This case asks you to write two memos, each to a different audience. To solve this case, you must think carefully about what information is most relevant to each audience.
The Case: Montana Department of Wildlife Memos.
As a senior forester for the Spring Creek State Park in Montana, one of your jobs is to assess, on a yearly basis, the success of the overall management strategies of the Montana Department of Wildlife (MDW). MDW requests such yearly reports from all of its senior foresters in an effort to determine whether or not it is doing a good job meeting its goals, which include:
MDW will use the information you provide to assess their overall management plan. Additionally, they may use your memo to make some changes in their methods of managing Spring Creek State Park. Your memo will be read by a team of three management foresters at MDW who will use the recommendations you have made to decide what, if any, changes should be made in their management strategies.
In preparation for writing this memo to MDW, you spent a week taking notes and recording your various observations as they pertain to the management goals listed above. Based on these notes and observations, you have arrived at several recommendations, which are reflected in the "Notes for MDW memo" below.
The Task
Part I: Using the "Notes for MDW memo" below, perform the following activities:
Part II: It is now one month after you have submitted your memo to MDW, and you have just learned that your recommendations were well received and that most of them have been approved by your three readers. However, there is a slight problem. Various groups have caught wind of the recommended changes and are upset. Environmentalists in Montana, especially a group called "Forests First," are worried about rumors they've heard that MDW will be "lightening up" restrictions on timber harvesting. Timber companies and loggers, on the other hand, are upset because they have heard that new environmental protection plans might restrict their ability to harvest large tracts of forest.
With this in mind, MDW has asked you to explain and justify the recommendations you made in your memo. This time, though, you will be writing not to MDW, but rather to the general public in an effort to explain the reasoning behind the recommendations you have made. To this end, DMW has asked you to write a letter to the local paper, The Montanian, in an effort to explain the new management strategy changes. Perform the same steps as in Part 1, this time with the general public (of which the environmentalists and the logging companies are members) as your audience.
Documents/Information/Samples
Notes for Montana Department of Wildlife Memo
Reforestation efforts along sector nine of Spring Creek seem to be failing. Spruce Pines along west bank below average in size and show signs of Herman's fungus disease. Also, yellowed needles near tree tops indicate acid rain damage. Recommend uprooting existing saplings (roughly 35) and replacing with Blue Fur Pines, which are hardier and, though not as attractive to timber harvesters because of softer wood, will grow more quickly and help ease erosion along west bank of Spring Creek.
Current cutting program for sector three (the heart of Spring Creek State Park's forest) could be expanded to include Black Pines and Sugar Maples. Right now, dense canopy cover is blocking rejuvenatory undergrowth. As a result, certain animals (gray squirrel in particular) forced to extend eating territory into northern sectors, depleting berry supply for at least seven bird species. Recommend allowing timber companies to begin selective harvesting in sector three.
Current cutting program for sector seven (Lisa's Cavern) resulting in rapid deforestation of Black Pines. Primary cause seems to be run-off from east bank, where tree population is only 22% of what it was in 1988. As a result, root system exposed on nearly half of trees, stunting growth. Recommend issuing two-year moratorium on all harvesting to monitor situation.
The current staff of the Fire Prevention Unit (FPU) has been cut in half over the past ten years due to budget cuts to MDW at the state level. Although the reduced FPU has performed well in containing and extinguishing small fires over the past few years, the FPU has not yet been forced to manage larger fires, such as the 1993 California fires. With two years of record low rainfall, the chances of a major fire or fires are greater now than during the time when the FPU was reduced in size. Recommend increasing the size of the FPU by 20% over a two-year period. This translates into hiring approximately four new employees. With the California fires providing context, a good case could be made to State government for increased revenues for this expansion.