Land Management Agency Discretion :: essays research papers

Agency discretion towards reach focus has been an give away since the Forest Services conception. Gifford Pinchot had envisioned local timberers managing put downs with ideas and guidelines that create been positive with modern science and conservation in mind. Since then, laws such as the interior(a) environmental Policy motion (NEPA), the Wilderness Bill and Endangered Species Act have limited the amount of authority and discretion a land wanglement dresser has over a particular area. These laws along with the online forest plans under the inflict & Resource Management plans under the 1982 Regulations have made it possible for agencies to be subject to everyday opinion of whether the forest plans are best suited for a particular area and if the agency is successfully implementing these forest objectives.Historically, land management agency discretion has been some(prenominal) greater than present day. Land management was left to scientists and forest professionals w ho were entrusted with managing common forests for the common good. This allowed for land management agencies to act without opposition from conflicting observe points. But during the 1960s and 70s, America started to question the federal administration and science. With the passage of NEPA, the public became more involved with policy decision reservation and opened agencies up to lawsuits and litigation. According to National Forest System Land & Resource Management Planning (1982 Regulations) Sec. 219.6, the intent of public participation in the National Forest system is to broaden the information base upon which land and resource management planning decisions are made. It is also the intent to plug that the Forest Service understands the needs, concerns and values of the public. NEPA requires that the Forest Service issues Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), hold public comment periods, and issue a rendering of the proposed planning action that is available to the public . Though this limits agency discretion towards public lands, it is the values of the public that dictate how public lands should be managed.Americas National Forests and public lands are intended to represent the publics values and interests. With the requirement that the land management agencies issue EIS reports, land management discretion has been limited. Not only are the agencies required to report the underway environmental health of a proposed area, but offer alternative plans as well. NEPA has held agencies accountable for how the publics National Forests are managed. No longer could agencies, at their own discretion, choose which the best way to manage public lands is whether or not it coincides with what the public wants out of its lands.