Campus Access Only
All rights reserved. This publication is intended for use solely by faculty, students, and staff of University of the Pacific. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, now known or later developed, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author or the publisher.
Date of Award
Thesis - Pacific Access Restricted
Master of Arts (M.A.)
First Committee Member
Second Committee Member
Third Committee Member
There are two prevailing views today about our forests and natural resources. Both views are considered the "right" view, each position comprising a set of values by which we make decisions and choices about using our natural resources. The "dominant world view," is anthropocentric and agriculturally based, with a strong belief that we can "fix" environmental problems through the use of technology. The key result of this view is a belief in the efficiency of economic expansion and its continued growth. The second view maintains we are part of nature, not masters of it, and that we have developed an arrogant attitude toward nature, believing we have the right to do as we wish regardless of the consequences. The result of this view is a belief in the interconnectedness of all life, thus all life has rights.
This work argues that the "dominant" worldview shaped the policies of the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). Consistent with this worldview, the USFS management. paradigm was to provide the greatest return, a commodity-driven focus. However, when public values changed towards a more ecocentric view, the USFS should have reevaluated its method of doing business. Instead, it remained entrenched in its management objective- timber production.
After the courts enjoined the USFS against cutting in the Pacific Northwest, aftet struggling with confrontational environmentalists and increased activism within the agency, the USFS attempted to re-write its management paradigm. However even though the policy sounds eco-friendly, the USFS is still mandated by Congress, and forced by appropriations approved by Congress, to cut trees. Different ideologies are accommodated only when they do not conflict with economics. Thus, in spite of changing values, it is still business as usual.
Bennett, Cathy. (2003). The U.S. Forest Service : business as usual : a thesis .... University of the Pacific, Thesis - Pacific Access Restricted. https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/583
To access this thesis/dissertation you must have a valid pacific.edu email address and log-in to Scholarly Commons.Find in PacificSearch
If you are the author and would like to grant permission to make your work openly accessible, please email