Getting the Cut Out
How the Forest Service Is Cutting Forest Protections to Boost Logging in the Pacific Northwest
Introduction
For 30 years, the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) has been slowly but steadily reversing the damage caused by extensive and reckless clearcutting that eliminated the vast old-growth forests that once blanketed the Pacific Northwest. The NWFP recognized the need to protect and restore mature and old-growth forests for species like the Northern Spotted Owl who depend on these forests for their survival. These protections also helped restore watersheds and improve water quality, benefiting aquatic species and drinking water supplies.
In February 2023, the Chief of the U.S. Forest Service ordered a 33% increase in the agency's "timber target," which is the amount of trees that staff are pressured and expected to sell for logging each year. The Forest Service has identified the Pacific Northwest as one of the regions the agency is planning to "have the greatest increase in total timber volume sold" in order to meet the increased timber target and that it is pursuing "updating land management plans" like the Northwest Forest Plan to do just that.
In November 2024, the Forest Service announced its proposal to amend the NWFP for the first time since it was approved thirty years ago. If approved in its current form, the proposed amendment would substantially weaken existing protections for mature and old-growth forests at the same time the agency is in the process of increasing logging on our National Forests.
Sign our petition to maintain existing projections for wildlife and watersheds in the NWFP! Keep reading to see how how we got here.
For much of its history, the U.S. Forest Service primarily managed national forests, including those in the Pacific Northwest, for logging, with little concern about how that logging affected terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems.
Mt. Bailey Roadless Area, Umpqua National Forest (2000).
By the 1980s, the Pacific Northwest had become the poster child for rampant and short-sighted clearcutting of old-growth forests.
BLM Eugene District (1989).
The liquidation of old-growth forests accelerated throughout the 1980s and the impacts to wildlife and watersheds became impossible to ignore:
"As a result of over a century of logging and fire control, the forests of the Pacific Northwest presently consist of a highly fragmented mosaic of recent clearcuts, thinned stands and young plantations interspersed with uncut natural stands." (FEMAT Report, 1993).
Willamette National Forest (1990).
The natural stands that remained included "1,000-year-old or older forests of large trees." (FEMAT Report, 1993).
Olympic National Forest.
By approving such extensive logging of old-growth forests in the Pacific Northwest, the Forest Service was violating its mandate under the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) to maintain "viable populations" of species like the Northern Spotted Owl who rely on these forests for their survival.
Because of this (as well as extensive old-growth clearcutting on non-federal lands), in 1990 the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service listed the Northern Spotted Owl as a "threatened" species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
Shortly thereafter, federal court decisions found that the Forest Service was in fact failing to maintain "viable populations" of the Northern Spotted Owl.
This dramatically curtailed the Forest Service’s ability to continue liquidating what little old-growth was left in the Pacific Northwest.
Northwest Forest Conference
In 1993, President Clinton convened the Northwest Forest Conference in Portland, OR.
After the conference, an interagency group called the Federal Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEMAT) was created to "produce a plan" recognizing the need to protect and restore old-growth forest ecosystems for species like the Northern Spotted Owl and Marbled Murrelet that depend on them for their survival.
A year later, the Northwest Forest Plan was approved.
Northwest Forest Plan (1994)
Where logging interests had dominated management of Pacific Northwest forests prior to 1994, the NWFP put species and habitat protection on equal footing.
In attempting to balance the interests of the timber industry with the need to protect and restore old-growth forest habitat, the NWFP created various land use allocations (LUAs) throughout the planning area.
Two of these LUAs are of particular importance to the original NWFP and the current proposed amendment:
- Late-Successional Reserves
- Matrix lands.
Late Successional Reserves
- Late-Successional Reserves (LSRs) are intended to "protect and enhance conditions of late-successional and old-growth forest ecosystems, which serve as habitat for late-successional and old-growth related species including the northern spotted owl."
- Designed to "maintain a functional, interacting, late-successional and old-growth forest ecosystem" throughout the NWFP area.
- In the NWFP area, 5.9 million acres of national forest land are designated as LSRs.
Late Successional Reserves
West of the Cascades
- In general, no logging is supposed to occur in stands over 80 years old (though there are exceptions).
- For stands up to 80 years old, logging is allowed but only "to benefit the creation and maintenance of late-successional forest conditions."
Late Successional Reserves
East of the Cascades and Klamath Province
- Like LSRs on the west side of the Cascades, logging in these LSRs is supposed to "focus on younger stands" (i.e., up to 80 years old).
