e r n a t i v e s A, B, a n d C  Forest  Service  Proposal  xi  Acknowledgement I Stead to and  would l i k e  f o r t h e i r help i n the w r i t i n g o f t h i s  thank J e r r y Parker Ken P e t e r s o n  the beginning. s o much t i m e to  t o thank P r o f e s s o r s I r v i n g Fox and Gordon thesis.  f o r g e t t i n g me s t a r t e d  I want  on t h i s  topic  f o r h e l p i n g me o r g a n i z e my t h o u g h t s i n I want t o t h a n k a l l t h e p e o p l e  during the personal interviews.  t h a n k R i k Haugen f o r h i s s u g g e s t i o n s  who g a v e I'd also  me like  and I n a G i l l i s f o r  h e r work on t h e maps.  B . R. H  e  xii  Jory  and Morgan: Alpine  and y o u r p e o p l e .  This  hope t h a t y o u w i l l  Lakes i s f o r you i s written  always have  i n the  the  opportunity to p a r t i c i p a t e i n decisions like  the A l p i n e  Lakes  decision.  PART I INTRODUCTION A.  History Since at l e a s t  1946 t h e r e has been i n t e r e s t i n p r e s e r v i n g  the A l p i n e Lakes area o f the c e n t r a l Washington Cascades as I n 1946 the F o r e s t S e r v i c e d e s i g n a t e d  Wilderness.  Lakes L i m i t e d Area.  an A l p i n e  Since t h a t time v a r i o u s p r o p o s a l s  have  been made f o r p r o t e c t i o n o f the a r e a . The  North Cascades Study Team, made up o f F o r e s t  and Park S e r v i c e p e r s o n n e l ,  Service  recommended t h a t the A l p i n e Lakes  a r e a and the Enchantment area be i n c l u d e d i n the Wilderness system.  T h i s system was s t a r t e d i n 1964 under the f e d e r a l  Wilderness  Act.  The North Cascades Study Team recommendation  was made i n 1965, but i t was s e v e r a l y e a r s b e f o r e  the F o r e s t  S e r v i c e became a c t i v e l y i n v o l v e d i n p l a n n i n g f o r the A l p i n e Lakes  area. In 1970 the A l p i n e Lakes P r o t e c t i o n S o c i e t y (ALPS) p r o -  posed a N a t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n A r e a w i t h a Wilderness T h i s Wilderness  core i n c l u d e d the two separate  by the F o r e s t S e r v i c e i n a s i n g l e Wilderness r e s u l t o f requests  core.  areas  Area.  proposed As a  from ALPS and other groups, members o f  the Washington C o n g r e s s i o n a l  d e l e g a t i o n asked t h a t the  F o r e s t S e r v i c e proceed w i t h p l a n n i n g f o r the A l p i n e Lakes area.  I n 1971 the C h i e f o f the F o r e s t S e r v i c e promised t o  s t a r t a study and develop a p r o p o s a l c a t i o n f o r the a r e a .  f o r Wilderness  classifi-  A study team was formed i n J u l y o f 1972.  By December o f  1972 t h r e e l a n d use a l t e r n a t i v e s had been developed.  In  January o f 1973 p u b l i c meetings were h e l d at seven l o c a t i o n s around the F o r e s t  S e r v i c e study a r e a .  At these meetings and  i n w r i t t e n submissions members o f the p u b l i c commented on the three a l t e r n a t i v e s .  By June o f 1973 a s i n g l e p r o p o s a l had  been developed a l o n g w i t h a d r a f t environmental statement. The  Regional  F o r e s t e r i n P o r t l a n d , Oregon, sent  C h i e f o f the F o r e s t  S e r v i c e i n Washington, D. C.  I n October 1973, two p u b l i c h e a r i n g s p u b l i c response t o the s i n g l e F o r e s t on these h e a r i n g s proposal  these t o the  were h e l d ato get  Service proposal.  Based  and on f u r t h e r w r i t t e n submissions a f i n a l  was developed.  Congress i s expected t o a c t some time i n 1975 on the Forest  S e r v i c e ' s proposed l e g i s l a t i o n and on t h r e e  proposed b i l l s .  other  The A l p i n e Lakes P r o t e c t i o n S o c i e t y , the  A l p i n e Lakes C o a l i t i o n , a c o a l i t i o n o f f o r e s t p r o d u c t s i n d u s t r y and r e c r e a t i o n groups, and the C o a l i t i o n o f Conservat i o n Groups, made up o f groups l i k e the S i e r r a Club, W i l d e r n e s s S o c i e t y , and the F r i e n d s drafted b i l l s .  the >  o f the E a r t h , have a l l  At the moment, Congress has been busy w i t h  o t h e r matters and has not acted on the A l p i n e Lakes  area.  T h i s study d e a l s w i t h the r o l e o f the s p e c i a l F o r e s t study team i n the development o f the F o r e s t posed  legislation.  Service's  Service pro-  B.  A r e a o f Study D u r i n g the process  of developing  a p l a n f o r the  o f the A l p i n e Lakes Wilderness Area the F o r e s t  creation  Service re-  c e i v e d p u b l i c i n p u t from a v a r i e t y o f sources through s e v e r a l channels.  The  formal p u b l i c h e a r i n g s  were o n l y the most  v i s i b l e means o f c o l l e c t i n g p u b l i c r e a c t i o n s .  Other means  i n c l u d e d formal w r i t t e n i n p u t , i n p u t w r i t t e n on an or more s p e c i a l b a s i s than t h a t accompanying the meetings w i t h groups or i n d i v i d u a l s , i n f o r m a l T h i s t h e s i s w i l l focus f o r A l p i n e Lakes was  on the process  developed.  hearings,  contacts.  by which the  of l o c a l Forest  plan  Specifically, i t will try  to determine the r e l a t i v e r o l e s t h a t p u b l i c i n p u t , S e r v i c e p o l i c y and  informal  g u i d e l i n e s , and  Service personnel  the analyses played  Forest  and i n s i g h t s  i n the  recommenda-  t i o n s of the s p e c i a l study team to the R e g i o n a l  Forester i n  P o r t l a n d , Oregon, and  to the C h i e f i n Washington, D.  P u b l i c input provided  some o f the i n f o r m a t i o n  d e c i s i o n c o u l d be based. past  on which a  Other sources o f i n f o r m a t i o n were  s t u d i e s o f the A l p i n e Lakes area conducted by  Forest  S e r v i c e and  other o r g a n i z a t i o n s , studies of  p u b l i c l a n d areas i n the country, information  f o r the use  water, timber, f o r a g e , p o l i c y and  The  and  of resources and  supply  and  other  demand  r e c r e a t i o n . N a t i o n a l and  processed  the  i n the area i n c l u d i n g  the i n s i g h t s o f l o c a l p e r s o n n e l  t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n was  C.  regional  determined  how  to a r r i v e at a d e c i s i o n .  o b j e c t i v e o f t h i s t h e s i s can be d e s c r i b e d more  specifically.  The  Forest  Service personnel  who  worked  on  A l p i n e Lakes study i n Washington s t a t e at the l o c a l developed a p r o p o s a l  f o r the a r e a .  form, w i l l  the A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ' s  represent  level  This proposal, i n f i n a l p r o p o s a l to Congres  Some of the f a c t o r s which l e d to the development o f t h i s p o s a l are the s u b j e c t o f t h i s The  sources  i n p u t , w i l l be  thesis.  o f i n f o r m a t i o n were mentioned above.  r e l a t i v e importance o f these assessed.  than o t h e r s . at  In e v a l u a t i n g the r o l e o f p u b l i c be  some groups might have more impact  Part of t h i s evaluation w i l l  the communication process  t i o n was  The  sources, p a r t i c u l a r l y p u b l i c  i n p u t , the impact o f i n p u t from v a r i o u s groups w i l l s t u d i e d to determine why  pro-  include looking  through which c e r t a i n i n f o r m a -  t r a n s m i t t e d more c l e a r l y than other  information.  What o b s t a c l e s l i m i t e d the t r a n s m i t t a l o f some i n f o r m a t i o n , what channels eased the t r a n s m i t t a l of some? Another set of f a c t o r s to be  evaluated  s t r a i n t s imposed on the l o c a l p e r s o n n e l policy. had  The  to work w i l l be  studied.  i n f o r m a t i o n was  Did they l i m i t  planners  the k i n d of  c o l l e c t e d , and d i d they  weighed?  con-  by n a t i o n a l r e g i o n a l  g u i d e l i n e s and r u l e s w i t h i n which the  i n f o r m a t i o n which was how  are the  predetermine  Did the F o r e s t S e r v i c e have  p a r t i c u l a r o b j e c t i v e s i n i t s d e a l i n g s w i t h the p u b l i c i n the importance i t a t t a c h e d  to p u b l i c i n p u t ?  A t h i r d set o f f a c t o r s are the i n s i g h t s o f the themselves. fit  They processed  the i n f o r m a t i o n and  i n t o the c o n s t r a i n t s o f p o l i c y .  a f f e c t the r o l e o f d i f f e r e n t  and  sources  How  planners  attempted to  did their insights  of information?  How  important  were t h e i r own experience  and f e e l i n g s i n r e l a t i o n  t o p u b l i c i n p u t and o t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n i n p l a n n i n g the l a n d use  p a t t e r n and management  p o l i c i e s best  s u i t e d t o the  A l p i n e Lakes area? These are the three p r i n c i p a l s e t s o f f a c t o r s which t h i s t h e s i s w i l l study. o f how these  The r e s u l t  should be an e x p l a n a t i o n  f a c t o r s l e d t o the p r o p o s a l which has been sent  to Washington, D. C.  To a r r i v e at the r o l e s o f F o r e s t  v i c e p o l i c y , the i n s i g h t s o f l o c a l F o r e s t S e r v i c e  Ser-  planners,  and p u b l i c i n p u t i n t e r v i e w s were conducted.  Members o f  interest  groups and F o r e s t S e r v i c e p e r s o n n e l  were i n t e r -  viewed.  A.list  of basic questions  s p e c i f i c questions  was prepared  from which  more a p p r o r p r i a t e t o the persons b e i n g  i n t e r v i e w e d were developed. The  g e n e r a l areas  o f q u e s t i o n i n g were the events p r e -  c e d i n g F o r e s t S e r v i c e study  o f the A l p i n e Lakes a r e a , the  r o l e o f F o r e s t S e r v i c e p o l i c y , the r o l e o f l o c a l and  the r o l e o f p u b l i c i n p u t and o t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n .  s t u d y i n g the r o l e o f l o c a l p l a n n e r s ined.  In  t h r e e areas were exam-  They are the g e n e r a l l a n d use management  o f the p l a n n e r s , and  planners,  philosophy  the r e c r e a t i o n i n t e r e s t s o f the p e r s o n n e l ,  t h e i r i d e a s on l a n d and water management  research.  To  study the r o l e o f p u b l i c i n p u t s e v e r a l agreas were pursued. They are the reasons and m o t i v a t i o n s  f o r the p u b l i c i n v o l v e -  ment program, the means o f making i n p u t , the methods f o r h a n d l i n g the i n f o r m a t i o n p r e s e n t e d  i n the p u b l i c i n p u t ,  the r o l e s o f formal and i n f o r m a l channels o f communication.  S p e c i f i c q u e s t i o n s were asked o f members o f the groups and  of Forest Service personnel  i n the g e n e r a l areas the p l a n n e r s  listed  the p u b l i c input was  i n t e n t was  to see  o f the p l a n n e r s  how  how  a f f e c t e d the way  of  made.  Significance f o r Planning Planners  for  The  information  handled the i n f o r m a t i o n they r e c e i v e d and  the view the p u b l i c had  C.  above.  to p r o v i d e  interest  o f t e n f a c e demands from segments o f the p u b l i c  a voice i n planning decisions.  a r i s e are,  "How  Questions which always  should p u b l i c i n p u t s be i n c l u d e d i n the  d e c i s i o n process?"  and  "How  should v a r i o u s k i n d s  i n p u t be weighed a g a i n s t each other and formation  and i n s i g h t s t h a t the p l a n n e r s  of public  against other i n have?"  Views i n  t h i s area range from a p o l i c y o f depending p r i m a r i l y on e x p e r t i s e o f planners and i n f o r m selves.  of having planners  co-ordinate  segments o f the p u b l i c as they p l a n f o r them-  T h i s t h e s i s w i l l study  h a n d l i n g these The  t o one  the  U.  one  agency's methods of  questions.  S. F o r e s t S e r v i c e i s charged w i t h the management  o f one k i n d o f f e d e r a l l y owned l a n d , N a t i o n a l F o r e s t s . management o f these  lands i n v o l v e s an attempt to meet  t i o n a l goals i n p r o v i d i n g needed lumber, g r a z i n g  The na-  lands,  watershed areas, r e c r e a t i o n l a n d , h a b i t a t f o r v a r i o u s w i l d s p e c i e s , and  areas  for scientific  study.  Against  needs the needs o f the people w i t h i n each o f the S e r v i c e r e g i o n s must be weighed.  these Forest  In t h i s case the needs  o f t h e people  i n t h e P a c i f i c Northwest Region must be weighed.  Needs can be l o c a l i z e d even more by l o o k i n g at the s t a t e l e v e l and at t h e i n d i v i d u a l N a t i o n a l F o r e s t l e v e l .  In developing  p r o p o s a l s f o r the A l p i n e Lakes a r e a F o r e s t S e r v i c e p l a n n e r s must l o o k a t these l e v e l s o f demands and a t t h e c o n f l i c t i n g k i n d s o f demands.  At the same time they have t o f a c e the  q u e s t i o n s s t a t e d above about the r o l e o f p u b l i c i n p u t i n planning decisions. T h i s t h e s i s w i l l l o o k at one l a r g e agency, charged  with  meeting needs r a n g i n g from t h e n a t i o n a l l e v e l t o the l o c a l l e v e l , charged w i t h t h e management o f p u b l i c r e s o u r c e s , and charged will  w i t h i n t e r p r e t i n g and meeting p u b l i c demands. I t  examine how the p l a n n e r s made d e c i s i o n s i n one p a r t i c -  u l a r case.  Some r e s u l t s o f t h i s study s h o u l d be a p p l i c a b l e  t o t h i s agency i n o t h e r s i t u a t i o n s and t o o t h e r agencies i n other s i t u a t i o n s .  The q u e s t i o n s o f r e l a t i v e r o l e s o f v a r i o u s  components o f a d e c i s i o n a r e q u e s t i o n s most p l a n n e r s have t o ask.  8  PART I I INSTITUTIONAL AND The  U  0  S. F o r e s t  HISTORICAL SETTING  Service administers  the Snoqualmie  and  Wenatchee N a t i o n a l F o r e s t s w i t h i n which any A l p i n e Lakes W i l d e r n e s s Area c r e a t e d would l i e . took study o f and p l a n n i n g  The  Forest  S e r v i c e under-  f o r the area and managed the p u b l i c  involvement program as p a r t o f i t s d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s . t h a t the F o r e s t gram and  S e r v i c e managed t h i s p u b l i c involvement  the f a c t o r s t h a t a f f e c t e d the way  program are the focus  of t h i s t h e s i s .  s e t t i n g o f the F o r e s t  S e r v i c e and  Lakes area and  the p r o p o s a l s  A r e a w i l l prepare the reader A,  f o r the study  General O r i e n t a t i o n and  The  Forest  o f A g r i c u l t u r e s i n c e 1905.  1906  the  Alpine  itself.  Service  L e g i s l a t i v e Mandate  been a bureau of the I t administers  Since the s t a r t m u l t i p l e - u s e o f the F o r e s t  and  Department  National  Forests  including  long-term p u b l i c  Service's p o l i c y .  S e c r e t a r y o f A g r i c u l t u r e James W i l s o n wrote t o  Chief Forester, Gifford  pro-  administrative  i n n i n e r e g i o n s which cover the e n t i r e country  b e n e f i t have been goals  way  f o r the c r e a t i o n of a Wilderness  1)  S e r v i c e has  The  i t handled  the h i s t o r y o f the  Terms o f Reference o f the F o r e s t  Alaska.  The  the  Pinchot:  '.,,In the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f the N a t i o n a l F o r e s t s i t must be c l e a r l y borne i n mind t h a t a l l l a n d i s to be devoted to i t s most p r o d u c t i v e use f o r the permanent good of a l l the whole p e o p l e , and not f o r the temporary b e n e f i t o f i n d i v i d u a l s or  In  9  companies,, A l l resources of the National Forests are for u s e . . . and where c o n f l i c t i n g interests must be reconciled the question w i l l always be decided from the standpoint of the greatest good for the greatest number i n the long r u n , , , ' ^ Logging, mining, construction of water p r o j e c t s , highways, intensive and extensive r e c r e a t i o n , and grazing are a l l forms of land use i n National Forests. The Multiple Use-Sustained Y i e l d Act of i 9 6 0 gave l e g i s l a t i v e status to Forest Service p o l i c y .  It set  as  goals the development and administration of renewable surface resources for multiple use and sustained y i e l d . •It i s the p o l i c y of the Congress that the national forests are established and s h a l l be administered for outdoor r e c r e a t i o n , range, timber, watershed, and w i l d l i f e and f i s h purposes. 1 ^ Further i n the act "multiple use" i s defined, •Multiple use' means the management of a l l the various renewable surface resources of the national forests so that they are u t i l i z e d i n the combination that w i l l best meet the needs of the American people, making the most j u d i cious use of the land for some or a l l of these resources or r e l a t e d services over areas large enough to provide s u f f i c i e n t l a t i t u t d e for p e r i o d i c adjustments i n use to conform to changing needs and conditions; that some land w i l l be used for less than a l l of the resources; and harmonious and co-ordinated management of the various resources, each with the other, without impairment of the p r o d u c t i v i t y of the values of various resources, and not n e c e s s a r i l y the combination of uses that w i l l give the greatest d o l l a r return or the greatest unit output.3  Wilson i n Brockman, Recreational Use of Wildlands. p. 1^9. U . S . D . A . , The Multiple Use-Sustained Y i e l d Act of I960, 'ibid.  10 Recreation  and w i l d e r n e s s  Forest Service provides  are j u s t p a r t o f what  i n managing i t s l a n d s .  The  the Multiple  U s e - S u s t a i n e d Y i e l d Act does s t a t e t h a t the establishment maintenance o f w i l d e r n e s s act.  Wilderness has  s i n c e 1924,  i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the aims o f  been p a r t o f F o r e s t  when Aldo L e o p o l d , working f o r the F o r e s t  c r e a t i n g the G i l a P r i m i t i v e A r e a i n New  r e c e n t l y , i n 1964,  the  S e r v i c e management  i n the Southwest, encouraged the w r i t i n g o f an order  and  Service  administrative Mexico,  the Wilderness P r e s e r v a t i o n Act  More  created  the N a t i o n a l Wilderness P r e s e r v a t i o n System which i n c l u d e d wilderness  l a n d from b o t h the N a t i o n a l F o r e s t  N a t i o n a l Park system. on, but  system and  More d e t a i l s w i l l be p r o v i d e d  i t should be made c l e a r t h a t t h e r e i s a l o n g  the  further tradi-  t i o n i n the F o r e s t S e r v i c e o f p r o v i d i n g outdoor r e c r e a t i o n in  forests. R e c r e a t i o n a l p o l i c i e s o r i g i n a t e i n the n a t i o n a l  Within  the b a s i c p o l i c i e s R e g i o n a l  t i o n a l plans Forest  for t h e i r region.  Supervisors  D i s t r i c t Rangers,  and  F o r e s t e r s prepare r e c r e a -  Detailed planning  i s done by  t h e i r s t a f f i n consultation with  These plans  list  o b j e c t i v e s and  policies.  P h y s i c a l p l a n n i n g , when needed, i s done by landscape t e c t s i n the R e g i o n a l visor's 2)  F o r e s t e r ' s o f f i c e or i n the  archi-  Super-  office, Wilderness and  Planning hierarchy. sent  office.  the F o r e s t  Service  f o r Wilderness Areas passes through  Plans  drawn up  t o the R e g i o n a l  at the S u p e r v i s o r  F o r e s t e r and  level  the are  then to the C h i e f F o r e s t e r ,  11 They a r e then sent t o Congress, because Wilderness  Areas  can o n l y be c r e a t e d through an A c t o f Congress, When t h e Wilderness A c t was passed i n 1964, t h e r e a l r e a d y were areas d e s i g n a t e d f o r w i l d e r n e s s  purposes.  R e g u l a t i o n L - 2 0 e s t a b l i s h e d p r i m i t i v e areas i n 1930, The C h i e f o f t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e s h a l l determine, d e f i n e , and permanently r e c o r d , , , a s e r i e s o f areas t o be known as p r i m i t i v e a r e a s , and w i t h i n which, t o t h e extent o f t h e Department's a u t h o r i t y w i l l be m a i n t a i n e d p r i m i t i v e c o n d i t i o n s o f e n v i r o n ment, t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , h a b i t a t i o n , and s u b s i s t e n c e , w i t h a view t o c o n s e r v i n g the v a l u e o f such areas f o r purposes o f ^ p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n , i n s p i r a t i o n , and r e c r e a t i o n . There was no mention o f i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y w i t h l o g g i n g , g r a z i n g , or water development f o r i n d u s t r i a l purposes.  At the same  time r e g u l a t i o n U-3 e s t a b l i s h e d canoe a r e a s , s i m i l a r t o p r i m i t i v e a r e a s , but based  on l a k e and stream r e s o u r c e s .  I n 1939 r e g u l a t i o n s U - l and U-2 e s t a b l i s h e d w i l d e r n e s s areas and w i l d a r e a s .  No l o g g i n g , s p e c i a l use p e r m i t s ,  p l a n e s , b o a t s , o r roads were allowed i n these a r e a s . Wilderness areas were s i n g l e t r a c t s g r e a t e r than a c r e s , w h i l e w i l d areas ranged  100,000  from 5000 t o 100,000 a c r e s *  R e c r e a t i o n a r e a s , a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n t h a t was l e s s r i g o r o u s than w i l d o r w i l d e r n e s s a r e a s , were a l s o  established.  These r e g u l a t i o n s were passed as amendments L-20. never  to regulation  The r e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f p r i m i t i v e areas s t a r t e d but finished. D u r i n g t h e p e r i o d between t h e end o f World War I I and  1964 many c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s devoted t h e i r energy t o s e e k i n g  ^McCabe,  "A Wilderness Primer", p, 26.  12 l e g i s l a t i o n which would p r o t e c t w i l d e r n e s s S e r v i c e r e g u l a t i o n s o n l y gave w i l d e r n e s s  land.  The F o r e s t  land administrative  protection. The  N a t i o n a l Outdoor R e c r e a t i o n Resources Review Com-  m i s s i o n was e s t a b l i s h e d i n 1958 t o study and p l a n f o r p u b l i c r e c r e a t i o n a l needs,  A study done f o r ORRRC by the W i l d l a n d  Research Center at B e r k e l e y , wilderness  tracts.  C a l i f o r n i a attempted t o d e f i n e  C r i t e r i a were 1) s i z e g r e a t e r than  100,000 a c r e s , 2) no p u b l i c roads, 4) no s i g n i f i c a n t  3) u n i f i e d  e c o l o g i c a l disturbances  boundaries,  except f o r g r a z i n g 5  i n t h e West and e a r l y day l o g g i n g i n the E a s t , " e a r l y day" was not d e f i n e d i n terms o f exact  The term time, but  would appear t o mean t h e 18th o r e a r l y 19th c e n t u r y .  Be-  cause t h e r e had been much g r a z i n g i n the West and much " e a r l y day l o g g i n g " i n the E a s t , the two exceptions be made, o r t h e r e would have been v e r y l i t t l e The  had t o  land a v a i l a b l e .  l a c k o f f u r t h e r d e t a i l s i n the d e f i n i t i o n was a r e s u l t  o f compromise.  The r e p o r t r e p r e s e n t e d  a major e f f o r t t o  f a c e the problem o f s e l e c t i n g and managing w i l d e r n e s s F i n a l l y i n 1964, a f t e r 8 years Wilderness  A c t was passed.  and w i l d e r n e s s  areas.  o f b a r g a i n i n g , the  A l l the canoe areas, w i l d  areas,  areas i n N a t i o n a l F o r e s t s were a u t o m a t i c a l l y  p a r t o f the Wilderness  P r e s e r v a t i o n System.  P r i m i t i v e areas  were t o be s t u d i e d f o r t h e i r s u i t a b i l i t y f o r i n c l u s i o n i n the system.  The c h i e f c r i t e r i a f o r s e l e c t i n g areas  McCabe, op_ c i t , . p, 28,  relate  13 t o man's i m p a c t k)  criterion  on  the  l a n d . The  above, e m p h a s i z i n g the  evidence  o f man's i n f l u e n c e .  promising  over eight years,  included. ment, 2)  prospecting  by  the  projects  3)  hunting  1983,  o f A g r i c u l t u r e , h)  these  criteria  management c r i t e r i a  t o be  National  One concept Alpine  subject  with  were  1964,  6)  wilderness to of  conwater  fishing  criteria  the  an  f o r manage-  Presidential authoriza-  used  after  com-  subject  permissible  uses  and  for are  selection criteria  area,  Areas  which should  be  Recreation  Lakes N a t i o n a l  1983  concerning  Recreation  of National  uses  Rather than being  have been used i n choosing  3)  of  development  when i t e x i s t e d b e f o r e  under s t a t e laws.  selection,  a result  i f compatible with until  to  significant  more p e r m i s s i b l e  public interest,  grazing,  lack of  temporary roads needed  after  Secretary  were s i m i l a r  However, as  working of claims  i n the  5)  tion,  1)  These were:  preservation, trol  criteria  discussed  Areas.  Recreation  The  briefly  is  creation of  A r e a i s one  demand  the an  being  7 presented National  to  the  Recreation  A r e a s b e g a n as National  Forest  Service,  David Knibb  Area l e g i s l a t i o n .  a way  to include  Park system.  Later  in  National  A r e a s were c r e a t e d  B r o c k m a n , OJD c i t . . pp, 7  Knibb,  "NRA-Land Use  159-160, Conflicts"  the  used  f o r mass  T h e n some  National  i n mountain areas,  Forests,  reviewed  Recreation  areas i n  c o n c e p t was  r e c r e a t i o n r e l a t e d to water resources. Recreation  National  seacoast  the  has  sometimes  -14 Because N a t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n  Areas are c r e a t e d by Congress  to meet r e c r e a t i o n needs, t h e y g e n e r a l l y r e c e i v e b e t t e r fundi n g than normal F o r e s t Recreation  S e r v i c e r e c r e a t i o n areas.  National  A r e a l e g i s l a t i o n i s more f l e x i b l e than the W i l d e r -  ness A c t i n p r o v i d i n g f o r the a c q u i s i t i o n o f p r i v a t e l a n d , and  t h e r e are more l a n d use c o n t r o l s a v a i l a b l e f o r p r i v a t e  land.  Some o b j e c t t o these l a n d use c o n t r o l s , because they  can i n v o l v e the F e d e r a l government i n zoning,  r a t h e r than  l e a v i n g t h a t r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o l o c a l government.  The i n -  t e n t i s t o manage p r i v a t e lands w i t h i n the N a t i o n a l  Recrea-  t i o n A r e a as w e l l as p u b l i c lands  f o r r e c r e a t i o n purposes,  which may e n t a i l F e d e r a l z o n i n g .  More money i s a v a i l a b l e  than under the Wilderness A c t i f p r i v a t e l a n d i s t o be purchased. ary.  P r o h i b i t i o n o f timber h a r v e s t i n g i s d i s c r e t i o n -  National Recreation  from m i n e r a l  A r e a l e g i s l a t i o n can withdraw  lands  entry.  There are no b a s i c s t a t u t o r y g u i d e l i n e s f o r N a t i o n a l Recreation  Areas.  They can be whatever Congress c r e a t e s .  Each N a t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n  A r e a i s c r e a t e d by a separate  bill.  Congress c r e a t e s the N a t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n  Area without s p e c i -  f y i n g a l l the d e t a i l s o f the b o u n d a r i e s .  The b o u n d a r i e s are  drawn at the d i s c r e t i o n o f the S e c r e t a r y o f A g r i c u l t u r e o r the S e c r e t a r y  o f the I n t e r i o r , depending on who has j u r i s d i c -  t i o n over the p a r t i c u l a r a r e a .  U s u a l l y the Department o f  A g r i c u l t u r e has j u r i s d i c t i o n over areas i n N a t i o n a l and  Forests,  the Department o f the I n t e r i o r has j u r i s d i c t i o n e l s e -  where, but t h e r e have been e x c e p t i o n s .  Presumably an  15 Alpine the  Lakes N a t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n  Forest  Service.  Some o f t h e c o n t r o l s t h a t Recreation  A r e a management  m u l t i p l e u s e management. tive  A r e a w o u l d b e managed b y  are p o s s i b l e under  are p o s s i b l e under Wilderness However, t h e y  c o n t r o l s rather than l e g i s l a t i v e  w o u l d be  controls.  being  c o n t r o l s e s t a b l i s h e d by Congress, they  trols  used 4)  at the d i s c r e t i o n  Relationship  National  of Forest  t o Other Federal  administraInstead  w o u l d be  Service  and  of  con-  managers.  L a n d Management  Agencies The manage  Forest  S e r v i c e i s one o f s e v e r a l a g e n c i e s  federal public lands.  manages n a t i o n a l p a r k s , Fish  and W i l d l i f e  fisheries. and  The N a t i o n a l  monuments, and h i s t o r i c  S e r v i c e manages w i l d l i f e  The Department  other m i l i t a r y  Park  lands.  manages a l l p u b l i c l a n d s  which  Service sites.  refuges  The  and  o f D e f e n s e manages m i l i t a r y  bases  T h e B u r e a u o f L a n d Management not s p e c i f i c a l l y  allocated for •y  other  uses.  The r o l e s o f t h e F o r e s t  Service, the National  P a r k S e r v i c e , and t h e B u r e a u o f L a n d Management w i l l pared t o put the Forest l a n d management Since Department  1905  Service i n perspective  as a f e d e r a l  agency. the Forest  S e r v i c e has been a p a r t  of Agriculture,  o f F o r e s t r y was a p a r t Together with  be com-  P r i o r to that  o f t h e Department  Chief Gifford  Roosevelt  created  Forests,  Under P i n c h o t ' s  Pinchot  the majority  o f the  time t h e Bureau of the I n t e r i o r ,  President  Theodore  o f the present  National  direction  the Forest  Service set  16 a  tradition  management Being saw  o f c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t r a t h e r than o f the forests  i n t h e Department  i t s mission  f o r the use o f a l l resources.  of A g r i c u l t u r e the Forest  as p r o v i d i n g c r o p s ,  door r e c r e a t i o n , w i l d l i f e , Over t h e y e a r s  forests.  Other areas  headquarters, they  o f water, g r a z i n g ,  the multiple-use philosophy  the only areas such  o r roads  classified  as t h e Areas are  f o r s i n g l e use i n the  a s campgrounds, a d m i n i s t r a t i v e  are b a s i c a l l y  s i n g l e use areas, but  f o r an a r e a  t h e most  favorable  i s t h e management o b j e c t i v e .  t o do e v e r y t h i n g i n one a r e a ,  so g e n e r a l l y  u s e , p e r h a p s two, i s e m p h a s i z e d i n a g i v e n a r e a . s e v e r a l uses  objective the  o f uses  i s impossible  ever  evolved  are g e n e r a l l y i n m u l t i p l e use l a n d s .  combination  one  out-  o f timber.  Today Wilderness  Under t h e m u l t i p l e use p h i l o s o p h y  It  Service  and most i m p o r t a n t l y ,  way t o manage N a t i o n a l F o r e s t s . essentially  preservationist  are compatible,  i s to provide  American people  they  go on t o g e t h e r .  a s many o f t h e r e s o u r c e s  as p o s s i b l e .  Under p u b l i c  t h e r e h a s b e e n some c h a n g e i n r e c e n t y e a r s emphasis  on t i m b e r  recreation Forests  the Forest  Yellowstone the world,  pressure  on  less outdoor  I n a d d i t i o n t o managing N a t i o n a l  S e r v i c e manages N a t i o n a l  which are unforested  Grasslands,  areas.  N a t i o n a l Park,  was c r e a t e d i n 1872.  the f i r s t  n a t i o n a l park i n  I n 1880 t h e O f f i c e o f  N a t i o n a l Parks  was e s t a b l i s h e d u n d e r t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f  the  Between  Interior,  The  needed by  toward  p r o d u c t i o n a n d more e m p h a s i s  and w i l d e r n e s s .  Wher-  1890  a n d 1916,  when t h i s  office  17 became t h e  National  Park S e r v i c e ,  s e v e r a l p a r k s were  i n c l u d i n g Y o s e m i t e , S e q u o i a , Mount R a i n i e r , C r a t e r V e r d e , G l a c i e r , and the  first  National  National recreational, Service  was  National and  Monuments were  P a r k s were s e e n as historic,  given  the  and  task  f o r p u b l i c use and  by  the  were t o be  creation,  and  easier,  villages  the  was  interest.  Park  for future  left  large No  hotel  uses  extensive  never been  i n the  roads provided  o r i e n t a t i o n of the  objectives  untouched.  as  and  generations  These  T h e r e has  philosophy  and  The  a compromise w i t h  study.  well,  scenic  made b e y o n d o b s e r v a t i o n ,  scientific  As  Mes  of outstanding  generations.  to areas  f o r a m u l t i p l e use  Beyond the  Parks.  o f managing t h e s e areas  result  resources  need  areas  scientific  present  paved highways next  Lake,  established.  Monuments f o r p r e s e r v a t i o n  conflicted, and  Rocky Mountain N a t i o n a l  created  Forest  reany  Service.  t o make p u b l i c  P a r k S e r v i c e has  of  use  been  preservation. In  order  to  create  Park S e r v i c e would included would  i n the  create  mation could Act  s t u d y an  National  a new create  a new  or the In  area  and  P a r k and  National  create  o f whether the  National  Park System,  National  of Congress could  regardless  a new  a new  P a r k o r Monument  recommend t h a t An  Act  of  i t be  Congress  a Presidential procla-  Monument, National  Park S e r v i c e , the  Likewise Recreation Forest  Park Service  past and  there the  have been c o n f l i c t s  Forest  Service.  between  Many p a r k s  an Area,  Service,  B u r e a u o f L a n d Management were t o manage i t . the  the  the  were  18 created  from N a t i o n a l  Forests.  Mountain, Olympic, p o r t i o n s cently, pride  Some o f t h e s e were Rocky-  o f G r a n d T e t o n , and more r e -  North Cascades N a t i o n a l  o f management  Parks,  Each agency has a  and "ownership", and t h e r e  o f l o s s o r g a i n when l a n d i s t r a n s f e r r e d . are  different,  and  the other  one b e i n g being  sons i n t e r v i e w e d diminished  the  would  like  philosophies  r e c r e a t i o n and p r e s e r v a t i o n i s t .  and t h a t  same t i m e  The  r e c e n t l y these  at the f i e l d  There  level  conflicts  there  is a  seems t o be m u t u a l r e s p e c t ,  each agency i s proud  to continue  sense  m u l t i p l e u s e and c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t  s a i d that  of cooperation.  i s some  t o manage  Perhave  spirit but at  o f t h e work i t d o e s a n d  a l l t h e a r e a s i t manages  how. The  B u r e a u o f L a n d Management  minately  450 m i l l i o n  p a r e s t o about  acres  L a n d Management was Office is  acres  f o r the Forest  f o r the Park S e r v i c e ,  created  and t h e G r a z i n g  part  o f t h e p u b l i c domain.  160 m i l l i o n  25 m i l l i o n  about  acres  i s responsible  This  com-  S e r v i c e and  The B u r e a u o f  i n 1946 f r o m t h e ' G e n e r a l  Service.  o f t h e Department  f o r approx-  Land  L i k e the Park S e r v i c e i t  o f the I n t e r i o r ,  Much o f t h e l a n d managed b y BLM i s l a n d w h i c h was n o t wanted b y t h e F o r e s t ment  f o r watershed  or by the p u b l i c f o r various  suitable are  Service  largely f o r grazing  areas,  substantial years  particularly  uses.  and t i m b e r  Much o f i t i s  or mining a c t i v i t y .  i n Oregon and C a l i f o r n i a ,  timber h a r v e s t i n g  goes o n .  BLM h a s a t t e m p t e d t o p r o v i d e  manage-  There where  In the l a s t  few  more o u t d o o r r e c r e a t i o n .  19 BLM  faces  two m a j o r p r o b l e m s i n m a n a g i n g i t s l a n d s .  has  no o r g a n i c  actlike  the Park Service  do,  so i t s r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s  stated.  Efforts  arebeing  passed.  Second, t h e s t a f f  made now t o h a v e a n o r g a n i c a c t is relatively  offices  don't have t h e e x p e r t i s e  lease  land t o state r e c r e a t i o n agencies  arebetter  funded  ship  handling mineral veying  lands  a l l federal lands,  and o f f i c i a l l y  a c q u i r i n g and l i q u i d a t i n g  be c a l l e d  Service  owner-  federal  land,  and h a n d l i n g  on o f f s h o r e  lands.  and t h e Park S e r v i c e ,  a r i s e about  on t o f i n d  Basically  with  thebest  The s u r -  a solution.  S e r v i c e ' s , m u l t i p l e use.  is  similar.  An  example i s g r a z i n g .  resources  T h e r e i s more  of providing  resources  W i t h l e s s s t a f f management i s l e s s i n t e n s i v e . Ranchers w i l l  lowland range i n t h e w i n t e r . higher  Service.  t h e two S e c r e t a r i e s  BLM's o r i e n t a t i o n i n m a n a g i n g i t s  the Forest  with  and t h e o t h e r  the Forest  use,  m i n i n g o n BLM l a n d , b u t t h e p h i l o s o p h y  on  o f land  for  a n d o w n e r s h i p powers w o u l d b r i n g BLM i n c o n t a c t  Where c o n f l i c t s  like  agencies  BLM h a s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  p o w e r s w o u l d b r i n g them i n c o n t a c t  is  T h e y may  or federal  keeping records  i n c l u d i n g those  both the Forest  may  Frequently the  they need.  r i g h t s o f way on f e d e r a l l a n d s , leases  3000 n a t i o n -  and s t a f f e d .  