The Forestry Source Blog

If you're interested in following the revision of the national forest planning rule -- or taking part in writing it -- here is some information you'll need:

Three national roundtables:

First National Roundtable - April 1-2, 2010 at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington DC.  This meeting will engage attendees in dialogue about the planning rule and will solicit focused input on how the planning rule should address restoration, climate change, watershed health and biodiversity (NOI substance principles 1-4).
  
Second National Roundtable - April 20-21, 2010 in Washington DC (specific location TBD).  This meeting will engage attendees in dialogue about the planning rule and to solicit focused input on how the planning rule should address the social, economic and cultural contribution of NFS lands to surrounding communities; provide for effective collaboration; consider the relationship between national forests and surrounding lands; and use the latest in planning science (NOI substance principle 5 and process principles 1-3).
  
Third National Roundtable - May 11-12, 2010 in Washington DC (specific location TBD).  This meeting will allow stakeholders to discuss and build upon the synthesized results from the Science Forum and the preceding national and regional roundtables.

Key web sites:

Forest Service Planning Rule Website -- http://fs.usda.gov/planningrule

Planning Rule Blog -- http://blogs.usda.gov/usdablogs/planningrule/

Stay tuned....

Steve Wilent, Editor, The Forestry Source

Welcome to this blog devoted to The Forestry Source, the SAF's monthly newspaper. This blog is a place for ideas: your thoughts on the articles, columns, essays, and letters that have appeared in print -- or topics that might be covered in future issues. As editor, I place a high value on constructive criticism. Praise is certainly welcome, but I want and need to hear your perspectives, positive or negative, on the newspaper’s coverage of forestry issues. Perhaps your response is simply to add more to the story, to add detail based on your knowledge, experience, and research. This kind of feedback will help me, Joe Smith, and other folks at SAF make the newspaper better, to provide more and better service to members. I hope you'll post your comments here on this blog, for the benefit of all who may wish to read them. However, if you wish, send me a private e-mail at wilents@safnet.org.

With that in mind, two questions:

1. What article or type of article is of the most value to you?

2. And what topic hasn't been covered enough or at all in the Source? What article or type of article ought to be included in the mix?

By the way, the posts and comments on this blog prior to today’s were made in the Trees are the Answer blog. Although we've narrowed the focus to The Forestry Source specifically, you still can respond to any of the blog posts from the past.

Let me know what you think....

Steve Wilent

Editor, The Forestry Source

It's an important question. After all, advocacy is kind of what this blog--and SAF's "Trees are the Answer" campaign--is about. 

Lucky for us (perhaps), two professors from the Michigan Technological University say "yes."

"As long as a scientist's work is transparently honest, the scientific community is obligated to, and almost always does, confer credibility," they write. "Scientific credibility is not the same as effectiveness. One may have scientific credibility and be effective or ineffective at advocacy."

To read more, visit the Michigan Tech website.