- However, additional guidelines allow logging these areas under the guise of reducing the threat of wildfire.
Matrix
- Matrix lands were designated as the areas where most logging would occur.
- Nominal protections for older forests encouraged but not required.
- In the NWFP area, 3.8 million acres of national forest land are designated as Matrix lands.
How Effective Has the NWFP Been Since 1994?
Over the last 30 years, the NWFP put a stop to the rapid loss of old-growth forests and has begun to reverse the damage to wildlife habitat and watersheds caused by decades of reckless clearcutting.
And by allowing these forests to recover, they are capturing and storing vast amounts of carbon, a "nature-based solution" for combating the climate crisis.
Willamette National Forest (1990 vs. 2020)
Swiping to the right shows how this part of the Willamette National Forest south of Oakridge looked like in 1990, the year the Northern Spotted Owl was listed as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act. The landscape is heavily fragmented by extensive clearcutting. After the NWFP went into effect in 1994, protections for the Northern Spotted Owl's habitat led to changes in how the Forest Service could manage these lands. Swiping to the left shows how this same area looked in 2020 after 25 years of NWFP protections. (Google Earth).
But in recent years, Forest Service staff has been under pressure to dramatically increase the amount of logging on National Forest lands, particularly in the Pacific Northwest.
And protections that are built into the NWFP for mature and old-growth forest habitat are now seen as barriers to that planned increase.
Timber Targets Report
Timber Targets Report
In April 2022, the Forest Service issued a report detailing how it could increase logging on National Forest lands.
The Forest Service stated that it was already selling over 3 billion board feet (BBF) of trees annually, "higher than any period in the previous few decades."
The Forest Service also explained how it was "substantially increasing" the use of new legal authorities passed by Congress to increase logging on National Forests.
How the Forest Service Plans to Increase Logging
In order to "achieve and sustain" higher logging levels, the Forest Service stated that a "reallocation of agency support staff . . . must [ ] be prioritized to support this effort."
How the Forest Service Plans to Increase Logging
Next, the Forest Service explained that three geographic regions "should have the greatest increase in total timber volume sold":
- Pacific Northwest (Region 6)
- Eastern (Region 9)
- Southern (Region 8)
The Forest Service stressed the need for "updating land management plans" like the Northwest Forest Plan in order to facilitate more logging.
In updating those land management plans, the Forest Service openly called for "streamlining the process for timber sales."
Barriers to Increasing Logging
The Forest Service then identified what it considered to be "barriers" to its ability to increase and sustain higher logging levels. In discussing these "barriers," the Forest Service essentially claimed the following actions would lead to increased logging:
- More staffing and funding (including for road maintenance)
- "Legislative fixes" to make it harder to litigate timber sales
- Removal of current old-growth protections in Alaska
Timber Targets FOIA
FOIA and Find Out
In order to determine how increasing and sustaining higher logging levels would impact the Pacific Northwest Region, WildEarth Guardians filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for all documents related to "timber targets" since 2017.
In response, we received over 13,000 pages:
- 7,127 pages were released in full
- 7 pages were partially redacted
- 5,916 pages were fully redacted...
...like this one.
Note: due to the Trump administration's unprecedented attack on federal employees at the time this StoryMap is being published, on the pages that follow WildEarth Guardians decided to include additional redactions of Forest Service staff names and contact information unless they were in leadership positions.
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
In the documents that we could read, one of the first things we noticed is that Forest Service staff is under constant pressure to meet timber targets assigned by the Forest Service Chief, who at the time was Tony Tooke.
In these meeting notes from June 2017, the Regional Leadership Team for the Pacific Northwest Region explained that there is "clear direction and intention" from the Chief's Office to "increase our restoration activities" (i.e., logging) with the intent to "increase acres treated and volume output as a consequence."
The notes indicate that the national timber volume target would increase to 4 billion board feet (BBF) by FY20, though it is not clear that a formal decision was made on that. However, what is clear is that the Forest Service did everything it could to meet that target.
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
Remarkably, the Regional Office explained that its contribution to reaching the national 4 BBF timber target could only be accomplished by "doing business differently."
What does "doing business differently" look like?
According to the Forest Service, it means taking a "hard look at how we are doing NEPA."
The Regional Office openly asked "are we doing more [environmental] analysis than is necessary; can we take more risk in some areas"?
The message is clear: taking "more risk" means doing less environmental analysis on proposed logging projects.