Beyond managing t h e s e surveying  small,  Service.  local  who  Service  and powers a r e n o t c l e a r l y -  25,000 f o r t h e F o r e s t  a l l y versus  and F o r e s t  It  Forest  Service  g r a z e on t h e i r own  I n t h e summer t h e y w i l l  range.  graze  I n b e t w e e n i s BLM l a n d  t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e s t o c k must move.  Because i t h a s no o r g a n i c  20 act  and b e c a u s e  of the nature  of i t s land  BLM's g r a z i n g  management i s n o t what t h e a g e n c y w o u l d l i k e . starting  t o change, the  B e c a u s e BLM Areas, cal,  land  lies  near  Park  and  relieve  or p o t e n t i a l  land  One  proAct,  hope o f some  a b l e t o p r o v i d e more  the F o r e s t S e r v i c e or Park  the p r e s s u r e  on  L i k e w i s e where  BLM  Wilderness  Areas  Service,  attempts  so i t w o u l d d e t r a c t  from  out-  are  the  Areas,  major t a s k these three agencies w i l l and management  t h r e e o f them w i l l  be  of public  f a c e soon  i n v a r i o u s a s p e c t s o f l a n d management. o f members o f e a c h  guide, t h i s  f u t u r e work w i l l  t h a n t h e r e has  The  Several  performed  and  ex-  I f the  of these agencies  be  will  lands i n Alaska,  able to provide expertise  impressions  5)  be  Service lands.  existing  the d i s p o s i t i o n  perience  sort  t o d e v e l o p BLM  Wilderness  All  they w i l l  of this  S e r v i c e and  One  identi-  r a t h e r than l e g i s l a t i v e  withdrawn from m i n i n g .  i s that  recreation  managed b y  be  c a n be  i n BLM  made n o t  They are almost  Because t h e y are not under the W i l d e r n e s s  these areas  Forest  authorized to create Wilderness  have a d m i n i s t r a t i v e  tection.  door  i s not  just  c u s t o d y t o management.  i t creates P r i m i t i v e Areas,  but  people  change from  This i s  are  with less  any conflict  been i n the p a s t ,  CI a s s i f i c a t i o n  of Federally-Owned  classifications  b e e n and w i l l  be m e n t i o n e d  between these  classifications  d i f f e r e n c e s were i n p a r t  Public  of federally-owned land  i n this  thesis.  The  Land have  differences  are important, because  what t h e v a r i o u s p a r t i e s  these  involved  21 in  t h e A l p i n e Lakes  The  most i m p o r t a n t  p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s were t a l k i n g classifications  are Wilderness  National Recreation Areas, National Parks, use  about. Areas,  and m u l t i p l e  areas. Wilderness Areas  are c r e a t e d under the Wilderness A c t .  They are r o a d l e s s areas  o v e r 5000 a c r e s w i t h no v i s i b l e  d e n c e o f man's i m p a c t .  The o t h e r c r i t e r i a  Areas  are discussed l a t e r  i n the t h e s i s  where t h e W i l d e r n e s s A c t i s c o p i e d .  f o r Wilderness  or i n the  appendix,  The F o r e s t S e r v i c e a n d  the Park  S e r v i c e c a n b o t h recommend W i l d e r n e s s A r e a s  Congress  c r e a t e s them.  official  creation  little is  vice  Service Wilderness  e x t r a p r o t e c t i o n , because toward  Wilderness Areas  and  A c c o r d i n g t o one P a r k S e r v i c e  o f a Park  already oriented  evi-  Park  affords  S e r v i c e management  preservation.  Most F o r e s t  were c r e a t e d f r o m P r i m i t i v e  Ser-  Areas.  T h e s e a r e a s were a l l c r e a t e d b y t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e p r i o r t o the Wilderness A c t . a c r e s t o 100,000  T h e y were d i v i d e d  never  Areas  for inclusion  were t o be s t u d i e d  possible was  present but  System.  completed.  In addition  to review  as W i l d e r n e s s .  100,000  there w i l l  into  A l l Primitive  i n the Wilderness  o v e r 5000 a c r e s f o r The Park S e r v i c e  a l l i t sroadless areas.  there are both P r i m i t i v e Areas  a t some t i m e  5000  the Forest S e r v i c e under-  o f a l l i t s r o a d l e s s areas  classification  required  areas,  o f c l a s s i f y i n g P r i m i t i v e Areas  t h e s e two c a t e g o r i e s was  took review  wild  a c r e s , and w i l d e r n e s s a r e a s , o v e r  acres, but the process  Preservation  into  So a t  and W i l d e r n e s s  be o n l y W i l d e r n e s s A r e a s  Areas, except  22 for  BLM P r i m i t i v e A r e a s .  not  reclassified  use  management. Within  Those F o r e s t  Service  P r i m i t i v e Areas  as W i l d e r n e s s Areas would r e v e r t t o m u l t i p l e  W i l d e r n e s s A r e a s many u s e s a r e p r o h i b i t e d .  s o u r c e s cannot be removed, e x c e p t i n c a s e s s u c h as  Re-  rock-  h o u n d i n g , m o t o r i z e d v e h i c l e s cannot be u s e d , r o a d s and structures protected  cannot be b u i l t , kind  National Basically  T h e s e a r e t h e most  o f areas o f any f e d e r a l Recreation  land.  A r e a s have a l r e a d y been  discussed.  t h e s e h a v e b e e n a r e a s managed f o r i n t e n s i v e r e -  creation, with  the p r o v i s i o n o f f a c i l i t i e s  v e h i c l e s , boats, managed l i k e enjoyment  and so o n .  and o t h e r  i n t e n s i v e uses,  Wilderness Areas  of future  managed f o r p r e s e n t  They are not  o r even N a t i o n a l  generations  i s kept  Recreation  P a r k s where  i n mind.  use by the p u b l i c .  manages s e v e r a l N a t i o n a l  f o r motorized  They a r e  The F o r e s t  Service  Areas, the Park  manages more o f them, i n c l u d i n g t h e f i r s t  Service  ones, and t h e  B u r e a u o f L a n d Management manages o n e .  Each N a t i o n a l  creation Area i s created  A c t o f Congress, so  there its is  c a n b e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e way e a c h a g e n c y manages  National  Recreation  A r e a s a n d b e t w e e n t h e way e a c h  area  managed. National  P a r k s make u p p a r t  T h e y were d e s c r i b e d as  by a separate  Re-  b y one - r e p r e s e n t a t i v e  the superlative units  bigger  than National  o f the National  o f t h e system.  Park  o f the Park  Service  They a r e g e n e r a l l y  Monuments, b u t t h e l a r g e s t u n i t  system i s Katmai N a t i o n a l  System.  Monument i n A l a s k a .  Both  i n the kinds  23 o f a r e a s a r e managed f o r t h e same p u r p o s e , t o p r o v i d e t h e American people o f present of high  scenic, recreational,  interest,. Parks  and f u t u r e  generations  historic,  and  such t o u r i s t  facilities  However, i n g e n e r a l  undeveloped classified very  except  I f s u c h a r e a s were t o b e would  change  little.  jects,  and u t i l i t y  hibited.  This  National  Parks a r e withdrawn from a l l uses  rights  meant t h a t  Forests  tioned  i n Forest  earlier  portions  o f way.  for tourist  s e v e r a l uses  f o r an  convenience  t h e u s e s men-  are l i m i t e d  i s managed f o r e x t e n s i v e '  T h e r e i s no n e e d f o r t h e k i n d  to find  the best  combination o f  Under t h i s  Service  philosophy  applies timber,  and r e c r e a t i o n a r e a l l o b j e c t i v e s .  i n an a r e a  to small  area.  u s e management.  sources  from  change i n a l l o w -  Generally  O v e r much o f i t s l a n d t h e F o r e s t  water, w i l d l i f e ,  pro-  A l l those uses are pro-  lands.  The r e s t  which t r i e s  such  since these uses are g e n e r a l l y  and p r e s e r v a t i o n .  of planning  grazing, water  p a r k s w h i c h were c r e a t e d  Service  o f the parks.  recreation  domestic  c o u l d undergo a d r a s t i c  f o r m s o f management,  permitted  tiple  i n Wilderness  as W i l d e r n e s s A r e a s , t h e i r management  mining, timber harvesting,  able  restaurants,  l a r g e areas i n parks are l e f t  fortrails.  Lands i n N a t i o n a l as  use, National  as h o t e l s ,  s h o p s , a n d r o a d s w h i c h w o u l d n o t be p e r m i t t e d Areas.  areas  scientific  B e c a u s e t h e y a r e managed f o r p r e s e n t  include  with  a r e s t u d i e d t o s e e how many  needs t h e y c a n meet.  mulgrazing, The r e -  different  I f u s e s s u c h as t i m b e r h a r v e s t i n g and  2h w a t e r s h e d management each other,  or grazing  t h e y may go on i n t h e same a r e a .  o r two u s e s a r e d o m i n a n t between u s e s . is  a n d r e c r e a t i o n c a n complement  since there  are often  every  a large  overall  out t o  needed by the American p e o p l e .  may p r o d u c e t i m b e r ,  others  may p r o v i d e  t h e most f a v o r a b l e  area  planning  a c o m b i n a t i o n o f a l l o r some u s e s i s c a r r i e d  produce resources  one  conflicts  M u l t i p l e u s e d o e s n o t mean t h a t  managed f o r e v e r y u s e , b u t t h a t w i t h i n  area  Generally  Some a r e a s  w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t , but  combination o f resources i s  provided. M u l t i p l e u s e management means r o a d s , p a r k i n g developed scape.  campgrounds, a n d b u i l d i n g s a r e p a r t  There are not the s t r i c t  Wilderness Areas  and N a t i o n a l  tion,  but there  recreation.  Parks.  as  Service  personnel  Re-  of providing  i s some o p p o s i t i o n  among  t o s i n g l e u s e management classification.  some such  The f e e l i n g  of  f o r America  o f m u l t i p l e u s e management.  In the Alpine  other  i n National  f o r providing natural resources  at the heart  this  exists  i s not the o v e r r i d i n g goal  i s implied by Wilderness  much q u e s t i o n  There i s a l s o not the  Because m u l t i p l e use i s the keystone o f F o r e s t  responsibility is  exist i n  C e r t a i n a r e a s may b e managed f o r r e c r e a -  S e r v i c e management, t h e r e Forest  o f the land-  p r o h i b i t i o n s that  p r i m a r y e m p h a s i s on r e c r e a t i o n t h a t creation Areas.  lots,  Lakes area  of a National  i s s u e was c r u c i a l classifications  there  d i d n o t a p p e a r t o be  Park being  created.  i n the North Cascades. of land  are important  However, The  three  i n the Alpine  2  Lakes p l a n n i n g t o be  process.  classified  s o l v e d was  5  Every proposal  a Wilderness.  which land  should  One  be  included  o f the  included  Wilderness Area(s) should  be.  Society  of Conservation  and  the  Coalition  posed a N a t i o n a l The  Recreation  p r o v i s i o n of areas  management o f l a n d s issues  involved  M u l t i p l e use  surrounding  the  e x i s t i n g L i m i t e d A r e a and  any  land  any  National  Wilderness  the  Recreation  classified  the  Forest  B.  The  the  Protection  Groups each  pro-  core.  Recreation  o f the  land  the  Area created. so  an  the  surrounding  was  should  resources  issue.  of  and/or  much l a n d  other  important  Area.  classification  How  that  both  than  Choosing  a major part  of  s t u d y team's w o r k .  and  Behavior o f the  Forest  Service  Administration  The  headquarters  o f the  i n W a s h i n g t o n , D.  Service ment a r e  and  his staff.  separate  ment i s i n t h e staffs.  large  Wilderness Area(s) created  u s e d was  Administration  1)  office  Service  re-  W i l d e r n e s s A r e a were  among t h e s e p o s s i b l e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s the  t o be  a Wilderness  w o u l d be  f o r m u l t i p l e use  c o u l d be  Lakes  a National  classification  surrounding  how  land  f o r n o n - W i l d e r n e s s r e c r e a t i o n and  i n considering  was  issues  and  Alpine  Area with  the  be  The  some  The  Forest  C. w i t h Forest  Service  the  Chief  research  Regional  regional offices  apply  t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r region without problems o f resource  management.  the  o f the  and  a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l y at t h i s  hands o f n i n e  are  Forest  forest level.  Foresters  national  manageManage-  and  national policy  getting into  the  They i n i t i a t e  day  their to to  policy  day for  26 their region the  forest  and  offices  Under the visors,  provide  one  expertise  or the  Regional  rangers  Foresters  f o r each N a t i o n a l  manage t h e i r  forest.  The  in certain  are  National  source uses.  Supervisor's  Supervisor's and  the  tions with  office.  District  i n the  arrangements should  Planning  R a n g e r and  and  o f the  district.  the  is clearly  diverse sonnel  f o r day  an  activities  The  and  of the  freedom to adapt  agency, but  how  well  out  rangers  stand  the  f o r c e s i n the  Forest  Service  hierarchy,  to  to  office.  geographically  still  permitting  situation.  The  perForest of  these  district. Forest  organization  Forest  dis-  i s responsible  have freedom t o adapt  s t u d i e d the an  The  direction  for a l l functions  what h a p p e n s i n o r g a n i z a t i o n s .  trifugal by  as  local  procedures  still  Kaufman h a s  i t functions  office  agency w h i l e  procedures to t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r Herbert  of a l l func-  o f the  i n t e g r a t e the  to t h e i r  Forest  management o f t h e  direction  re-  districts,  through i t to the n a t i o n a l to  sale  i s his supervisor.  t o day  forest  attempt  S e r v i c e Manual s p e l l s  take care  i s a well-defined  under the  office.  regional office  This  the  There  for planning  forest  makes  made f o r c e r t a i n  i s divided into  e a c h p e r s o n k n o w i n g c l e a r l y who  trict  office  staff  t o have a t i m b e r  be  his staff  Super-  their  g e n e r a l l y o r i g i n a t e s from the Each f o r e s t  ranger i s responsible  Forest  T h e y and  m a j o r d e c i s i o n s , s u c h as w h e t h e r o r n o t o r what f i n a n c i a l  when  cannot p r o v i d e i t .  Forest.  Forest  fields  He  Service  counteract  and  these  Service  and  see  to b e t t e r under-  discusses the  to  the  cen-  policies  used  forces.  By  spending  27 time with D i s t r i c t  Rangers i n f i v e  u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f what t h e y d i d and what t h e y He  states  that  tively  short  t i m e t o do  Forest  Service.  to  many f u n c t i o n s  one  o f what f a c t o r s  having operations  geographical  just  job  He  conditions i t s job  points  to  throughout and  present  ing  timber,  the  large  i t performs.  and  forest fires  o f f i c e s and  national  Forest  Supervisors  Instructions and  physical close  distance  The  The Forest  have t o  District to  the  general  are  challenges  Forest  Service  itself  flexibility  Kaufman d i s c u s s e s  Service  unified.  prohibitions  officers  place  i n dealing the  By  and  t h e i r spedue  attitudes, R a n g e r s may  stressed with  toand feel  national  decentraliza-  local  problems.  t e c h n i q u e s used to keep  using  are  R a n g e r s must  i t s needs above has  functions.  depend  Social distance  to u n i t y .  perform-  Rangers,  The  guidelines  same t i m e .  sale  Rangers.  District  i n b a c k g r o u n d , e x p e r i e n c e , and  t i o n to provide  and  f i t the  t o t h e i r community and  goals.  and  is  r a n g e management, office  sometimes c o n t r a d i c t o r y .  s i t u a t i o n at  differences  and  and  Service.  management and  office  from above, sent  develop p o l i c y to cific  Forest  for recreation,  Regional  the  the  Fighting  even p e r s o n n e l  general  to  rela-  a r e a managed  management, and  often  a  Kaufman shows some d i f f e r e n t ways o f Likewise  country  land  wildlife  on  the  h a v i n g had  w h i c h demands a l o t f r o m t h e  this function.  heavily  an  affected  challenges  Rangers have a l o t o f d i s c r e t i o n i n the of  Kaufman g o t  did.  under v a r i e d  the  districts,  authorizations,  p r e d e t e r m i n e what l i n e  the  directions, personnel  28 will  do.  D e t a i l e d m a n u a l s and  guidelines  on how  things  require  clearance  t l e d by  supervisors,  t o be  f r o m a b o v e , and personnel  Budgets are  prepared at  the  Regional,  Forest,  are  plans  the  and  done.  f i t i n t o the Reports,  work by signed  the to  District  National  pattern.  official  diaries,  find  for  misbehavior are  from normal p o l i c y . transfer  and of  public  o f the  has  the  approved  over  opinions  from  Forest  o f a t t i t u d e s among t h e  Service  office  differ  training, badges,  the  contribute  de-  the  tendencies to  officers,  personnel that  have  sanctions  o f u n i f o r m s and  field  at by  certain  S e l e c t i o n of candidates, use  set-  inspections  public  means o f d e t e c t i n g  are  Districts  regular  actions  together  transfers of personnel,  promotion, the  soliciting  put and  line.  and  some c o n t r o l .  performance of  appeals by  Rangers' heads, r e g u l a r  level,  levels,  of supervisors,  faults,  B e c a u s e some  l o w e r down f e e l  larger  offices  instructions  because disputes  C o n g r e s s , t h e n d i s t r i b u t e d down t h e to  provide  image  to the  coincide  the  formation  with  agency  goals. Kaufman c o n c l u d e s t h a t goals,  2)  there  are  few  1 ) p e r f o r m a n c e comes c l o s e  symptoms o f  field  t o r e s p o n d t o u n i f i e d p o l i c y a c t i o n , 3) men  are  responding to  leadership,  upheld by  their superiors  w o r k s , 6)  the  has  preserved  k)  officers  leaders  i n a p p e a l s , 5)  the  within  h a v i n g to b r i n g i n people from  He  i t s organization  outside  to  field  generally  transfer policy  t e c h n i q u e s o f i n t e g r a t i o n work. flexibility  ceasing  feel  rangers are  to  fill  feels i t without  high  offices.  29 The  Forest  forces.  S e r v i c e has  managed t o r e s i s t  F r o m Kaufman's p o i n t  model f o r other  2)  o f view i t o f f e r s a  organizations  Behavior of the  the c e n t r i f u g a l  to  Forest  Some h a v e c r i t i c i z e d t h e  favorable  copy*  Service  Wilderness Act  f o r vagueness.  8 McCloskey  felt  there  nitions  of Wilderness.  an  area  as  if  part  o f an  entire the an  was  vagueness i n the  It i s unclear  a whole or to p a r t s  area  area  be  i s roaded  o f an  o r has  disqualified?  whether they a p p l y area.  For  been logged,  uses.  should  the  about  McCloskey f e e l s  whether i n c o m p a t i b l e  to  instance,  There i s a l s o vagueness  p r o h i b i t i o n of incompatible open q u e s t i o n  qualifying defi-  uses always  i t is  disqualify  9 areas  from c o n s i d e r a t i o n .  relating  to p e r m i s s i b l e  compatible is  and  included The  i n the  purpose  the  c r i t e r i a o f the  A  Forest  d e t e r m i n e what p a r t s  copy o f the  Service's  o f the  Wilderness Act  s u i t a b l e l a n d was  not  Alpine and  compete w i t h  classified other  uses  as  9  "The  ^McCabe, op_ c i t .  clauses  which uses  are  Act  decision  of resources  process  Lakes r e g i o n  met  t o d e t e r m i n e how  much  purposes.  classification  Wilderness.  S e r v i c e makes a d e c i s i o n l i k e Lakes. o McCloskey, Meaning"  the  Wilderness  needed f o r other  land which i s s u i t a b l e f o r Wilderness necessarily  feels  appendix.  of the  to  McCabe  u s e s make i t c o n f u s i n g  which a r e n ' t .  was  of the  Likewise  W i l d e r n e s s has  is  Forest  i t s d e c i s i o n i n the  Alpine  of  1964:  not  to  whenever the  Wilderness Act  All  I t s Background  and  30 S e v e r a l p e o p l e h a v e s t u d i e d and Service, and  Michael  evaluated  very  Frome t r a c e d t h e  o f the  Pinchot  I n t e r i o r to the  a s t r o n g a t t i t u d e toward the use  the  Forest  organization's h i s t o r y  i t s management o f f o r e s t  e a r l y , when G i f f o r d  Department  analyzed  land.  He  stated  moved h i s b u r e a u f r o m Department  that the  of Agriculture,  of natural resources  existed.  The T r a n s f e r A c t o f 1905 e f f e c t e d t h e s w i t c h t h a t R o o s e v e l t h a d recommended and o p e n e d a new e r a i n g o v e r n m e n t f o r e s t r y . The s m a l l b u r e a u t h a t P i n c h o t h e a d e d b l o o m e d as t h e U,S, F o r e s t S e r v i c e , Use r a t h e r t h a n mere c u s t o d y was now c l e a r l y t h e d o c t r i n e t o g o v e r n t h e f o r e s t r e s e r v e s ( s o o n t o be designated •national forests'). In a c e l e b r a t e d l e t t e r to the C h i e f F o r e s t e r , S e c r e t a r y o f A g r i c u l t u r e James W i l s o n d e c l a r e d t h a t ' c o n s e r v a t i v e u s e i n no way conflicts w i t h (the r e s e r v e s ' ) permanent v a l u e , * Thus, s a l e and c u t t i n g o f t i m b e r were i n s t i t u t e d and r e g u l a t e d , and f e e s were c h a r g e d , 1 0 Frome f e e l s changed w i t h  the  a t t i t u d e of the  Forest  Service  has  time.  B a s i c a l l y t h e modus o p e r a n d i o f t h e a g e n c y evolved i n t o the f o l l o w i n g sequence:  has  Resource c u s t o d i a n s h i p C a s u a l management o f r e s o u r c e s A p p l i c a t i o n of multiple-use p r i n c i p l e s I n t e n s i v e management o f r e s o u r c e s E n v i r o n m e n t a l a w a r e n e s s and e c o l o g i c  11  responsibxlity.  1 1  However, c h a n g e i s s l o w , b e c a u s e t h e  agency does not  t o p e o p l e w i t h new ideas. The F o r e s t S e r v i c e i s n o t s i n g l e - m i n d e d ; yet t h e r e a r e few e x p r e s s i o n s o f i n d i v i d u a l i s m . Innovative t h i n k i n g l i k e that of such f i g u r e s  Frome, The  Forest  Ibid.,  hk.  p.  S e r v i c e , p,  14,  cater  31 as A l d o L e o p o l d , A r t h u r C a r h a r t , and R o b e r t M a r s h a l l i s n o t encouraged,, Despite the i d e o l o g y o f decent r a l i z a t i o n , t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d i t s p e r s o n n e l move down t h e same p a t h , ' 3 It  was f r o m t h e s e  impetus  i n n o v a t i v e p e o p l e t h a t much o f t h e  f o r p r o v i d i n g o u t d o o r r e c r e a t i o n came.  t i m e t h e r e were g r e a t  pressures  f o r resource  A t t h e same  development.  During  "World War I I t h e r e was h e a v y demand f o r t i m b e r  virgin  f o r e s t s i n the P a c i f i c  Olympic N a t i o n a l Park, these  pressures.  The  I t required great  passed t o increase  the  needs.  Forest  supply  allowable  I n speaking  Service  areas.  1963  1970.  cuts  considerably  against  this  bill  t o meet the Chief o f  He s a i d  unlogged,  a b e t t e r way t o i n c r e a s e  land.  A ten year  S e r v i c e p o l i c y may b e s l o w e d b y Development Program f o r t h e p e r i o d  t o 1972 was s u b m i t t e d  program f o r "timber was  strongly.  would be t o improve t h e p r o d u c t i v i t y o f  Changes i n F o r e s t Congress,  industry protested  spoke o f t h e need t o keep areas  o f timber  underproductive  t o combat  t o get a N a t i o n a l Timber Supply A c t  even non-wilderness the  effort  of  When t h e M u l t i p l e U s e - S u s t a i n e d Y i e l d A c t  industry tried  housing  from  Northwest, i n c l u d i n g those  i 9 6 0 was p a s s e d , t h e t i m b e r  of  12  t o Congress.  The p o r t i o n o f t h e  s a l e s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n a n d management"  f u n d e d up t o 95$ o f t h e r e q u e s t e d  level  from  The p o r t i o n f o r " r e f o r e s t a t i o n and s t a n d  19^3 * ° management"  L e o p o l d , C a r h a r t , and M a r s h a l l were t h r e e o f t h e p e o p l e worki n g i n t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e who a p p l i e d t h e g r e a t e s t p r e s s u r e on t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n t o p r o v i d e w i l d e r n e s s o n i t s l a n d s . l 3  Ibid..  p. 42.  32  was funded up t o u s e " up t o  45$»  k0$>  f o r t h e same p e r i o d ; " r e c r e a t i o n - p u b l i c  " w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t management" up t o  " s o i l and water management" up t o 5 2 $ .  62$;  and  I n 1 9 7 1 the proposed  a d m i n i s t r a t i o n budget i n c l u d e d a $ 5 m i l l i o n i n c r e a s e t o $ 5 2 m i l l i o n f o r "timber s a l e s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and management," while  t h e a p p r o p r i a t i o n f o r a l l o t h e r management was kept at  ?25 million.  A summary o f a p p r o p r i a t i o n s i n the P a c i f i c  Northwest Region f o r f i s c a l y e a r 1 9 7 ^ i s i n c l u d e d i n the appendix a l o n g w i t h a b r i e f commentary. o f the a l l o c a t i o n process  I t g i v e s an i d e a  on a f o r e s t by f o r e s t b a s i s and  on a r e g i o n a l b a s i s . In 1 9 7 0 President  Nixon r e l e a s e d the f i n d i n g s and recom-  mendations o f h i s Task Force on Softwood Lumber and Plywood. I t recommended t h a t d e t e r m i n a t i o n provide,  "...reasonable  0  industry.  should  f l e x i b i l i t y t o take account o f  a n t i c i p a t e d swings i n demand " scrapping  o f timber f o r s a l e  Frome f e e l s t h i s  represents  o f s u s t a i n e d y i e l d and c a v i n g i n t o the t i m b e r However, the F o r e s t  plement these  S e r v i c e d i d l i t t l e t o im-  proposals.  A F o r e s t S e r v i c e r e p o r t , Management P r a c t i c e s on the B i t t e r r o o t N a t i o n a l F o r e s t A Task Force A p p r a i s a l May 1969April  1970. s t a t e s t h a t the p r e s s u r e  t o grow more timber  w i l l not go away e a s i l y . A r e c e n t s t u d y o f timber supply s i t u a t i o n s i n western Washington and Oregon i n d i c a t e s t h a t the t i m b e r output from the N a t i o n a l F o r e s t s w i l l  I b i d . , pp.  156-157.  33 d r o p a t l e a s t o n e - t h i r d once t h e b a c k l o g o f v i r g i n o l d - g r o w t h t i m b e r i s g o n e . (USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e 1969c) The p i n c h i s a l r e a d y b e g i n n i n g t o d e v e l o p . Inadequate t i m b e r s u p p l i e s are b e i n g blamed f o r a r e c e n t upward s p i r a l o f p r i c e s . Present concern i s g r e a t enough t h a t C o n g r e s s i s c o n s i d e r i n g l e g i s l a t i o n to a c c e l e r a t e the timber growing e f f o r t on t h e N a t i o n a l F o r e s t s . ^ 5 Despite Service  the  to use  creation,  there  demands f r o m w i t h i n  natural resources  before  was  one  of these.  from s t r i c t l y u t i l i t a r i a n as  a crop  t o be  values  without  Forest  about He  the  Forest  w o r r y i n g about  have been p e o p l e i n t h e  were c o n c e r n e d a b o u t r e c r e a t i o n and Robert M a r s h a l l  and  Service  rewho  Wilderness.  u r g e d g e t t i n g away  w h i c h v i e w even r e c r e a t i o n  measured q u a n t i t a t i v e l y .  The most i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r t h a t t e n d s t o b r e a k down t h e w i l d e r n e s s i s t h e m i s t a k e n a p p l i c a t i o n o f the good o l d u t i l i t a r i a n d o c t r i n e o f the g r e a t e s t number i n t h e l o n g r u n . I t m i g h t be s a i d , f o r i n s t a n c e , t h a t t h e t o t a l amount o f p l e a s u r e w h i c h c o u l d be d e r i v e d f r o m a h i g h w a y a l o n g the S i e r r a S k y l i n e would exceed t h a t w h i c h c o u l d be g o t t e n f r o m a t r a i l When one c o n s i d e r s , however, t h a t t h e r e a r e m i l l i o n s o f m i l e s o f h i g h w a y i n t h e c o u n t r y , many o f them e x c e p t i o n a l l y s c e n i c , and n o t a n o t h e r a r e a l e f t i n w h i c h one c a n t r a v e l f o r s e v e r a l weeks a l o n g the c r e s t o f a mountain range without encounteri n g t h e d i s t u r b a n c e s o f c i v i l i z a t i o n , i t a t once becomes a p p a r e n t t h a t , f r o m a n a t i o n a l l a n d s t a n d p o i n t , t h i s a r e a w o u l d be more v a l u a b l e as a w i l d e r n e s s . 1 ° 0  T h e r e a r e many who serves the  the  elite  feel  many, w h i l e  that harvesting  of n a t u r a l  p r o v i s i o n of Wilderness  resources  serves  only  few.  U.S.D.A., Management P r a c t i c e s on F o r e s t , p. 13. Frome, oj>. c i t • ,  pp.  68-69.  the  Bitterroot National  3h M a r s h a l l argued, however, t h a t a t r u l y d e m o c r a t i c s o c i e t y proves i t s e l f w i t h r e s p e c t f o r the r i g h t s o f t h e few, How many w i l d e r n e s s a r e a s , he was asked, d i d the c o u n t r y need? 'How many Brahms* s y m p h o n i e s , he r e p l i e d , 'do we n e e d ? ' ^ ? 1  These  same a r g u m e n t s a r i s e  today  when a r e a s  like  the A l p i n e  Lakes area are d i s c u s s e d . One  argument w h i c h i s f r e q u e n t l y r a i s e d  areas  w h i c h show t h e  tated  t o become a p a r t o f t h e W i l d e r n e s s  One  J u n e 1,  1966  showed t h a t he  effects  o f man's work c a n be  they  rehabili-  P r e s e r v a t i o n System,  Secretary of Agriculture  felt  i s whether  Orville  Freeman  could,  ' N a t i o n a l f o r e s t w i l d e r n e s s r e s o u r c e s s h a l l be managed t o p r o m o t e , p e r p e t u a t e , and where n e c e s sary, r e s t o r e , the wilderness c h a r a c t e r of the l a n d and i t s s p e c i f i c v a l u e s o f s o l i t u d e , p h y s i c a l and m e n t a l c h a l l e n g e , s c i e n t i f i c s t u d y , i n s p i r a t i o n and p r i m i t i v e r e c r e a t i o n , ^ 1  A n o t h e r argument for  Wilderness  Areas,  Rafael Wilderness jected  to the  concerns  who  s h o u l d draw  Frome d i s c u s s e s t h e  in California.  addition  The  case  because the  outsiders  drawing boundaries.  of the  Forest Service  o f 2200 a c r e s p r o p o s e d  tionists,  boundaries  by  ob-  conserva-  a d d i t i o n would s e t a precedent  c o n v i n c i n g t h e House I n t e r i o r  San  for  T h e y were s u c c e s s f u l i n Committee t o abandon  the  19 the  idea. Frome f e l t  land  1 7  should take  Ibid.,  p.  a l l the  conflict  precedence  about which use  i s unfortunate.  97.  18 F r e e m a n i n Frome, o p . c i t . . p . 19  Frome, op.  cit..  pp.  161-162.  100.  of  forest  35 T h e r e s h o u l d be no c o n t e s t b e t w e e n w i l d e r n e s s p r o t e c t i o n and t i m b e r p r o d u c t i o n ; b o t h a r e i m p o r t a n t f o r e s t r e s o u r c e s , and s c a r c i t y o f one c a n be as c r i t i c a l t o t h e n a t i o n as s c a r c i t y o f the other,20 McCloskey touches i n d u s t r y that the  Forest  M u l t i p l e Use-Sustained substitue b i l l  the p r e s s u r e  Y i e l d Act  from the  Service faces.  Y i e l d Act  to the Wilderness  would have l i k e d t o see Use-Sustained  on  of  He  19^0  Bill,  a compromise b i l l completely  states that  was The  timber  originally timber  like  the a  industry  the M u l t i p l e  r e p l a c e the  Wilderness  Bill, McCabe i s s t r o n g l y c r i t i c a l interpretation  of the Wilderness  o f the F o r e s t Act,  He  economic f a c t o r s weigh too h e a v i l y i n the determination  o f the  suitability  o f an  Service's  feels Forest  area  that Service's  for wilderness.  Men u s e t h e M i s s i o n s o n l y as v i s i t o r s , and t h e r e a r e t h e o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r s o l i t u d e as r e q u i r e d by the A c t , However, much o f t h e p r o p o s a l i s c o n cerned, not w i t h the s u i t a b i l i t y o f the area f o r W i l d e r n e s s , but w i t h r e s o u r c e i n v e n t o r y . Other t h a n some m e r c h a n t a b l e t i m b e r , t h e p r o p o s a l c o n cludes that the resource value of the area i s r e l a t i v e l y low. Such a d e t e r m i n a t i o n a p p e a r s of m a t e r i a l importance i n the recommendation o f t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e t h a t t h e a r e a be d e c l a r e d Wilderness, Some r e v i e w o f o t h e r w i l d e r n e s s proposals i n d i c a t e s that t h i s i s a uniform a s p e c t o f them. I f there are p o t e n t i a l o t h e r uses f o r p a r t s o f p r i m i t i v e areas, the agency w i l l l i k e l y recommend e x c l u s i o n o f t h e s e p a r t s from w i l d e r n e s s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . In a s i m i l a r r e p o r t c o n c e r n i n g t h e Mount J e f f e r s o n W i l d e r n e s s i n Washington ( s i c ) , f o r example, the agency recommended e x c l u s i o n o f p a r t s o f t h e p r i m i t i v e a r e a deemed s u i t a b l e f o r t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f saw timber,  • ••  I b i d . . p.  107.  36 Nowhere i n the d e f i n i t i o n o f w i l d e r n e s s o r elsewhere i s t h e r e a statement t h a t an a r e a i s not s u i t a b l e f o r w i l d e r n e s s i f i t has r e s o u r c e s v a l u a b l e f o r commercial u s e s , The F o r e s t S e r v i c e has t a k e n the stand, n o n e t h e l e s s , t h a t the v a l u e o f the l a n d f o r commercial uses i s a f a c t o r i n c o n s i d e r i n g the ' s u i t a b i l i t y ' f o r w i l d e r n e s s c l a s s i f i c a tion. / 2 1  He c r i t i c i z e s  the d i s i n c l i n a t i o n o f the F o r e s t  Service  to be l i b e r a l i n s e e i n g the temporary q u a l i t y o f some human disturbances.  When l o g g i n g has been done, even w i t h no p e r -  manent improvements o r h a b i t a t i o n on the l a n d and w i t h s t a n t i a l n a t u r a l recovery, wilderness.  sub-  an a r e a cannot q u a l i f y f o r  I n the M i s s i o n Mountains o f Montana areas i n -  f e s t e d w i t h spruce b a r k b e e t l e s were logged I n 1970 these  areas were omitted  i n 1954 and 1955»  from a w i l d e r n e s s  proposal.  Even though t h e p r o p o s a l s t a t e s t h a t the logged areas a r e h e a l i n g w e l l , and t h a t roads were immediately c l o s e d a f t e r l o g g i n g , these areas are not recommended f o r Wilderness because the i m p r i n t o f man i s s u b s t a n t i a l l y n o t i c e a b l e . The F o r e s t S e r v i c e demonstrates i n these recommendat i o n s t h a t i t i s not going t o c o n s i d e r p r i m i t i v e areas as a whole i n a p p l y i n g the standards e s t a b l i s h e d i n the d e f i n i t i o n . I t w i l l p i c k and choose the p a r t s o f a p r i m i t i v e area which i t f e e l s do not meet the d e f i n i t i o n a l s t a n d a r d s . I t w i l l recommend e x c l u s i o n from w i l d e r n e s s , although the i m p r i n t o f man t h a t e x i s t s i s t h e r e s u l t o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e c i s i o n s t o remedy a natural d i s o r d e r . 2 2  Wilderness  advocates f e e l t h a t minor d e f e c t s i n p a r t s o f a  l a r g e r a r e a a r e o v e r r i d d e n by the need t o manage t h e areas n e a r t h e boundary so the boundary can be p r o t e c t e d . i n g out areas w i t h minor d e f e c t s makes i t h a r d e r  McCabe, op. c i t . . pp. 33-34. I b i d . . p. 34.  Leav-  t o manage  37 the remaining  area f o r Wilderness,  McCabe p o i n t s t o t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n Act  o f t h e Department  o f the I n t e r i o r ,  have t h e narrow i n t e r p r e t a t i o n  that  o f the Wilderness He f e e l s  they  don't  the Forest Service has,  •These l a n d s a r e o f h i g h w i l d e r n e s s q u a l i t y w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n s o f a few o l d , i m p a s s a b l e m i l i t a r y r o a d s w h i c h a r e r a p i d l y d i s a p p e a r i n g , A few quonset huts a l s o remain, b u t t h e s e w i l l be r e moved. E x c e l l e n t s c e n i c , s c i e n t i f i c , and w i l d l i f e r e s o u r c e s would be i n c l u d e d i n t h e p r o p o s e d wilderness area,* There i s not the e f f o r t i n i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f t h e A c t , on t h e p a r t o f I n t e r i o r , to r e s t r i c t the a p p l i c a t i o n o f the Act.23 As  he d e s c r i b e s t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e , "They c o n t i n u e t o v i e w t h e 24  public  domain s o l e l y  McCabe s e e s for  as a s o u r c e  peting f o ra p o l i t i c a l He s a y s  t o much r e s o r t  that  Areas  as a c o n t e s t o f groups  response t o date  to the courts.  from  these  Gore Range-Eagle Nest  Service, in  from  the study,  sect  control  going through  it.  The c o u r t agreed  23 I b i d  P. 3 7 . p. 3 7 .  was  to the being  by the Forest  e v e n t h o u g h t h e r e was a r o a d b u i l t  a r e a s h o u l d be i n c l u d e d .  Ibid  i n Colorado  one  t h e a r e a s h o u l d be i n c l u d e d  adjacent  24  An a r e a n e x t  c o n s i d e r a t i o n as W i l d e r n e s s  Conservationsts f e l t  com-  c o n t e s t s have n o t l e d  However, he d o e s c i t e  P r i m i t i v e Area  process  the administering  example where c o u r t a c t i o n was s o u g h t .  excluded  development,"  the Forest Service's t y p i c a l decision  s e l e c t i n g Wilderness  agency.  