Most Oregonians support a balanced approach to federal forest management, and most of us recognize the economic and climate benefits of harvesting and processing local timber.  There’s broad consensus that science-based management can make our forests more resilient, protect wildlife, and clean our drinking water. But, are federal lands managed in a balanced, sustainable way?   

The Forest Service is the largest forest landowner in Oregon and by law manages for multiple uses and is guided by a public process with very strong environmental laws. Federal lands are broken into “land use allocations” with distinct management objectives to address their multiple use mandate.  Unfortunately, the unbalanced proportion of these objectives on the landscape doesn’t allow healthy forests to flourish.

Nearly 85% of federal land in western Oregon and Washington and northwestern California is reserved from timber management objectives in the Northwest Forest Plan and set aside for the northern spotted owl in late-successional reserves (30%) and recreation in congressionally designated wilderness (30%).  In wilderness, all forms of management are explicitly banned by law and limited management occurs in the other reserve areas.  

By contrast, only about 15% of these lands are designated for sustained-yield timber management.  Even in these timber specific areas, the Forest Service has often marginalized the importance of managing for a sustainable supply, categorizing the timber as a “by-product”.  

According to the Synthesis of Science to Inform Land Management Within the Northwest Forest Plan Area, “All seral stages contribute to native forest biodiversity, wildfire regimes, and resilience to wildfires and climatic changes. […] Thus, conservation of native forest biodiversity is more than managing for a single type of old growth or a single successional stage.”