Public Lands Conflict And Resolution

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.

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.

Published in collaboration with the Consensus Building Institute, this book calls for a mutual gains approach to land disputes. The authors detail techniques that allow stakeholders with conflicting interests to collaborate, voice concerns constructively, and reach successful agreements that benefit all parties involved in zoning, planning, and development.

Resolving Land and Energy Conflicts studies energy in the landscape across gas and oil, wind, transmission and nuclear waste disposal. The authors are particularly interested in the conflicts that emerge from specific sites and proposals as well as how this unique land use plays out in terms of conflict and resolution across scales and jurisdictions while touching on broader issues of policy and values. Resolving Land and Energy Conflicts briefly explains the general context around the energy type; the impacts and conflicts that have arisen given this context; the role laws, rules and jurisdictions play in mitigating, resolving or creating more conflict; and the ways in which communication, collaboration and conflict resolution have been or could be used to ameliorate the conflicts that inevitably arise.