o f commercial  for inthat the  s 38  The court found that there was sufficient evidence that the Meadow Creek area met the standards of primitivity as established in the Act, despite the existence of the road. The court stated that only the President by the Act has the power to consider whether a land area would be included as Wilderness, The Forest Service must report on the primitive area and upon any contiguous areas which would be •suitable* for inclusion according to the definitional standards of the Act, The court exercised no authority over the Forest Service with respect to the recommendations i t might make. It prohibited management for other uses i n the interim between the study and report, and final action of Congress, 2 5  McCabe also mentions the Forest Service practice of pretesting several alternative proposals for Wilderness through public meetings and then drawing up a single proposal, based on public response to the several  alternatives.  The Act i t s e l f , i t should be noted, requires only notice and hearing after a proposal has been prepared. Such pretesting of public opinion is not contemplated. The Forest Service does not deem public comment quite so essential under i t s other statutory mandates. Timber sales, for example, are made without elaborate efforts to determine the public reaction. The agency singles out wilderness for such special treatment. 2 ^ Some of the criticism comes from within the Forest Service.  Several reports have been published following  studies of management i n particular forests or regions. Management Practices on the Bitterroot National Forest Task Force Appraisal  A  May 1969 - April 1970 was one of these.  The u t i l i t a r i a n attitude of Forest Service management was c r i t i c i z e d , but the Forest Service was not alone i n taking the blame.  39 The d e s i r e t o k e e p t h e l a n d p r o d u c t i v e h a s a l w a y s b e e n an i m p l i c i t o b j e c t i v e i n F o r e s t S e r v i c e managemento Anyone who s a y s o t h e r w i s e h a s a f a u l t y sense o f history,, N e v e r t h e l e s s , a change o f emphasis i s n e c e s s a r y . The e m p h a s i s on r e s o u r c e p r o d u c t i o n g o a l s i s n o t u n i q u e t o t h e B i t t e r r o o t N a t i o n a l F o r e s t and does not o r i g i n a t e at the N a t i o n a l F o r e s t l e v e l . I ti s t h e r e s u l t o f r a t h e r s u b t l e p r e s s u r e s and a t t i t u d e s coming from above. W h i l e t h e g o a l s o f management on t h e N a t i o n a l F o r e s t a r e b r o a d a n d s o u n d , t h e most i n s i s t e n t p r e s s u r e r e c e n t l y h a s b e e n t o i n c r e a s e t h e t i m b e r c u t on t h e s e N a t i o n a l F o r e s t s i n o r d e r t o make more t i m b e r a v a i l a b l e t o e a s e t h e shortage of housing materials. The i n s i s t e n c e o f t h i s pressure i s i n d i c a t e d by the fact that the F o r e s t S e r v i c e i s r e q u i r e d , once a week, t o r e p o r t accomplishments i n meeting planned timber s a l e o b j e c t i v e s t o i t s Washington o f f i c e i n order t o keep t h e S e c r e t a r y o f A g r i c u l t u r e , Congress and o u t s i d e groups informed o f progress i n meeting t i m b e r c u t commitments. I t seems c l e a r t h a t u n t i l s o u n d l a n d management r e c e i v e s t o p p r i o r i t y i n f a c t as w e l l a s i n p r i n c i p l e f r o m t h e l e a d e r s o f t h e N a t i o n on down, t h e h a n d l i n g o f t h e p u b l i c l a n d s w i l l a l w a y s l e a v e s o m e t h i n g t o be d e s i r e d . ? 2  Mixed i n with Forest kind  criticism  o f t h e management o f t h e N a t i o n a l  i s a justification  o f management.  Later  f o r the existence i n the report  u s e d t o emphasize t h e important  o f some o f t h i s  bold  type-face i s  conclusions.  OF A L L THE POINTS TOUCHED UPON I N T H I S TASK FORCE REVIEW OF MANAGEMENT ON THE BITTERROOT NATIONAL FOREST, WE F E E L OBLIGED TO RESTATE FOUR WITH A L L THE EMPHASIS AT OUR COMMAND •ANY LINGERING THOUGHT THAT PRODUCTION GOALS HOLD PRIORITY OVER QUALITY OF ENVIRONMENT MUST BE ERASED •MULTIPLE USE PLANNING MUST BE DEVELOPED INTO A D E F I N I T I V E , S P E C I F I C , AND CURRENT DECISIONMAKING PROCESS THAT I T I S NOT TODAY.  2  ^U.S.D.A., Management P r a c t i c e s on t h e B i t t e r r o o t F o r e s t , p . 9»  National  40 •QUALITY CONTROL MUST BE EMPHASIZED AND REEMPHASIZED UNTIL I T BECOMES THE BYWORD OF MANAGEMENT. . »THE PUBLIC MUST BE INVOLVED MORE DEEPLY THAN EVER BEFORE IN DEVELOPING GOALS AND CRITERIA FOR MANAGEMENT. 28  F o r e s t Management i n Wyoming was another study.  It  s t a t e d t h a t t h e r e were some cases where l o g g i n g companies didn't  c o n s i d e r r e c r e a t i o n at a l l , and where  didn't e i t h e r .  One s u g g e s t i o n  planners  f o r improved management was  the p r o v i s i o n o f r r e s o u r c e i n f o r m a t i o n as a b a s i s f o r p u b l i c involvement. I n t h e Mountaineers p u b l i c a t i o n , The A l p i n e Brock Evans d i s c u s s e s i n the F o r e s t  the changes he f e e l s have t a k e n p l a c e  S e r v i c e over time.  began, t h e r e were many c r u s a d e r s National Forests  Lakes.  When the F o r e s t who f e l t  from e x p l o i t a t i o n .  Service  i t should  protect  Much o f the l a n d which  i s i n t h e N a t i o n a l W i l d e r n e s s P r e s e r v a t i o n System was s e t a s i d e i n the 1920's and the 1930's.  However, i n the 1940's  the emphasis changed t o r e p l a c i n g o l d t r e e s w i t h young ones t o make b e t t e r use o f the l a n d , and the F o r e s t  Service  became more c l o s e l y t i e d w i t h the timber i n d u s t r y . 20 L i m i t e d Areas were e s t a b l i s h e d i n the P a c i f i c Northwest i n 1946.  These were e s t a b l i s h e d by the R e g i o n a l  F o r e s t e r , not by the C h i e f F o r e s t e r .  The c l a s s i f i c a t i o n  was  used o n l y i n Region 6 , which i n c l u d e s Washington and Oregon. A L i m i t e d A r e a was a temporary c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , used t o s e t an a r e a a s i d e f o r study p r i o r t o permanent  classification.  41 The  phrase,  "stop,  scribing Limited was  Areas,  and  l i s t e n " has  The  a r e a s were c h o s e n b e c a u s e  a good p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t  strictly use  look,  hopeful  rather  logging.  t h a t much o f t h i s  Wilderness, these  t h e y m i g h t be  f o r W i l d e r n e s s use  which would i n c l u d e  areas,  could  he  Chief Forester  or the  Forester  them w i t h o u t  Secretary  Act, the  To  reclassify  Secretary  studied,  part  o f the  classified root for  for logging.  In  logging. o f the  created National  later  for  approval  the  by  classification o f the  and  In  1963  part  approval  of  be  as  strong  of the  M o n t a n a was  the  Wilderness  reclassified  1955» d e s p i t e  of  Wilderprotest,  P r i m i t i v e A r e a i n O r e g o n was  Disappointment  re-  Selway-Bitterreclassified  of conservationists with  the  G l a c i e r Peak W i l d e r n e s s A r e a i n Washington,  i n i960, Park,  Alpine  of  these  T h e s e a r e a s were t o  P r i m i t i v e A r e a i n I d a h o and  size  the  Three S i s t e r s  o f some  of Agriculture,  i n hearings,  n e s s A r e a s where s u i t a b l e .  as  established  P r i m i t i v e Areas r e q u i r e d  of A g r i c u l t u r e .  discussed  were  classified  p a s s a g e i n 1964  S e r v i c e , u n t i l the  multiple  Conservationists  P r i m i t i v e A r e a s were a p e r m a n e n t Forest  there  O r e g o n were r e c l a s s i f i e d  Regional  reclassify  de-  managed  1950*s l a r g e p a r t s  a r e a s i n W a s h i n g t o n and Because the  best  in  than f o r normal  l a n d w o u l d be  However, i n t h e  logging.  been used  l e d to  efforts  Because t h i s  to  create  l a s t has  L a k e s d e c i s i o n , i t w i l l be  i n Part  II.  a North  a direct discussed  Cascades  bearing in  on  detail  Evans f e l t been to  "de  t h a t many a r e a s  facto wilderness"  l o g g i n g companies i n the  were managed as as  such.  Because they  long time, for  their  being  sure  it  Act,  Forest  The  policies  satisfaction,  but  i t should  are  s a t i s f i e d with  not  w r i t e books o r a r t i c l e s  remembered t h a t Service policies may  Service  be  may  the  dissatisfied  v i e w was  Little  found.  people  feel  in  past.  little  about be  as  and  to the  from hear-  effect. to  the  the way  Wilderness  critical  o f the  i s a l o t of  Forest dis-  people  who  of National Forests  may  i t .  Also,  i t should  dissatisfied  be  with  Forest  conservationists discussed  above;  because they  don't  or other  feel  resource  written material expressing  T h e s e comments p r o v i d e  the F o r e s t  pres-  relate  remembered t h a t  c a t e r s enough t o t i m b e r  interests.  the  be  father  public  managed i t s l a n d s  t h e management  others as  No  sources  there  a  However, i n  Service  p u b l i c o b j e c t i o n s had  indicates that  for  sufficient  Forest  t h a t most o f them a r e  areas  classified  Wilderness  companies.  the  over  justification  facto wilderness".  S e r v i c e has  fact  weren't  t h e r e was  r e l a t e d management o f i t s l a n d s  Service's  they  they  above comments f r o m v a r i o u s  the has  and  had  These  were managed a s W i l d e r n e s s  to prevent  i n "de  i n g s were h e l d ,  way  1960's.  e a r l y 1960's t h e r e w a s n ' t  timber  The  although  over to timber  or l e g i s l a t i o n  selling  1950*s and  p e r m a n e n t l y c l a s s i f i e d as  turned  1950's and  Northwest which  f o r a l o n g t i m e were t u r n e d  conservationists felt  than being the  Wilderness,  i n the  S e r v i c e has  an  the  Forest  extraction  that point  i d e a o f how  of  some  conducted i t s business  43 One s o u r c e was f o u n d w h i c h r e p r e s e n t e d a d i f f e r e n t o f view. Public  In h i s article  Lands"  Con S c h a l l a u d i s c u s s e s t h e n e e d  t e n s i v e management lands.  p r e s e n t management  in  t h e West p r i v a t e  supplies  producing  of a significant  gap  s u p p l y a n d t i m b e r demand b y t h e y e a r 2000  if  and t h a t  On  f o r more i n -  o f the Forest Service's timber  He p o i n t s t o t h e l i k e l i h o o d  between t i m b e r  ly,  "Fostering Intensive Forestry  point  policies  are continued.  He s a y s  l a n d s a r e b e i n g managed f a i r l y  opportunities  f o r i n c r e a s i n g softwood  are mostly i n p u b l i c  ,  that  intensivetimber  lands.  S e v e r a l r e c e n t r e p o r t s h a v e s u g g e s t e d ways t o i n c r e a s e t i m b e r p r o d u c t i o n on p u b l i c l a n d s through i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n ; i f o p p o r t u n i t i e s e x i s t , t h e n why a r e n ' t f u n d s a p p r o p r i a t e d ? I b e l i e v e p o l a r i z a t i o n i n the ranks o f n a t u r a l resource users i s the major reason. The r h e t o r i c a n d i n v e c t i v e g e n e r a t e d h a v e so e n e r g i z e d t h e p o l i t i c a l forum t h a t i t i s simp l y more e x p e d i e n t f o r C o n g r e s s i o n a l l e a d e r s t o i g n o r e a n y and a l l p r o p o s a l s f o r i n t e n s i v e f o r e s t management. The demise o f H a t f i e l d ' s (S.350) and M e t c a l f ' s (S.1734) timber s u p p l y b i l l s i s evidence o f t h i s deadlock, ^ 2  He f e e l s N a t i o n a l Parks  the debate  over p o t e n t i a l Wilderness Areas  i s often unfortunate,  or '  , , , t i m b e r i n t e r e s t s a t one e x t r e m e , a n d p r e s e r v a t i o n i s t s a t t h e o t h e r , have been p r o m o t i n g t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e f o r m s o f 'more i s b e t t e r ' o b j e c t i v e s . As a r e s u l t , t h e s e g r o u p s h a v e become p r e o c c u p i e d with the l e s s d e s i r a b l e s i t e s f o r both timber p r o d u c t i o n and w i l d e r n e s s u s e . C o n t r o v e r s i e s r e g a r d i n g t h e e x t e n s i o n o f t h e n o - c u t zone i n t h e B o u n d a r y W a t e r s Canoe A r e a o f n o r t h e r n Minnesota, the e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f t h e N o r t h Cascades N a t i o n a l P a r k , t i m b e r h a r v e s t i n g p r a c t i c e s on t h e B i t t e r r o o t N a t i o n a l F o r e s t and t h e F r e n c h P e t e  29  ^Schallau, p . 659.  " F o s t e r i n g I n t e n s i v e F o r e s t r y on P u b l i c  Lands,"  hh  Creek area, are examples of s i t u a t i o n s where considerable public debate was generated byproposals to modify or eliminate timber production on economically i n f e r i o r timber-growing s i t e s . 3 0 By concentrating on the areas where timber can be grown e f f i c i e n t l y and managing them more i n t e n s i v e l y the Forest Service could provide the increased supply of timber needed i n the future and i t could avoid some of these  conflicts.  In the future, we must avoid the longstanding preoccupation for what's to be done with poors i t e timber-producing lands. This makes good sense from an economic e f f i c i e n c y standpoint. Besides, the low-site timber-growing lands often are the locus of competing u s e s . 3 1 Discussion of t h i s a r t i c l e should be seen as a start i n understanding the viewpoint of industry and of those concerned about future timber supplies,  and i n seeing how  these concerns r e l a t e to the creation of Wilderness Areas. Hopefully t h i s balances at least i n a small way the  discus-  sion of material which preceded i t and which represented different C,  set  a  of viewpoints.  History of the Alpine Lakes The Forest Service has operated within t h i s  general  background i n managing and studying the Alpine Lakes region, l)  P r i o r to the North Cascades Study of  1965  In 1908 the Snoqualmie and Wenatchee Forests were established Forest.  i n part of the former Washington National  As e a r l y as 1920 a proposal was made to include  I b i d . . p. 6 5 9 .  mm  NATIONAL FORESTS exisriNo  75  Map 1  100  \VILDEKHCSS|  46 the e n t i r e  Cascade range  N a t i o n a l Park  S e r v i c e study suggested  Snoqualmie and Stevens  Passes  some a r e a s  be i n c l u d e d  a 3»000,000 a c r e p a r k t o e x t e n d  Park,  d e r t o Mt. Adams a n d Mt. S t . H e l e n s  A l p i n e Lakes  from  1957 t h e e w l y n  Council  asked  that  the Canadian  i n southern  formed  bor-  Washington.  a 256,000  one o f 20 i n t h e P a c i f i c  Limited Area,  "for further study o f r e c r e a t i o n In  between  i n an I c e Peaks  19^6 t h e R e g i o n a l F o r e s t e r e s t a b l i s h e d  In  I n 1937 a  i n a N a t i o n a l Park.  acre Northwest,  potential."  North  Cascades  Conservation  t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e d e l a y s development o f  t h e Salmon L a S a c a r e a a n d s t u d y i t a n d t h e n e i g h b o r i n g Limited Area Wilderness and  f o rwilderness c l a s s i f i c a t i o n .  Society  suggested  Forest  and t h e S i e r r a  additional  Club  lent  I n 1958 t h e their  support  I n 1959 t h e  a r e a s t o be i n c l u d e d .  Service released plans f o r m u l t i p l e use zoning i n the  33 area/ In  1961 J o h n  Cascades Area,  Warth p r e s e n t e d a p r o p o s a l t o t h e N o r t h  C o n s e r v a t i o n C o u n c i l f o r an A l p i n e Lakes  a n d i n 1962 t h e W i l d e r n e s s  proposal. support  I n 1963 s e v e r a l  Society  t o 334,000  Area to replace the Limited Area. d e p e n d o n t h e amount o f p r i v a t e However, i n 1962 t h e f i r s t Wilderness Area had taken p l a c e .  A l p i n e Lakes  Protection  supported a  c o n s e r v a t i o n groups  a p r o p o s a l f o r a 278,000  The e x a c t  land  Wilderness similar  joined to  acre  Wilderness  s i z e was t o  included.  timber  sale  The N o r t h  i n the proposed Cascades  S o c i e t y , A l p i n e Lakes  Primer,  p.2.  k7  Conservation ging  Council  and r e q u e s t e d  Evans f e e l s  this  opposed t h e s a l e o f t h e timber  d e f e r r a l , but the timber  s a l e and o t h e r s  f o r log-  was s o l d .  Brock  made a b o u t t h e same t i m e 2k  were e x a m p l e s o f " w i l d e r n e s s sale  preventative  i s h e l d a t t h e upper end o f a v a l l e y  lower end, a r o a d when t h e a r e a suitable. later  i s quickly built  i s considered  So t h e l a n d  on w i t h o u t  logging."  A  instead o f the  t o t h e s a l e a r e a , and  f o rWilderness,  i t i s no l o n g e r  f a r t h e r down t h e v a l l e y  i s logged  much o b j e c t i o n f r o m c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s  possible. 2)  The N o r t h Cascades  From i t s f o r m a t i o n tion  Council  Study  i n 1957 t h e N o r t h C a s c a d e s  concentrated  on t h e a r e a  G l a c i e r Peak t o t h e C a n a d i a n b o r d e r , the  Alpine  presented ness Area. in  Lakes.  Part  o f the area  t h e G l a c i e r Peak L i m i t e d From  the  o f t h e Cascades further north  I t was i n 1957 t h a t  preliminary proposals  the Forest  f o r a G l a c i e r Peak  than Service Wilder-  Area.  N o r t h Cascades C o n s e r v a t i o n  organizations  including  Council proposed a National  P a r k be e s t a b l i s h e d i n t h e G l a c i e r Peak A r e a . efforts  from  i n c l u d e d i n t h e p r o p o s a l s was  1958 t o i960 c o n s e r v a t i o n  Service resisted  Conserva-  by Representative  The F o r e s t  Thomas P e l l y t o  h a v e t h e P a r k S e r v i c e make a r e c r e a t i o n e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e area.  I n i960 a F o r e s t  S e r v i c e G l a c i e r Peak W i l d e r n e s s  was e s t a b l i s h e d .  J  The M o u n t a i n e e r s , The A l p i n e  L a k e s , p . 111.  Area  48  C o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s were angered t h a t some areas had been left  out o f the W i l d e r n e s s A r e a .  f o r e s t e d v a l l e y s were o m i t t e d .  I n p a r t i c u l a r two h e a v i l y Buck Creek and Downey Creek  each have a c o n f l u e n c e w i t h t h e S u i a t t l e R i v e r , and t h e p o r t i o n s o f t h e i r v a l l e y s n e a r the c o n f l u e n c e s were kept i n m u l t i p l e use.  The F o r e s t S e r v i c e m a i n t a i n e d t h a t t h e  t r e e s i n these v a l l e y s and o t h e r areas c o u l d n o t be t a k e n away from the timber i n d u s t r y .  I r o n i c a l l y , these areas a r e  b e i n g s t u d i e d 15 y e a r s l a t e r f o r i n c l u s i o n i n t h e W i l d e r n e s s A r e a , under the F o r e s t S e r v i c e ' s Roadless A r e a Review. The  c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s banded t o g e t h e r .  o f the same k i n d o f d e c i s i o n s might G l a c i e r Peak.  They f e a r e d more  a f f e c t areas n o r t h o f  Because o f t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e w i t h t h e F o r e s t  S e r v i c e and t h e i r apprehension, t h e y c o n t a c t e d the N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e .  There were s e v e r a l r e q u e s t s f o r a j o i n t  o f the North Cascades  study  by the Departments o f A g r i c u l t u r e and  the I n t e r i o r , supported t o some extent by c o n g r e s s i o n a l p r e s sure f o r the same.  I n 19^3 NCCC proposed a N o r t h  Cascades  N a t i o n a l Park t o i n c l u d e the G l a c i e r W i l d e r n e s s A r e a and the a r e a t o the n o r t h toward t h e S k a g i t R i v e r V a l l e y , but not t o the Canadian b o r d e r .  I n c l u d e d were the downstream  p o r t i o n s o f t h e Buck Creek and Downey Creek  Valleys.  Adjacent t o the park t o t h e east and s o u t h was t o be a Chelan N a t i o n a l Mountain R e c r e a t i o n A r e a .  The p r o p o s a l  a l s o i n c l u d e d an A l p i n e Lakes Wilderness A r e a . L a t e r i n 1963 a j o i n t l e t t e r from S e c r e t a r y o f A g r i c u l t u r e O r v i l l e Freeman and S e c r e t a r y o f the I n t e r i o r  h9 Stewart  Udall  t o P r e s i d e n t Kennedy p l e d g e d  c o o p e r a t i o n " b e t w e e n t h e two t i o n was  a joint  bers  The Cascades  the  study,  and  s t u d y team, 2 f r o m  o f the  chairman  departments.  study o f the North  Kennedy e n d o r s e d  were  end  from  t h e White Pass  recommendaPresident  i n t h e y e a r t h e mem-  d e p a r t m e n t , and  a  years.  19660 study,  The  owned l a n d i n t h e  highway, a l i t t l e to the  Canadian  r e p o r t was  B e c a u s e t h e r e was t h e r e were two  south  of  border.  The  i n 1965  and.  prepared  disagreement  at  the  minority reports i n addi-  Park  S e r v i c e recommended a N a t i o n a l P a r k n o r t h  S k a g i t V a l l e y t o i n c l u d e Mount B a k e r and  toward  Ross Lake, a N a t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n A r e a  i n c l u d i n g p a r t o f Lake C h e l a n , Peak W i l d e r n e s s  Area  eastern portion  the  changing  to a N a t i o n a l Park,  Lakes-Mt. S t u a r t Wilderness, the  each  of  t o t h e s t u d y team r e p o r t . The  the  2y  in  of the  tion  later  era  selected.  Mount R a i n i e r N a t i o n a l P a r k ,  released  One  Cascades.  area studied included Federally  study took  "a new  and  an  the a r e a to the o f the  and  east  south Glacier  an A l p i n e  Okanogan W i l d e r n e s s  of the e x i s t i n g North  of  Cascades  in  Primitive  Area. The  Forest S e r v i c e proposed  P r i m i t i v e Area  to a Wilderness  G l a c i e r Peak W i l d e r n e s s  Area,  t h e r e g i o n b e t w e e n t h e s e two Aix  Wilderness  Rainier,  and  i n the  changing  Area,  the North  adding  creating a  a little  "High  Wildernesses,  Wildernesses  to  Country"  creating  Cougar Lakes r e g i o n east  c r e a t i n g two  Cascades  a  Mt.  o f Mount  s e p a r a t e d by  a  in  50  - A X A;  jS?  JJTJSHCOLUMBIA ? WASHINGTON  :•  4-"  NATIONAL  PARK-'[  V^> J ' /  \ /  /SVl  -  !  ^  CANADA  UNITEDSTAYE  r)  . RECREATION  '  PARK  :AS.CADE{  J  AM  Mtn  • ML L a g o ^ f ^BELLINGHAM  , Robinson '.  \  '  )KANDGAN<;  <£>iab_ '  \ 1  \  SKAGIT CO. " "  l  i rfcvl"^*  <' ~"- 4»MT. ;i  1I  )/  >  it  I^ATIONALYJ  Concrete  i  VERNON  «r«halem  O  II™  \  I \  ^^ELDORADOiQ-IFl  JiKAGITO)^  NAI,Q^  fe  I., t>'; V Bridgeport!  ^ -  / {\ r  KINGSTON, CO  V  \  ;tSi  S  \  TCHEE  f  "  r * - -D0UGtAS_C0._, GRANT CO. ! RRANTC O.  NORTH CASCADES STUDY  MANAGEMENT AREAS R E C O M M E N D E D BY NATIONAL PARK SERVICE  NATIONAL P A R K S I NATIONAL RECREATIONAL AREA 1  WILDERNESS AREAS OTHER NATIONAL FORESTS LANDS NQQUALMlEs NATIONAL, FOREST"  K o  \  5  m o s ^ /  /  G  |  F  F  O  R  D  p|  N C H 0 T  NATIONAL FOREST--  ~  SCALE OF MILES  5  0  5  Map 2  10  15  20  51' m u l t i p l e use c o r r i d o r i n the A l p i n e Lakes a r e a .  These would  be the A l p i n e Lakes Wilderness A r e a , 150,000 a c r e s , and the Enchantment Wilderness A r e a , 3 0 , 0 0 0 a c r e s . proposal  The Park S e r v i c e  resembled the NCCC p r o p o s a l which would have i n c l u d e d  2 7 8 , 0 0 0 t o 3 3 ^ , 0 0 0 acres depending on how much p r i v a t e l a n d c o u l d be a c q u i r e d .  The Park S e r v i c e a l s o suggested t h a t the  W i l d e r n e s s A r e a "... c o u l d be the core o f l a r g e r  surrounding  35  region." F o l l o w i n g the p r e l i m i n a r y v e r s i o n o f the study team recommendations, the Park S e r v i c e withdrew i t s p r o p o s a l f o r a G l a c i e r Park N a t i o n a l Park, and i t suggested t h a t most o f the a r e a i n proposed E l d o r a d o - C h e l a n N a t i o n a l  Recreation  A r e a be i n c l u d e d i n the North Cascades Park. The  study team, recommendations, p r i m a r i l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e  o f the views o f t h e chairman, proposed a North Cascades N a t i o n a l Park, o m i t t i n g Mount Baker, but i n c l u d i n g the a r e a from the Canadian b o r d e r t o the Northern p a r t o f Lake Chelan. They a l s o proposed an Okanogan Wilderness t o the east o f the park, two separate  Wilderness Areas i n the A l p i n e Lakes  area,  s m a l l a d d i t i o n s t o the G l a c i e r Peak W i l d e r n e s s A r e a , and a Mt.  A i x Wilderness. When Senators Henry Jackson and Warren Magnuson, and  Representative  L l o y d Meeds pushed l e g i s l a t i o n f o r the a r e a  t h e r e were some changes.  T h e i r l e g i s l a t i o n concerned the  a r e a from G l a c i e r Peak n o r t h .  They i n c l u d e d a Ross Lake  U.S.D.I. and U.S.D.A., The North Cascades, p. 77.  52 •. W ^ & C A ~ l f i X A '.'•<•)• / . ) C /v _ . 7NV\  ,.  -:C?^5A A A , rr A ^ - ^ A A V  ^ - 1  f  BRITISH COLUMBIA <  r  "I WASHINGTON  ;  \  V\  N  /''/•'•>  JflMMMfllSHB  6  ORTf-A  A  X-^BEL-LINGHAM  , \  S  ; AREA'  nson (  AA & \ "  7  _  A CASCADE t fOSS^x k ^ # S  „ iRECREATION, , y * S S A K E X  "  MANNINGy^T^sfL  SKAGIT  LAK.  Bridgeport  \v7cA0 %A A W  /  A  /A  w  V^CheJan o>.'  /  CHEVV^  v  S\-i  ""5A  6 V  A—-—?—MiSti  . 0<  t  V  {  www  M A:.,A.:rA-:. ^ /'/ {  t) 'A SEAULE^#A / "'/.©A -AFA) -A  :AJA  f N'T JIWENATCHEE r  MS"- CHELANCcTj )'  i TACOMA A  :  " GRANT CO.  /j" 1  '• A  .^4^N-. . • NORTH CASCADES STUDY M A N A G E M E N T A R E A S R E C O M M E N D E D BY FOREST SERVICE  N A T I O N A L PARK S E R V I C E ADMINISTRATION JRSJOh C C  • • »  NATIONAL PARK rOREST S E R V I C E ADMINISTRATION  i  •JQSlJALMl'b.  ^  MAIlON^^os,.^ FOREST  ~p3=s5Js^-  JWhitePass  > ! MT. mu A / WILDERNESS  i  AIPFORD PINCHOT ^ | .x^^rn^i^-p^froTiM^: I  ' '"^WftoNAL>ORESTA^?o /  o )9  AiX  Wll PI R N ! SS AREAS OTHER SPECIAL AREAS OTHER NATIONAL FOREST LANDS  y SCALE OF MILES  5  0  Map  5 3  10  15 2 0  yv,  NORTHl  7—r^r »_ MANNING  CASCADESv-T—/  M A T / i n v / A V n * ni>  - p K A N O G A N  !  WILDERNESS  - CANADA "T»aaa— nSCADE t . <• • ^PRIMITIVE  RECREATION, -'I.-^ELLING HAM ]  _\  " \  I R \  \  -~»>:»  .'^.^Wl.'V-t  .Robmson  _V\'HATCOMCa_ \  r  •••  0•  SKAGIT CO. |  S^S^'j^ •  • *•  -  Mtn. s  '  ( Concret^  ; [  SKAGJT.CO. __  \ S N O H O M 1 S H C O , "jU**" ' 1  L^f3os^  0 )  ^  '  '  ^  "  EVERETT 3  '  ' ~ ^ > ? S , |  )QUALMIE ] I  ^ .  0/  '  ^  KINGSTON C p .  ; ;A -dh /  x  1  ALP/NELAT  ' ) ' ' SEATTLE >!  ;  !  ' /  D \\ WENATCHEE  '  p^DOUGLAS_ J \ GRANT C  poT^jK ! ^  CHSLAN  NORTH CASCADES STUDY  RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT AREAS NATIONAL PARK SERVICE ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL PARKS  mm  FOREST SERVICE ADMINISTRATION !  MT. A/X W/LDEKNESS  SjOfe^GIFFORD  PINCHOT NATIONAL FOREST v <  A  ^.c. o  M  M  WILDERNESS  mm  OTHER NATIONAL FOREST LANDS " SKAGIT  *  if  AREAS  OTHER SPECIAL AREAS WILD  SCALE OF MILES 5  RIVER  cxmrmmm 0 5  Map  h  10  15  20  5k  N a t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n A r e a which s e p a r a t e d  the renamed Pasayten  W i l d e r n e s s to the east from the park and which s e p a r a t e d n o r t h and  south p o r t i o n s o f the park,,  They added p a r t  the S k a g i t V a l l e y i n the west to the park and Recreation  Area.  the  the  of  National  They i n c l u d e d a Lake Chelan N a t i o n a l R e c r e a -  t i o n A r e a south o f the park, t h e r e b y making the park s m a l l e r . They l e f t  the p o r t i o n o f the highway c o r r i d o r f o r the  c r o s s s t a t e highway from Ross Lake east under F o r e s t c o n t r o l i n s t e a d o f i n c l u d i n g i t i n the Park,  new Service  Some s m a l l  a d d i t i o n s to G l a c i e r Peak W i l d e r n e s s were i n c l u d e d . The  bill  passed a l o n g w i t h b i l l s  f o r Redwoods N a t i o n a l  Park, Biscayne N a t i o n a l Monument, a d d i t i o n a l Wilderness A r e a s , a W i l d and  Scenic R i v e r s  System i n October, 1 68.  System, and The  Q  a National Scenic  b i l l which i n c l u d e d the North  Cascades N a t i o n a l Park r e p r e s e n t e d  a serious defeat  f o r the  F o r e s t S e r v i c e , because about 67^,000 acres o f F o r e s t were t u r n e d two  over t o the Park S e r v i c e i n the park and  National Recreation S e v e r a l observers  Trails  land the  Areas. f e e l t h a t the Study Team f e l t  a need  y  to make up  to the F o r e s t  S e r v i c e f o r the Study Team recommen-  d a t i o n o f a N a t i o n a l Park.  The  proposal  W i l d e r n e s s e s i n the A l p i n e Lakes a r e a was the blow to the F o r e s t Report on, the F o r e s t "de  Service.  f o r two a way  separate of softening  From the time o f the  Study  Service s a i d only that p o r t i o n of  the  f a c t o w i l d e r n e s s " which the Study Team recommended f o r  W i l d e r n e s s would be t r e a t e d as such. be managed f o r m u l t i p l e use.  Other areas were to  Conservationists  felt  that  '  55 THE WILD CASCADES  The new North Cascades National Park is bisected by the Ross Lake Recreation Area through part of which will run the North Cross-State Highway. Contiguous to the Ross Lake area is the Pasayten Wilderness area, with the Chelan National Recreation area abutting the southern sector of the national park. Numbers indicate the points shown in the accompanying photographs. I—Forbidden Peak. 2— Mount Shuksan. 3—Mount Redoubt. A—Mount Challenger. 5—Diablo Lake 6—Cascade Pass. 7—Eldorado Peak 6—Colonial Peak. 9—Washington Pass. 10—Lake Chelan. Map 5  Seattle Times October 27,  1968  56 the  two a r e a s were s e l e c t e d l a r g e l y b e c a u s e t h e y d i d n ' t  much c o m m e r c i a l substantial  3)  timber.  commercial timber,  to  logging  A f t e r the North Cascades  Evans s t a t e s t h a t Forest  I n the areas outside  on t h e west  officials  sold  Study o f t h e Snoqualmie  ging.  to s e l l plans  several tracts  report  t h e same y e a r t h e A l p i n e  a W a s h i n g t o n g r o u p , was 926,400 a c r e core the In  Forest  o f timber  National  o f 364,480 a c r e s . Forest  year deferral Recreation  Forests  Lakes P r o t e c t i o n S o c i e t y  Recreation  Areas. (ALPS),  I n 1970 ALPS p r o p o s e d Area, with  The s e p a r a t e  conservation  of timber sales w i t h i n  Area.  planned  area.  a  a Wilderness  a r e a s recommended  S e r v i c e were i n c l u d e d w i t h i n  1970 ALPS a n d o t h e r  for log-  o n t h e two W i l d e r n e s s  founded.  0  officials  1968 t h e S n o q u a l m i e a n d Wenatchee N a t i o n a l  prepared a preliminary  plans 1974  through  i n 1966 a n d 1968 showed  roads i n the conservationist-proposed  In  area  s i d e Wenatchee N a t i o n a l  Transportation  In  National  s i d e o f t h e Cascades announced no  on t h e e a s t  o r made p l a n s  which d i d i n c l u d e  began.  l o g i n the conservationist-proposed  However,  include  t h e ALPS  proposal.  groups requested the proposed  by  a 5  National  They noted t h e tendency o f Congress t o  create  Wilderness Areas l a r g e r than those proposed by the  Forest  Service.  The Wenatchee N a t i o n a l  refused  the d e f e r r a l .  At  t h e same t i m e  proposals  i n the area.  Forest  Supervisor  c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s were f i g h t i n g  other  M i n i n g i n t e r e s t s wanted a t r a i l f o r  57  Map 6  58 motorized  ore c a r r i e r s ,  on r i v e r s  i n t h e a r e a , a c o a l b u r n i n g power p l a n t  and  recreational  mining no  trail  trail  plans  built.  was  the  sold  are the  The  Wilderness  Act  i t s P r i m i t i v e Areas  possible Alpine  inclusion  L a k e s was  that  sell  the  The  sections i n  At  the  time  of  sec-  In order to l o g paying  owners o f t h e  up  private  sales.  checkerboard  land  revert  r e q u i r e d the F o r e s t S e r v i c e to i n the  entire  i n the Wilderness  scheduled  f o r review i n 1974.  review.  Mountaineers,  in  some o f i t s l a n d f o r  op_, c i t . , p .  117*  1974  c o u n t r y by Protection  review for  System.  a f t e r these  priority  A l p i n e L a k e s was  L i m i t e d A r e a , w h i c h meant i t d i d n ' t f a l l  J  con-  compensation.  a r e a s were s t u d i e d , s t a r t i n g  Area  for  s e c t i o n s are  s u c c e s s f u l b i d d e r s at the timber  the p u b l i c w i t h f a i r  all  When p r i v a t e  Often the  proposed  new  Some o f t h e s e  t o l o g g i n g companies.  same t i m e .  Conservationists to  a territory.  cost.  with  right-of-way i n states  in territories.  t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e may  l o g g i n g at the land  dismissed  companies need r o a d s w i t h t h e p u b l i c  90$ o r more o f t h e  the  p a t t e r n o f ownership  a l o n g the proposed  dams  proposed,  ALPS t o o k  problem  R a i l r o a d s were g r a n t e d a l t e r n a t e  t i o n s were l a t e r  logged,  Another  checkerboard  t h e g r a n t s W a s h i n g t o n was  to  c a s e was  was  However, t h e r e a r e a p p a r e n t l y  i n a 40-mile wide s t r i p  areas  The  operations.  a 20-mile wide s t r i p  these  wanted t o b u i l d  s u b d i v i s i o n s were p l a n n e d ,  f o r the mining  servationists  and  agencies  proposal to court.  t o be  some a r e a s .  several  into  the  a  Primitive  59 Conservationists on  the Alpine  asked the F o r e s t  Lakes,  People  Service  f r o m ALPS s a i d  N o r t h w e s t R e g i o n was f i n i s h e d  reviewing  One o f t h e F o r e s t  confirmed that  Supervisors  2 or 3 years  completed  ago i n 1971  D, C. o f f i c e was b u s y r e v i e w i n g in  fact,  still  finishing  Service in  a t the time  studies  responded  the n a t i o n a l schedule  turned  t o Congress.  studies  to multiple-use  by the Regional  ists  feared  areas  to  logging  as  soon as p o s s i b l e .  intent  as W i l d e r n e s s  of the other  only  a r e a s were l o g g e d  Spokesmen owners s a i d  f o r the forest  t h e y were a l s o  c a u s e ALPS h a d a b i l l  forced  also  Lakes without  feared  they said process  Forest  a repetition  o u t , some  t o the study  report.  i n d u s t r y and f o r l a n d -  t o t u r n to Congress. i n 1970,  they  I n the Pasayten  C o n g r e s s w a i v e d i t s own r e q u i r e m e n t  Alpine  lost  f o r Wilderness  As i t t u r n e d  products  a bill  conservation-  t h o s e a r e a s m e n t i o n e d as  ready t o submit  feared  reclassi-  L a k e s might be  subsequent  Congress might pass i t q u i c k l y .  Industry  f o r 197^  S e r v i c e h a d made known i t s  such i n the North Cascades Study.  survey.  Forester,  i f t h e whole a r e a wasn't c o n s i d e r e d  to treat  were  When t h e F o r e s t  c o u l d be  of the Alpine  The F o r e s t  regions;  conservationists  Areas  fied  timbered  The Washington,  L a k e s was s c h e d u l e d  Limited  then.  t h e r e v i e w was  some r e g i o n s  of priorities,  Since  the P a c i f i c  from other  of P r i m i t i v e Areas.  that Alpine  that  P r i m i t i v e Areas  o r 1972.  of the interviews  f o r action  that  there  might be p a s s e d  Service  feared  Wilderness  be a  mineral  f o r the  study o f the area.  o f t h e North Cascades s i t u a t i o n  a g e n c i e s were c o l l e c t i n g  instead o f before i t .  data  during  Be-  They where  the d e c i s i o n  60 The  pressure  from both  these  groups l e d to a l e t t e r  from  the Washington C o n g r e s s i o n a l d e l e g a t i o n r e q u e s t i n g t h a t Forest  Service begin  groups urged tion,  t h a t the  area.  In  start  the  study  formed t o s t a r t The  team.  that  any  ALPS and  S,  Representative  the  other  C h i e f o f the  and  to develop  In J u l y the  two  Forest  The  s t u d y was  material that  with  a study  and  a proposal  develop  Supervisors  of  for  to  Wilderness team  was  a p r o p o s a l b y May  of  s e l e c t e d t h e members  made a p r i o r i t y  came t o t h e  the  Service promised  1 9 7 2 a three-man s t u d y  of  study  Forest  delega-  L l o y d Meeds, t o  Forest S e r v i c e proceed  1 9 7 1 the  classification.  1 9 7 3 o  area.  members o f t h e W a s h i n g t o n C o n g r e s s i o n a l  p a r t i c u l a r l y U.  request  the  t o study the  the  item.  of  T h i s meant  Chief received his  im-  mediate a t t e n t i o n i n s t e a d of w a i t i n g behind  other m a t e r i a l .  The  t o get  regional office  drew up  a critical  done i n t h e  s h o r t e s t time  possible.  was  on  at the  unusual  derness and  study  i t was  tion  the  two  counts  o f an  o n l y case  r e q u e s t i n g and  government The  a r e a not  entire  d e c i s i o n to I t was as  the  job  proceed  only  a Primitive  Congressional  expediting administrative review  team d e f i n e d s t u d y  f u r t h e r data.  two  time.  classified  o f an  o b j e c t i v e s and  E x i s t i n g d a t a were c o l l e c t e d  along with public input.  the  The  the  wilArea,  delegaby  a  agency.  n i n g system.  