The first part of the paper reproduces the text that was intended to be published in a Lithuanian professional forestry journal. It first concisely reviews State forestry administrations in the countries of the Baltic Sea region, judging their adherence to the traditional model of bureaucracy versus the model of new public administration. Then it describes the Lithuanian approach in greater detail, providing criticism of inefficiencies caused by an overly bureaucratic administration. Attempts to publish the text led to the closure of the journal. Reflecting on this media turmoil, the second part of the paper discusses the role of a forest scientist. Should s/he be a neutral expert expedient to existing institutional structures, or rather seek to catalyze the desired policy processes? Is it worth to engage in “popular discourses” or better to stick solely to the standard production of peer review articles?