Luzzi, James2006-02-152006-02-152001https://hdl.handle.net/1794/226117 p.This paper will examine the dominant method of coping with this question, the method that is called the rational planning model. Specifically, it will address how this model has been applied to federal forestry planning. This examination is presented in three parts. The first section offers a description and general overview of the rational planning model and a discussion of the criticisms that its approach has stimulated. The second section discusses the model’s application to forestry planning as codified in the National Forest Management Act and the administrative rules that direct their implementation. Consequences of the application of the model to forestry issues are discussed in the context of the events that led to the shutdown of logging on federal lands in the Pacific Northwest. This section also introduces the 1999 Committee of Scientists Report that recommended changes in the planning rules for the National Forests. Versions of these recommendations were adopted in November 2000 as final governing rules. The third section introduces the concept of ‘planning for ambivalence’ and examines some of the Committee’s recommendations in light of the uncertainties inherent in making forestry plans. The question of whether the rational model can withstand ambivalence is addressed in the context of adaptive management, or plan making as experimental action.49520 bytesapplication/pdfen-USWorking Paper