1972,  path  These t h r e e  In October  Field  developed and  evaluated  investigations provided  s t e p s were c a r r i e d  1 9 7 2 forest  a plan-  out by  September  management teams f r o m e a c h  N a t i o n a l Forests developed  management o b j e c t i v e s  of x  61 for  the  area to h e l p the  I n December o f  1972  were d e v e l o p e d . classified  as W i l d e r n e s s ,  to  complete the  1970*  The  area to develop and  f o r the  some as until  scenic area,  and  be  some t o  p r i v a t e l a n d c o u l d be  the  timber  i n d u s t r y completed  from the  timber  management g o a l s .  Research,  Inc.  Business  Economics  (BEAR), a c o n s u l t i n g f i r m hired  conduct  e c o n o m i c and  area.  and  Service  in  At was  the  the  T h i s was cation that  for  same t i m e  the North U.S  o f the  to the  the  first  0  The  Cascades C o n s e r v a t i o n  area.  a legislative not  a r e a have been passed o f 1973  proposal  The  importance  history passed.  of this  f o r the A l p i n e None o f t h e  l a n d use  intro-  Wilderness.  for possible  classifi-  bill  was  Lakes  other  bills  yet.  p u b l i c meetings at seven l o c a t i o n s  a r o u n d t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e s t u d y a r e a were h e l d . i n g s were i n t e n d e d  Council  C o n g r e s s m a n Thomas P e l l e y t o  legislative  e v e n t h o u g h i t was  I n January  three  to  Forest  d e s i g n a t i n g a 580,000 a c r e A l p i n e L a k e s  o f p a r t o f the  the  study  of  1972.  i t started  area,  ecological  r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s were p r e s e n t e d  b u s y , NCCC a s k e d  duce a b i l l  study  industry, inventoried  a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f W a s h i n g t o n , was  study  acquired  a  professors an  area  C e n t r a l W a s h i n g t o n C a s c a d e s S t u d y Team,  of personnel  Advisory  alternatives  areas.  M e a n w h i l e i n 1972  the  alternatives.  E a c h p r o p o s a l i n c l u d e d some l a n d t o  managed f o r W i l d e r n e s s  made up  team d e v e l o p  three l a n d use  be  begun i n  study  These meet-  t o a l l o w t h e p u b l i c t o comment on  alternatives.  Almost  2000 p e o p l e  the  attended.  62 By  the  March 1 d e a d l i n e  inputs their  had  been s t u d i e d  recommendations  Oregon,  I n June  m e n d a t i o n s and o f the  Forest  1973  the  a draft  o f an  Company p a r t l y The  issue  S,  had  District  order  Service  tially  f o r out  single  built to  on  by  set  sent  Portland, his  recom-  to the  Chief  an the  two  proposal  a final  River  appeal to illegal  the  road  conser-  Chief sent  sent  of  to  back to  settlement, to  and  A  the  Federal  stop u n t i l matter.  from Wilderness  Court  the This  case poten-  classification  reached.  public hearings, t o get  one  i n Wenatchee  p u b l i c response to  A deadline  submissions. was  the  the  a p r i v a t e company w h i c h c o u l d  proposal.  for written  Pack  discovery,  Pack R i v e r  settlement  1973  the  reported  announced i t s i n t e n t i o n t o  of court  some l a n d  Service  a final and  in  made  some o f i t s p r i v a t e  i n P o r t l a n d was  a c t i o n by  of the  Forest  proposal  Forester  to t h i s  i n S e a t t l e , were h e l d  was  inputs  an  October  one  road  prior  A report  disqualify  In  Supervisors  Forester  of A g r i c u l t u r e could review the  regardless  these  a Wenatchee n e w s p a p e r  had  f r o m Spokane o r d e r e d  represented  1973  1973  illegal  Attorney  Service  Secretary  and  of  responded with  Service.  Forest  Forest  Regional  Regional  1973  In A p r i l  environmental statement  a l i m i t e d permit  Forest  two  through p u b l i c land  Forest  vationists  the  representing  Service.  discovery  land.  and  to the  M e a n w h i l e i n May  U.  submissions  5000 p e r s o n s h a d b e e n r e c e i v e d .  over  the  written  o f November  B a s e d on  drafted into b i l l  these  form.  e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t a t e m e n t were  the 20,  public The  being  63 prepared  i n June  197^ t o b e s e n t  to the President  for his  recommendation t o Congress. Three other b i l l s  have been s e n t  One was d r a f t e d b y A L P S . Coalition,  a coalition  a t i o n groups.  t o W a s h i n g t o n , D. C.  One was d r a f t e d b y t h e A l p i n e  of forest  products  i n d u s t r y and r e c r e -  A t h i r d was d r a f t e d b y t h e C o a l i t i o n  o f Conser-  v a t i o n Groups, t h e outgrowth o f t h e North Cascades Council.  A l l four b i l l s  were i n t r o d u c e d  was n o t y e t r e a d y , b u t t h a t all  four b i l l s  version other from D,  o f the Forest  three  bills.  Senator  Service  bill  the Washington d e l e g a t i o n  felt  be i n t r o d u c e d Service b i l l  Forest  1973» i n  together,  A preliminary  was i n t r o d u c e d :with t h e  So f a r no r e s u l t  has been  forthcoming  Congress. T h e P r o b l e m i n Summary The  and  should  Conservation  i n October  b o t h t h e S e n a t e a n d t h e House o f R e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . Henry Jackson mentioned t h a t t h e f i n a l  Lakes  above m a t e r i a l has d e s c r i b e d  t h e atmosphere i n which t h e s t u d y  t h e A l p i n e L a k e s was d e v e l o p e d . Forest  the Forest  team's p r o p o s a l f o r  The j o b g i v e n  lands  to the  S e r v i c e b y C o n g r e s s , as s t a t e d i n and i n t e r p r e t e d  f r o m p e r t i n e n t l e g i s l a t i o n was d i s c u s s e d . role  Service  o f the Forest  Service i n the provision o f wilderness  was d e s c r i b e d .  National Recreation of the Forest agencies  The s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e c o n c e p t o f A r e a s was m e n t i o n e d .  Service t o other  The r e l a t i o n s h i p  f e d e r a l l a n d management  a n d some o f t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s  were d e s c r i b e d .  The h i s t o r i c a l  of federal  The o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e F o r e s t  lands  S e r v i c e and  6k some s t u d i e s A  general  Service  o f i t s o r g a n i z a t i o n and b e h a v i o r  summary o f t h i s  material  i s that  oriented  toward g r a z i n g  I n the past  and t i m b e r p r o d u c t i o n  a  record  i t has been  as u s e s o f  resources. The  material r e l a t i n g to the history  Lakes i n d i c a t e d t h e p r e s s u r e s to  discussed,  the Forest  i s a highly structured organization with  o f p e r f o r m i n g i t s work e f f i c i e n t l y .  its  were  change.  and  Forest  Service's  had  failure  to the loss  Service. various  This  recent  interest  as w i l d e r n e s s  pressured  has  of Forest loss  the Forest  a r e a were p a r t  Lakes t h e  land  t o the Park  o f l a n d and t h e f a c t  Service  land  t o t h e s e demands c o n -  Service  desires that  f o r the Alpine  felt  has i n c r e a s e d  to the Alpine  to l i s t e n  groups w i t h  made p r o p o s a l s  the  o f land  I n one c a s e r e l a t e d  tributed  Service  Demand f o r o u t d o o r r e c r e a t i o n o n f o r e s t  f o rpreservation  greatly.  the Forest  o f the Alpine  often  Lakes area  that conflicted  and had  t o come t o some d e c i s i o n  about  o f t h e atmosphere i n which t h e s t u d y  team w o r k e d . The  material  work o f t h e F o r e s t this  Service  a s e t t i n g f o r the study o f the s t u d y team.  Because t h e aim o f  s t u d y i s t o examine t h e r o l e s o f p u b l i c i n p u t ,  Service in  provides  policy,  and t h e v a l u e s  t h e development  description important.  o f t h e s t u d y team members  o f t h e s t u d y team's f i n a l  o f t h e environment  Forest  proposal,  i n which t h e y worked i s  a  65  PART I I I ANALYTICAL MODEL, LITERATURE REVIEW AND METHODOLOGY  A,  The A n a l y t i c a l 1)  ing  Model  The Model D e f i n e d  The Model A b s t r a c t l y E x p r e s s e d  The  model which has been used  to detail  segment  Easton  t h e model.  Organizations  processing  thesis i s basically  t a k e n as a r e s u l t  outputs,  system,,  Readings by K a r l  and t h e b e s t  of information  of the receipt  of this  of information.  All  storage, these  or they  inputs  processing  preprocessed  and t h e  information.  Each  organiza-  T h e s e may b e g e n e r a t e d from  may b e g e n e r a t e d b y o u t s i d e  come t o t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n s 1  informa-  sources.  information  system v i a e s t a b l i s h e d communication  Along these  these  o f i n f o r m a t i o n and  w i t h i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n , t h e y may b e r e t r i e v e d tion  cybernetic  way t o s t u d y  f l o w depends upon i n p u t s  inputs  be r e f e r r e d t o  studied to a c l a s s i c a l  which are responses t o t h e i n p u t s .  t i o n processes  a communi-  T h e y compare s o c i e t y o r a n y  i s to trace the flow  Information  for collect-  w h i c h make u p s o c i e t y f u n c t i o n b y  information,  organizations  as a b a s i s  i n particular will  of society being  system.  steps  f o rthis  or information processing  Deutsch and David later  Terms  a)  and a n a l y z i n g d a t a  cations  i n General  channels.  c h a n n e l s may b e p l a c e s where i n f o r m a t i o n i s o r screened.  This  screening  serves  to regulate  66 the  flow  with  o f i n f o r m a t i o n so the o r g a n i z a t i o n i s not  i n f o r m a t i o n i t cannot The  process.  i n f o r m a t i o n which i s e i t h e r generated  or retrieved  w i t h i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n d e p e n d s on t h e r e s o u r c e s organization, bers,  on the a t t i t u d e s and p e r c e p t i o n s  information storage  ment, a n d t e c h n i q u e s ,  and  perceptions  they  see t h e i r  the l i m i t s  i t relates  bers  Attitudes t h e way  o f information they  They form t h e world-view o f these  t o t h e work t h e y  do.  Rules  a r e imposed  feel people  o n mem-  o f an o r g a n i z a t i o n b y t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n s o r i n d i v i d u a l s These r u l e s c o n s t r a i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n b y  d e f i n i n g procedures  f o r some o f i t s a c t i o n s .  Many o f t h e s e  are required f o r the successful operation  organizations. structured, structured  These b u r e a u c r a t i c  and t h e i r  of bureaucratic  organizations are h i g h l y  information flow  and b e h a v i o r a r e  as w e l l .  Information  r e c e i v e d from o u t s i d e i s a l s o a f f e c t e d b y  attitudes  and p e r c e p t i o n s  formation  i s determined b y the goals  individuals  generating  and b y r u l e s .  Initially  this i n -  o f o r g a n i z a t i o n s and  and t r a n s m i t t i n g i t .  been t r a n s m i t t e d , t h e communication  channels  Once i t h a s and p r o c e s s i n g  system o f t h e r e c e i v i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n determine which tion  equip-  An o r g a n i z a t i o n c a n  o f i t s resources,  own work a n d t h e k i n d  superior to i t .  rules  and p r o c e s s i n g  o f members o f a n o r g a n i z a t i o n a f f e c t  should be generated. as  Resources  such as c a r t o g r a p h i c techniques o r  c o m p u t e r e q u i p m e n t , money, a n d t i m e . work n o f a r t h e r t h a n  o f the  o f i t s mem-  a n d o n t h e r u l e s i m p o s e d . o n i t s members.  include personnel,  overloaded  i s handled  i n w h i c h manner.  informa-  The a t t i t u d e s and p e r c e p t i o n s  6  o f members  affect  more s e r i o u s l y , , operates  affect  which information  the treatment  outside,  perceptions  ate  output  of information  should  be.  appropriate  outputs  i n t e r a c t i n g with  leads  d e t e r m i n e what  o f receiving inputs  organizations  the appropri-  and s e n d i n g  s e v e r a l times  on a  t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n makes a f i n a l  outsiders  Bargaining  These  I n e i t h e r case a t t i t u d e s  c a n be r e p e a t e d  i t s proposals  together.  outputs.  T h e s e o u t p u t s may g e n e r a t e a new s e t  The p r o c e s s  t i c u l a r matter before  processed,  to individuals or  and r u l e s a g a i n  of inputs.  find  received too.  h a v e b e e n made, s c r e e n e d , a n d  o r t h e y may b e a c t i o n s .  and  can  of information  o r g a n i z a t i o n i s ready to respond with  may be o u t p u t s  By  they p r e f e r t o review  The r u l e s w i t h i n w h i c h t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n  Once i n p u t s the  7  i n this  par-  decision.  fashion the organization  and t h o s e o f o u t s i d e r s  coming c l o s e r  between an o r g a n i z a t i o n and  others  t o a n a r r o w i n g o f t h e gap b e t w e e n them a n d p e r h a p s t o  some f o r m o f c o n s e n s u s . the  organization  and  study o f the organization's  can  be e n d e d , b)  should  When t h e f i n a l  The A b s t r a c t  d e c i s i o n i s made,  be r e a d y t o go on t o a n o t h e r behavior  Model R e l a t e d  matter,  i n p a r t i c u l a r matter  to the Alpine  Lakes  Situation This basic the  Alpine  d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e m o d e l c a n be r e l a t e d t o  Lakes s i t u a t i o n .  a t i o n makes t h e v a l u e  Looking at the Alpine  Lakes  o f t h e a b s t r a c t m o d e l more c l e a r .  situ-  68 The  organization being  Service personnel  who  These are  rangers,  man  study  team.  formation  about  flow  This  their had  own  the  tion  on  factors on  the  Forest  information  timber  generation  and  t o the  o f the  Forest  was  sent  who  and  work o f t h e s e  area,  a study  staff,  and  tions,  formal  l e v e l s w i t h i n the  proposal. the  Service  As  and  the  Service  of  and  other full-time the  approximately  Information  management, Rules  to  retrieval perceptions  been d i s c u s s e d  wilderness,  within  S e r v i c e , and  levels  percep-  constrained  operate  S e r v i c e , and  or i n t h e i r earlier, a  the  the  the  the  regula-  higher  informal rules  organization with  They  informa-  work done on  procedures e s t a b l i s h e d by  i s a bureaucratic  deci-  Congress.  and  a t t i t u d e s and  entire Forest  Forest  has  Forest  T h e s e a t t i t u d e s and  T h e y had  procedures developed at higher organization.  the  The  0  final  team w o r k i n g  past  p u b l i c involvement.  r u l e s and  of i n -  g e n e r a t e d much  techniques,  involved.  planners.  three-  outputs  recreation, wildlife,  a f f e c t e d by  laws which govern the  the  could provide  i n c l u d e d views toward l a n d use  recreation,  by  area.  r e t r i e v e d some f r o m r e c o r d s .  a final  Service  and  sent  Forest  Lakes  l e d to the  Service personnel  of s p e c i a l i s t s  to prepare  and  f o r the A d m i n i s t r a t i o n  computer equipment  2 years  tions  proposal  resources,  relating  staffs,  Lakes a r e a  decision, supporting  areas,  and  final  C.  resources  the A l p i n e  over s e v e r a l years  the  t o W a s h i n g t o n , D.  on  group o f  organization received inputs  the A l p i n e  s i o n , w h i c h was  local  concentrated  supervisors, their  of information  The  studied i s that  and  own Forest  well-defined  69 structure  f r o m t h e C h i e f ' s O f f i c e down t o t h e D i s t r i c t  Ranger l e v e l ,  and t h e r e  are rules f o r the operation  of this  bureaucracy. The  planners  received information  they  developed  their  three  tion  contributed by the p u b l i c - t o help  a l t e r n a t i v e s they used  w e r e h e l d t o r e c e i v e comments natives. single  Written  proposal  inputs  proposal. written there  Forest  these  c o n s t i t u t e d communication  The  from  initial  Alpine  public three  inputs  s e t o f i n p u t s was  Lakes area  o f the area input.  were i n p u t s Finally,  at higher  and well individ-  levels  of the planners  and  final  As  groups and  of  chan-  and t h e  r e c e i v e d and  the past  reacted  information  r e t r i e v e d from r e c o r d s , Forest  set of inputs  and outputs  through  t o i t , a n d some  l e d t o an o u t p u t , Following  between t h e p l a n n e r s  about  information  Service personnel  a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r the area.  came a d i a l o g u e  l e d to a  through the proper  and m a t e r i a l r e l a t i n g  This  of a  Public hearings  with  they  alter-  outside.  generated by the l o c a l study  these  channels.  and o f f i c i a l s  on them a f f e c t e d how  inputs  about  meetings  f o r the meetings, hearings,  S e r v i c e made t h e i r  imposed  informa-  Public  the s i n g l e proposal  The a t t i t u d e s a n d p e r c e p t i o n s  rules  the  alternatives.  Government o f f i c i a l s  nels.  to  and q u e s t i o n s  were m e e t i n g s a n d c o n v e r s a t i o n s  uals. the  about  The p r o c e d u r e s  inputs  them.  When  c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e development  from these  more w r i t t e n i n p u t s  from o u t s i d e .  this  the  output  and o u t s i d e r s .  r e l a t i n g to the a l t e r n a t i v e s .  a f t e r w r i t t e n i n p u t s had been processed  and  There  70 considered was  along with  developed.  formal  part  decisions  T h i s was  o f the  about  ment t o t h e  the  formal  o f the  study  Service  and  area  to  The  final  output  Forester i n Portland W a s h i n g t o n , D,  cluded  draft  statement. i n g the  the was  and  C.,  o f the  outputs.  about  the the  continual  The  Forest  the A l p i n e  Lakes  S e r v i c e p o s i t i o n on  d e c i s i o n process a proposal  on  t o the to  and  sent  a final  by which the  an  as  the  well.  to the  C h i e f o f the  Congress.  m o d e l i s s e e n as  process  changes  I n t e r e s t g r o u p s made c h a n g e s i n  t o go  legislation The  sending  Forest  changed s i g n i f i c a n t l y .  t h e i r positions during  in  and  the  agree-  some o f them came d u r i n g  groups b a r g a i n e d 197^  and  preceded  T h e y were a l l p a r t  of r e c e i v i n g inputs interest  outputs  a  were  logging c e r t a i n areas,  team, and  process  F r o m 1968  Other outputs  Some o f t h e s e  proposal  w h i c h was  o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f some a r e a s ,  decision process.  area.  a single  the next major output  l o g g i n g or not  study  information,  decision process.  i n management p o l i c y . creation  other  Regional Forest  This proposal  environmental a b s t r a c t way  planners  Service in-  impact  of  describ-  a r r i v e d at t h i s  final  output.  2)  E l a b o r a t i o n o f the  More d e t a i l c l e a r l y to the The  i s n e e d e d so  that  data which should  detail will  being  Model  sketch  out  the  be  the  model l e a d s  collected  information  and  more analyzed.  processing  system  described. S o c i e t y has  system.  been d e s c r i b e d  as  a classical  Like mechanical or e l e c t r i c a l  cybernetic  communication  devices  the o r g a n i z a t i o n s which make up s o c i e t y operate by r e c e i v i n g and  sending  information.  Looking  at the sources  of  informa-  t i o n , the paths through which i t i s t r a n s m i t t e d , the t o r s and p r o c e s s i n g u n i t s f o r the i n f o r m a t i o n , and responses to r e c e i p t of the i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e s way  to d e s c r i b e the b e h a v i o r  o f these  recep-  the  the  best  organizations.  In  t h i s case the flow o f i n f o r m a t i o n w i t h i n the group o f Forest Service personnel  working on the d e c i s i o n about  A l p i n e Lakes a r e a and between t h i s group and be  examined to l e a r n how  outsiders  some f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t e d to  group's f i n a l d e c i s i o n about the  the will  this  area.  I n f o r m a t i o n r e c e i v e d t h a t an o r g a n i z a t i o n f e e l s i t must take i n t o account i s an i n p u t to the d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s . These i n p u t s a f f e c t the d e c i s i o n by c r e a t i n g s t r e s s f o r the o r g a n i z a t i o n r e c e i v i n g them. Messages which the F o r e s t S e r v i c e p l a n n e r s can be  seen as i n p u t s to the o r g a n i z a t i o n ,  (Easton,  1965)  i n p u t s and and  describes p o l i t i c a l  outputs.  outputs  He  and  David  Easton  systems i n terms o f  suggests t h a t the concepts o f i n p u t s  a l l o w the h a n d l i n g o f a v a r i e t y o f changes i n '  the environment without separate  received  the treatment o f each change as  unique.  There are two  major k i n d s  o f i n p u t s , demands and  support.  Demands are i n p u t s which seek change i n the a c t i o n s o f the political  system.  o f the p o l i t i c a l  Support expresses system,  Easton  approval  f o r actions  concentrates  on demands.  These c r e a t e s t r e s s f o r the system. form o f output  I t responds w i t h some  to the p u b l i c or some o t h e r p a r t y which then  72 feeds back i n t o responds.  The  the  outputs  tinue responding p e r m i t t i n g the individuals  and  the planners  sion  The  to s t r e s s by  The  system to p e r s i s t  and  themselves  o n l y way  made i n p u t s t o t h e  important  f o r i t t o be  questions  Groups  a ) who  made i n p u t s , b ) what k i n d s  c ) why  d i d these  group  the  r e c e i v e d by  relating  and  decision  f o r information to a f f e c t  was  con-  f e e d i n g back i n f o r m a t i o n  o u t s i d e the F o r e s t S e r v i c e p l a n n i n g  o f the planners  input.  allow the  or other p a r t y  e v a l u a t i o n o f system performance.  and  process.  s y s t e m when t h e p u b l i c  deci-  them  to inputs  as  ares  o f i n p u t s w e r e made,  inputs create stress  f o r the  planners.  O u t p u t s a r e an o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s way o f r e d u c i n g s t r e s s from i n p u t s a l r e a d y r e c e i v e d . They are a l s o a way o f l e a d i n g t o t h e g e n e r a t i o n o f new i n p u t s 0  Members o f a p o l i t i c a l express  t o some o r g a n i z a t i o n t h e y  t h e i r wants.  1)  others  i n p u t s , t h e n be  issues,  converted  be  2)  be  converted  converted  converted  to outputs,  o r be  to outputs,  k)  the be  and  the out-  says 3)  total  be number  converted  to  o r 5)  be  converted to outputs,  to issues,  may  with  political  t o demands, E a s t o n  or m o d i f i e d to reduce  then disappear  reduced,  c a n h e l p them  them i m p l e m e n t e d t h r o u g h  disappear,  combined w i t h of  see  When w a n t s a r e  t h e y may  feel  T h e s e become demands when t h e members o f  s y s t e m want t o puts.  system have wants w h i c h t h e y  then disappear  o r become  outputs.^  E a s t o n d e f i n e s i s s u e s as demands w h i c h a r e b e i n g d i s c u s s e d i n o r d e r t o do s o m e t h i n g a b o u t them and n o t j u s t f o r educational purposes.  73 A p a r t y may  e x p r e s s a want a b o u t t h e A l p i n e L a k e s  T h i s want i s c o n v e r t e d the  Forest  order  evaluate puts.  the  i t s significance,  toward a h i g h e r some o t h e r  level  outputs  as new  inputs  may  sent  be  on  outside  to adjust  of study  Forest  the  planners  c a n be  This  the  their  levels should  be  Forest  separate  of the  public  Forest  how  or  be  Service  Service  a) what k i n d s make, b )  or  they  f e d back  and  parties  I t can t o do  also  the  of outputs  same.  did  w e l l d i d these  d i d these  to  Service  outputs,  positions.  Forest  out  s t a t e , or f e d e r a l  O u t p u t s may  s t r e s s , c ) what e f f e c t  decision  local,  f e d back to the  the  demand,  S e r v i c e , or perhaps  r e c i p i e n t s of the  allows  the  In  some f o r m o f  d i r e c t e d toward the Forest  to  stress.  process  respond with  agency at  Service planners  deal with  demand c r e a t e s  to another p a r t y .  times.  allow various  and  i n the  from the  several  Areas  are  government  The  The  s t r e s s the  These outputs  level.  i n t o a demand when i t i s e x p r e s s e d  Service planners.  to r e l i e v e  issue  outputs  the  outputs have  on  process.  Information reaching come f r o m w i t h i n t h e outside.  an o r g a n i z a t i o n o r g a n i z a t i o n or  may from  2 Karl  Deutsch  lists  a system.  streams o f i n f o r m a t i o n  may  reach  own  n e t w o r k o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n and  2)  There i s the  information  1)  three  There i s the  i t s other  system's  resources.  p o l i t i c a l s y s t e m ' s memory w h i c h  r e c e i v e d i n the  D e u t s c h , The  political  Nerves of  past.  3)  Government.  that  There i s a  stores stream  74 of information are  part  coming from the  of the  capability.  Forest  The  third  sages t h a t the  Forest  prime q u e s t i o n  here  inputs  r e c e i v e d by  outside.  Service's  first  information  i s comprised  i s what i s t h e  two  streams  generating  o f the v a r i o u s  Service receives  the  The  mes-  from o u t s i d e .  source  of the  The  various  planners.  I n o r d e r t o s c r e e n and c h a n n e l d i f f e r e n t k i n d s o f i n p u t s , p o l i t i c a l systems need switchboards. S c r e e n i n g and channeling h e l p an o r g a n i z a t i o n d e a l xvith s t r e s s . Once m e s s a g e s h a v e b e e n f o r m u l a t e d go  through  path  communication channels.  for information  zation to  the  to flow  channels  from p a r t i e s o u t s i d e  o r g a n i z a t i o n or w i t h i n the  i n more e f f i c i e n t  allow  processed  the  prior  to  receipt  decisions flict  the  or c o n f l i c t s  process  i s the  goals.  evaluate  Easton  w e l l these  take  that  more  of t h i s  how  o f feedback the  the  an  organi-  handle The  i t can  be  network  prolonged  d e c i s i o n or  the  outputs  con-  Once  political  system  meet s t a t e d  policy  system  this  receives  evaluation.  communication o f messages s y s t e m and  to reduce s t r e s s .  allocate values  so  the  from o u t s i d e which p e r m i t s discusses  regulated  more c o m p l e x t h e  to outputs,  must  fashion.  e v a l u a t i o n of performance.  stress for a p o l i t i c a l  systems can 1)  Part  a  organization to  systematic  The  they  organization.  of information  are.  Through a process  information  creates  how  an  switchboard,  i n p u t s have been c o n v e r t e d needs to  and  a response.  o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n and  sent,  These p r o v i d e  Having e s t a b l i s h e d channels allows information  and  f o r a s o c i e t y and  some o f t h e  Political Z)  induce  steps  systems most  members  75 of the s o c i e t y t o accept of the time. cate values tions  directed  o r can't  about  motivations,  sions  induce  enough p e o p l e  The system  allocation  and i n t e r e s t  t o demands.  o n l y when t h e y  process.  feels  Public  attitudes  can be i n s e r t e d  1) s t r e s s  a r e n ' t met, 2 )  ficient kind  s t r e s s when t h e t o demands a n d  stress  into  the d e c i s i o n  systems  t o w h i c h a s y s t e m must  o f support  because  demands  due t o demand i n p u t o v e r l o a d , t h e  due t o t h e f a i l u r e support.  needed t o process o f output  Eliminating  the input,  to maintain  stress  of stress.  f o rprocessing generally results  failure,  channels,  communication channels these  from  when a message c a n g e t t h r o u g h t h e but there i s i n s u f f i c i e n t  an a p p r o p r i a t e r e s p o n s e ,  to reduce  itself  due t o o v e r l o a d , t h e k i n d o f demand made, o r  l a c k o f time response  suf-  o f t h e second  i s p e r h a p s t h e e a s i e s t way f o r t h e s y s t e m t o g i v e  communications for  i n deci-  t h e y must go t h r o u g h t h e  of stress  due t o l o s s  stress  political  Stress  1)  a r e n o t always  play a role  a c h a n c e t o d e a l w i t h t h e o t h e r two k i n d s  the  opinion,  input that p o l i t i c a l  o f demand made, o r t h e t i m e 3)  and  alloca-  have.  There are three kinds  kind  misallo-  t o accept  i n c e r t a i n matters  w e l l - d e f i n e d ways o f r e c e i v i n g  respond:  a s b i n d i n g most  Expectations, public  I n o r d e r t o be i n s e r t e d ,  generally  this  are converted  toward a u t h o r i t y .  converted  allocations  T h e s y s t e m s u n d e r g o s t r e s s when t h e y  as b i n d i n g .  attitudes  these  can't  o r 2) c h a n n e l  failure,  c a r r y t h e messages.  stresses, p o l i t i c a l  capacity when  In order  s y s t e m s s c r e e n demands  76 as  soon as p o s s i b l e .  demands.  of  screening  I n c o m i n g m e s s a g e s must p a s s t h r o u g h them t o b e  received. become  G a t e k e e p e r s a r e a way  There are gatekeepers  demands.  Further  k e e p e r s as w e l l .  a t t h e p o i n t where w a n t s  along i n the process  T h e y may  there  e l i m i n a t e demands,  are  gate-  r e v i s e them,  combine them, o r s e n d them on a s t h e y a r e . The  Forest  information hearings, tions,  Service planners  had channels through which  c o u l d be t r a n s m i t t e d .  P u b l i c m e e t i n g s and  p r o v i s i o n s f o r w r i t t e n i n p u t s , telephone  i n f o r m a l m e e t i n g s were some o f t h e s e  c a u s e t h e r e was a l a r g e amount  a l a r g e amount of information  generated i n the past,  and  about  the Alpine  the planners  due t o o v e r l o a d above.  h a d t o do what  The  important  cation in  Through gatekeeping  could  c ) who  area,  to reduce  stress  o f s t r e s s men-  t h e v a r i e t y o f demands, readily.  a t a r e a ) what k i n d s  information  organization evaluate  Lakes are  Lakes  two k i n d s  c h a n n e l s were u s e d , b ) d i d t h e y  transmitting information,  and  A l o t o f people  c o u l d b e h a n d l e d more  issues to look  f u n c t i o n , d ) how was the  they  as w e l l as t h e o t h e r  many o f them c o n f l i c t i n g ,  Be-  had t o develop a network  a n d were i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e A l p i n e  the planners  tioned  channels.  of public participation  which c o u l d handle a l o t o f i n f o r m a t i o n . knew a b o u t  conversa-  perform  i t s performance  communi-  satisfactorily  performed the  screened,  of  gatekeeping  e) how w e l l through  could  feedback.  77 The i n f o r m a t i o n w h i c h a n o r g a n i z a t i o n c a n g e n e r a t e i t s e l f o r r e t r i e v e f r o m i t s memory d e p e n d s on t h e r e s o u r c e s a t t h e d i s p o s a l o f of the organization, Among t h e s e r e s o u r c e s a r e p e r s o n s who p r o v i d e a d v i c e . These a d v i s o r s may a f f e c t d e c i s i o n s d i r e c t l y . The  resources  information the  generating  capability.  computer, s o c i a l  skills  provided  ther defined  and c a r t o g r a p h i c  The s t a f f r e s o u r c e s  by d e s c r i b i n g the t r a i n i n g  including supporting  of the supporting  staff will  potential to affect  Likewise,  the scienequipment  staff.  or Regional  furof  I n some c a s e s t h e r o l e  be i m p o r t a n t  when t h e y h a v e  T h e i r r o l e as a d v i s o r s  d e c i s i o n s made b y t h e s t u d y  s t u d y team a d v i c e  Supervisors  c o u l d be  and e x p e r i e n c e  k n o w l e d g e t h e s t u d y team d o e s n ' t h a v e . has  staff,  included  w h i c h c o u l d b e drawn o n , a n d t h e amount o f t i m e  f o r the study.  personnel  science,  Service's  These resources  t h r e e - m a n s t u d y team a n d t h e s u p p o r t i n g  tific, and  a v a i l a b l e a f f e c t e d the Forest  may a f f e c t  team.  decisions by Forest  Foresters.  3 One  p o r t i o n o f McMeiken's s u r v e y  of political  scientists  k  relates  t o the r o l e o f advisors.  Snyder  s a i d that  may e f f e c t i v e l y b e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s .  Because  depend on t h e i r  the advisors  making d e c i s i o n s  the  kind  advisors simply  o f advice  f o r advice,  advisors  decision-makers may b e  t h r o u g h t h e a c t o f g i v i n g a d v i c e and 5  they give,  Maclver  reported  a similar  «* McMexken, P u b l i c H e a l t h  P r o f e s s i o n a l ? and t h e Environment,  Snyder i n McMeiken, o £ , c i t , M a c l v e r , " M u n i c i p a l Water S u p p l y i n t h e Grand R i v e r B a s i n " i n S e w e l l and B u r t o n , P e r c e p t i o n s and A t t i t u d e s i n R e s o u r c e s Management,  78 phenomenon i n h i s s t u d y decision i n Ontario. whom he  called  water supply,  of people i n v o l v e d i n a water  One  g r o u p he  studied included  regional scientists. so  they  Their preferences  d e p e n d e d on  reflected  their  the  got  w h i c h had  b e e n most h i g h l y p u b l i c i z e d .  advisory  w i t h i n the  c a p a c i t y may  Forest  vant  Lakes area, w i t h  data.  into  outside  Forest  the  of sufficient that The  their advice  power and an  area  may  be  and  S e r v i c e may  will  their  provide  or accompanied by  easily  about w h i c h t h e  the  d i s p o s a l o f the  limitations, affect  c ) who  group  in  ignored.  Forest  with  tend  an  asked are planners, provided  decision-makers i n the  t o be  advice  and  Service.  simply  political relate  others  a ) what were t h e were t h e r e  advice, Forest  d)  how  any  the  pressure  have a l o t o f I t may  rele-  information  sufficient Forest  the  Parties  S e r v i c e doesn't have  b)  their  other  superiors.  i n f o r m a t i o n , w h i c h o b l i g a t e s i t t o d e p e n d on Q u e s t i o n s t o be  the  are  and  makes a d e c i s i o n f o r t h e  be  group  more f a m i l i a r w i t h  analyses  come f r o m p a r t i e s who  can't  of the  g r o u p was  p u b l i c input  d e c i s i o n s made b y  quality  input  information.  S e r v i c e who  T h e y may  the  Their advice  c h i e f input  That  about  e f f e c t i v e l y make d e c i s i o n s f o r  decision-maker superiors. Alpine  for  preferences  from they  Personnel  people  T h e y knew l i t t l e  others  information.  supply  to  sufficient for  resources  advice. at  resource  did this  advice  Service.  The a t t i t u d e s and p e r c e p t i o n s o f o f f i c i a l s as r e l a t e d to the k i n d of i n f o r m a t i o n generated and r e t r i e v e d b y t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n , and t h e i r a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d and p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e p u b l i c and o t h e r g r o u p s o u t s i d e t h e i r  79 o r g a n i z a t i o n and these p e o p l e ' s views determine how t h e o f f i c i a l s g e n e r a t e i n f o r m a t i o n a n d how t h e y r e c e i v e and p r o c e s s i n p u t s from o u t s i d e . The by  way o f f i c i a l s  their  they  feel  g e n e r a t e and r e t r i e v e process,  after  i s important  a n d , t h e r e f o r e , what  affect  what t h e y  as t h e i r v a l u e  officials  do w i t h  the information,  Some s t u d i e s h a v e b e e n made o f i n decisions.  framework a f f e c t s  produce, so i t a f f e c t s  t h e way t h e y  from o u t s i d e .  can be used  i n achieving organizational goals. i s fitted  They look  the kind  information  from o u t s i d e  into  the  a t how t h a t  sent  i s allowed  d e c i s i o n , and n o t a l l i n f o r m a t i o n  same f o r m a s i t was s e n t .  dependent upon o f f i c i a l s ' m i n e s how i n p u t s  of deal  sent  This process  affect  with  Information being  to affect i s received i n  of interpretation,  a t t i t u d e s and p e r c e p t i o n s ,  from o u t s i d e  informa-  information  t h e i r view o f the i s s u e  resolved; not a l l information their  they  Later i n the d e c i s i o n  o f a t t i t u d e s and p e r c e p t i o n s  Just tion  d e t e r m i n e s what k i n d o f  i n f o r m a t i o n has been r e c e i v e d , t h e i r a t t i t u d e s  perceptions  role  environment, as d e s c r i b e d  from r e c o r d s .  what d e c i s i o n s t h e y make. the  at t h e i r  a t t i t u d e s and p e r c e p t i o n s ,  information  and  look  deter-  decisions.  6 Gilbert  White  suggests that  a t t i t u d e s and p e r c e p t i o n s  d e c i s i o n s i n t h r e e ways:  1)  can  affect  the  a t t i t u d e s o f p e o p l e m a k i n g d e c i s i o n s ; 2) T h r o u g h  opinions  o f the preferences  opinions  o f what t h e p r e f e r e n c e s  White,  "Formation and R o l e  o f others;  Directly  3) T h r o u g h  o f others  through  their  should be.  of Public Attitudes"  their  80 These l a s t  two ways mean t h a t  the public  only by a f f e c t i n g decision-makers. about  public  tudes  of o f f i c i a l s  attitudes  as w e l l .  