National-level forest policy is changing in response to social pressure to “improve forest health.” A particularly fierce public debate surrounds the forest health impacts of administrative appeals, lawsuits, public involvement, and federal agency ability to balance managerial efficiency, ecological health, and social expectations. A self-administered mail survey was conducted in 2003 to assess public opinion on litigation and forest restoration in north central Arizonan communities in the ponderosa pine ecosystem. Although results indicate some support for limits to the right to file suit, appeal, and review environmental decisions, an overwhelming number of respondents indicate a strong desire to be more informed and involved in forest management decisions.
The Journal of Forestry is the most widely circulated scholarly forestry journal in the world. In print since 1902, the Journal has received several national awards for excellence. The mission of the Journal of Forestry is to advance the profession of forestry by keeping forest management professionals informed about significant developments and ideas in the many facets of forestry: economics, education and communication, entomology and pathology, fire, forest ecology, geospatial technologies, history, international forestry, measurements, policy, recreation, silviculture, social sciences, soils and hydrology, urban and community forestry, utilization and engineering, and wildlife management. The Journal is published bimonthly: January, March, May, July, September, and November.