There's a long history in the Pacific Northwest of what taking "more risk" to approve more logging looks like and it wasn't good for wildlife or watersheds.
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
But perhaps it isn't surprising that "more risk" is taken to approve more logging when your job depends on it.
In this December 2017 letter, the Regional Forester for the Pacific Northwest Region told Forest Supervisors that it is "critical" that they "take advantage of all the tools available to us" to approve logging projects, including "simpler" environmental analyses and a variety of other "tools" intended to streamline the process for approving timber sales.
The Regional Forester then bluntly explained that their jobs depended on how efficiently they approved timber sales:
"Just as use of these types of tools are part of my performance standards, they will also be part of your performance standards."
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
In this May 2018 email, the head of the Threatened and Endangered Species Program for Region 6 said they were "very concerned" for staff on the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest "not meeting this year's timber target" because of habitat protections for threatened and endangered species.
"I feel horrible for that."
This underscores the perverse nature of having timber targets in the first place. Forest Service staff are under relentless pressure throughout the year to meet these targets. And it raises significant concerns when the person in charge of protecting threatened and endangered species in the Regional Office is seemingly more concerned about whether protections for those species are precluding a forest from meeting its timber target.
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
The pressure to increase logging and timber volumes on National Forest lands at the expense of wildlife and watersheds was made clear in this February 2, 2023 spreadsheet on timber target assignments.
In column C, you can see that the initial FY23 timber target for the Siuslaw National Forest was 40 million board feet (MMBF). In column F, however, it says the Siuslaw National Forest has 5 MMBF in "additional capability" for a final FY23 timber target of 45 MMBF (Column G).
In responding to this push for "additional capability" (i.e., selling more trees for logging), someone in the Regional Office documented that there had been internal "complaints about sacrificing aquatics work for additional 5 mmbf" in timber volume (Column I).
(Note that although the spreadsheet says "scraficing auatics," it is pretty clear the author meant "sacrificing aquatics").
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
One day after the Regional Office documented internal complaints about the Siuslaw National Forest "sacrificing aquatics" to sell more trees for logging, the Forest Service Chief at the time, Randy Moore, again told the agency to "increase to a 4 billion board foot program annually starting with an incremental increase in FY23 to 3.45 billion board feet[.]"
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
In the Pacific Northwest Region (Region 6), the Forest Service was directed to increase timber targets to 575 million board feet (MMBF) in FY23 and 653 MMBF in FY24.
That means that the Pacific Northwest Region's portion of the national timber target is increasing from 16.6% in FY23 to 18.1% in FY24.
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
The same month the Forest Service Chief increased the national timber target, Region 6 drafted an internal statement explaining a new strategy called the "3+1 Model" that was intended to "expedite the pace and scale" of logging.
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
Region 6 staff then explained how the 3+1 Model would work to "produce a predictable and consistent amount of timber":
- The "3" refers to having three minimum years of "shelf stock," meaning enough logging projects that are far enough along in the environmental review process to likely provide 3-years worth of timber sales to meet target levels.
- The "1" refers to one year of "sale-prep shelf stock," meaning enough logging projects that are ready to be cut to provide enough timber volume each year to meet target levels.
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
The Forest Service then declared that:
"all hands are on deck to do what is needed to move the machine forward."
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
A couple months later, Region 6 leadership met with the Federal Timber Purchasers Committee (FTPC), a timber industry trade group that lobbies for increased logging on National Forests.
In discussing the "3+1 strategy," Region 6 leadership told the timber industry that it "is designed to produce timber volume throughout the year" and that they are "meeting frequently with individual forests to discuss progress and forest needs in order to meet 3+1."
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
Discussing the 3+1 Strategy, the Forest Service stressed that it is "seeking efficiencies with NEPA documents," including use of "streamlining authorities like CE's and Emergency Authorizations."
In other words, the Forest Service told the timber industry that it is doing everything it can to approve timber sales as quick as possible with as little environmental review and public participation as possible.
The Forest Service then excitedly stated:
We are looking for feedback from industry!
Importantly, the Forest Service never asked the public for its feedback on the "3+1 Strategy" for increasing logging in the Pacific Northwest.
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
Right after telling the timber industry that it was going to "streamline" the process for reviewing the environmental impacts of timber sales, Region 6 leadership then told the timber industry that it was "going to be as aggressive as possible" in meeting the increased timber targets.
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
In a May 2023 presentation, the Federal Forest Resource Coalition (FFRC), a timber industry trade group, noted the impact it has had on getting "16 New Authorities for expedited management on the National Forests."