Some f a c t o r s  1 ) The i n d i v i d u a l ' s  of h i s ability  situation;  4 ) The i n d i v i d u a l ' s  ( a ) Man's m a s t e r y  3 ) The i n d i v i d u a l ' s  o f man a n d n a t u r e :  ( b ) Man's s u b j u g a t i o n t o These f a c t o r s  o f p e r s o n n e l a r e formed,  t o Forest S e r v i c e s t a f f working  comments a b o u t  must go t h r o u g h concept  public  attitudes  decision—makers  o f gatekeepers, used  the decision-makers attitudes  decision  through, tudes  c a n be r e l a t e d  i n t h e model.  determine  o f gatekeepers  how a t t i t u d e s  o f the person  affect  o r persons  decision-makers,  limits  on t h e impact  cognitive  effect  t o Easton's  inputs  affect  about  decisions.  on w h e t h e r t o l e t a demand  t o change i t o r t o r e j e c t  facing the public  not  on t h e A l p i n e  The a t t i t u d e s o f  a n d t h e way t h e y r e c e i v e  Demands must h a v e some i m p a c t  place  help  and t h e y  a n d how t h e i r  i t i s based  on t h e a t t i -  attitudes.  t o get p a s t gatekeepers and  and t h e f a c t o r s m e n t i o n e d a demand c a n h a v e .  i n trying to affect  One  above difficulty  decision-makers i s  d i s s o n a n c e , a p r o c e s s whereby d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s  receive  pass  performing the gatekeeping  f u n c t i o n a n d on t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s o f p u b l i c  to  shape  decision. White's  The  view  ( c ) Man's harmony w i t h n a t u r e .  can be a p p l i e d  which  to deal with the complexity o f the  over nature;  e x p l a i n how t h e a t t i t u d e s  Lakes  conclusions  e x p e r i e n c e ! 2 ) The  p e r c e p t i o n o f h i s own r o l e :  perception  nature;  White l i s t s  decisions  a t t i t u d e s , b u t some o f them a p p l y t o t h e a t t i -  are;  individual's  can a f f e c t  will  c e r t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n which i s strange t o t h e i r  81  way of seeing things or information with which they disagree. Cognitive dissonance i s one way gatekeepers and d e c i s i o n makers have of reacting to c e r t a i n unfavorable demands.  In  t h i s discussion of White's study of attitudes i t should be remembered that the same factors which affect values affect public values.  officials'  Another factor can be included  i n looking at public a t t i t u d e s ; the decision s i t u a t i o n the s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l climate). haven't been mentioned;  (i.e.  Likewise two conclusions  1) Different people may view the  same environment d i f f e r e n t l y .  2)  q u a l i t y w i l l vary among people.  Concern for environmental Understanding these two  factors and the others l i s t e d e a r l i e r i s one of the c u l t i e s that decision-makers  diffi-  face i n analyzing public  attitudes.  » 7  Kates'  study of perception and choices of flood p l a i n  residents and of t e c h n i c a l personnel involved i n flood p l a i n management describes differences residents and perceptions  between perceptions  of t e c h n i c a l personnel.  residents tended to base t h e i r perceptions experiences i n t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r area.  of  He found  on t h e i r own  They d i d n ' t accept  information about floods more severe than any they had experienced, floods  and they d i d n ' t f e e l a need to learn from  i n other l o c a t i o n s .  Technical personnel had a  broader base of information which they added to t h e i r personal experience.  From t h i s broader base they had a  willingness to consider a wider range of a l t e r n a t i v e s and 7  Kates, Hazard and Choice Perception i n Flood P l a i n Management.  82 a more p r e c i s e k n o w l e d g e o f t h e alternatives. Kates  R e s i d e n t s would b e n e f i t  f e e l s , but  situation  too  d e t a i l s o f the  only  i f this  complex o r too  from b e t t e r  information simplistic.  didn't They  d e a l w i t h a l a r g e range o f a l t e r n a t i v e s , but a d e s c r i p t i o n would render t h e i r object  o f any  to help  information  them s e e  Officials  own  personal  little  they helped residents  understand the  I n f o r m a t i o n was  too  stand need  or  would  possibility sibility  evidence  that  situation better. to  Kates f e e l s there  underwas  i s that  of t h e i r  job  a greater this  the  t e c h n i c a l t r a i n i n g and  o f f i c e may  than r e s i d e n t s desire  i s the  a  which  public's understanding of flood hazard.  lead o f f i c i a l s  work i n t e r m s o f s o l v i n g p r o b l e m s . better  be  understanding  f o r t e c h n i c a l personnel to develop information the  The  experience.  complex f o r r e s i d e n t s  t o want t o u n d e r s t a n d .  would h e l p  If  simplistic  attitudes unrealistic.  Kates presents  often  the  couldn't  too  h a v e a more s o p h i s t i c a t e d  o f f l o o d hazard, but  information,  make  exchange w i t h r e s i d e n t s  beyond t h e i r  may  various  to  feel  construct  case, r e s i d e n t s  T h e y may  t o see  may  respontheir  want t o do  i s necessary. things  the  T h e y may  than residents  be  One  a have  have.  s k e p t i c a l about  officials. The hazard or  v a r i e t y o f ways r e s i d e n t s for excluding  had  for ignoring  themselves from danger l e d  decreased i n t e r e s t i n c a r e f u l consideration measures. residents  Only i n areas accept  the  of high  of  flood to  protection  c e r t a i n t y of hazard  p r o b a b i l i t y of h a v i n g to bear  did  future  83 losses*  Kates  concludes that  r a t i o n a l i t y bounded by dependent ing. and  on  the  l i m i t s of* t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e ,  L e t t i n g t h e m s e l v e s be not  benefiting  residents  could  officials  of Public  length held,  are  flood-  experience that  q u a l i t y o f messages  r e l a t e d to  attitudes g  of i n t e r e s t here.  v i e w o f man  and  w h i c h he i n the as  of  Sewell  in  found i n f l u e n c e d  superior  or  that  and  attitudes  British  attitudes  were  positions  to nature,  and  engineers d i f f e r e d  Public  Health  from M e d i c a l H e a l t h O f f i c e r s ,  some o f G i l b e r t W h i t e ' s c o n c l u s i o n s  perceptions  number o f  inferior  Consulting  engineers,  and  studied  engineers  organization,  background.  f r o m government  of  broader understanding  reduced the  findings  service  professional  personal  and  send.  Factors  of  differed  had  Health o f f i c i a l s  Columbia,  l i m i t e d to  from the  officials  Empirical  demonstrated  r e l a t i v e c e r t a i n t y or u n c e r t a i n t y  technical  of  the  t h e i r perceptions  inspectors  These f i n d i n g s  about the  support  formation  of  perceptions  of  attitudes. An  important  officials faced  part  o f the  i s their attitude  with hypothetical  Sewell studied  nor  the  attitudes  and  toward p u b l i c  decisions Public  neither  involvement. the  When  engineers  Health O f f i c i a l s  said  they  would t r u s t a group o f j u s t  s c i e n t i s t s , just p o l i t i c i a n s ,  just  a mixed group.  laymen; t h e y p r e f e r r e d  But  Sewell f e e l s ,  8 S e w e l l , " I n t e g r a t i n g P u b l i c V i e w s i n P l a n n i n g and M a k i n g " i n S e w e l l and  B u r t o n , o£. c i t .  or  Policy  8k  The r e s u l t s show t h a t some o f t h e o f f i c i a l s were n o t e s p e c i a l l y a n x i o u s t o i n v o l v e e i t h e r the g e n e r a l p u b l i c or other agencies, except i n a r a t h e r c u r s o r y c o n s u l t a t i v e capacity,, • P u b l i c i n v o l v e m e n t ' , s u g g e s t e d one o f them •makes d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g cumbersome and i n e f f i c i e n t , and p e r h a p s e v e n i m p o s s i b l e , , In a d d i t i o n most o f t h e P u b l i c H e a l t h officials were c o n v i n c e d t h a t t h e y s h o u l d o c c u p y t h e key p r o f e s s i o n a l r o l e i n d e a l i n g with environmental q u a l i t y problems. ° 1  Other studies information  generation  Maclver studied decisions  e x a m i n e d how  the  o f the  perceptions  about water s u p p l y  that  the  very  c l o s e l y w i t h the  River  or use  preferences  these a t t i t u d e s a f f e c t information  of o f f i c i a l s  i n part  of Ontario.  institutional to  get  water from the t o use  the  felt  the  a given  Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l  Great  L a k e s was  institutional  Maclver also same c r i t e r i a  the  best  s o l u t i o n w o r k e d , and  correlated officials.  river,  those  groundwater,  and  a p i p e l i n e from  solution.  Individuals  d i f f e r e n t groups c o u l d  of supply, the  length  of time that  regional nature  and  a r r i v e at d i f f e r e n t s o l u t i o n s .  and  the  information  found  one  within  setting rarely differed.  found that  - cost  in  He  s e t t i n g of the  f a m i l i a r w i t h groundwater p r e f e r r e d  of  involved  f o r p a r t i c u l a r s o l u t i o n s were  managers p r e f e r r e d  Ontario  generated  used i n the  o f the  They f i t t e d  use  the  the  solution the  d e c i s i o n to t h e i r  -  criteria own  perceptions, Maclver stated that public  involvement.  McMeiken, 0 £ .  there  was  no  Perhaps o f f i c i a l s  c i t . , p.  63,  strong felt  sentiment the  for  existing  85 s y s t e m o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n s was  adequate,  Maclver  felt  were i n f o r m a t i o n gaps b e t w e e n g r o u p s o f o f f i c i a l s between t h e s e  g r o u p s and  by  one  as  c o n s e r v i n g more o f t h e  it  better.  the p u b l i c .  experience  of Forest their  t h e i r v i e w a b o u t man  and  nature  tion  they  felt  was  This  included information they  information they important  important  organization,  by  like  itself  made i n p u t s .  b a c k g r o u n d s and  try  to understand the  inputs.  experience land-use  and informa-  choices  and see  for  Part  solving  of  Forest Service,  From t h e  this The  determine beginning  the A l p i n e Lakes a r e a  to i n v o l v i n g the  as  the  Forest  public i n i t s  T h e r e were c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t g r o u p s , i n t e n s i v e  ing  of  What t h e y  they h o l d .  i n the  r e c r e a t i o n s t s , members o f t h e o t h e r s who  the  i t s members h o l d .  team's work on  committed  decisions.  themselves  many o r g a n i z a t i o n s , c a n h e l p  some o f t h e v a l u e s  it,  the k i n d o f  generated  the v a l u e s  experience  way  i n the A l p i n e Lakes d e c i s i o n .  p r o b l e m s t o s o l v e and  comes f r o m t h e i r  Service  affected  using  the  to perform  r e c e i v e d from o u t s i d e .  them i s d e t e r m i n e d  study  ability  done  such  and  Service personnel,  and  the  Having analyses  e x i s t i n g water supply  they view t h e i r r o l e  of  and  agency l e d to i g n o r i n g c e r t a i n a l t e r n a t i v e s ,  The  the  there  forest  Because these  experiences,  how  products  the  Forest  and  came f r o m  vary-  S e r v i c e had  a t t i t u d e s were f o r m e d t o make  I t i s important  of the planners  the  people  industry,  was,  t o l o o k a t a) what  and  use  the  b ) what t h e i r v a l u e s  management, r e c r e a t i o n , w i l d e r n e s s ,  to  about  other  issues  86 are,  c ) how t h e s e  a t t i t u d e s and p e r c e p t i o n s  f o r m e d din p a r t b y t h e i r d)  i n very  general  experience  with  a t t i t u d e s was, f ) what  f e e l i n g about groups and i n d i v i d u a l s and about t h e i r v i e w s . a r e ,  was b e t w e e n t h e v i e w s o f t h e s e the  planners,  differed i)  the Forest  outside t h e i r  how w e l l t h e p l a n n e r s  planners  S e r v i c e views  from  there  are,  which  or proposals,  seem t o h a v e u n d e r s t o o d  k ) how t h e i r v a l u e s  received inputs  organiza-  were t o v i e w s  how p u b l i c  j ) how t h e i r  appear t o have a f f e c t e d i n f o r m a t i o n generated the planners,  1  o u t s i d e r s and t h e v i e w s o f  h ) how o p e n t h e p l a n n e r s  from o f f i c i a l F o r e s t  officials  g ) how much d i s p a r i t y  a t t i t u d e s were f o r m e d a n d what t h e y  by  Service,  t e r m s what f a c t o r s s h a p e d p u b l i c a t t i t u d e s  e) what t h e r a n g e o f t h e s e  tion  may h a v e b e e n  values  and r e t r i e v e d  a f f e c t e d t h e way t h e  outside.  The l e g a l f r a m e w o r k , r e g u l a t i o n s . p r o c e d u r e s . and p o l i c i e s w i t h i n w h i c h a n o r g a n i z a t i o n must operate help define the goals o f the organizat i o n , t h e k i n d o f i n f o r m a t i o n i t p r o d u c e s , and a framework i n t o w h i c h i n p u t s from o u t s i d e a r e fitted. Some o f t h e s e r u l e s c a n b e e x p l a i n e d b y s t u d y i n g how b u r e a u c r a c i e s operate. Government executive  o r g a n i z a t i o n s a r e c r e a t e d t h r o u g h l a w s or>  orders,  defined by these in  important  a n d some d e t a i l s o r subsequent  of their  operations are  laws o r o r d e r s .  Individuals  positions within the organization or i n d i v i d u a l  o r groups o u t s i d e t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n e s t a b l i s h p o l i c i e s and procedures constraints  which f u r t h e r c o n s t r a i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n .  These  c o n s t i t u t e a framework w i t h i n w h i c h t h e o r g a n i z a  t i o n h a s freedom©  87 The Service the  institutional study  team was  d i s c u s s i o n o f the  s e t t i n g which constrained  the  discussed  supplement  i n Part  existing rules,  t h e o r e t i c a l m a t e r i a l on b u r e a u c r a t i c  II.  To  some o f t h e behavior  Forest  pertinent  i s examined  below. Anthony Downs^ l i s t s bureaucracies. to ing  resolve  and  1) A h i e r a r c h y  conflicts;  2)  gets  information  devices  uniform  which are  e x i s t s i n order  same as to the  Formal r u l e s are needed t o to assure  behavior  created  to  6)  due  t o r u l e s and  There i s personal  higher  levels;  7)  according  5)  straints Service the  loyalty  and  flexibility.  However, t h e y  do  i n the A l p i n e  characteristics  as  efficiency serious  of the  These seven f o r the  should can  activities Informal  needs are  of  imper-  a l s o be  do.  flow.  Bureaucracy.  characteristics,  s e e n as  What t h e  of con-  Forest  governed  by  structure.  pose l i m i t a t i o n s These l i m i t a t i o n s  o f d e c i s i o n s can  e s p e c i a l l y when t h e y  in  communication  operation  L a k e s a r e a was  c o n s t r a i n t on what k i n d s  ^°Downs, I n s i d e  personal  bureaucratic  of information  from b u r e a u c r a c i e s ,  complex  Operations  Downs a s s e r t s t h a t b u r e a u c r a c i e s the  person q u i c k l y ;  informal personal  on what b u r e a u c r a c i e s could  communicat-  involvement, p a r t i c u l a r l y  t o Downs, a r e n e c e s s a r y  bureaucracies.  the  able  conflict-resolving  o u t s i d e r s ; k)  with  of  t e c h n i c a l a t t r i b u t e s o f t h e work done;  There are  networks t o improve  the  right  serve  t o be  system f o r  co-ordinate  members become i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d ; sonal  characteristics  A hierarchical  i n f o r m a t i o n , u s u a l l y the  hierarchy, 3)  seven b a s i c  are  large.  on act  emerge The  88 greater  the  volume o f i n f o r m a t i o n ,  of handling  the  information.  making d e c i s i o n s , t h e r e and  there  output.  The  outside  the  g r e a t e r the  Because budgets  a tendency t o keep c o s t s is  to reduce the  can  be  down.  lowering  to the  the  costs  of  and  One  way  groups  information  always l i m i t e d ,  there  is  to accomplish  this  Decisions  of business  Lyden p o s i t s t h a t  government  organizations.  handled  The  that a  government  which d i f f e r  d i f f e r e n c e s may  organi-  from  exist  those because  others,  m o t i v e t o make them i n n o v a t i v e .  however, a g a i n s t  i t s formal  the  business  o r g a n i z a t i o n s h a v e more i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h  lack a profit  cautioned,  fact  o r g a n i z a t i o n , not  z a t i o n s have c e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  by  people  unit  the volume o f i n f o r m a t i o n  S e r v i c e i s a government  they  used per  comments o f Downs i s t h e  or p r i v a t e organization.  and  in  costs.  Related Forest  resources  higher are  cost  co-ordination of decisions,  volume o f i n f o r m a t i o n h a n d l e d .  a f f e c t e d by  to reduce  and  the u n i t  greater delays  i n t e r a c t i o n with  b u r e a u c r a c y the  processing.  greater  There are  i s poorer  a r e more p e r s o n n e l  the  judging  a government  He  organization  structure.  The f o r m a l i z e d b u r e a u c r a t i c s t r u c t u r e o f r e l a t i o n s h i p s s e r v e s l e s s as a n e t w o r k f o r d e c i s i o n m a k i n g t h a n as a means o f l e g i t i m a t i n g and c o n t r o l l i n g d e c i s i o n s made i n more i n f o r m a l ^* (and f r e q u e n t l y c l i e n t c o - o p t e d ) r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The  r u l e s p l a y an  determination  important  part  o f what i t s e e k s t o d o ,  i n the  organization's  what i t s g o a l s  are.  Lyden, "Decision-Flow A n a l y s i s : A Methodology f o r Studying the P u b l i c Policy-Making Process" i n LeBreton, et a l . , Comparative A d m i n i s t r a t i v e T h e o r y , p. 1h2,  89 It  cannot n o r m a l l y  do. and  Achievement retrieving  s i d e has  t o be  can  the  help  relevant. flicts  s e e k t o do  of these  goals  information.  these  goals  will  Several the  o f the Forest  a bureaucracy, the  of these  behave as tion.  the  are  attitudes  Forest and  r e c e i v e d as  S e r v i c e has  Forest  the  i s forced to  characteristics.  goals  d e f i n e d by  The  S e r v i c e the  goals  the  of important o f any  h a v e t o be  Forest  as  conas  and  procedures  single into  o f d e c i d i n g what t o do  one  on  a business  i t s goals  about the A l p i n e  can  and  to  organiza-  be  complex. timber,  Service  goals  and  or of  Lakes the  Inputs other  process  area. legal  Service related  Lakes a r e a , b)  the  framework.  S e r v i c e i n the  a) how  These  organization.  of these  Forest  Forest  the  grazing.  Forest  o f the  i n the A l p i n e  the  within  S e r v i c e has  the m u l t i p l e - u s e  Some i s s u e s t o examine a r e  Being  problem of r e c e i v i n g  r u l e s o f the  These f a c t o r s c o n s t r a i n e d the  decision  seen  readily  include providing  officials  fitted  constraints placed  be  which  basic characteris-  operate  o r g a n i z a t i o n , not  means t h a t  from advocates  out-  i n f o r m a t i o n which  water, i n t e n s i v e r e c r e a t i o n , wilderness, goals  from  them.  i n f o r m a t i o n which c o n f l i c t s w i t h Multiple-use  generating  S e r v i c e have a l r e a d y been d e s c r i b e d .  a government  For  will  laws, r e g u l a t i o n s , p o l i c i e s  of bureaucracies  limits  be  i t to  Only information  i t s goals  not  for  information  goals.  organization achieve  rules allow  reason  Likewise  used to achieve  i n f o r m a t i o n which supports  tics  i s one  I t i s understandable that  with  used by  more t h a n t h e  how  the  and to  policy the  bureaucratic  90 nature  o f the group o f p e r s o n n e l  can be d e s c r i b e d , c) how these  working on the d e c i s i o n  r u l e s can be used t o i n f e r  the g o a l s o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n , d) what procedures a r e p r o v i d e d i n t h e r u l e s f o r h a n d l i n g i n p u t s from o u t s i d e , e) what ences t h e r e were between the goals o f the p l a n n e r s  differ-  and the  g o a l s o f those making i n p u t s , f ) how the v a r i o u s r u l e s a f f e c t e d what k i n d o f i n f o r m a t i o n was generated and r e t r i e v e d and how they a f f e c t e d the way i n p u t s from o u t s i d e were i n t e r p r e t e d , g) how much the r e l a t i v e importance o f r u l e s and o f the a t t i t u d e s and p e r c e p t i o n s the g e n e r a t i o n  o f the p l a n n e r s  i n affecting  o f i n f o r m a t i o n and t h e r e c e i p t and i n t e r p r e -  t a t i o n o f i n p u t s from o u t s i d e can be e v a l u a t e d , h) how much the g o a l s and r u l e s were d e f i n e d at h i g h e r l e v e l s i n t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e and how much they were d e f i n e d at the l e v e l o f the l o c a l  planners.  The same f a c t o r s which a f f e c t what k i n d o f i n f o r m a t i o n i s generated, r e t r i e v e d , o r r e c e i v e d by an o r g a n i z a t i o n a f f e c t what k i n d s o f outputs a r e a p p r o p r i a t e f o r the organization. All fit  o f these  f a c t o r s have been d i s c u s s e d .  Since  they  i n t o the o b j e c t i v e s o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n , they determine  what k i n d o f responses t o i n p u t s are a p p r o p r i a t e . puts a r e b o t h a r e s u l t o f i n t e r p r e t i n g i n p u t s  The out-  already  r e c e i v e d and a way o f i n f l u e n c i n g what k i n d s o f new i n p u t s w i l l be r e c e i v e d .  They a r e an o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s attempt t o  reduce s t r e s s w h i l e g u i d i n g the d e c i s i o n process general d i r e c t i o n o f organizational goals. outputs  i n the  The r e l a t i o n o f  t o the work o f F o r e s t S e r v i c e p e r s o n n e l  i n the A l p i n e  91 Lakes a r e a has  a l r e a d y been d i s c u s s e d .  shape o u t p u t s  have a l s o been d i s c u s s e d .  these  and  factors  study.  the  Questions  outputs  of attitudes  and  rules  i n determining  effectively  c ) what k i n d s  the  outputs  to the  o f new  The  which  relation  t o the p u b l i c  d i d the  outputs  achievement  and  between of  a) what w e r e t h e  perceptions of the planners  government o r g a n i z a t i o n s , b) process  factors  i s an a p p r o p r i a t e a r e a  t o examine a r e :  roles  The  relative and  the  to  other  lead the  decision  of the p l a n n e r s '  i n p u t s were g e n e r a t e d  by  these  goals,  outputs.  B e c a u s e t h e g o a l s o f an o r g a n i z a t i o n u s u a l l y are d i f f e r e n t from t h o s e o f o t h e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s and i n d i v i d u a l s i n v o l v e d i n a d e c i s i o n , t h e groups have t o b a r g a i n . They attempt t o r e s o l v e t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e s by exchanging i n p u t s and o u t p u t s o v e r a p e r i o d o f t i m e . O r g a n i z a t i o n s h a v e g o a l s t h e y hope t o a c h i e v e . they don't  l e t outsiders dictate  power o v e r t h e  organization.  these  power o r i n f l u e n c e o v e r m a t t e r s ,  flict  w i t h the  goals of others.  a little  goals unless  their  power i s s h a r e d , b a r g a i n i n g i s a n e c e s s a r y In the  Service  power and  other  shares  case  part  to  Whenever  of the  deci-  influence with  the p u b l i c  and  Forest with  agencies.  Forest  S e r v i c e as  the p u b l i c ,  lists  con-  o f the A l p i n e Lakes area the  I n u s i n g a c o m m u n i c a t i o n s m o d e l one  by  g o a l s may  a compromise.  have  to  E a c h o r g a n i z a t i o n has  i n order to achieve  sion process.  they  However, when t h e y h a v e  share  g i v e up  Normally  factors  political  could treat  a neutral receptor for information  Timothy O'Riordan d i s p u t e s t h i s l i m i t i n g people's  articulation  of public  clear  generated  idea.  expression  p r e f e r e n c e s as  the  to  He and  the  92 q u a l i t y o f environment they v a n t , " they are d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d .  2)  12  1) People don't a c t u n t i l  People don't h e l p each  other  u n l e s s they f e e l commonly a f f e c t e d .  3)  g r a d u a l l y worsening s i t u a t i o n s .  People a r e unaware o f  4)  People can t o l e r a t e  the i n t e r c o n n e c t i o n s o f a c t i o n s i n the environment; they  will  p o l l u t e and demand a b e t t e r environment at the same time. 5) People d i s c o u n t gains.  f u t u r e u n c e r t a i n t i e s i n f a v o u r o f immediate  6) People postpone d i f f i c u l t  d e c i s i o n s , l e a v e them t o  p o l i t i c i a n s , and are o f t e n d i s a p p o i n t e d w i t h the r e s u l t s . 7) People p l a y s e v e r a l r o l e s s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , conflicto  Because o f these  and these  may  f a c t o r s O'Riordan f e e l s a  t h e o r y o f d e c i s i o n s s t a r t i n g from the p u b l i c and moving upward t o decision-makers i s f a u l t y .  Rather, d e c i s i o n s  i n v o l v e c o n f l i c t between decision-makers and c e r t a i n groups and  individuals.  F i n a l d e c i s i o n s are a r r i v e d at through  b a r g a i n i n g among these The  actors.  F o r e s t S e r v i c e i s a r e c e p t o r f o r i n p u t s and an  emitter of outputs. c l u d e d i n the model.  The i d e a o f b a r g a i n i n g has t o be i n By l i s t i n g t h r e e a l t e r n a t i v e s w i t h i n  a c e r t a i n range the F o r e s t S e r v i c e s t a t e d i t s p o s i t i o n on management o f the A l p i n e Lakes a r e a .  Through b a r g a i n i n g  w i t h v a r i o u s i n t e r e s t groups, i n which b o t h the i n t e r e s t groups and the F o r e s t S e r v i c e m o d i f i e d f i n a l p r o p o s a l was prepared  their positions, a  by the F o r e s t S e r v i c e ,  The  F o r e s t S e r v i c e i s not s i m p l y a n e u t r a l r e c e p t o r o f demands  12  O'Riordan, "Towards A S t r a t e g y o f P u b l i c Involvement" i n S e w e l l and Burton, op, c i t , , p, 107 •  93 f r o m t h e p u b l i c , p r o c e s s i n g and at  a c o n s e n s u s o f what t h e  insights  and  bargained  perceptions  with  g r o u p s and  the  p u b l i c says.  about  public.  individuals  e v a l u a t i n g them t o I t i s an  S i m i l a r l y , w i t h i n and  i n t h e p u b l i c t h e r e was  Service personnel  h a v e a t t i t u d e s and  p e r c e p t i o n s , t h e r e was  The  aim  The over  important  these  how  g r o u p s when t h e  much d i d t h e F o r e s t reach  are  a) how  a need  study  gaining process,  the  share  with  the  Forest  d i f f e r e n c e s between  others  situation  groups s t i l l  e) was  correspondence  team b e g a n i t s work, c )  S e r v i c e and  between t h e  for bargain-  much power o r i n f l u e n c e  l a r g e were t h e  a more s a t i s f a c t o r y  differences  among  messages r e c e i v e d .  questions  b)  and i t  i n v o l v e d i n the d e c i s i o n  the A l p i n e Lakes a r e a d i d others  Service planners,  to  and  with  bargaining.  o f b a r g a i n i n g i s t o maximize the  between messages s e n t  agency  the A l p i n e Lakes a r e a ,  Because the F o r e s t  ingo  arrive  concede i n  for all,  exist  how  d)  order  what  a f t e r the  bar-  the b a r g a i n i n g s a t i s f a c t o r y to  the  major p a r t i e s i n v o l v e d . The first  process  w h i c h has  work o f t h e  Forest  ment o f t h e p u b l i c and final  proposal  goes t o of  the  t o be  of other  sent  same p a r t i e s may  are d i f f e r e n t Forest  covered  Service study  by  be  this  model.  Once t h e  i n v o l v e d , but  the  C o n g r e s s and  d i s c u s s e d above.  Service's proposal  from  has  to  parties  Many ulti-  President,  What g o e s on  been f i n a l i z e d  the  proposal  begins.  the  the  involve-  government a g e n c i e s  d e c i s i o n process  d e c i s i o n , the  from those  team,and t h e  to Congress.  Congress, a separate  m a t e l y making the  the  been o u t l i n e d above l e a d s  i s not  after  9k  B.  The Methods Used t o A p p l y the Model I n attempting  Service planners a r e a , two sources  t o f i n d what f a c t o r s a f f e c t e d the F o r e s t  i n t h e i r d e c i s i o n about the A l p i n e Lakes o f i n f o r m a t i o n were used.  read and i n t e r v i e w s were conducted. to  answer the q u e s t i o n s 1)  Documents were  The r e s e a r c h was  intended  r a i s e d i n the d i s c u s s i o n n o f t h e model.  Documents  I t was o r i g i n a l l y hoped t h a t some correspondence  files  c o u l d be reviewed t o see how o u t s i d e groups and i n d i v i d u a l s i n t e r a c t e d with the Forest Service planners.  Apparently  i n the o f f i c e o f the Snoqualmie N a t i o n a l F o r e s t any c o r respondence was f i l e d  as an i n p u t t o the d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s .  These were a l l coded u s i n g the F o r e s t S e r v i c e ' s technique. rearranged to  Codinvolve  Because the f i l e s i n the o f f i c e were b e i n g o r were i n the basement, i t was deemed i m p r a c t i c a l  go through the f i l e  of inputs.  No other f i l e s w i t h  cor-  respondence c o u l d be l o c a t e d . The  other documents were a v a i l a b l e t o the p u b l i c .  i n c l u d e d r e p o r t s by the F o r e s t S e r v i c e and i n t e r e s t  They  groups,  j o u r n a l p u b l i s h e d by some o f the i n t e r e s t groups, the N o r t h Cascades Study Report, some manuals o u t l i n i n g F o r e s t procedures and p o l i c i e s , and newspaper f i l e s . ments were i n t e n d e d  These docu-  t o p r o v i d e background i n f o r m a t i o n on  the h i s t o r y o f the a r e a , the v i e w p o i n t s ment o f some o f the i n t e r e s t  and type  of involve-  groups, the i s s u e s which were  b e i n g d i s c u s s e d , the way t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e n o r m a l l y ducts  i t s business.  Service  con-  Some o f these m a t e r i a l s were a l r e a d y  95 discussed  i n Part  II,  The r e s t  background f o r the i n t e r v i e w s cases  by f i l l i n g  obtained source  i n details  2)  Interviews  The  b a s i c purpose o f the i n t e r v i e w s  had lect  on t h e i r  What k i n d  A l l the persons  the  All  o f the people interviewed  organization decision.  or interest  These i n c l u d e d t h r e e  the  Lakes study,  study  to replace visors,  rangers  and a r r i v e influenced  Lakes  interviewed.  S e r v i c e were  two o f t h e t h r e e  team a n d a man who  from  were members o f some  i n districts  interviewed.  affected by the  o r i g i n a l members o f  j o i n e d the study  team l a t e r  one o f t h e o r i g i n a l members, b o t h F o r e s t  a n d a man on t h e s t a f f  Portland,  receive  col-  did?  i n d i v i d u a l s were  from the F o r e s t  thought  d i d the planners  g r o u p w o r k i n g on t h e A l p i n e  No u n a f f i l i a t e d  Nine people  Alpine  people  groups, and events  t o b e h a v e t h e way t h e y  raised i n  interviewed  a l l the information  a d e c i s i o n , which persons, planners  o f v i e w what  of information  compile  some  s o t h e i n t e n t was  own, what i n f o r m a t i o n d i d t h e y  o u t s i d e , how d i d t h e y at  worked,  was t o p r o v i d e  answer t h e q u e s t i o n s  out from s e v e r a l p o i n t s  happened.  were t h e p r i m e  With Informed I n d i v i d u a l s  d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e model.  find  information  a b o u t how t h e d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s  were i n v o l v e d i n t h e d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s , to  some  The i n t e r v i e w s  information which could help the  provided  a n d s u p p l e m e n t e d them i n some  or verifying  i n the interviews.  o f information  of* t h e i n f o r m a t i o n  on  Super-  i n the r e g i o n a l o f f i c e i n  96 Three members o f the A l p i n e Lakes C o a l i t i o n were i n t e r viewed*  One was a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f the B u r l i n g t o n Northern  R a i l r o a d , one was a former r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f the I n d u s t r i a l F o r e s t r y A s s o c i a t i o n , and the o t h e r r e p r e s e n t e d  the Western  Horsemen's A s s o c i a t i o n * S i x members o f the A l p i n e Lakes P r o t e c t i o n S o c i e t y were interviewed.  These i n c l u d e d people i n v o l v e d i n r t h e  founding  o f ALPS and the p r e s i d e n t o f ALPS. Two members o f the C o a l i t i o n o f C o n s e r v a t i o n interviewed.  One was a member o f the Mountaineers and  s e v e r a l o t h e r member groups o f t h e C o a l i t i o n . i n t e r v i e w e d by telephone.  She was  The o t h e r person was the p r e s i -  dent o f the North Cascades C o n s e r v a t i o n  Council.  Three members o f the Governor's Task Force were i n t e r v i e w e d . Force,  Groups were  on  Wilderness  One was the c o - o r d i n a t o r o f the Task  one was a county commissioner who was a member o f t h e  Task F o r c e ,  and one was a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f the O f f i c e o f  P o l i c y P l a n n i n g and F i s c a l Management, The  a s t a t e agency.  i n t e r v i e w s were conducted between J u l y 29, 1974  and August 26, 1974.  Most o f them were 1-g- hours t o 2 hours  long. At f i r s t  glance  t h e r e appears t o be a preponderance o f  members o f ALPS who were i n t e r v i e w e d . cases  two people were i n t e r v i e w e d  However, i n some  together,  i n t e r v i e w might a c t u a l l y be counted as two.  so t h a t one I f ..any  ment were t o be suggested i n the group o f persons  improve-  interviewed,  i t would be t o i n t e r v i e w a few more members o f the A l p i n e  97  Lakes C o a l i t i o n , perhaps one more r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f i n d u s t r y and  one o r two r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s The  o f i n t e n s i v e r e c r e a t i o n groups.  persons t o be i n t e r v i e w e d  were i n i t i a l l y chosen on  the b a s i s o f recommendations by Dick Buscher, the l e a d e r o f the F o r e s t S e r v i c e study team.  He suggested rangers who  headed d i s t r i c t s i n the A l p i n e Lakes, but who a l s o had d i f f e r e n t f e e l i n g s about management  o f the a r e a .  He and J o e l  D a h l i n , one o f the members o f t h e study team, f e l t and  these r a n g e r s and the two s u p e r v i s o r s  Forest  c o u l d present the  S e r v i c e ' s p o i n t o f view a d e q u a t e l y .  t i v e o f the r e g i o n a l o f f i c e was a l s o  t h a t they  One  representa-  recommended.  Two members o f the A l p i n e Lakes C o a l i t i o n were recommended.  From them a few more names o f persons who might be  h e l p f u l were o b t a i n e d .  One was s e l e c t e d t o p r o v i d e  a view  from the C o a l i t i o n but not d i r e c t l y a f f i l i a t e d w i t h the f o r e s t products i n d u s t r y . Three members o f ALPS were recommended. to r e p r e s e n t  some o f the d i f f e r i n g views w i t h i n ALPS.  them s e v e r a l o t h e r names were o b t a i n e d , felt  They were  felt From  and those who i t was  c o u l d p r o v i d e u s e f u l a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n were  selected.  Some attempt was made t o cover b o t h s i d e s o f the  Cascades• One r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f the C o a l i t i o n o f  Conservation  Groups was recommended, and he was i n t e r v i e w e d v e r y on the phone.  From him the o t h e r two names were  They were i n t e r v i e w e d because i t was f e l t the C o a l i t i o n o f C o n s e r v a t i o n  briefly  obtained.  t h a t ALPS and  Groups r e p r e s e n t e d  different  98 strategies groups  and a t t i t u d e s about  each had t h e i r  Two  own  the area  legislative  a n d b e c a u s e t h e two  proposal.  o f t h e members o f t h e G o v e r n o r ' s T a s k F o r c e  recommended b y D i c k  Buscher.  T h e i r group r e p r e s e n t e d  government agency i n v o l v e d i n t h e d e c i s i o n . had  been c o n t a c t e d p r i o r In s e l e c t i n g  attempt  to balance  a d d i t i o n a l persons one  more v o t e  ment  these  were  to talking with persons  The t h i r d  Dick  member  Buscher.  t h e r e was n o t a  the v a r y i n g viewpoints.  