For decades, forestry in Arizona has been paralyzed through inconsistent and constantly changing laws, rules, and policies of the federal government. For example, since 1982, National Forest planning has been governed by no less than 6 different proposed or enacted planning rules, many of which are inconsistent with one another. In this, my sabbatical seminar, I will discuss some potential ways to fix this problem. Since almost all of the forest land in Arizona is federally owned, federal forest policy dictates the success or failure of efforts to restore and sustain the health of Arizona’s forests. Using a single technical rule in the National Environmental Policy Act as an example, the mechanisms by which federal policies can lead to failure are discussed. 3 possible solutions to the current paralysis, using changes in federal rules, are presented. Given the difficulty of achieving such changes at the federal level, more radical solutions at the state level are also considered. Unresolved issues regarding the legal basis of federal control over Arizona’s forests are discussed, as well as the possibility of challenging federal control under the “equal footing doctrine”. In 2012, Arizona’s Proposition 120 took the first step towards challenging federal ownership of Arizona’s public lands. While the proposition failed, the effect of Prop 120 passing is considered. A system of Arizona laws and policies to replace federal law and policy is presented. Essential elements of a possible “Arizona Forest Management Act” are presented, which I argue would be a better framework for stewardship of Arizona’s forests. A financing scheme to pay for the management of the forests through an “Arizona Forest Pass” and other mechanisms is discussed.