We have been deluged by responses to Barry Wynsma's thoughtful essay on Forest Service leadership - or the lack thereof. Provided here is some feedback on the essay.
Editor's Note:
Fiedler-Keegan reports suggest a more comprehensive restoration strategy is needed in many at-risk forests in the Intermountain West.
About nine years ago, two University of Montana researchers - Carl Fiedler, a forest ecologist and Charles Keegan III, and economist - started beating the drum for a more comprehensive approach to thinning at-risk forests in the Intermountain West.
Fiedler had theorized that thinning from below - the standard cookie-cutter thinning approach that focuses exclusively on the smallest trees in a dense stand of trees - was more expensive on a per acre basis and produced a less desirable ecological result that a more-detailed program that accounted for tree species, age class distribution and leave trees - trees that because of their species, health and quality out to be left in the stand.
Herein, we present the results of two Fiedler-Keegan studies - one done in New Mexico and the other done in Montana - which prove the veracity of Fiedler's theory. Plainly stated, the two studies confirmed that thinning from below - based on 9 and 16-inch diameter limits - approaches currently favored in Congress, is more expensive and less ecologically effective than the more comprehensive approach.
Click below to read the two reports, plus a third Keegan-Fiedler report written for the U.S. Forest Service's Rocky Mountain Research Station in 2000.
Fiedler New Mexico Report 
human need to use natural resources is fundamental to our continued presence on earth."