another  strict  Interviewing  f r o m one g r o u p d i d n o t s i m p l y mean a d d i n g -  f o r that viewpoint.  The i n t e n t  was  to supple-  i n f o r m a t i o n a l r e a d y p r o v i d e d b y o t h e r members o f t h a t  organization. support  I f the conclusions which w i l l  some v i e w p o i n t s  more t h a n  a m a t t e r o f how many p e o p l e  f o l l o w seem t o  others, i t i s not  were i n t e r v i e w e d f r o m  simply  each  organization. The of  i n t e r v i e w s were s e m i - s t r u c t u r e d .  general questions  T h e r e was  w h i c h were t o be a n s w e r e d .  these  were n o t a p p r o p r i a t e t o some o f t h e g r o u p s .  these  basic questions  to  the p a r t i c u l a r  steered the  specific  questions  felt  i n mind,  An a t t e m p t still  A few t i m e s  keeping  the b a s i c  questions  length.  suited  worthwhile,  to maintain  some outline  w h i c h i t was  w o u l d h a v e b e e n t o o o f f e n s i v e o r p r o b i n g were One a r e a  From  I f the interview  i n a d i r e c t i o n n o t a n t i c i p a t e d b u t deemed  d i r e c t i o n was p u r s u e d .  list  Some o f  w h i c h were  i n t e r v i e w were d e v e l o p e d .  i n f o r m a l i t y was made, w h i l e of  questions  a  omitted.  o f q u e s t i o n i n g has n o t been d i s c u s s e d a t  I t i s mentioned here  b e c a u s e a n a t t e m p t was made t o  99 pursue t h i s  area with  covered three the  Service  areas r e l a t i n g  personnel.  the philosophy  conservation  their  to the insights o f  ideas  o f the Forest  Service with  a n d l a n d u s e was i n v e s t i g a t e d .  on s i t u a t i o n s when  a need f o r timber h a r v e s t i n g ,  areas,  s i n g l e u s e management i n c l u d i n g u s e s  land  attitudes relation  of conservation to nature.  some e x t e n t for in  kinds  relation  other  posed t o  t h a n l o g g i n g and land,  These areas o f q u e s t i o n i n g tried  the need  indicated to  to balance various  demands  how t h e y v i e w e d e c o n o m i c u s e o f t h e l a n d  to e s t h e t i c use o f the land.  that  Forest  of recreation or recreation  Service personnel  have.  r e c r e a t i o n t h e y e n j o y o n weekends a n d h o l i d a y , tional visits  t o Wilderness Areas, the effect  The k i n d o f their  o f t i m e i n t h e f o r e s t s on t h e i r r e c r e a t i o n a l  and  t h e r e l a t i o n between t h e i r  t h e i r w o r k were s t u d i e d .  preferences,  i n t e r e s t i n wilderness  These questions  recrea-  o f spending a  lot  first  around  g r o u p s , a n d t h e i r v i e w o f man i n  S e c o n d was t h e p a t t e r n interests  uses  o f r e c r e a t i o n , the f l e x i b i l i t y of  how t h e p l a n n e r s  use o f the land,  included  the a p p l i c a b i l i t y of  the need f o r f u r t h e r wilderness  f o r other  other  t h e economic t h r e a t  logging by creating wilderness  wilderness,  This  relation  "multiple use" i s applicable,  w h e t h e r i t i s p r i m a r i l y a means o f f i t t i n g  for  It  planners. First  to  general  a i l Forest  and  supplemented the  s e t b y s h o w i n g how w e l l - e s t a b l i s h e d t h e i n t e r e s t i n  wilderness  o f t h e s e p e o p l e was.  100  T h i r d , the views o f F o r e s t S e r v i c e p e r s o n n e l toward r e s e a r c h i n f o r e s t and water management was probed.  Their  views o f the important problems t o be r e s e a r c h e d i n l a n d and water management, t h e k i n d s o f l a n d areas t o be s t u d i e d , t h e need f o r p r a c t i c a l v e r s u s l e s s c o n c r e t e areas o f r e s e a r c h , the v a l u e o f Wilderness  Areas f o r r e s e a r c h , and r e s e a r c h  needs i n the d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f p u b l i c r e c r e a t i o n a l p r e f e r e n c e s were areas o f q u e s t i o n i n g .  These o p i n i o n s suggest how t h e y  see l a n d and water management and what d e f i c i e n c i e s f e e l need t o be c o r r e c t e d through r e s e a r c h .  Since  they scientific  r e s e a r c h i s one purpose f o r the c r e a t i o n o f Wilderness  Areas,  t h e i r views show more c l e a r l y how t h e y made d e c i s i o n s . The  i n t e n t o f m a i n t a i n i n g some i n f o r m a l i t y i n the i n t e r -  views was t o m a i n t a i n as comfortable a s i t u a t i o n as p o s s i b l e f o r b o t h the i n t e r v i e w e r and t h e i n t e r v i e w e e .  To some e x t e n t  t h i s e v o l v e d over the month o f i n t e r v i e w i n g .  I f one i n t e r v i e w  seemed a l i t t l e uncomfortable,  an attempt  next i n t e r v i e w more c o m f o r t a b l e .  was made t o make t h e  One change which c o u l d be  noted d u r i n g the month was t h a t as more i n t e r v i e w s had been conducted  and more i n f o r m a t i o n had been gathered, the q u e s t i o n s  c o u l d be more s p e c i f i c . One t h i n g should be mentioned h e r e ,  1-g- t o 2 hours  r e p r e s e n t s a l o n g time f o r a working person t o g i v e up f o r an i n t e r v i e w .  The g e n e r o s i t y o f the i n t e r v i e w e e s w i t h  time i s g r e a t l y a p p r e c i a t e d .  their  The l i m i t e d time which i t had  been f e l t would be a v a i l a b l e was a prime reason f o r h a v i n g an o u t l i n e o f q u e s t i o n s from which t o work.  101  One r e a s o n specific  i t was f e l t  number o f p e r s o n s  need  i n some i n t e r v i e w s  forstatistical  3)  was j u s t  a statistical  During  mentioned, the i n t e r v i e w s  sample.  were  dis-  T h e r e was no  version  to questions  were made.  t o s e n t e n c e s and paragraphs  The w r i t t e n s t a t e m e n t s were s e e n as e a c h  a f f e c t e d what t o o k p l a c e stories  together  0  t o g e t one a c c o u n t  interviewees  information  o f what h a p p e n e d .  i n earlier  interviews  f o r r e a c t i o n o r comments.  of the w r i t t e n materials helped i t appears that  a n d o f what f a c t o r s  a c c o u n t s was t o m e n t i o n  some t h i n g s w h i c h h a d b e e n d i s c u s s e d ask l a t e r  person's  T h e p r o b l e m was t o p u t a l l o f  One way o f t r y i n g t o v e r i f y  clarified  f a c t o r s and  r e s p o n s e s were w r i t t e n i n p o i n t  o f how c e r t a i n e v e n t s t o o k p l a c e  retrospect  d i d not represent  No c o r r e l a t i o n s o f v a r i o u s  the interviews  soon a f t e r .  and  were  accuracy.  T h e s e n o t e s were c o n v e r t e d  these  a n d some a r e a s  and n o t i n o t h e r s .  answers o f i n t e r v i e w e e s  form.  Interviewees  Data A n a l y s i s  As  the  structured.  a l l a s k e d t h e same q u e s t i o n s ,  cussed  d i d n o t have t o be a  f r o m e a c h g r o u p was t h a t t h e  i n t e r v i e w s were n o t r i g i d l y not  there  verify  information.  Some In  later  interviews  supplemented o r  i n earlier  interviews  rather  than  negating i t . The  d i f f e r e n c e s i n testimony  differences facts.  appeared u s u a l l y t o be  o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n r a t h e r than d i f f e r e n c e s o f  I f d i f f e r e n c e s went b e y o n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , a n  a t t e m p t was made t o o b t a i n w r i t t e n m a t e r i a l t o s u b s t a n t i a t e  102  one  story  a n d no able  or the  judgment  and  other.  I f no  c o u l d be  s u c h m a t e r i a l was  available  made o f w h i c h v e r s i o n was  more  reason-  f i t b e t t e r w i t h o t h e r t e s t i m o n y , b o t h v e r s i o n s were  presented. Often instead  o f d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n two  were o m i s s i o n s  i n one.  d e c i d e why  o m i s s i o n m i g h t h a v e b e e n made.  for  the  such  as  the  In that  omission which appeared cognitive  dissonance  new  m a t e r i a l was  was  e x a m i n e d t o s e e why  story. the As  treated  much as p o s s i b l e was  understand  people  where t h e  stories  composite  p i c t u r e was  That questions  inferred  or  Lakes d e c i s i o n ,  c o u l d be  found,  final  f a c e , the I f not, i t  people's  what t h e y s a i d . and  supported  someone's  definitively. attitudes  By  trying  trying each  drafts  been w r i t t e n ,  see a  done w i t h  answers c o u l d not  of this  t h e s i s were  interviewed f o r their  be  felt  that  been answered.  i t was  felt  found  a final  they  events  comments.  It  could faulty.  of the A l p i n e  could best  Even a f t e r the c h e c k was  0  circulated  s e e where q u e s t i o n s  most f a m i l i a r w i t h  i t was  whether q u e s t i o n s had  to  other,  a n s w e r e d o r where r e a s o n i n g a p p e a r e d  and  to  and  obtained.  c o m p l e t e l y a n s w e r what was  T h e y were t h e p e r s o n s  had  about  h o p e d t h e y c o u l d more r e a d i l y c o u l d n o t be  reason  or disproved  s a i d what t h e y s a i d  among some o f t h e p e r s o n s was  proved  f o r which d e f i n i t i v e reason  If a  f r e q u e n t l y , s i n c e much o f  of various people  does not  made t o  testimony.  arose  there  was  o r a need t o save  to help i n t e r p r e t why  attempt  i t might have been added t o  T h i s k i n d o f problem  perceptions  an  reasonable  as v a l i d  i n f o r m a t i o n c o u l d n o t be  For that  case  stories,  say draft  needed.  103  PART I V  FINDINGS  A.  Introduction From t h e a n a l y t i c a l model d e v e l o p e d  o f how It  t h e s t u d y team a r r i v e d  can d e s c r i b e i n s i m p l i f i e d  studied here,  the f i n a l  i n P a r t I I I a model  at i t s output t e r m s how  c a n be  developed.  the d e c i s i o n  being  recommendation o f the F o r e s t S e r v i c e  s t u d y team c o n c e r n i n g t h e management o f t h e A l p i n e L a k e s a r e a , was  reached.  T h i s m o d e l c a n be e x p r e s s e d  as f o u r  propositions. P r o p o s i t i o n 1; The s t u d y team's o u t p u t , i t s recommendation c o n c e r n i n g the A l p i n e Lakes a r e a , was d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e s t u d y team a n d t h e i n f l u e n c e o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n r e c e i v e d and c o n s i d e r e d by t h e s t u d y team. P r o p o s i t i o n 2 : T h e s t u d y team's o b j e c t i v e s were d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e r u l e s c o n s t r a i n i n g i t a n d t h e a t t i t u d e s and p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e members o f t h e s t u d y team. P r o p o s i t i o n 3? The i n f o r m a t i o n w h i c h a f f e c t e d t h e o u t p u t o f t h e s t u d y team c o n s i s t e d o f a ) i n f o r m a t i o n w h i c h was r e c e i v e d f r o m o u t s i d e and s c r e e n e d and i n t e r p r e t e d b y t h e s t u d y team i n a c c o r d w i t h t h e v a l u e s o f t h e s t u d y team members and b ) i n f o r m a t i o n g e n e r a t e d b y t h e s t u d y team. P r o p o s i t i o n k: The i n f o r m a t i o n g e n e r a t e d b y t h e s t u d y team a n d t h e s c r e e n i n g a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m o u t s i d e were d e t e r m i n e d by a) t h e r u l e s c o n s t r a i n i n g t h e s t u d y team, b ) t h e a t t i t u d e s a n d p e r c e p t i o n s o f s t u d y team members, and c ) t h e r e s o u r c e s a v a i l a b l e t o t h e s t u d y team.  104  These four propositions w i l l be used to organize the presentation of the findings of t h i s t h e s i s .  As can be  seen, Proposition 1 i s the most general of the four. other three w i l l be discussed f i r s t ,  and discussion of  Proposition 1 w i l l serve as a summary. i s discussed,  The  As each proposition  the questions i t suggests and the answers  provided by the research conducted w i l l be studied. C l e a r l y there i s some degree of overlapping between the various propositions, but hopefully a rigorous explanation of the roles of the various factors of the study team w i l l B,  a f f e c t i n g the output  emerge,  Proposition 2 The study team's objectives were determined by the rules constraining i t and the attitudes and perceptions of the members of the study team. The important questions are:  study team?  What were the attitudes  study team members? members' attitudes objectives? 1)  What rules constrained the and perceptions of the  How d i d the rules and the study team and perceptions affect  the study team's  What were the study team's objectives?  The Rules  F i r s t the rules constraining the study team should be discussed.  These include laws already mentioned, general  p o l i c y and regulations, p o l i c y and regulations s p e c i f i c to the Alpine Lakes s i t u a t i o n , and understandings.  105 It  should be r e c o g n i z e d  c o n s t r a i n the b e h a v i o r  t h a t the r u l e s t h a t i n f a c t  o f an o r g a n i z a t i o n c o n s i s t o f more  than the bare p r o v i s i o n s o f an a c t , a r e g u l a t i o n , o r a statement o f agency p o l i c y . significance reflect  The r u l e s t h a t are o f p r a c t i c a l  the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f them b y the mem-  b e r s o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n which i n t u r n stem t o a c e r t a i n extent  from the a t t i t u d e s and p e r c e p t i o n s  i n the a n a l y s i s which f o l l o w s an e f f o r t not  o n l y the r u l e s t h a t e x i s t but  preted  they hold.  Thus  i s made t o i n d i c a t e  a l s o how they were i n t e r -  and a p p l i e d by the F o r e s t S e r v i c e study team, a)  Laws  The  F o r e s t S e r v i c e i s governed b y s e v e r a l laws.  Some o f these were d i s c u s s e d  earlier.  the F o r e s t  i n the most b a s i c manner i s t h e  Service's mission  The one which  M u l t i p l e U s e - S u s t a i n e d Y i e l d Act o f i960. is  The F o r e s t  committed through t h i s act t o managing renewable  resources  describes  Service  surface  t o "best meet the needs o f the American p e o p l e . "  There i s enough freedom o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n t h a t phrase f o r higher  l e v e l Forest  Service personnel  t o choose what t h e y  f e e l i s the p a t t e r n o f needs o f Americans. the F o r e s t  The law  gives  S e r v i c e a mandate t o meet the needs o f the  American p e o p l e , but i t does not  s p e c i f y these needs o r  s p e c i f y how they are t o be met.  The n a t i o n a l , r e g i o n a l , and  f o r e s t o f f i c e s decide  i n a h i e r a r c h i c a l f a s h i o n what t h e  needs a r e , and t h e i r d e c i s i o n s about these needs can s l o w l y over time i n response t o i n p u t from o u t s i d e .  change The  A l p i n e Lakes study happened t o come a t a time o f change.  106 There i s a f e e l i n g  among some t h a t  h a v e b e e n i n t e r p r e t e d t o be resources,  a need  e s p e c i a l l y timber.  e x p l i c i t l y described  as b e i n g  the  of t h i s  act.  The  impact  make them r e s p o n s i b l e as  d e f i n e d by  is  not  sider just  known.  uses arose,  the  This  Alpine  act  A r e a s and  In  and  general  a r e a where t h e man,  r e m a i n . , . " and  were  act  some r e a s o n s Forest  terms these  where man  were l i s t e d :  Wilderness  was con-  wilderness  being  resource more  Act,  than  chosen. Forest  criteria  Service for  i n selecting portions  of  suitable for wilder-  "an  area  character  the  of and  area  are  1)  that  the  does  undeveloped influence,  sect. (c).  area not  that  be  un-  o r human h a b i t a t i o n . . . " ^  o f man's w o r k " n o t i c e a b l y , Z)  ^U.S.DoAo, The  to  pressure  lists  i t be  permanent  improvements  to  people"  h i m s e l f i s a v i s i t o r who  without  "imprint  had  i t s community o f l i f e  further that  of  team was  c r i t e r i a were t h a t  land r e t a i n i n g i t s primeval  the  aims  f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g them.  Service  e a r t h and  they  of  is  definition  a f f e c t e d the  Federal  F o u r more c r i t e r i a  study  resources,  political  The  0  area  l a k e s w h i c h were o r were n o t  trammeled by not  the  the  between p o t e n t i a l  clearly  Lakes s t u d y  guided  Alpine  ness. "an  data  Act  the  What t h i s  f o r the  When c o n f l i c t s  Wilderness  Wilderness  the  on  act determined which use(s) The  in  act  needs  f o r consumptive use  consistent with  superiors.  resource  these  "the needs o f the American  In planning  use.  past  Hovever, w i l d e r n e s s  s e r i o u s l y a l l uses o f the one  this  their  to  i n the  there  show be  107  opportunities for solitude or primitive recreation, 3) that the area cover at least  5000  acres,  4)  that there may be  other features of s c i e n t i f i c , h i s t o r i c a l , or scenic 2  interest.  Uses which are prohibited i n a Wilderness Area  are l i s t e d , but those are primarily considerations for managers of a Wilderness Area, not for a study team planning for an area.  The act also states that there shall be oppor-  tunity for public comment on the Forest Service's proposal. Nominally this was the reason for having public hearings on the single proposal.  The Forest Service had other motives  in having the hearings, but these requirements provided the i n i t i a l reason.  By modifying i t s proposal i n response to  public input the study team was able to have a plan that incorporated more information and which would generate more p o l i t i c a l support.  These latter motives were more important.  It is important to remember that the Wilderness Act gives the power to create Wilderness Areas to the Congress. Prior to the act the Forest Service created i t s own Wilderness Areas, and i t had freedom to make decisions on i t s own or involve the public, as i t saw f i t .  Now the Forest Service  conducts studies on behalf of the Administration and prepares a wilderness proposal for Congress to vote on. advisor, not a decision-maker.  It is an  Because the Forest Service  i s no longer in a decision-making position with respect to Wilderness, i t must make greater efforts to be p o l i t i c a l l y Ibid.  108 responsive  i n p l a n n i n g f o r such areas*  h a v e some p u b l i c t o be  enacted.  support  to keep the p u b l i c Although  and  Congress  that  much t o i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . a slight  Service will  and  to ignore  i n the pasto  Selection  They f e e l  The  subject too  consider only roadless,  "rnitrammeled"  and/or  structures  areas*  t o be  On  restricted.  N a t i o n a l Park  I n a proposed  Wilderness  Area  the Park  with a fiberglass  t h e s t u d y team h a d  freedom  i n p l a n n i n g what k i n d  was of  I n p l a n n i n g w h i c h a r e a s s h o u l d be  implementing  toilets  t h e number  S e r v i c e would b u i l d  a  c o n t a i n e r f o r waste and f l y and  empty i t p e r i o d i c a l l y .  T h e s e a r e e x a m p l e s o f t h e room f o r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n  in  Mount  conditions,  c o n t a i n e r out w i t h a h e l i c o p t e r  later  has  campground o n c e t h e W i l d e r n e s s A r e a  u s e r s had  can  generally  the F o r e s t S e r v i c e removed  To m a i n t a i n s a n i t a r y  not  Park  the area  Forest Service w i l l  created.  concrete vault  the  and  Park S e r v i c e  indicate  The  a backcountry  rule,  t h e s e i m p r i n t s o f man's w o r k  i f other factors  Whitney i n C a l i f o r n i a  had  of Wilderness Areas  high wilderness value.  the  as a  i t i s t o o v a g u e and  the F o r e s t S e r v i c e d i f f e r s .  d i s a p p e a r over time  Olympic  s t u d y team  i s seen here  c o n s i d e r some a r e a s w h i c h h a v e r o a d s  from  opposition  e x t e n t management u n d e r t h e a c t b y  f o r Wilderness.  in  The  Congress  i n mind i n p l a n n i n g .  the Wilderness Act  t h e r e i s some f e e l i n g  to  a n d must h a v e s u p p o r t i n  I t i s more d i f f i c u l t  t o p r o p o s a l s t h a n i t was  P r o p o s a l s have t o  included  to interpret  i n the a c t .  and w h i c h the a c t ,  should and  o f management w o u l d be u s e d  t h e s e p l a n s t h e s t u d y team and  and  other Forest  109 Service point  officials  i s that,  freedom  h a d and w i l l  have freedom.  The i m p o r t a n t  a s t h e a b o v e e x a m p l e s show, t h e r e was  within the constraints  o f the act.  A Park S e r v i c e  s t u d y team c o u l d h a v e come u p w i t h d i f f e r e n t about  what t o i n c l u d e i n t h e p r o p o s e d  with different The ness  statement  account.  statement  native of  A draft  W i l d e r n e s s A r e a and  guidelines.  environmental  Public  government  f o rcareful  impact  comment h a s t o b e agencies review the  and r e q u e s t a d d i t i o n a l  f u r t h e r impetus  land uses  public  Other  recommendations  Policy Act affects wilder-  and a f i n a l  have t o be p r e p a r e d .  taken into  provides  management  National Environmental  studies.  draft  proposed  some  information.  consideration  i n t h e s t u d y a r e a and f o r t a k i n g  The a c t  of alteraccount  views.  T h e s e t h r e e a c t s a r e t h e most i m p o r t a n t constraints  on t h e s t u d y o f t h e A l p i n e L a k e s  considering the c r i t e r i a look at environmental n e r s were r e q u i r e d  f o rWilderness  impacts  and p u b l i c  laws  a c t i n g as  area.  While  and t h e need t o opinion, the p l a n -  t o k e e p i n m i n d t h e n e e d t o manage a l l  lands w i t h i n the m u l t i p l e - u s e philosophy, emphasizing tained y i e l d  o f renewable  resources.  I t may a p p e a r  a sus-  that  p l a n n i n g a W i l d e r n e s s A r e a and managing l a n d s w i t h i n t h e multiple-use philosophy are opposing use  concepts.  philosophy includes the r e a l i z a t i o n  that  some u s e s o f  some r e s p u r c e s a r e i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h o t h e r u s e s . is  The m u l t i p l e -  Wilderness  not compatible with timber h a r v e s t i n g or i n t e n s i v e  recreation.  M u l t i p l e - u s e c a n mean t h a t  c e r t a i n areas are  110  managed f o r o n l y one classified  the  lands  act.  One  smaller area,  like  area  like  w i t h no try  to  resource  as m u l t i p l e - u s e  multiple-use with  o r two  uses.  l a n d , but  c a n be  the philosophy  dominant  the best  whole A l p i n e Lakes  b)  General  The  first  viewing  overall  The  combination  study  team h a d  of uses  for  Policy  and  the  Regulations  of p o l i c y which i s apparent  Service personnel  after  i s multiple-use.  A l l the personnel  cated  as  in this  philosophy  manage N a t i o n a l F o r e s t s , provided  later,  More d e t a i l  be  that  such a l l - p e r v a s i v e a t t i t u d e s point  national sure  office  to serve  is  to rangers'  offices  t o be  there  uses p o s s i b l e i n the best l e a d s t o a t t i t u d e s and but  are  i t also leads  above  From  way  the  pres-  possible  resources  in  Y i e l d Act  Forest  t o be  combination.  perceptions  from  i s continual  Beyond the M u l t i p l e U s e - S u s t a i n e d  s e v e r a l decades t h a t r e s o u r c e s  to  of personnel.  of the  indi-  made h e r e i s  to p o l i c y  management o f a l l t h e  been p a r t  way  has  their attitudes  the needs o f America i n the b e s t  a p o l i c y w h i c h has  personnel,  point  o f the philosophy  through multiple-use forests.  the  on  will  w h i c h becomes p a r t  but  the best  inter-  This  a l r e a d y been mentioned under laws. confidence  to  area,  area  Forest  a larger  i s b e i n g managed f o r m u l t i p l e - u s e  inconsistency i n philosophy. find  and  or exclusive i n a  the A l p i n e Lakes a r e a , while  a whole f o r e s t  land i s not  including i t within  i s consistent with use  That  the  there  Service  for  managed f o r a l l t h e In part  i n Forest  this  policy  Service  to r u l e s which supplement  and  111 clarify  the act,  traditions  The s t u d y  team h a d t o b e aware o f p a s t  dating to long before  t h e a c t , and i t h a d t o be  aware o f t h e c o n t i n u i n g change i n m u l t i p l e - u s e Again and  t h e y were c o n s t r a i n e d t o k e e p t i m b e r  other resource  policy.  harvest  needs  consumptive needs i n mind, as w e l l as  i n t e n s i v e r e c r e a t i o n n e e d s , and t o a v o i d t h i n k i n g j u s t i n terms o f Wilderness, Tied  to this  was t h e p o l i c y  was m e n t i o n e d e a r l i e r ,  Right  " i n meeting planned  from t h e t o p t h e r e  m e e t i n g p r o j e c t e d wood p r o d u c t Because these pete  with  Along  timber  Forest  jobs  timber  i s a policy of  needs through  timber  sales.  h a r v e s t i n g i n a r e a s where i t i s f e a s i b l e . t o meet t i m b e r  forlocal,  needs i s a p r e s s u r e t o  resource-based  economies.  S e r v i c e has t o c o n s i d e r c a r e f u l l y  The  the p o s s i b i l i t y  or a cattle  which grazes  I t has a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  on F o r e s t  avoid destroying jobs. the pressure  Area  land.  The s t u d y  of resources.  o f how much t i m b e r the  study  f o rthis  against  a s much l a n d  and j o b s  T h e r e i s no c l e a r - c u t  production  to »  In providing a  they had t o t r y t o maintain  them c o u l d b e p r o v i d e d .  operation  f o r Wilderness  i n m u l t i p l e - u s e as p o s s i b l e , so r e s o u r c e s on  ranching  team was f o r c e d t o  f o r and t h e need  the need f o r other uses Wilderness  once  sale  o f c l o s i n g down a l u m b e r m i l l  balance  As  n e e d s h a v e t o b e met, o t h e r u s e s h a v e t o com-  with pressure  provide  timber.  t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e has t o r e p o r t  a week on how i t i s d o i n g objectives".  of producing  dependent definition  a r e a i s enough, b u t  team h a d t o make some d e t e r m i n a t i o n  o f how much  112 timber production team h a d and  for this  area  i s enough, b u t  t o make some d e t e r m i n a t i o n  assure  that  sufficient  o f how  timbered  the  study-  much was  l a n d was  set  enough  aside  for  harvesting. One Forest  a c t i v i t y which p o l i c y doesn't  Service's  t i o n Areas. that  One  within  mission  i s the  to i n t e r p r e t of National Forest  the  Supervisors  Forest  ing  from the  A r e a has This  to  The  more w i t h the  Chief's  the  office.  The  idea of National like  the  i n mind a c c o r d i n g  Once t h e  Administration  Area considered, Forest  Service  Service's  role  was  an  still  Forest  including  initial  i s Forest  Service policy  agencies  Service  can  effective  i t chooses recommendation One  impetus  of for  policy  Forest  the a than  originatRecreation Service. Chief's  Recreation  developed  one  A r e a s was  o f the  Interior  i n mind t h a n w i t h Forest  Service  the  to p o l i t i c a l  of p o l i c y  c o n s t r a i n t on  and Forest  official.  i t wants a N a t i o n a l  become i n v o l v e d .  i s a result  felt  o r i g i n a t i n g from the  decides  subsequent  Recrea-  Service  idea of National  Department  to  the  t o come f r o m someone e l s e  Bureau of Outdoor R e c r e a t i o n  Service  the  come f r o m someone e l s e t h a n t h e  i s Forest  office.  This  of  i s a lawyer  Areas i n t h e i r powers.  A r e a has  Service,  part  A r e a s , but  as n o t  stated that  National Recreation the  Recreation  legislation  Recreation  o f ALPS who  legislation  c o u l d recommend N a t i o n a l  as  creation of National  representative  i t s enabling  see  initiatives,  Recreation the  This view of the  Forest  r a t h e r t h a n law,  but  the  study  team.  i t  113 Forest National despite  Service  Recreation  follow-up  three  was  some l a n d  to  Area.  state that  the  being  p o l i c y appears q u i t e  the  final  proposal  d e s i r e s b e t t e r , but cluded  l a n d was  being  strong,  this possibility.  The  recommending a N a t i o n a l  input  supporting The  was  an  Forest  such a Service  lands.  There  personnel  Recreation  area  the  At was  one  the  Chief's  as but  general point  considered to  office  p o l i c y l e d the Recreation  a  were  Area,  In  Lakes, i n order  administers  for  f i t public level  pre-  s t u d y team  Area despite  Forests  Forest  Service  i s a branch of the  or  c o n c e r n them.  of the  i s just Forest  on  Alpine  S e r v i c e , which i s  b r a n c h w h i c h manages  National  F o r e s t s , which deals  s t a t e and  basically  the  Forest  Service  only  There  a manager o f p u b l i c  a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l y from the with  private  Lakes  separate  but  to  public  state regulations  a t t i t u d e among r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s that  was  recommendation.  which are near N a t i o n a l  Coalition  Lakes area  designated  though.  Recreation  p o l i c y at  recommended.  suitable for inclusion i n Service  avoid  lands  Alpine  Forest  for Alpine  a  Service  A r e a was  recommended f o r i n c l u s i o n .  recommending a N a t i o n a l  proposal  a Forest  Recreation  for inclusion i n a National  not  of  North Cascades Study f i n i s h e d  a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r the  Recreation  suitable  the  interagency  which i n c l u d e d  careful  a l t e r n a t i v e or  creation  s t u d y team l e a d e r w o r k e d on  19<->5» i n w h i c h a N a t i o n a l  National  it  The  an  N o r t h C a s c a d e s , w h i c h was  t o the  Among t h e one  occasionally include  A r e a s as  t h i s policy,,  study i n the  in  studies  private  administers  lands,  state  114  r e g u l a t i o n s i n those p a r t i c u l a r cases o f lands which a f f e c t the N a t i o n a l F o r e s t s , f o r i n s t a n c e the p r i v a t e l a n d which i s i n t e r s p e r s e d w i t h p u b l i c lands i n the A l p i n e Lakes The  Forest  area*  S e r v i c e does not have power over the management  o f p r i v a t e lands beyond a d m i n i s t e r i n g the s t a t e r e g u l a t i o n s , and  i n d u s t r y guards i t s independence.  not  d e n y i n g reasonable  lands.  access  There i s a p o l i c y o f  to p r i v a t e lands v i a p u b l i c  T h i s i s important f o r areas l i k e the  checkerboard  areas i n the A l p i n e Lakes where a l t e r n a t e s e c t i o n s are i n p r i v a t e hands, and public lands. making any l a n d s and  access,  i f provided,  has  to go  T h i s p o l i c y l e d the study team to  through avoid  e x p l i c i t recommendation f o r a c q u i s i t i o n o f p r i v a t e to a v o i d recommending i n c l u s i o n o f l a r g e areas  p r i v a t e l a n d i n the Wilderness Area or i n any  other  of  classifi-  c a t i o n such as a N a t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n A r e a which might i n f r i n g e on what the F o r e s t S e r v i c e f e e l s are p r i v a t e owners' rights.  The  study team was  more r e l u c t a n t than some members  o f the p u b l i c t o s a c r i f i c e c e r t a i n p r i v a t e r i g h t s f o r the benefit  of the p u b l i c .  The  most important p o l i c y a f f e c t i n g the F o r e s t  Service's  d e c i s i o n about the A l p i n e Lakes i s the p o l i c y o f i n v o l v i n g the p u b l i c and  c o n s i d e r i n g t h e i r wants.  Before  going i n t o  t h i s p o l i c y i t would be u s e f u l to d i s c u s s the f a c t o r s which seem t o have to l e a d the F o r e s t S e r v i c e to t h a t p o l i c y . I n 1960, Forest  before  the Wilderness Act was  passed,  S e r v i c e c r e a t e d the G l a c i e r Peak W i l d e r n e s s .  o f the events c o n c e r n i n g  the Some  t h i s Wilderness A r e a were d e s c r i b e d  115 earlier. had  When c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s saw  ignored  fight  the  some o f t h e i r p r o p o s a l s ,  Forest  They organized  ist  who  o f the  o f events f e l t the  state  the  to  Park Service  create  most o f t h i s  the  Forest  S e r v i c e was  more p o l i t i c a l  representatives  i n the n o r t h e r n  were w e l l - o r g a n i z e d .  As  and  still  complacent the  forest  part  products  of the  The to  Forest the  There  discussed  earlier,  they  the  p r o p o s e d and  study  p u b l i c hearings  Seattle hearing  North  1965»  of  were  a held.  c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s were >  a N o r t h C a s c a d e s N a t i o n a l P a r k was  Service, a powerful  had  agency, had  lost  created.  a l o t of  land  P a r k S e r v i c e , a r e l a t i v e l y weak a g e n c y .  The two  1968  case  industry  state.  report  In  when  forest  particular  Cascades Study,  P a r t i c u l a r l y i n the  National  Sound where c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s  was  Following  them.  interpretation  interagency  strong.  to  conservation-  e n o u g h power t o h e l p b r i n g a b o u t t h e  N a t i o n a l P a r k was  Service  power i n W a s h i n g t o n  In t h i s  o f the  a l o t o f power i n P u g e t  The  They thought  than c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s d i d .  were s m a l l m i l l s  to help  a North Cascades  information  contacted.  i n d u s t r y had  many o f t h e  Forest  they banded t o g e t h e r  G l a c i e r Peak.Wilderness,  P a r k S e r v i c e was  products  was  to ask  efforts  provided  the  Service,  They d e c i d e d  Park north  that  man  who  described  these  events f e l t  r i v e r v a l l e y s w h i c h were o m i t t e d  Wilderness  had  been i n c l u d e d ,  been able  t o work t o g e t h e r  might not  h a v e b e e n as  from the  that  i f the  G l a c i e r Peak  c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s wouldn't  to pressure  f o r a p a r k , and  anxious f o r i t s c r e a t i o n .  In  have they  other  116 words, because the F o r e s t S e r v i c e f a i l e d t o r e c o g n i z e p o l i t i c a l power o f the p u b l i c , and t i o n groups, and d e c i d e d  s p e c i f i c a l l y of  t o l e a v e two  management so i n d u s t r y c o u l d h a r v e s t  the  conserva-  v a l l e y s i n multiple-use timber,  they l o s t  a  l a r g e amount o f l a n d t o the Park S e r v i c e . The  F o r e s t S e r v i c e ' s o r g a n i z a t i o n i s geared toward  r u r a l and  semi-rural areas.  T h e i r personnel  become v e r y  f a m i l i a r w i t h the wants o f people i n s m a l l towns and areas.  They don't have as dependable a way  d e s i r e s o f people i n l a r g e c i t i e s .  rural  of sensing  This could help  the  explain  t h e i r f a i l u r e t o l i s t e n t o the i n p u t s o f people from Puget Sound c o n c e r n i n g placency  G l a c i e r Peak and t h e i r apparent com-  about t h e i r own  political position.  r e a l i z e the p o l i t i c a l power behind The  They d i d n ' t  the c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s ' views.  r e s u l t appears to be a s t r o n g concern w i t h  c a r e f u l l y to the p u b l i c .  T h i s concern was  manifested  change b o t h i n the r u l e s t h a t c o n s t r a i n e d F o r e s t personnel sonnel. was  and i n the a t t i t u d e s and p e r c e p t i o n s The  change i n the r u l e s was  listening as  a  Service  o f the  that a greater  to be made t o r e c e i v e i d e a s from the p u b l i c and  per-  effort to  a r r i v e at p r o p o s a l s  f o r l a n d management which c o u l d generate  p o l i t i c a l support.  The  was  impact o f the N o r t h Cascades s t r u g g l e  compared to the impact o f the Echo Park d e c i s i o n i n the  1950's,  The  S i e r r a Club d e f e a t e d  o f R e c l a m a t i o n to b u i l d a dam  a p r o p o s a l by the Bureau  i n Utah.  From then  on  Congressmen f e l t they had t o take note o f c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s and t h e i r p o l i t i c a l power.  S i m i l a r l y the North Cascades  117 struggle  l e d t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e t o much g r e a t e r p u b l i c  involvement the Future  i n i t s decisions. i n 1970  and I n f o r m  Documents l i k e  a n d I n v o l v e i n 1972  the Forest Service t o i n c r e a s e d p u b l i c F o r t h e F u t u r e was future  directions.  involvement  was p a r t o f t h e s e d i r e c t i o n s . excerpts  from  committed  involvement.  