This includes "expedited NEPA" meaning more logging is approved with less environmental review and less public comment.
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
However, FFRC complained that the Forest Service's use of these expedited authorities was "inadequate" because the agency "only approved 8 fuel breaks using new authority, with only 5 more in the works."
FFRC also complained that it took the Forest Service over 16 months to issue guidance on "Emergency Actions" authority, which are additional ways to approve more logging with limited environmental review or public comment.
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
FFRC stated the Forest Service (and BLM) are not being "aggressive enough" in using these "expedited authorities."
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
One month later, in June 2023, the Regional Office held an internal meeting to discuss progress on meeting that year's timber target.
The Regional Office stated that since the rollout of the 3+1 Strategy, the agency has been able to use "a variety of different avenues to increase the pace and scale" of logging in Oregon and Washington.
The Regional Office holds regular meetings with individual forests "to review and trouble shoot any challenges that they may be experiencing accomplishing their assigned unit timber volume targets."
The Regional Office also revealed that it meets at least twice a year to share "critical information" with the timber industry regarding "current timber volume attainment."
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
Also in June 2023, the Regional Office held an internal "timber target check-in" meeting to discuss progress on attaining that year's timber target. The Regional Office noted the steady increase in its timber target assigned by the Forest Service Chief and the need to attain those targets.
For example, Regional Office leadership explained that "we came up short last year and it set a bad precedent that R6 is not a good investment." In fact, because Region 6 missed its target the previous year, its funding was "reduced and sent to R8 & 9."
The message is clear - if you don't meet your assigned timber target, your region is punished by leadership in Washington D.C.
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
To meet these timber targets, the Regional Office has asked its staff to do more with less, which means environmental review goes by the wayside.
In particular, Regional Office leadership explained that other than the funding provided by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), there would be "no new money coming" to meet higher timber targets.
Moreover, leadership warned staff "don't just depend on FTEs [full-time employees]" to meet higher timber targets. Rather, they should "utilize the tools!" they already have.
As noted above, those tools include the "expedited authorities" that the timber industry lobbied for to streamline the Forest Service's process for approving timber sales as quickly as possible and with as little public comment as possible.
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
At the end of the June 2023 meeting, Regional Office leadership complained that their current timber volume "numbers are dismal" and that its staff had "a lot of ground to make up!" by the end of the fiscal year.
Regional Office leadership then pointedly asked its staff:
- What's your number? (i.e., how close is your forest to hitting its timber target?)
- Do you have any additional volume to produce?
- Any kind of major obstacles?
Pressure to Meet Timber Targets
This relentless push to approve new logging projects in order to meet increasing timber targets is further illustrated in this table, which shows:
- The assigned timber target for each forest in Region 6 for FY24,
- The "accomplishment" toward meeting that target though Q1 in FY24, and
- How much more logging the forest must approve in order to meet its assigned target for FY24.
The constant pressure for Forest Service staff to meet or exceed timber targets while simultaneously reducing the time for environmental reviews and public comment raises significant concerns about whether corners are being cut in order to keep "moving the machine forward."
Praise for Getting the Cut Out
In addition to the constant pressure to meet timber targets, Forest Service staff are celebrated when they do meet them.
Here, you can see a message from September 2017 congratulating a Forest Service employees at "the first forest to meet their FY17 target!!!"
The fact that forests are singled out for notification that they are the "first" to meet their annual timber target indicates an agency culture where timber production not only dominates but is treated like a competition between different national forests.
Praise for Getting the Cut Out
This "competition-like" atmosphere is made clear in a series of emails in February 2018 between the Regional Timber Program Manager and the Forest Silviculturist for the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest.
Here, the Forest Silviculturist enthusiastically announced that because of their "break-neck pace" of auctioning off national forests, the Okanogan-Wenatchee NF led Region 6 in volume sold in the first quarter of 2018, a "once in a lifetime event." The Regional Timber Program Manager responded "Oh boy! Nothing but good news from you!"
The rivalry expressed in these emails ("take that Colville") underscores an agency culture where forests are not seen as dynamic ecosystems but simply a resource to be utilized for career advancement.
Praise for Getting the Cut Out
In this email, Forest Service staff were congratulated for selling enough trees on the Siuslaw National Forest to meet their timber target for the year.
The email acknowledges the stress that Forest Service staff are under further illustrates the degree to which timber targets are the dominant factor for staff performance standards:
- "It is a big deal that these two sales sold this week."
