The United States Forest Service, perhaps more than any other federal
agency, has made great strides during the past two decades revolution-
izing its public involvement efforts and reshaping its profile through
the hiring of professionals in many disciplinary areas long absent in
the agency. In fact, to a large extent, the agency has been doing
precisely what everyone has been clamoring for it to do: involving the
public more in its decisions; hiring more wildlife biologists,
recreation specialists, sociologists, planners, and individuals with
"people skills"; and, fur- thermore, taking a more comprehensive and
long-term view in planning the future of the national forests. The
result has been significant-in some ways, monumental-changes in the
agency and its land manage- ment practices. There are provisions for
public input in almost all as- pects of national forest management
today. The profeSSional disciplines represented throughout the agency's
ranks are markedly more diverse than they have ever been. Moreover, no
stone is left untumed in the agency's current forest-planning effort,
undoubtedly the most compre- hensive, interdisciplinary planning effort
ever undertaken by a resource agency in the United States. Regardless of
the dramatic change that has occurred in the U. S. Forest Service since
the early 1970s, the agency is still plagued by con- flicts arising from
dissatisfaction th how it is doing business.