a s e t o f p o l i c y statements Public  Framework F o r  Framework  f o r broad  i n land use planning  I n Inform  a n d I n v o l v e some  Framework F o r t h e F u t u r e were  listed  0  Objective s Involve the p u b l i c i n F o r e s t r y P o l i c y and Program F o r m u l a t i o n -—Policy. S e e k o u t a n d o b t a i n l o c a l and n a t i o n a l views i n t h e p r o c e s s o f p o l i c y and program formulation. D i s c h a r g e o u r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n ways t h a t make o u r management p r o c e s s e s v i s i b l e a n d our r e s p o n s i b l e people a c c e s s i b l e . C o n s u l t w i t h and s e e k c o - o p e r a t i v e a c t i o n w i t h a g e n c i e s a t a l l l e v e l s o f Government, and w i t h p r i v a t e groups and i n d i v i d u a l s , i n programs f o r r e s o u r c e management a n d e c o n o m i c development,^ The  objective  o f Inform  a n d I n v o l v e was  stated  thus:  TO INFORM THE PUBLIC OF THE S C I E N T I F I C , SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND ECONOMIC FACTORS THAT R E L A T E ' TO LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT. AND TO INVOLVE THE PUBLIC CONSTRUCTIVELY I N PROVIDING INFORMATION, COMMENT AND POINTS OF VIEW THAT WILL LEAD . TO BETTER LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DECISIONS. The  p l a n described i n the brochure  was  seen  as "...not  new I & E ( i n f o r m a t i o n a n d E d u c a t i o n ) p r o g r a m b u t ... r a t h e r  U.S.D.A., Framework F o r t h e F u t u r e , p .  2.  a  118 a d i r e c t i o n o f emphasis t h a t r e f l e c t s c u r r e n t F o r e s t  Service  5  policy." The  Manual and o t h e r documents p r o v i d e d a d d i t i o n a l  guidelines.  A 1973 study by t h e r e s e a r c h arm o f the F o r e s t  S e r v i c e examined p u b l i c involvement programs, commented on them, and proposed improvements.^  Because a l o t o f people  i n S e a t t l e , as w e l l as o t h e r p a r t s o f Washington, know about the A l p i n e Lakes, the F o r e s t S e r v i c e would be f o o l i s h not t o make a s a t i s f a c t o r y d e c i s i o n . One  r u l e was imposed by the House I n t e r i o r and I n s u l a r  A f f a i r s Committee. Colorado,  The former chairman, Wayne A s p i n a l l o f  s t a t e d that wilderness  only i f a mineral G e o l o g i c a l Survey.  p r o p o s a l s would be s t u d i e d  survey had been completed by the U.S. I t made cases  l i k e the Pasayten  Wilder-  n e s s , where the requirement was waived by Congress, v e r y unlikely. study.  T h i s requirement p l a c e d a time burden on the  The e x p l a n a t i o n s  g i v e n by the F o r e s t S e r v i c e and  by ALPS d i f f e r on t h i s matter. People from the F o r e s t S e r v i c e s t a t e d t h a t  originally  the G e o l o g i c a l Survey was going t o study o n l y t h e areas i n the b o u n d a r i e s o f the o r i g i n a l Wilderness  proposal.  The  F o r e s t S e r v i c e p r e v a i l e d on them t o i n c l u d e t h e Van Epps Pass-Jack Creek c o r r i d o r between the two proposed nesses.  Wilder-  T h i s study was completed, but then ALPS put  I b i d . . p. 5 U.  S. D.A., P u b l i c Involvement and the F o r e s t  Service.  r  119 pressure  on t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e t o i n c l u d e t h e  a r e a s , w i t h i n t h e ALPS W i l d e r n e s s cerned  that these  mineral and  survey.  areas  proposal.  i n c l u d e d these  for inclusion  felt  t h e d e l a y was due'to t h e ALPS  to  study  only,  i n the r e v i s e d study.  n e s s was b e i n g  considered.  conducting  t h e whole p r o c e s s  o f a much l a r g e r of the e n t i r e  area.  tory  then  h a d man-  had t o be  The F o r e s t  f o r a study  standard  Forest  Service  considered  h a v e t o go b a c k , p e r h a p s s e v e r a l t i m e s ,  to inven-  I n ALPS's v i e w t h e F o r e s t  Service  the delay.  From t h e p o i n t o f v i e w o f ALPS a n d some o t h e r the  Area  A national conservation  t o l d ALPS t h a t i t was  areas.  a  of the Wilder-  t o inventory the smallest area being  additional  caused  areas  the  area i n t h e i r National Recreation  i n that proposal.  and  matters,  Wilder-  ALPS h o p e d o p t i m i s t i c a l l y f o r  ness  procedure  single  and i n f o r m a t i o n t o r e q u e s t  a n d more r e a l i s t i c a l l y  representative  Service  boundaries  the study,  was d e l a y e d .  proposal, core  Wilderness  To c o m p l i c a t e  When t h e a d d i t i o n a l  S e r v i c e had adequate time  a study  The F o r e s t  t h e y were aware t h a t a l a r g e r ,  power p r o b l e m s .  study  t o add an  t o ALPS t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e made a r r a n g e m e n t s  B u r e a u o f M i n e s , w h i c h was  studied,  a  action.  the area w i t h i n the separate  although  con-  areas,  the Forest Service decided  area  According  T h e y were  m i g h t n o t be c o n s i d e r e d w i t h o u t  A r e v i s e d study  a t t h e same t i m e  checkerboard  importance  political  o f t h e d e l a y i s t h a t i t weakens  effort.  Their effort  is strictly  groups,  their  voluntary,  120 and  the  longer  voluntary  the  o r g a n i z a t i o n to  They have o t h e r ride  process  Service  of opposition delayed Alpine could  i s paid to  to t h e i r  i t s p o s i t i o n i f the  endure a d e l a y  organizations  not,  and  t h e y are  that  two  different  should  show t h a t  T h e r e was  an  Service's  versions  the  the  by  Congress.  s u r v e y so  the  of allowing  Congress to  by  the  part  did  affect  further  was  like  o f the  area  ALPS.  o f r u l e s l e a d i n g t o an indirect  the  objectives.  presented  House Forest  Forest  Service  was  considered an  p o s s i b l e as  and  an  the  smallest  objeca  tactic  additional objective  Regardless  This  fact  unclear.  p o t e n t i a l l y be  s t u d y team's o b j e c t i v e s  groups l i k e  do  objective of i n c l u d i n g  as much as  surveyed.  paid,  The  have been  of view there  consider  the  they  ALPS  delays.  delay  an  could  organizations  of  S i e r r a C l u b have  groups o u t s i d e  process  is  c o u r s e some n a t i o n a l  A d d i t i o n a l l y from the  these areas  aimed at v o l u n t a r y  was  the  of t h i s  From ALPS' p o i n t  of delaying  limiting  Of  The  weakening  f o r t h e i r work, and  o b j e c t i v e i n v o l v e d here i s  some a r e a s p r o p o s e d b y  a  d e c i s i o n process  organizations  of view there  over-  effort.  expect  obvious o b j e c t i v e o f meeting the  point  in  can  e s p e c i a l l y a f f e c t e d by  Committee's r e q u i r e m e n t .  case  like  s t a f f persons, but  eventually  some r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s  more e a s i l y .  a  f r o m i t s members.  political  f o r i t s work and  Likewise  harder i t i s f o r  w h i c h may  L a k e s C o a l i t i o n were p a i d  full-time  the  support  responsibilities  sufficiently.  conservation  a  elicit  their responsibilities  Forest  tive  g o e s on,  area  possible  o f whether i t  or not,  the  delay  s i t u a t i o n c o u l d have been  o b j e c t i v e which then l e d  to  121  c)  Specific  Some p o l i c y to  t h e A l p i n e L a k e s study,,  forest  and R e g u l a t i o n s  constraints  team b y t h e n a t i o n a l  related  more  specifically  T h e s e were i m p o s e d  and r e g i o n a l  offices  on t h e s t u d y  a n d t h e two  offices.  The  s t u d y team h a d f r e e d o m , g r a n t e d b y t h e n a t i o n a l ,  regional,  and f o r e s t  team s a i d , p o l i c y alternative did  Policy  offices,  b u t , as one member  precluded considering a  o f the  no-Wilderness  o r a n a l t e r n a t i v e w i t h a huge W i l d e r n e s s .  not state  that  t h e s e were w r i t t e n commitments,  He  just  t h e y were a l t e r n a t i v e s w h i c h were p r e c l u d e d b y p o l i c y higher  levels.  policy  t h e conduct  freedom.  district rangers  input had i n d i c a t e d 1 0 0 $ p r o p o s a l o f the A l p i n e Lakes  o f t h e s t u d y t h e s t u d y team h a d a l o t  S u p e r v i s o r s p u t t o g e t h e r t h e work o f t h e i r  to prepare  Forest Plans.  I n an e f f o r t  t o be  the Forest Service s t a r t e d u s i n g study  was f a i r l y new, a t l e a s t  were i n v o l v e d .  to the P a c i f i c  when t h e A l p i n e L a k e s s t u d y was b e g u n . freedom o f t h e study  importance  the pro-  much.  when s e v e r a l r a n g e r d i s t r i c t s  the  pro-  I n t h e p a s t p l a n n i n g was g e n e r a l l y done a t t h e  level.  provincial  f o r i n p u t and t h e f i n a l  and laws would n o t have a l l o w e d  t o be changed t h a t In  of  public  f o r t h e two W i l d e r n e s s  Coalition, posal  to the public  sent t o Congress  support  from  L i k e w i s e , i f i n t h e s t e p between t h e s i n g l e  p r o p o s a l brought posal  that  of rules  The  Northwest  teams approach Region,  This discussion of  team l e a d s t o a r e i t e r a t i o n  i n t h e development  less  of the  o f some o f t h e s t u d y  122 team's o b j e c t i v e s . discussed.  Several objectives  The f a c t  amounted t o r e v i e w general p o l i c y freedom  that  specific  o f study-team  policy output  c o n s t r a i n t s meant t h a t  i n specific  matters  have a l r e a d y been constraints t o see that  the study  h e l p them meet t h e g e n e r a l o b j e c t i v e s  Subsequent office  to the start  developed  which would  study the Chief's  planning procedures  f o ra l l forests.  However, t h e s t u d y team h a d t o e s t a b l i s h i t s own in  trying  and  t o prepare  regional  team's  already discussed.  o f t h e A l p i n e Lakes  land-use  output which would s a t i s f y  procedures the national  offices.  Some o f t h e p l a n n i n g methods s h o u l d b e v i e w e d Officially  decisions  environmental those  intrinsic  determinism.  what u s e s  for  as r u l e s .  on t h e b a s i s o f  Using techniques s i m i l a r to Nature,  p r o v i d e d resource data through which the  suitability  experts developed  this  a r e made l a r g e l y  o f I a n McHarg, a s d e s c r i b e d i n D e s i g n W i t h  specialists  i t met  l e d them t o a n o b j e c t i v e o f  d e v e l o p i n g p l a n n i n g t e c h n i q u e s and p r o c e d u r e s best  really  of the land  c a n b e mapped.  c r i t e r i a which are used  the land  i s or i s not suitable.  These  t o determine f o r I n many  cases  information points the planners t o the best land use an a r e a .  tific.  T h e method i s f e l t  The s p e c i f i c  were a c o m b i n a t i o n Service  methods u s e d  t o be r a t i o n a l  and s c i e n -  i n t h e A l p i n e Lakes  o f e x i s t i n g methods u s e d b y t h e F o r e s t  i n o t h e r p l a c e s a n d c h a n g e s made b y t h e s t u d y  for their  specific  much r a t i o n a l i t y  study  situation.  The i n t e n t  team  was t o l e n d a s  t o t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s as p o s s i b l e .  To  123 a great extent  such  an i n t e n t  c a n be  o f the F o r e s t S e r v i c e o f best the American people. w h i c h was  better  p e r c e i v e d by rather  than  that  through  f o r other uses  t h e more v a l u a b l e u s e s . the  criteria  t e c h n i q u e s was  not  and  Rational  a result  techniques  use  c a n be b e n t  of these  to  Wilderness  of the  but  The  intensive  techniques  o f the  inten-  development.  t o meet p o l i c y  techniques  as  was  experts.  p o l i c y background surrounding t h e i r  With the use is  the  committed  o r t h e m o d e l s on w h i c h t h e y were b u i l t , tions  taking land  s t u d y team  by  of  f o r Wilderness  or timber production r a t h e r than  these  role  than Wilderness,  The  developed  l a n d s m i g h t be  to the  the r e s o u r c e needs  T h i s would i n c l u d e not  suited  certain  recreation  serving  the planning techniques used,  c o n s t r a i n e d by fact  attributed  the r o l e  objectives. o f the  public  t o make a c h o i c e when r e s o u r c e d a t a i n d i c a t e more t h a n i s possible.  are developed  When t h e b e s t u s e  and  Here the  intent  relation  to Inform  Forest clear  public  clear,  alternatives  input p o i n t s to the best  alternative.  i s similar and  i s not  one  t o what was  Involve.  The  S e r v i c e when i t s r a t i o n a l  already discussed i n  public  techniques  was  to help  c o u l d not  the  provide  answers. There  w e r e some e x c e p t i o n s .  have been s u i t a b l e  Some a r e a s w h i c h w o u l d  f o r timber h a r v e s t i n g according to  r e s o u r c e d a t a were i n c l u d e d i n t h e " W i l d e r n e s s , the Deception  Creek area.  from LeBreton  i n part I I I that  n e c e s s a r i l y the r e a l  T h e s e e x c e p t i o n s and  structure  official lead  f o r instance the  structure  comment  i s not  t o some c o n c l u s i o n s  124 about that  the role this  within  o f environmental  determinism,,  r a t i o n a l method o f m a k i n g d e c i s i o n s was  the context  team l e a d e r s a i d ,  of p o l i t i c a l  reality.  to l i s t e n  technique tion any  still  "The F o r e s t S e r v i c e w o u l d h a v e b e e n  to the public,  T h e y were  tenable.  The method, j u s t  be  used  to develop  be  g e n e r a l l y i n accord with p u b l i c wishes.  to  convince  that  the best  These  office,  the Congress,  supporta-  and t h e p u b l i c  T h e s t u d y team knew t h a t  wanted a p o l i t i c a l l y  tenable  proposal.  Understandings  Some o f t h e r u l e s t h e p l a n n e r s were l e s s mentioned above. personnel.  exceptions  R a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g w o u l d n o t a l w a y s b e enough  the n a t i o n a l  levels  d)  the  p a t t e r n o f l a n d use which would  a good j o b had b e e n done.  higher  like  I t could  the objective of developing a p o l i t i c a l l y  proposal.  com-  and t h e u s e o f t h i s  o t h e r method, i s s u b j e c t t o i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .  ble  very  had t o leave the F o r e s t S e r v i c e w i t h a p o s i -  t h a t was p o l i t i c a l l y  reflect  used  As t h e s t u d y  unwise n o t t o c r e a t e a l a r g e Wilderness."; mitted  I t appears  o r c o n s t r a i n t s which operated  explicit  or less  Sometimes r e s p o n s e  These r u l e s  others, but they  t o them v a r i e d  guide behavior  c a n be c a l l e d  formal than  o f personnel  "understandings"  t h e r e was more f r e e d o m o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n  on  t h e ones among as do because  associated with  them. The  Forest Service likes  situation with  two e x t r e m e s .  t o be i n t h e middle  i n any  This leads to a search f o r  compromise i n p l a n n i n g s i t u a t i o n s .  As one i n d u s t r y  125 spokesman put i t , g e t t i n g i n p u t from j u s t one s i d e makes the F o r e s t S e r v i c e u n c o m f o r t a b l e . They l i k e t o see two views at  opposite  poles.  At t h a t p o i n t they can develop a p o s i t i o n  i n t h e middle, which by v i r t u e o f b e i n g i n t h e m i d d l e , becomes the best p o s i t i o n . One  member o f t h e C o a l i t i o n o f C o n s e r v a t i o n  Groups  c h a r a c t e r i z e d t h i s method o f d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g as a numbers game.  I f 50$ o f t h e p u b l i c i n p u t supported one extreme and  50$ supported t h e other extreme and nobody supported  anything  i n between, the F o r e s t S e r v i c e would s t i l l be happy because the numbers would support l i k e Codinvolve  t h e middle ground.  Developments  o n l y make f o r a b e t t e r numbers game.  At t h e same time t h a t t h e wish f o r compromise i s h e l d , the F o r e s t  S e r v i c e has p r e f e r r e d p o s i t i o n s on many i s s u e s .  For instance, s e v e r a l o f the Forest Service s a i d t h a t what the F o r e s t  personnel  S e r v i c e r e a l l y wanted f o r t h e  A l p i n e Lakes was r e p r e s e n t e d  by the o f f i c i a l p r o p o s a l f o r  the A l p i n e Lakes i n the North Cascades Study. S e r v i c e people s a i d t h e f i n a l p r o p o s a l  These F o r e s t  w i l l represent  a  compromise between what the F o r e s t S e r v i c e wanted and what the p u b l i c wanted.  The p o s i t i o n o f the A l p i n e Lakes  C o a l i t i o n , b a s i c a l l y one extreme, was v e r y c l o s e t o the o f f i c i a l proposal  i n the North Cascades Study, the p r e f e r r e d  p o s i t i o n o f the F o r e s t S e r v i c e .  The F o r e s t  S e r v i c e had, i n  o t h e r words, chosen one extreme, not t h e middle, as i t s preferred alternative.  Officially  the F o r e s t  Service  p r e f e r r e d none o f t h e t h r e e a l t e r n a t i v e s o r any o t h e r  126 position. input. are  R a t h e r , i t was a n e u t r a l r e c e p t o r  Unofficially  there  was a p r e f e r r e d p o s i t i o n .  c e r t a i n p o s i t i o n s which the Forest  Service  c e r t a i n i s s u e s , b u t a t t h e same t i m e t h e r e hold  a p o s i t i o n between t h e extremes  Forest  Service  faces  a conflict  t o do a n d what p o l i t i c a l representative  of conflict  personnel  will  will the  criticize Forest  group's p o s i t i o n . ing  objectives.  close  other  Service  b e t w e e n what i t w o u l d  like  pushes i t t o do.  Forest  preferred  Service  compromise  support,  conflict-  to develop a proposal Service  proposals  f o r the Alpine  w h i c h was  i n d i c a t e d the  Lakes area.  The  the f i r s t  which a t t r a c t e d broad  a n d ih i c h p u b l i c i n p u t  w o u l d show was a  proposal.  In planning  where W i l d e r n e s s A r e a s s h o u l d  question,  "What i s W i l d e r n e s s ? "  discussed  i n Part  Service  but they  his particular interest  o b j e c t i v e , which appears t o have o v e r r i d d e n  political  A  He a l s o s a i d t h a t p r i v a t e l y  o b j e c t i v e , was t o d e v e l o p a p r o p o s a l  court  Forest  T h e s t u d y team was f a c e d w i t h  t o what p a s t  Forest  i s a desire to  Wilderness p u b l i c l y ,  agreed with  I t sought  on  Lakes C o a l i t i o n suggested  i tprivately.  Service  prefers  The  when he s a i d t h a t  not c r i t i c i z e  There  on t h e s e i s s u e s .  pressure  o f the Alpine  this kind  f o r public  go, t h e  always a r i s e s .  I I , the Park Service  As was  and t h e F o r e s t  i n t e r p r e t the Wilderness Act d i f f e r e n t l y .  case i n Colorado  the  Forest  Service  not  be c o n s i d e r e d  addressed the question  c a n choose which areas f o r Wilderness.  The  o f whether  should  The q u e s t i o n  or  should  remains,  127 "How do p e o p l e fies  i n t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e know when a n a r e a  f o r Wilderness?" I n a sense  statement  used  the process  appeared  s i m i l a r t o the simple  i n m a t h e m a t i c s , s o m e t i m e s c y n i c a l l y when  t h e r e ' s no o t h e r way o f p r o v i n g s o m e t h i n g , intuitive." wilderness described  An a r e a q u a l i f i e s character."  the process  c i r c u l a r manner. for  Act.  o f s e l e c t i n g Wilderness suitability  a line  about  fields.  The f a c t  were u s e d o f these  experts  ness and from  Wilderness  selection  to develop  policy  from  interpretation  The c r i t e r i a f o r  stems f r o m  the i n a b i l i t y f o r Wilder-  The F o r e s t S e r v i c e has n o t q u a l i f y as  constrained the study  I t had freedom t o look a t a l l t h e l a n d i n t h e study  a r e a , b u t i t knew what k i n d s f o r Wilderness  o f lands  by the n a t i o n a l  comes u p i m m e d i a t e l y that  was t h e  i n the Wilderness Act  o f what l a n d s w i l l  and t h i s  o f drawing  That  any o t h e r c r i t e r i a  above.  o f the  by experts i n various  that the c r i t e r i a  interpretation  team.  a matter  f o rWilderness.  f o r Wilderness  study  the q u a l i t y  around t h e r o a d l e s s a r e a remaining.  o t h e r r e s o u r c e u s e s were d e v e l o p e d  The  given i n the Wilderness  M a p p i n g was l a r g e l y  l a n d w h i c h was s u i t a b l e  i n a less  c o u l d be d e f i n e d  but not f o rWilderness.  I n mapping t h e a r e a n o t h i n g  l a n d was mapped.  when i t "has  One o f t h e s t u d y team members  Intrinsic  other land uses,  "The p r o o f i s  f o rWilderness  t e a m was f o r c e d t o u s e t h e c r i t e r i a  its  quali-  concerns  Forest Service people  office. roads.  are u s u a l l y  rejected  The q u e s t i o n w h i c h Conservationists feel  who s a y t h a t a n y a r e a where a  128 road  has been b u i l t  "purists." can  Some o f t h e s e  be c l o s e d t o c r e a t e The  Forest  only roadless still  along  the f l a t s  area  Forest  Forest One  "second-growth  I f there  about  Forest  considering  has been j u s t  a jeep  and f i l l s  i t i s the prerogative  conflict  recreation,'  the question  between W i l d e r n e s s  i s between W i l d e r n e s s  o f roads  use and  Some o f t h e r o a d s t h a t  m a j o r campgrounds.  Road i s about  20 y e a r s  campgrounds.  The F o r e s t  there  are acceptable  f a i r l y new r o a d about be  the C o a l i t i o n  to  F o r example, t h e I c i c l e  Creek  o l d , paved, and has s e v e r a l major Service  feels  the Eightmile  that  f o r some r o a d s closure,  Creek road,  Only loggers  O t h e r s would have t o h i k e .  be c l a s s i f i e d  buffer  o f Con-  o l d • and/or  alternatives to total  a gate.  Now  forms o f  as W i l d e r n e s s ,  f o r the Wilderness,  This  A  built i n  1967 o r 1968, where more l o g g i n g i s p l a n n e d ,  managed w i t h  road.  like  timber  over.  u s e and o t h e r  s e r v a t i o n Groups wanted c l o s e d a r e f a i r l y support  The  o f Congress, not  management i n t h e A l p i n e L a k e s a r e a was l a r g e l y the  by a  roads.  S e r v i c e man f e l t  the c o n f l i c t  track  i s p o s s i b l e , an  equipment, i t i s n o t s u i t a b l e .  feels  roads  that had roads i n the past  I f an area has had cuts  Service to close  showed t h a t  strict  that  are  Wilderness."  where n a t u r a l r e g e n e r a t i o n  or other  Service  f o r Wilderness  conservationists feel  Some a r e a s  qualify.  can q u a l i f y .  bulldozer  qualifies  Service i s very  areas.  could  the  no l o n g e r  could  c o u l d d r i v e up t h e  The a r e a would n o t have  b u t i t would serve suggestion  as a  and r e a c t i o n  129 to  i t would i l l u s t r a t e  other  the  conflict  Service proposal aside  and  f o r motorized  large Wilderness Groups has Service  private  ALPS p r o p o s a l  acreage,  included this  felt  any  the  Teanaway a r e a .  recreation.  t h i s was  c o u l d p o t e n t i a l l y be  the area  the  the  order  area  added t o t h e  i s set  to a r r i v e  of  at  a  Conservation The  Forest  of public land  Wilderness  which  proposal.  To  land.  examples  These  few  The  study  show how  o f the  pretation realized  o f the there  the  crux  Wilderness  was  wilderness  i n t e r e s t s and  and  wilderness  interests,  attempt  Act.  to  Forest  t o be  The  Forest study  Service  con-  "purist" of  team  in  roadless  Service's  between timber  of  qualified  o b l i g a t i o n to  This notion  o f the  some c o n f l i c t  and  and  an  land f o r Wilderness,  a p p e a r e d t o be  the  land i t f e l t  team f e l t  v i e w o f some c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s .  sider  Forest  l a n d would i n v o l v e a c q u i s i t i o n  only roadless  areas  area  i n Wilderness.  last  the  more u n d e v e l o p e d  Wilderness.  sider  In  In  this  Coalition  c o u l d make some d e t e r m i n a t i o n for  and  forms o f r e c r e a t i o n . A n o t h e r example i s t h e  add  between W i l d e r n e s s  inter-  also harvesting  between i n t e n s i v e r e c r e a t i o n  and  cater to  i t felt  an  o b l i g a t i o n to  a l l sides i n developing  i  conits  proposal. T h e r e h a v e b e e n some c h a n g e s i n management i n t h e Lakes area,  particularly  outside  Enchantment  Lakes r e g i o n  there  fires, and  and  i n 150,000 a c r e s  h e l i c o p t e r landings  and  the  are  Limited Area.  restrictions  of the A l p i n e  Lakes  cargo drops are  on  In  Alpine the  camp-  seaplane  prohibited.  130 These are a r e s u l t o f d e c i s i o n s at the F o r e s t l e v e l r a t h e r t h a n d e c i s i o n s i n the h i g h e r l e v e l s , but  they are a r e s u l t  o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g s w i t h h i g h e r l e v e l s t h a t p o r t i o n s o f the A l p i n e Lakes be managed as Wilderness s i o n i s made by The  Congress.  moratorium on logging, comes from the same under-  standings.  Because t h i s wasn't o f f i c i a l p o l i c y on the  c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s pressed request  until a final deci-  Congressmen and  a moratorium on timber  Governor Evans to  s a l e s w i t h i n the  being considered  f o r Wilderness.  L i m i t e d A r e a and  o u t s i d e the F o r e s t S e r v i c e had  d e f e r timber  ducted  now,  a f f e c t the w i l d e r n e s s  district  The  Snoqualmie F o r e s t  to the request  F o r e s t a w h i l e to c a t c h on."  final  responded  f o r a moratorium.  Creek and M i l l e r R i v e r areas are examples o f areas  o f the  a f f e c t e d by the moratorium. took the Wenatchee  They responded more s l o w l y .  a l l the groups are d i s c u s s i n g . The  d i d e s t a b l i s h a moratorium, but Snoqualmie N a t i o n a l F o r e s t ,  The  Skykomish  Timber s a l e s have e s s e n t i a l l y been c o n f i n e d t o areas  ALPS' b i g g e s t achievements.  con-  a c t i v i t y which might  However, one ALPS o f f i c i a l s a i d , " . . o i t  the areas  to  reclassifica-  c h a r a c t e r o f the a r e a u n t i l a  d e c i s i o n has been made.  Deception  a right  In the Roadless Area s t u d i e s b e i n g  p o l i c y i s to d e f e r any  r i g h t away i n 1970  areas  Both w i t h i n the o l d  s a l e s u n t i l a f i n a l d e c i s i o n about  t i o n had been made.  site,  That i s one  outside of  Wenatchee N a t i o n a l F o r e s t i t d i d so l a t e r than the  S e v e r a l c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s noted  a great d i f f e r e n c e i n s e n s i t i v i t y to r e q u e s t s  l i k e those  for  131  a moratorium i n the Snoqualmie Forest and the Wenatchee Forest,  Such actions as moratoria are not s t r i c t l y p o l i c y .  They are understandings, and they depend on who i n the Forest Service i s involved.  Understandings l i k e the new  regulations i n the Enchantment Lakes and the logging moratorium are manifestations  of an effort by the study  team and the two supervisors to maintain as much of the study area as possible i n i t s e x i s t i n g condition u n t i l the study process was complete.  This was an effort to prevent  the p o s s i b i l i t y of land being precluded from Wilderness before completion of the study.  Various i n t e r e s t  groups  d i f f e r e d on how much they f e l t the study team and the two supervisors were committed to t h i s objective, but there were some manifestations 2)  of t h i s objective,  Attitudes and Perceptions  In studying attitudes members, the attitudes  and perceptions of study team  and perceptions of other Forest  Service personnel should be considered.  In part they  represent the value framework of the organization as a whole and the atmosphere within which personnel work.  The follow-  ing refers to a l l the Forest Service personnel who were interviewed. When attitudes immediately.  are discussed, multiple-use comes up  In a l l the interviews i t was evident that  Forest Service employees f e e l a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to provide a l l the resources and uses of resources p o s s i b l e .  Wilder-  ness i s one of these resources, but i t i s seen as a d e s i r e ,  132 whereas r e s o u r c e s  like  Because Wilderness its  place  that is  i n the  i s s e e n as  the  Many see  Forest  source  uses.  rocks"  are  to  the  study  team t o  cluded  other  resource  Wilderness  this  on  land  say  consistent with consistency  the  i c e " or this the  "Wilderness view.  fact  that  a l w a y s on  to  their  land,  by  a utilitarian  i n s t r u c t e d by  place.  law  to use  appropriations He  the  favors  the  resources,  timber  alive,  trees.  and  them as  them as  though they  fact  and  charge  that  i s wrong.  that  a  forest  Service i s Congress  viability  in  d i e and  are  that  around  replaced  forever,  t h e r e would always He  felt  that  this  of  i s , not  just  a  forest  i s t h e way  the  forest  by  Park  redwoods, whereas a p a r k does n o t . the  uses.  of trees.  i n Redwoods N a t i o n a l  w o u l d be  farm t h e r e would assure  However,  h a r v e s t i n g over other  e v e n t u a l l y they  Preserving  the  Forest  s a i d people don't u n d e r s t a n d the  They are  treats  Besides,  the  is  uses.  felt  that p r e s e r v a t i o n i s t s ignore  but  sacrificing  concerned with u t i l i t a r i a n values  only  pre-  use,  philosophy.  to other  fair  minds.  of resource  some e x t e n t  lands  the  Wilderness  from m u l t i p l e - u s e form  on  re-  I t seems more  are  is  tree  absence o f other  Service representative  said  new  that  something  A Forest  He  its  as  multiple-use  some p o t e n t i a l W i l d e r n e s s  they  Wilderness  one  i s achieved  needs.  from  u s e s was  Areas,  water are  i s different  i n the  that  is different  and  philosophy  phrases to describe  p r o v i d i n g Wilderness still  Service  "Wilderness  forage,  a d e s i r e f a t h e r than a need,  multiple-use  of other uses.  done b y  timber,  A be view  133 u t i l i t a r i a n bias to  look  toward t h e f o r e s t .  at the study  Planning  area  was done w i t h  The s t u d y  from a u t i l i t a r i a n  team  attempted  viewpoint.  t h e i d e a o f making t h e b e s t use  of the resources. One r a n g e r along  a road  visual,  admitted  that  i n the past  w o u l d be managed c a r e f u l l y  esthetic,  and w i l d l i f e  values  i n a timber  U n d e r t h e s p e c i a l management u n i t  Forest  Service w i l l  these  values  the area  harvesting  to the exclusion o f other values.  in  said  the Forest  but  that  that  Service  i s changing.  associated with pect.  He f e l t  didn't  h a v e t o overcome t h i s  sensitive  the study  on  timber  One o f t h e  t h e r e w e r e n ' t many p e o p l e  to conservationist  However, t h e r e  changing Forest  carefully  p r i m a r y emphasis  i n the past sensitive  harvest  objectives the  throughout  team members  and n o t p l a c e  the s t r i p  f o rrecreation,  area.  have t o c o n s i d e r  only  i s some  values,  inertia  Service policy  i n this  res-  team h a d enough f r e e d o m t h a t i t  to conservationst  inertia. values  T h e y a t t e m p t e d t o be  i n l o o k i n g a t t h e whole  area. There i s a general competent. smart  felt  a line  other uses,  Forest  the Forest  the Forest  Service  on a map. and t h a t  He t h o u g h t  Service  flexibility.  Service i s should  be  properly  t h e a r e a was s u i t a b l e  the Wilderness  Act merely  S i m i l a r l y personnel  c o u l d manage t h e p e r i p h e r a l a r e a unit  that  e n o u g h t o manage t h e A l p i n e L a k e s a r e a  without for  One r a n g e r  feeling  limits  felt  they  a s a s p e c i a l management  b e t t e r t h a n as a N a t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n  Area.  A  National  134 Recreation resources help  the  A r e a was and  petence. protect  their  s u i t a b l e f o r t h e mix  They d i d n ' t  job.  Service people  area  around the  special  the  on  being  area  The  o b j e c t i o n comes n o t  to another agency, but  resources  f r e e from the  Congressional  to the  Forest  w o u l d be by  the  new  t o l d how.  The  and  that  public.  to  can  Forest  Lakes N a t i o n a l  Service  Recreation the  f r o m a d e s i r e t o manage i t s  c o n s t r a i n t s o f any  a t t i t u d e s and  Forest  additional  are  having  d e s i r e t o go  sense of  i n t e r e s t s of  i n general.  behavior  w o u l d be  created  He'd  he  properly  t o work i n be  t o c o r r e c t anyone e l s e ' s  there  One  changed  treated  to Alaska  there.  respon-  the  S e r v i c e weren't needed,  A n o t h e r w a n t s t o go  starting mistakes.  i n d i c a t e s a person looking f o r  e n j o y m e n t , and  t h a t n e e d s t o be  an  opportunity  t o do  a big  job  done.  These a t t i t u d e s i n d i c a t e that tend  they  The  to n a t u r a l resources  the  f o r e s t s i f they  challenge,  com-  from a f e a r o f l o s i n g  happy because r e s o u r c e s  f r e s h without  of  i s s e n s i t i v e manage-  They f e e l  S e r v i c e , to the  i f people's  sufficiently  National  feeling  seemed t o i n d i c a t e a s t r o n g  American people, stated that  to a  legislation.  S e v e r a l men sibility  of  i t would  what i s n e e d e d  Wilderness  w o u l d most l i k e l y manage an A l p i n e Area,  this  feel  classification.  area without  feel  Objection  Area i s based i n part  the  protect  do  Forest  ment, n o t  s e e n as  private land.  rangers  Recreation  not  to view t h e i r  job  Forest  Service  personnel  as p r o v i d i n g as many r e s o u r c e s  as  135 possible Forest  t o the American p u b l i c .  They f e e l  S e r v i c e manage a n a r e a r a t h e r t h a n impose r e s t r i c t i o n s  that  having the  either  letting  someone  else  leaving  a n a r e a a l o n e i s t h e p r e f e r r e d way o f p r o v i d i n g  these resources. his  needs, both  Nature  must b e managed b y man t o meet  f o r tangible resources l i k e  water, and f o r i n t a n g i b l e Wilderness. Forest  Others  a l o n e w i l l n o t meet  as t h e  t h e s e needs, and l e a v i n g an a r e a  t h e s e needs e i t h e r  the Park  recreation,  resource uses, The  r e c r e a t i o n and  T h i s does n o t  0  t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e opposes W i l d e r n e s s .  that, unlike and  resources l i k e  t i m b e r and  won't manage a n a r e a a s w e l l  S e r v i c e t o meet  mean t h a t  on t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e o r  I t means  S e r v i c e which provides o n l y  Wilderness  the Forest Service provides a v a r i e t y o f among w h i c h a r e W i l d e r n e s s  and r e c r e a t i o n .  s t u d y team and o t h e r F o r e s t S e r v i c e p e r s o n n e l  still  feel  uses,  and they f e l t  qualified  their  job i s to provide this and f e e l  their  variety  felt  and  o f resource  organization i s the best  t o serve the country through  the p r o v i s i o n  o f these  resource uses. The rangers not go  pattern of recreational said  interests varied.  t h e y go i n t h e W i l d e r n e s s  f o rrecreation.  Two  f o r t h e i r work, b u t  One s a i d he a n d h i s f a m i l y p r e f e r t o  t o t h e beach o r E a s t e r n Washington t o get out o f the  mountains. he  i  The o t h e r s a i d  t h e r e ' s no way t h e y ' d  would see a l l t h e c o n f l i c t s  He'd e n d u p c a r r y i n g  out cans  go b e c a u s e  he h a s t o d e a l w i t h a t work. and l i t t e r .  136 The  two s u p e r v i s o r s u s e d  t o go i n t h e w i l d e r n e s s f o r  r e c r e a t i o n when t h e y were y o u n g e r . of  their  work.  All  t h r e e men who were on t h e o r i g i n a l  one  man who  all  use the Wilderness  of  joined  recreation  one  t h e s t u d y team l a t e r f o rrecreation.  for  o n , and one r a n g e r Most  enjoy t h i s  a s t h e s i n g l e most  form  Only  important  f o r h i m s e l f and h i s f a m i l y . selecting  s t u d y team members who v i s i t  r e c r e a t i o n t h e two s u p e r v i s o r s r e d u c e d  t h e r e would be s t r o n g b i a s At  team,  t h e s t u d y team l e a d e r , i d e n t i f i e d  the use o f the Wilderness activity  study  a l o n g w i t h o t h e r forms o f r e c r e a t i o n .  man, D i c k B u s c h e r ,  In  Now t h e y o n l y go a s p a r t  least  the Wilderness  the chances  against Wilderness  that  i n the study.  t h e s t u d y team members h a d some u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f  t h e n e e d s and d e s i r e s predisposed possible.  o f Wilderness users.  to the creation  They weren't  o f as s m a l l a W i l d e r n e s s as  The commitment  to multiple-use of Forest Service  p e r s o n n e l means t h a t most  o f them do n o t h a v e a s s t r o n g a n d  exclusive ists  a commitment  have.  stronger  Their  t o Wilderness selection  c e s s i o n t o proponents to  a s some c o n s e r v a t i o n -  The s t u d y team members were men who h a d a  commitment  colleagues.  