- "we rose to the occasion!"
- "it's pretty awesome."
- "Please take a moment and a few deep breaths and be appreciated."
Praise for Getting the Cut Out
In 2019, a Forest Service presentation proudly proclaimed:
"Congratulations R6! More timber offered and sold in twenty years."
NWFP Habitat Protections Are Seen as an Impediment to Logging
In the years leading up to the Forest Service's proposed amendment to the NWFP, the agency and timber industry expressed concerns that habitat protections built into the NWFP were preventing the Forest Service from meeting timber targets.
In this 2018 email discussing the Mission Restoration Project on the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest, the Forest Silviculturist complained that "the LSR stuff is what is keeping us from ever developing any kind of shelf stock and making us live hand-to-mouth every year."
In other words, according to the Forest Silviculturist, habitat protections in the NWFP that restrict logging in LSRs make it difficult for the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest to meet annual timber targets.
NWFP Habitat Protections Are Seen as an Impediment to Logging
In April 2018, the Associated Oregon Loggers (AOL) wrote to Forest Service leadership in the Regional Office to discuss "Regional Improvement Initiatives in Oregon."
NWFP Habitat Protections Are Seen as an Impediment to Logging
The AOL letter criticizes the Forest Service because it believes the agency has "wandered toward ecological preeminence since 1990."
In other words, prioritizing habitat protections for wildlife and watersheds are seen as a barrier to logging...
NWFP Habitat Protections Are Seen as an Impediment to Logging
...which is precisely what AOL said.
Indeed, according to AOL, current "environment values" are trammeling the timber industry's economic interests.
Instead, AOL urged the Forest Service to "authorize and reward effective tradeoffs" between environmental values and economic interests.
NWFP Habitat Protections Are Seen as an Impediment to Logging
The timber industry's position is so warped that it portrays public participation that is critical of its desire to log National Forests as "blackmail."
According to the timber industry, the Forest Service should "reduce" opportunities for the public to file legal "objections & litigation" so that "more land management" (i.e., logging) can move foward.
NWFP Habitat Protections Are Seen as an Impediment to Logging
And one of the "barriers" AOL told the Forest Service to address in order to authorize more logging is the "outdated" NWFP.
The timber industry falsely claimed that its economic interests are not sufficiently "integrated" into existing plans like the NWFP and that these plans should have "fewer" standards and guidelines that make it easier to approve logging projects.
NWFP Habitat Protections Are Seen as an Impediment to Logging
In April 2023, just a couple months after the Forest Service Chief ordered an increase in the national timber target to 4 BBF per year, agency staff prepared a briefing paper for former Rep. Derek Kilmer (WA-6th) to discuss timber targets on the Olympic National Forest.
Notably, the Forest Service told Rep. Kilmer that:
"The availability of forest stands that can be thinned is currently increasing but will drop below current levels after 2040 and continue to decline under current Northwest Forest Plan restrictions."
In other words, the Forest Service explained to Rep. Kilmer that if "current Northwest Forest Plan restrictions" on logging remained in place after 2040, it would be harder "to ensure the Olympic National Forest rebuilds its timber program more in alignment with historic production levels."
Getting "Creative"
In May 2023, the Deputy Chief of the National Forest System, Chris French, attended a meeting with the timber industry in Denver and discussed how increased federal funding through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act benefited the Forest Service's timber program.
In particular, Deputy Chief French explained that although "lots of the money came in the form of fuels reduction. . . we have been creative in doing fuels reduction that produces volume and forest products."
Despite the Deputy Chief's subsequent claim that "they need to have science driving our decisions," getting "creative" with fuels reduction projects in order to increase logging levels is an economic-driven decision, not a science-driven one.
More Logging, Less Environmental Analysis
One month before the Forest Service announced its intent to amend the NWFP, Region 6 leadership participated in a meeting with the timber industry to discuss increasing timber targets and how they will be met.
Region 6 leadership "encouraged" its staff to use new legal authorities "as much as possible in order to expedite NEPA decisions and build timber sale shelf stock."
Translation? Do everything you can to approve more logging as quickly as possible with as little environmental analysis and public participation as possible.
Collusion with the Timber Industry to Increase Logging
In January 2024, one month after the Forest Service announced its intent to amend the NWFP, the agency met with the Oregon Logging Conference and told the timber industry they are "an indispensable mechanism" for logging National Forest lands and the Forest Service is finding ways to "ensure we're hearing industry's concerns and finding ways to improve the ways we do business."
