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.

First Published in 2011. During the 1970s, land managers in the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) often must have felt they lived in interesting times. The decade began with the first Earth Day, an event that revealed the increasing strength and militancy of the environmental movement; as it ended, western commercial users of the public lands, disaffected by environmentalist policymaking victories, had launched the "sagebrush rebellion." Those managers were expected to reconcile often sharply polarized interest group pressures with professional values, as well as with diverse federal statutes and regulations that reflected uneasy compromises among group and professional influences. Although the technical specifics of public lands management differ from those in other fields of natural resources management, the political tensions in public lands policymaking are similar to those in other natural resources fields. Thus, this description of the Forest Service's xiii xiv PREFACE and BLM's handling of those tensions should be of interest to many in the natural resources management community as a whole. This study should also be useful to students of public administrative politics generally.

From Denali's majestic slopes to the Great Swamp of central New Jersey, protected wilderness areas make up nearly twenty percent of the parks, forests, wildlife refuges, and other public lands that cover a full fourth of the nation's territory. But wilderness is not only a place. It is also one of the most powerful and troublesome ideas in American environmental thought, representing everything from sublime beauty and patriotic inspiration to a countercultural ideal and an overextension of government authority. The Promise of Wilderness examines how the idea of wilderness has shaped the management of public lands since the passage of the Wilderness Act in 1964. Wilderness preservation has engaged diverse groups of citizens, from hunters and ranchers to wildlife enthusiasts and hikers, as political advocates who have leveraged the resources of local and national groups toward a common goal. Turner demonstrates how these efforts have contributed to major shifts in modern American environmental politics, which have emerged not just in reaction to a new generation of environmental concerns, such as environmental justice and climate change, but also in response to changed debates over old conservation issues, such as public lands management. He also shows how battles over wilderness protection have influenced American politics more broadly, fueling disputes over the proper role of government, individual rights, and the interests of rural communities; giving rise to radical environmentalism; and playing an important role in the resurgence of the conservative movement, especially in the American West. Watch the book trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jsq-6LAeYKk

In this book, two leading experts on community action provide the first scholarly examination of the civic renewal movement that has emerged in the United States in recent decades. Sirianni Friedland examine civic innovation since the 1960s as social learning in four arenas (community organizing/development, civic environmentalism, community health, and public journalism), and they link local efforts to broader networks and to the development of "public policy for democracy." They also explore the emergence of a movement for civic renewal that builds upon the civic movements in these four arenas. In contrast to some recent studies that stress broad indicators of civic decline, this study analyzes innovation as a long process of social learning within specific institutional and policy domains with complex challenges and cross-currents. It draws upon analytical frameworks of social capital, policy learning, organizational learning, regulatory culture, democratic theory, and social movement theory. The study is based upon interviews with more than 400 innovative practitioners, as well as extensive field observation, case study, action research, and historical analysis.