to Wilderness  assure that  t h a n many o f t h e i r  appears  t o mean l e s s  o f large Wilderness  t h a n an  t h e s t u d y team w o u l d b e b e t t e r  understand  the desires  of conservationists;  conditions  and t h e r e s u l t s  was i n a b e t t e r p o s i t i o n  particular  t h a n men l e s s  con-  attempt  able to  i f political  o f study indicated  W i l d e r n e s s A r e a was i n o r d e r , t h i s  a  a  larger  study  sensitive to  team  137 Wilderness  v a l u e s to propose  a large  Wilderness.  For a l o t o f the Forest S e r v i c e personnel i n t e r v i e w e d r e s e a r c h needs c e n t e r e d around felt  t h e r e were j u s t  There  was  fragile How  people  problems not  a c o n c e r n w i t h how  areas  c o u l d be  can the use  of people  o f an  r a t h e r than  p e o p l e management.  people  and  managed w i t h o u t a r e a be  land  Some  problems.  t h e i r use  of  restricting  maximized through  a simple r e a c t i o n  like  them.  dispersal  regulating  use? A l o n g w i t h p e o p l e management i s a n e e d carrying  capacity.  What i s t h e  carrying  c a p a c i t y of high country?  capacity  of areas  Just an  collected  Alpine in  creation  area d r a s t i c a l l y .  being  that  the  I n one  on t h e  Lakes Wilderness district.  c a p a c i t y o f an  effect Area  S e r v i c e doesn't  much u s e  can  want t o k i l l  they  Area  trails  can  o f the p r o p o s a l to c r e a t e on u s e  of recreational know t h e  easily ruin areas by  it.  carrying The  establishing  forest Wilder-  c a p a c i t y and  of  carrying  an  land >  indicates  f o r r e s e a r c h on  dilemma on  use.  Needs f o r r e s e a r c h i n t h e b e h a v i o r a l s c i e n c e s were identified.  of  information i s  This  management  to  tolerate.  n e s s , w h i c h i s i n t e n d e d t o p r o t e c t them. a need  and  i n c r e a s e s use  ranger d i s t r i c t  I f managers don't  area, they  carrying  c o u l d d i s p e r s e use  of a Wilderness  of  ecological  By k n o w i n g t h e  a r e a and  a r e a s w h i l e k n o w i n g how the  and  the F o r e s t S e r v i c e c o u l d b u i l d  t r a i l h e a d s which s u i t less-used  social  f o r study  One  study b e i n g s t a r t e d by  Dr,  J o h n Hendee,  also  138  head o f the F o r e s t S e r v i c e Research  Station i n Seattle,  examine t h e b a c k g r o u n d  o f p e o p l e who  l a n d management i s s u e s  and  how  them.  C o d i n v o l v e d a t a from  used.  A University  theorized  that  sort  the A l p i n e Lakes  enough a b o u t  be  of sampling  that  suitable system  what m o t i v a t e s p e o p l e  i n pursuit  tolerate?  One  man  takes p l a c e .  developed  Another  o f a hobby? felt  o t h e r forms o f l i f e man  has  on t h e  restrictions  cate its  i t s ability  above, a l l r e l a t e d  the problems f o r e s e e n by plans.  To  possibility c o u l d be propose.  they they  forest  i s , on what  the  o f government  the W i l d e r n e s s  to provide?  Act,  to provide, These r e s e a r c h  to people problems,  indi-  t h e s t u d y team i n d e v e l o p i n g  some e x t e n t t h e y c o u l d t r y t o m i n i m i z e  o f such problems i n p l a n n i n g .  aware o f t h e p r o b l e m s w i t h o u t They had  they  not.  effect  like  i n the  affect  needs mentioned  idea  What r e g u l a t i o n s w i l l  and  laws  some  What a r e  the F o r e s t S e r v i c e i s supposed  do  Perhaps  t o g e t an  What i s i t t h a t how  Such  a r e a o f r e s e a r c h would  i s n e e d e d on what W i l d e r n e s s  and  they  much c h a n g e i n t h e i r b e h a v i o r w i l l  W i l d e r n e s s A c t means, and regulations  be  i t i s through  t o do what t h e y do.  have been w e l l - s t u d i e d , but Research  and  of research.  s h o u l d be  be  how  an i s s u e ,  areas  p e o p l e ' s w a n t s and n e e d s .  tolerate  in  study w i l l  a v o c a l m i n o r i t y once  action  of  l o o k i n g f o r , and  i n federal  o f Montana f o r e s t r y p r o f e s s o r has  these v o c a l m i n o r i t i e s t h e o r i e s might  involved  t h e y become i n t e r e s t e d  people w i l l . j o i n  become c o n c e r n e d  get  will  an o b j e c t i v e  More o f t e n  the they  having solutions  of developing a proposal  to  139 which would minimize but  their  tive  t h e p e o p l e p r o b l e m s managers w o u l d  l a c k o f i n f o r m a t i o n i n many a r e a s meant t h i s  c o u l d not r e a l l y  be  e r o s i o n of the land base.  more wood p r o d u c t s smaller.  The  c a n be  utilization  t o use  Research  as b a d  Are parks  and  concern on  the l a n d base  o f a l l the m a t e r i a l  on  how  gets  site  in  examined, i n c l u d i n g r e s e a r c h  i n this  need f o r r e s o u r c e s i s growing,  a  i s needed  these m a t e r i a l s economically.  management i s s e e n  not.  indicated  p r o v i d e d as  t i m b e r h a r v e s t a r e a s s h o u l d be on how  objec  met.  Some r e s e a r c h n e e d s i d e n t i f i e d about  face  the  Single-use  r e s p e c t , because  as  the  country's l a n d base i s  Wilderness Areas  what p e o p l e  really  want? Creation fires of  of Wilderness Areas  accumulate  materials.  forest  the  f i r e hazard i n Wilderness Areas  future  to trees  l e t the p u b l i c  over time.  appear  i n the  and  s h o u l d be  know t h a t  what  a Wilderness Area w i l l  d i e , v e g e t a t i o n types w i l l  become f o r e s t e d . future  researched.  s h o u l d be  of high altitude  happens  How  change change,  a Wilderness Area  considered.  and p o o r  in  r e s e a r c h need i s a need  s e a r c h need i s the r e v e g e t a t i o n o f overused problems  removal  other p a r t s o f the ecosystem  Along with t h i s  Trees w i l l  meadows w i l l  f o r fores  t h e r e i s no  r e s e a r c h i s needed t o determine  Wilderness Areas. to  areas, because  fuels  F u e l s a c c u m u l a t i o n and means o f r e d u c i n g  Ecological in  i n those  means t h a t  soils.  Another areas  will re-  with  140 The  areas mentioned  for research  show a f e a r t h a t  the  creation  of Wilderness Areas w i l l  p o s e a l o t o f management  problems  f o r the  Service.  For  h a v e b e e n more a r e a l i z a t i o n  that  may  Forest  than a f e a r o f the particularly fear  o f the  t h o s e who  reason,  they r e a l i z e  the  apparent  was  small  as  of  arise  colleagues,  an  shortage  Others would p r e f e r t h a t much r e s e a r c h  this  problems would  f o r many o f t h e i r  W i l d e r n e s s A r e a s as  that  s t u d y team  h a v e t o manage, t h i s  p r o b l e m s and  Some w o u l d l i k e this  problems, but  the  actual solutions.  possible  t h e y be  for  larger,  but  i s n e e d e d i n s o l v i n g manage-  ment p r o b l e m s .  Personnel  also  may  T h e r e was  i n t e r e s t shown i n f i n d i n g out  be  about  harmed. the  means o f  desires  concern f o r the  personnel  feel do  to provide  timber. i s put  l a n d b a s e and  the  on  how  W i l d e r n e s s management w i l l  to  the  feeling  Service  Forest  better  Service.  resources  pressure how  into Wilderness. suggestions change t h e  should  be  for  This  research  ecosystem  managed b y  with  more  the  point Forest  them.  Objectives  The  r u l e s c o n s t r a i n i n g the  perceptions  objectives listed  to the  about  T h e y want t o know  b e c a u s e t h e y know what t o do  3)  and  that  and  resources  l a n d base demonstrated the  i t i f more l a n d  concern f o r the  natural  recreating public  communicating these d e s i r e s  The  t h e y can  of the  fear that  o f the  f o r the  below.  s t u d y team and  members c o n t r i b u t e d  s t u d y team.  to  the a set  attitudes of  These o b j e c t i v e s w i l l  be  141 The  study team had an o b j e c t i v e of* p r o v i d i n g as many  r e s o u r c e s and uses o f r e s o u r c e s as p o s s i b l e to meet the needs o f the American p e o p l e .  T h i s stemmed from the  p r e s s u r e s o f laws, p o l i c y from above, past t r a d i t i o n , from the v a l u e s o f the members. had  t o be  A l l uses o f the  c o n s i d e r e d and the b e s t combination  arrived at. Wilderness  While r e a l i z i n g t h a t i t was  and  resources  o f uses  planning f o r a  Area, the study team made an attempt to l e a v e  as much l a n d as p o s s i b l e i n m u l t i p l e - u s e , so t h a t o t h e r r e s o u r c e s than Wilderness  and r e c r e a t i o n c o u l d s t i l l  be  provided. The  c r i t e r i a o f the Wilderness  Act had to be  met.  These were t h a t 1) the a r e a not show the " i m p r i n t o f man's work" n o t i c e a b l y , 2) t h e r e be o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r s o l i t u d e o r p r i m i t i v e r e c r e a t i o n , 3) the a r e a cover at l e a s t 5000 a c r e s , 4) t h e r e may historical,  be o t h e r f e a t u r e s o f s c i e n t i f i c ,  or s c e n i c i n t e r e s t .  The  above were the major  c r i t e r i a which d e f i n e d what c o u l d or c o u l d not be The  Wilderness.  study team sought to i n v o l v e the p u b l i c i n i t s  p l a n n i n g process  and l i s t e n t o i t c a r e f u l l y .  Due  cases o f poor communication the study team f e l t  to past  pressure  from above and from i t s members* v a l u e s to communicate w e l l w i t h the p u b l i c .  T h i s i n c l u d e d f i n d i n g people's  d e s i r e s f o r l a n d use management, o b j e c t i v e was support The  t o develop  "real"  A c o r o l l a r y of t h i s  a p r o p o s a l which would have p o l i t i c a l  among the p u b l i c and i n Congress. study team had  An o b j e c t i v e was  freedom i n c a r r y i n g out i t s study.  to c a r r y out the study i n a manner c o n s i s t e n t  142 with  Forest  t o be  Service p o l i c y  and  philosophy  recommended f o r i n c l u s i o n  System,  The  roadless  areas  study  Forest  Service  without  i n the  that  a l r e a d y had  to true Wilderness.  p o t e n t i a l Wilderness  knew t h e r e g i o n a l o f f i c e , o f f i c e w o u l d be selected The  study  where t i m b e r  team a t t e m p t e d  c o u l d be  sumptively  and  with  resource  the  these Forest  i n the  feels  of the  Area.  Part  its  the  Forest  Service's  look  the  how  at They  national  areas  were  resources  to  used  con-  associated  c a t e r to the  timber  areas  pressure  f o r the  country.  a v o i d recommending a  National  due  to r u l e s ,  but  values  them f r o m m a k i n g a b e t t e r  case f o r a N a t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n tain  area  Service view.  d e s t r u c t i o n of jobs  o f t h i s was  team members p r e v e n t e d  the  Area(s).  or other  to provide to  in-  to minimize d e p l e t i o n of  They t r i e d  A n o t h e r o b j e c t i v e was Recreation  Forest  Wilderness  to minimize the  Service  letting  more i m p o r t a n t l y ,  harvested  uses.  by  team chose t o  l o o k i n g a t t h e i r work t o see  for inclusion  Service  proposal  r o a d s and  study  strict  and  including only  roads and/or s t r u c t u r e s . They  The  i n the  areas  Preservation  A Park  a different  c o u l d h a v e recommended c l o s i n g t h e revert  about  o f man's w o r k .  team c o u l d have d e v e l o p e d  c l u d i n g areas  Wilderness  i s rigorous  signs  in selecting  Area,  f r e e d o m and  They wanted t o flexibility  main-  t o manage  resources. The  private their rights  study  team s o u g h t  s e c t o r and  own  affairs.  o f the  of l o c a l  to maintain and  They d i d not  the  freedom  s t a t e government  levels  the  t o manage  want t o i n f r i n g e  p r i v a t e sector or of other  of  of  on  the  government.  143 The s t u d y mineral  team w a n t e d t o meet  survey  f o r areas  the requirement  t o be c o n s i d e r e d  T h e r e were two p o s s i b l e c o r o l l a r i e s was  to include a d d i t i o n a l  included i n the survey o t h e r was the  Forest  went  had  so t h e y  f o r Wilderness.  to t h i s  objective.  One  c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s wanted c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d .  to delay the process  so t h a t l e s s  The  opposition to  S e r v i c e p r o p o s a l would be g e n e r a t e d  as  time  on. T h e r e was  meet  areas  of a  an o b j e c t i v e o f d e v e l o p i n g  the general  techniques  o b j e c t i v e s d i s c u s s e d above.  the freedom t o develop  these  planning  wanted t o p l a n from a u t i l i t a r i a n  to best  The s t u d y  techniques.  team They  v i e w and i n as r a t i o n a l  a  manner a s p o s s i b l e . A n o t h e r o b j e c t i v e was b e a compromise  past  proposals.  objective  a p r o p o s a l which would  of a l l inputs, while keeping  t h e r e were p r e f e r e n c e s by  to develop  i n the Forest  T h e s e two  of developing  i n mind  S e r v i c e as  evidenced  objectives conflicted,  a compromise  that  and t h e  appears t o have been  dominant, In l o o k i n g at the c o n f l i c t s Wilderness  and t i m b e r  recreation  the study  o b j e c t i v e was  related  harvesting team t r i e d  attempted  or Wilderness  and i n t e n s i v e  to cater to a l lsides.  t o a l l segments o f t h e  team a l o n g w i t h t h e two F o r e s t  t o l e a v e as much o f t h e s t u d y  condition u n t i l  like  This  to the objectives o f c o n s i d e r i n g a l l  r e s o u r c e u s e s and o f l i s t e n i n g The s t u d y  between i n t e r e s t s  public.  Supervisors  area i n i t s e x i s t i n g  t h e ^end o f t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s  as p o s s i b l e .  Pressure to  from above and v a l u e s  t h i s d e s i r e not  to e l i m i n a t e more l a n d from  b e f o r e any d e c i s i o n . l a n d had  Wilderness  As the study team l e a d e r s a i d , much  a l r e a d y been e l i m i n a t e d from c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r  Wilderness The  o f some o f these people l e d  by past management d e c i s i o n s .  study team had  conservationist values.  an o b j e c t i v e o f b e i n g s e n s i t i v e to They wanted t o m a i n t a i n  r  an open  ear to what c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s f e l t , to a v o i d i g n o r i n g them as has been done i n the past by F o r e s t S e r v i c e A f i n a l o b j e c t i v e was  t o develop a p r o p o s a l which would  minimize people problems and those who Area,  o t h e r management problems f o r  would a c t u a l l y manage an A l p i n e Lakes  M i n i m i z i n g these problems was  insufficient The  above l i s t  attempted i n the f a c e  o f o b j e c t i v e s can be  study  Area proposal  summarized f o r  T h i s summary g i v e s a condensed i d e a  o f what the study team sought t o  Wilderness  Wilderness  information.  a n a l y t i c a l purposes.  The  personnel,  do.  team sought to i n c l u d e i n t h e i r  Wilderness  lands which would meet the c r i t e r i a i n the  Act.  These are lands where 1 )  "the i m p r i n t  man's work" i s " s u b s t a n t i a l l y u n n o t i c e a b l e , "  2)  there  t  of are  o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r s o l i t u d e or a p r i m i t i v e k i n d o f r e c r e a t i o n , 3) t h e r e are at l e a s t 5000 a c r e s , h)  t h e r e may  be  other features of e c o l o g i c a l , g e o l o g i c a l , s c i e n t i f i c , historical,  or scenic value.  t a t e d t h a t o n l y r o a d l e s s areas would be no  Forest Service p o l i c y c o u l d be  "second-growth W i l d e r n e s s , "  s i d e r i n g areas  f o r Wilderness  included;  dic-  there  As w e l l i n con-  or f o r o t h e r uses the  study  of  145 team s o u g h t  t o use  r e s o u r c e d a t a and  to  make t h e i r  c h o i c e s as r a t i o n a l  an  o b l i g a t i o n t o meet t h e  s t u d y team a t t e m p t e d  to develop  large  the  They  removal By  o f recom-  survey.  a Wilderness  Area  of timbered  lands  i n c l u d i n g as  little  Wilderness  s t u d y team c o u l d c o n t i n u e t o p r o v i d e a  relatively  of timber  as p o s s i b l e  felt  i n the  amount  providing to  the  the F o r e s t S e r v i c e ' s l a n d base.  land with h a r v e s t a b l e timber Area  as p o s s i b l e .  undergone a m i n e r a l  p r o p o s a l which would minimize from  techniques  Congressional requirement  mending o n l y areas which had The  planning  f o r l o g g i n g companies.  l a n d f o r timber h a r v e s t i n g , the  provide large  the k i n d not  enough a r e a s  well  s t u d y team  for intensive  permitted i n a Wilderness  As  as  sought  recreation,  Area.  Some  areas  w h i c h c o u l d p o t e n t i a l l y have been i n c l u d e d i n W i l d e r n e s s recommended f o r m o t o r i z e d s t u d y team a t t e m p t e d wherever The  study  on  manage t h e  Instead  they  a r e a s u r r o u n d i n g the  Wilderness  a N a t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n A r e a would a t t r a c t  to the  impacts  t o a v o i d recommending a N a t i o n a l  as a b u f f e r  g e n e r a l a r e a and  the W i l d e r n e s s  National Recreation Area to  The  to maintain a multiple-use posture  team s o u g h t  They f e l t  many p e o p l e tive  recreation.  possible.  Recreation Area core.  or other i n t e n s i v e  were  would t h e r e b y have negaAs w e l l ,  they  l e g i s l a t i o n would l i m i t  a r e a around chose  core.  the Wilderness  to propose  s u r r o u n d i n g the Wilderness  Area  felt  their  freedom  effectively.  a s p e c i a l management  Area.  too  unit  146 The be  study  politically  involve  team t r i e d acceptable.  mise b y weighing tried  desires.  They attempted  they  sensitive  i n view o f past  felt  Their public  to develop  of a l l sides  t o be p a r t i c u l a r l y  They sought  effort to  and p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s  the views  conservationists  effort a compro-  A t t h e same  0  time  t o the views o f  insensitivities  t o a v o i d any i n f r i n g e m e n t  to their o f the  t h e p r i v a t e s e c t o r and s t a t e and l o c a l  governments had. for  T h e y made a g r e a t  and t h e b r o c h u r e s  were w e l l - o r g a n i z e d .  rights  a p r o p o s a l which would  a s much o f t h e p u b l i c a s p o s s i b l e .  hearings  they  t o develop  They t r i e d  a n y l a n d s where t h e y  t o a v o i d making  felt  these  recommendations  p a r t i e s had  primary  jurisdiction. These f o u r g e n e r a l of the Forest and  the  Service study  planning effort  some o f t h e s e  f o r t h e A l p i n e Lakes area.  p r o b l e m s an o r g a n i z a t i o n l i k e  public  In trying  the study  decisions. serve  The p h i l o s o p h y  concept  indicate,  the p h i l o s o p h y Wilderness  the Forest  t o c a t e r t o most  of multiple-use  some o f  Service i s  or a l l o f the  i s an attempt  the m u l t i p l e use philosophy  As  these  includes  but i n the face o f p u b l i c  concern,  i s n o t always adequate t o t h e problems o f  selection  a n d management.  1  difficult  and n e e d s a s p o s s i b l e .  of Wilderness,  Clearly  They r e f l e c t  team was b o u n d t o f a c e v e r y  a s many p e o p l e  objectives the  team i n c a r r y i n g o u t i t s s t u d y  objectives conflicted.  bound t o f a c e .  to  o b j e c t i v e s summarize t h e i n t e n t i o n s  147 Proposition 3  C.  The i n f o r m a t i o n w h i c h a f f e c t e d t h e o u t p u t o f t h e s t u d y team c o n s i s t e d o f a ) i n f o r m a t i o n w h i c h was r e c e i v e d from o u t s i d e and s c r e e n e d and i n t e r p r e t e d b y t h e s t u d y team i n a c c o r d w i t h t h e v a l u e s o f t h e s t u d y team members a n d b ) i n f o r m a t i o n g e n e r a t e d b y t h e s t u d y team. The the  important  study  tion  questions  team r e c e i v e f r o m o u t s i d e ?  screened  and i n t e r p r e t e d ?  generated w i t h i n the study importance 1)  a r e : What i n f o r m a t i o n d i d  Sources 1946  Since  What:i i n f o r m a t i o n  team?  o f t h e two s o u r c e s  r e c e i v i n g messages about  f o r Information  the Forest  the Alpine  o f t h e C a s c a d e Range,  asked f o r timber  area  journals.  Forest  1972. tant  Service study  part  creation,  i n the f i n a l  companies  conservationists  and p r o t e c t i o n o f t h e  t h e s i s c o n c e r n s t h e work o f  team w h i c h was f o r m e d i n J u l y o f  recommendations  and p r e s e n t e d  this  made b e f o r e  section will  the study  o f the study  p r i o r t o the study discuss  team  team's  some i n p u t s w h i c h were  team o f f e r e d i t s t h r e e a l t e r n a t i v e s  the p u b l i c . In  the  products  a larger  B e c a u s e some o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n w h i c h h a d a n i m p o r -  was g a t h e r e d  to  This  Some w e r e  concerned  sales i n the region while forclassification  the  S e r v i c e had been  Lakes area.  Forest  wrote proposals i n various  was  What was t h e r e l a t i v e  messages about t h e a r e a p e r s e , o t h e r s portion  informa-  of information?  o f and Channels or earlier  How was t h i s  1963  f o u r Northwest  conservation  N o r t h Cascades C o n s e r v a t i o n  organizations,  Council, the Mountaineers,  148 t h e Mazamas, and  the P a c i f i c  Northwest  Chapter o f the  C l u b , p r e p a r e d a p r o p o s a l f o r an A l p i n e Area.  T h i s p r o p o s a l appeared  o f The  W i l d Cascades  and  c o u l d be  called  Brock Evans  wrote  Cascades."  He  Alpine  "The  1967  Alpine  contended  Lakes:  much p r i v a t e  area.  Miller  He n o t e d t h a t  River,  o f The  Wild  Stepchild  land  o f the  became t h e  w o r r y i n g about  and Mt.  until  p l a n s f o r development  Lake  Stuart  disposition  then o u t l i n e d country,  which  the d e p l e t i o n  respondence c o u l d be After  deferred  o f 1967  T h i s p r o c e s s began " i n  U s i n g t h e example o f t h e E i g h t m i l e he  showed t h r o u g h e x c e r p t s f r o m  w i t h the Forest  S e r v i c e how  conducted d e s p i t e p r o t e s t  outlining threats  m i n i n g Evans  called  A l p i n e Lakes  area.  He  o f the r e m a i n i n g r o a d l e s s  through timber s a l e s .  sale  had  o f the whole a r e a had been s e t t l e d .  e a r n e s t " i n 1962. timber  o f t h e a r e a s be  were  the  were o m i t t e d from t h e L i m i t e d A r e a , c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t s asked that  North  North  i n a r e a s s u c h as  Salmon L a Sac,  Cascades  conservationists  the area that  N a t i o n a l P a r k , n o b o d y was  Lakes  Dorothy,  issue  t h a t because  t r y i n g to protect  Cascades  278,000  f o r Wilderness of on how  issue  acquired.  I n t h e October-November  so b u s y  Wilderness  i n t h e A p r i l - M a y 1964  to 334,000 acres depending  acres  Lakes  Sierra  from  a timber  Creek  cor-  sale  conservationists.  f r o m t i m b e r h a r v e s t i n g and  on p e o p l e t o o r g a n i z e t o s a v e  from the  149  Shortly after  this  article  and  proposed N o r t h Cascades N a t i o n a l L a k e s P r o t e c t i o n S o c i e t y was mentioned above, a l o n g timber area  s a l e s i n the  studied.  work o f t h e  creation  This  considered  written  the  be  The  proposal  i n the  study  shows, t h e Forest  written  Service  In  1970  oral  that  the  o f Washington Department  Area with  Service New  communications  the  prepared was  and  for  and  to  the  the  public  meetings,  a l l informed  i n t e r e s t e d i n the  p r o d u c t s i n d u s t r y and Resources  C e n t r a l W a s h i n g t o n C a s c a d e s S t u d y Team, and  of  members were  Newsletters,  of Natural  the  Wilderness  busy sending o r a l  Forest  someone was  forest  initiate  a major input  made t o i n f o r m  Lakes area.  the  for  a  was  Alpine  stage  Recreation  recruited, the  for  called  delegation.  about  inputs  form o f l e g i s l a t i o n ,  to the  effort  major  team.  Washington C o n g r e s s i o n a l an  Alpine  o f ALPS p r e c e d e d  i t helped  I t a l s o was  the  the  the  to precede  They s e t the  1970  on  from i n d u s t r y  considered  same t i m e ALPS was  and  two  thesis.  by  communications  The  requests  s t u d y team.  proposal,  At  formed.  can  creation of a National  core.  P a r k i n 1968,  s t u d y team, i n f a c t  o f the  information  the  area,  of concern of t h i s  what i s t o be the  with  p u b l i c hearings  This  slide the  area.  the  state  created study  the  team  U n i v e r s i t y o f W a s h i n g t o n c o n s u l t i n g f i r m , BEAR, a detailed report  submitted t o the  made a v a i l a b l e t o t h e  Forest  on  the  area.  Service  public.  The  and  In  1972  the  report  summary r e p o r t s  report  included  were  resource  150 data,  estimates  economy and team's own an  on u s e  the  and  to l e t the the  area  a specific directed.  turned the  over  study  reasons  to  proposal.  Forest  Forest  the  the  study  Areas, At  the  and same  was  forest  pro-  Service study  The  to the  two  proposals  study  team.  i n the press study  and  team was  three  proposals.  O v e r 1900  persons  communities  they  attended  around the  there could be  with  L e t t e r s gave proposals.  pressure two  v i a Congress-  groups  intended  through.  of support  and  area  M e e t i n g s were h e l d  team t h r o u g h  above p r o p o s a l s .  formed,  the  i n d i v i d u a l s began to  study  alternatives  they  d e s c r i b e d above c o u l d  team know t h a t t h e s e  meetings, or expressions two  doing,  C o n g r e s s know how  indirect  folloxv t h e whole p r o c e s s  ninety  ALPS was  managed.  team t o d i s c u s s t h e  l e t the  o f the  As  body t o w h i c h i n p u t s about  i n f o r m a t i o n to the  in  proposal.  S e r v i c e and  s h o u l d be  O t h e r g r o u p s and  its  of this  Wilderness  s u p p o r t i n g v a r i o u s p o r t i o n s o f the  Publicity men  separate  area,  among o t h e r members o f t h e  for this  Once t h e  be  impact  o f the  on  i n d u s t r y , landowners, i n t e n s i v e r e c r e a t i o n i n t e r e s t s ,  tried  was  f o r two  of the  support  others  felt  o f t h e ALPS p r o p o s a l  C e n t r a l W a s h i n g t o n C a s c a d e s S t u d y Team  recruiting ducts  impact  of the resources  proposal  assessment  time  o f the  In  1973  invited the area.  communicate  letters,  informal  f o r opposition to the  study  team  p u b l i c comment  prepared  on i t .  seven p u b l i c meetings Four thousand  one  held  s i x hundred  (4690) w r i t t e n i n p u t s r e p r e s e n t i n g 5380 p e r s o n s  were  151 received.  These i n p u t s were s e p a r a t e d  i n t o primary i n p u t s ,  generated by i n d i v i d u a l a c t i o n , and secondary i n p u t s , generated by o r g a n i z e d  action.  H a l f o f the i n p u t s were  p r i m a r y i n p u t s , u s u a l l y p e r s o n a l l e t t e r s o r t e a r forms from the F o r e s t S e r v i c e b o o k l e t s . came c h i e f l y from i n d u s t r y .  The secondary i n p u t s  Other sources  o f i n p u t such as  meetings o r r e g u l a r correspondence o u t s i d e the formal cess were n o t documented.  pro-  T h e i r r o l e has t o be i n f e r r e d .  Most i n d i v i d u a l w r i t t e n i n p u t s appear t o have been i n c l u d e d in this tabulation.  The other i n p u t s , those not counted,  seem t o be c h i e f l y i n p u t s from the major groups who communicated with the study team c o n t i n u o u s l y d u r i n g the p r o c e s s , u s i n g v a r i o u s means such as c o n t a c t i n g Congressmen, g e t t i n g cartoons  o r e d i t o r i a l s i n l o c a l papers, meet-  i n g s w i t h the study team o r the two s u p e r v i s o r s ,  sending  them l e t t e r s and w r i t t e n m a t e r i a l . T h i s process i n October 1973#  ended f o r m a l l y a f t e r the p u b l i c  hearings  Two thousand seven hundred f i f t y two  (2752) i n p u t s r e p r e s e n t i n g 6469 persons were r e c e i v e d i n r e a c t i o n t o the F o r e s t S e r v i c e p r o p o s a l area.  These i n p u t s i n c l u d e d o r a l i n p u t s from the o f f i c i a l  t r a n s c r i p t s and w r i t t e n i n p u t s . these The to and  f o r the A l p i n e Lakes  Following analysis of  i n p u t s the study team prepared  i t s final  proposal.  groups went on u s i n g the same channels o f communication l e t the F o r e s t S e r v i c e and Congress know how they t o communicate any changes i n t h e i r p o s i t i o n s .  felt  The one other group proposal discussed here came from the Coalition of Conservation Groups.  This proposal was  prepared shortly before the public hearings i n October 1973* and just after the study team released i t s  proposal.  A pamphlet for public distribution and communications to the study team like those from the other groups but less detailed were used to influence the study team.  Communica-  tions from the Coalition were more a continuation of past efforts like those in 1963 a n c * ^9^7 than a continuous and specific effort like those of the Central Washington Cascades Study Team, later the Alpine Lakes Coalition, and of ALPS. For many of the groups in the Coalition of Conservation Groups the Alpine Lakes was one concern out of several, and their communications were different from those of groups more specifically organized around the Alpine Lakes area. 2)  Substantive Information  Because they both preceded the alternatives  of the  Forest Service study team, the proposals of ALPS and the Alpine Lakes Coalition w i l l be discussed f i r s t . the Forest Service alternatives,  Afterward  reaction to them, the  Coalition of Conservation Groups proposal, and the single Forest Service proposal w i l l be discussed, a)  The ALPS Proposal  ALPS proposed a Area with a  364,000  950,000  acre National Recreation  acre Wilderness core.  Approximately  128,000 acres i n the National Recreation Area would be  153  '  i n c l u d e d i n a one-mile wide b u f f e r s t r i p s u r r o u n d i n g the Wilderness Area.  I n t h i s b u f f e r a r e a timber h a r v e s t i n g  would be a l l o w e d o n l y under s t r i c t of  guidelines.  I n the r e s t  the N a t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n A r e a o u t s i d e the Wilderness  other  uses such as timber h a r v e s t i n g o r g r a z i n g would be allowed o n l y i f t t h e y were compatible w i t h the p r i m a r y purpose o f providing recreation.  The b u f f e r a r e a would prevent  clear-  c u t t i n g adjacent t o the W i l d e r n e s s , which would d i m i n i s h the q u a l i t y o f the W i l d e r n e s s .  I t would a l s o p r o v i d e a  "near w i l d e r n e s s " atmosphere f o r those who c o u l d not o r would not go f a r t h e r , i n t o the a c t u a l W i l d e r n e s s . ALPS proposed  c o n c e n t r i c zones w i t h l e s s i n t e n s i v e use i n  the core and more i n t e n s i v e use on the p e r i m e t e r . felt  Thus  t h i s p l a n would permit u n i f i e d management  They  o f the  e n t i r e a r e a r a t h e r than d e a l i n g w i t h j u s t a p o r t i o n o f the area.  They a l s o i n c l u d e d a p o l i c y f o r a c q u i r i n g n e c e s s a r y  p r i v a t e l a n d through  purchase.  D u r i n g t h e time f o l l o w i n g p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h i s p r o p o s a l ALPS gathered and p r e s e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n s u p p o r t i n g i t s p r o p o s a l and d i s c u s s i n g i t s impacts.  Perhaps the most obvious  k i n d o f i n f o r m a t i o n i s t h a t r e l a t e d t o the f o r e s t industry.  products  ALPS e s t i m a t e d t h a t i t s p r o p o s a l would reduce by  25 m i l l i o n board f e e t p e r y e a r the a l l o w a b l e h a r v e s t l e v e l s , or  about  2.5$ o f the c u r r e n t h a r v e s t l e v e l i n the f o u r -  county r e g i o n .  I t was f e l t  t h a t improved  management  p r a c t i c e s i n the r e m a i n i n g a r e a c o u l d make up f o r t h i s  7  ALPS memo, Sept. 30,  1973.  2.5$.  154 N e v e r t h e l e s s AXPS responded impactSo proposed  t o e s t i m a t e s by o t h e r s o f these  They acknowledged t h e l a r g e r Wilderness A r e a and c o n t r o l s on h a r v e s t i n g as c o n t r i b u t i n g t o t h e i r  l a r g e r n e g a t i v e economic impacts.  Using a Forest Service  e s t i m a t e o f t h e l o s s i n timber s a l e revenues  to school  d i s t r i c t s and c o u n t i e s p e r m i l l i o n board f e e t o f timber l o s t , ALPS showed t h a t t h e i r p r o p o s a l would not cause  losses  8 of more than about  one p e r c e n t o f the annual  budgets.  Because a p p r o x i m a t e l y 40$ o f the timber h a r v e s t e d i n t h e a r e a was exported, ALPS f e l t  t h e impact  o f t h e i r proposal  on l o c a l jobs was not as s e r i o u s as the C e n t r a l Washington Cascades Study Team s t a t e d i t was. of  impacts based  They f e l t  that  estimates  on " f u l l y i e l d " as prepared by the C e n t r a l  Washington Cascades Study Team o r on p o t e n t i a l annual h a r v e s t as prepared by t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e were e x a g g e r a t i o n s . They s t a t e d that h a r v e s t i n g i n the a r e a had never 55$ of  exceeded  " f u l l y i e l d " and that c u r r e n t h a r v e s t l e v e l s were  58.5$ o f t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e ' s p o t e n t i a l annual h a r v e s t , which i n t u r n was 70$ o f " f u l l  yield."^  No ALPS estimates o f j o b impacts were o b t a i n e d . o t h e r s ' e s t i m a t e s were o b t a i n e d .  When these a r e p r e s e n t e d ,  the above f a c t o r s , and the f a c t t h a t i f d i r e c t (i.e. job  l o g g i n g and s a w m i l l s ) a r e exaggerated,  impacts  s h o u l d be remembered.  However,  j o b impacts  so a r e i n d i r e c t  ALPS d i d p r e s e n t  evidence  t h a t i n the l o n g r u n i n o t h e r areas such as Redwoods N a t i o n a l 8  9  Ibid. ALPS l e t t e r t o Dick Buscher, March 1, 1973.  155 Park by  job losses  i n t i m b e r h a r v e s t i n g were more t h a n r e p l a c e d  jobs a s s o c i a t e d with ALPS a t t e m p t e d  recreation.  t o p r o v i d e a p l a n w h e r e b y maximum  of* r e c r e a t i o n p o t e n t i a l w o u l d r e s u l t . areas  such  permit  ties,  c l o s u r e s so t h a t  retained,  a policy  maximum W i l d e r n e s s ,  w h i c h was  currently divided  clear policy  They f e l t  recommended  as t h e Teanaway a r e a f o r m o t o r i z e d  minimum r o a d c o u l d be  They  this  areas  recreation,  f o r roadside  for  the  among two  forests  p l a n would improve land-use  Wilderness,  recreation uses  suited  f o r Wilderness  the lands best  or f o r timber  suited  and  They t r i e d  highway through ownership,  recreation.  i n the  harvesting valleys  to address  included.  the  itself  Essentially  w o u l d be  By  that used of  Areas  u n d e r one  areas  of  the  areacrowded  checkerboard  recreationists,  to areas too h i g h f o r timber  i n proposing Wilderness.  were i n c l u d e d , .  felt  problems l i k e  the needs o f n o n - W i l d e r n e s s limit  area.  harvesting, grazing, or f o r other  Snoqualmie Pass,  ALPS d i d n o t  f o u r coun-  f o r o t h e r forms  w o u l d be managed f o r t h e i r b e s t u s e s  wide p l a n .  land to  g u i d e l i n e s f o r u n i f y i n g management  f o r p r o v i d i n g non-Wilderness  lands best  recreation  for acquiring private  c o n s o l i d a t i n g management o f t h e w h o l e a r e a t h e y while  use  Some t i m b e r e d  o f mixed  ownership  t h e Teanaway a r e a was  the  lowland  were only  r o a d l e s s a r e a which c o u l d have been added f o r a major i n c r e a s e in  the  size  o f the W i l d e r n e s s .  The  boundaries  N a t i o n a l R e c r e a t i o n A r e a were drawn t o a l a r g e the highway c o r r i d o r s  i n mind.  of  the  extent  These highways are  the  with  156  portals to the Alpine Lakes, arid they create a lot of the management problems.  Including them and such areas as the  Teanaway area, I c i c l e Greek, and the three a r t i f i c i a l lakes near Cle Elum and Snoqualmie Pass would permit better management of the area for non-Wilderness uses. Over a period of several years this information and elaboration of i t was presented to the Forest Service.  Since  the end of 1 9 7 4 and the preparation of the final Forest Service proposal ALPS has amended i t s proposal.  Since a  new session of Congress is now i n progress, a new b i l l had to beiintroduced.  The size of the National Recreation Area  and of the Wilderness core have been increased, and some guideli