Collusion with the Timber Industry to Increase Logging
Regional Office leadership then invited the timber industry to "comment on our planning documents" and "if you support the activities being proposed, provide your positive comments."
"Please communicate often with us . . . We are in this together and benefit from the input you give us."
NWFP Amendment
The Times They Area A-Changin'
After intense lobbying by the timber industry, and just months after the Forest Service Chief ordered an increase in the national timber target (with a specific focus on the Pacific Northwest), the agency announced its intent to amend the NWFP.
Proposed Changes to the 1994 NWFP
In November 2024, the Forest Service published a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for its propose amendment to the NWFP.
The Forest Service pointedly states that the current NWFP that has been in place since 1994:
"has largely not achieved its timber production goals."
Proposed Changes to the 1994 NWFP
As a result, the Forest Service states that its proposed amendment to the NWFP:
"is broadly designed to improve the consistency and reliability of timber harvest and forest restoration and resiliency projects" (i.e., logging).
Proposed Changes to the 1994 NWFP
Late-Successional Reserves
The Forest Service is proposing to increase the minimum stand-age for logging in "moist" LSRs from 80 years-old to 120 years-old.
This proposed change alone would open an additional 824,000 acres of mature forests to logging.
Late-Successional Reserves Between 80-120 years old.
These maps depict over 1.2 million acres of LSRs in the 80-120 year-old age class throughout the NWFP area (30m x 30m pixels). Approximately two-thirds (824,000 acres) are classified by USFS as "moist" LSRs while the remaining one-third (400,000 acres) are classified as "dry" LSRs. (USFS, Esri).
Proposed Changes to the 1994 NWFP
Late-Successional Reserves
In addition to opening an additional 824,000 acres to logging, the Forest Service would allow logging in all "moist" LSRs in order to "maintain or restore habitat" for "species that depend upon younger stands."
This would eviscerate the entire concept of LSRs, which were originally intended to provide large blocks of older forests for species like the Northern Spotted Owl.
Matrix
Proposed changes in Matrix lands would lead to the eventual elimination of remaining old-growth.
That's because the Forest Service has proposed to only protect old-growth using arbitrary "established by" dates rather than considering how old a forest stand or tree is.
For example, in many Matrix areas, if a stand of trees was not established by 1825, it will never be considered old-growth, not matter how old it becomes. That means the Forest Service can aggressively log areas up to 200 years old.
And, with natural disturbances like fire and wind, it will just be a matter of time before the small amount of remaining old-growth on Matrix lands is gone for good.
Forest Service Ignores Rampant Logging on Non-Federal Lands
The Forest Service is required to consider the cumulative impacts of logging on other non-federal lands like this clearcutting along Highway 26 on private timber industry land in the Oregon Coast Range.
Forest Service Ignores Rampant Logging on Non-Federal Lands
However, the Forest Service all but ignores these impacts in its environmental analysis for the proposed NWFP Amendment, suggesting instead that state laws are adequately protecting wildlife and fish habitat on non-federal lands.
Clearcutting in the Oregon Coast Range (1994 - 2020)
Swiping the right shows how these non-federal lands looked like in 1994 while swiping left shows how they looked like in 2020. (Google Earth).
Summary
As the slides above show:
- The Forest Service Chief has ordered an increase in the national timber target to 4 BBF per year, a 33% increase above the previous 5-year average.
- The Forest Service has specifically identified the Pacific Northwest as one of the regions that will be the focus for increased logging to meet that higher timber target.
- The Forest Service and the timber industry consider the current NWFP as a barrier to achieving higher timber targets because of its protections for mature and old-growth forest habitat.
- The Forest Service and the timber industry also want to reduce the amount of environmental analysis and public participation there is in timber sale projects.
- All of this puts Forest Service staff under constant pressure to meet or exceed timber targets in order to maintain good job performance reviews.
This is not how our National Forests should be managed.
What Comes Next?
Amending the NWFP to ease restrictions on logging National Forests in the Pacific Northwest could be just the beginning.
"Fix Our Forests Act"
The so-called "Fix Our Forests Act" is cynical bill being pushed in the aftermath of devastating urban fires that originated on private lands in the Los Angeles area in early 2025.
Those fires had nothing to do with federal land management but are now being used to support this legislation that would more than triple the acres that can be logged on federal lands without detailed environmental review or public input.
Immediate Expansion of American Timber Production Executive Order
In addition, President Trump recently issued an executive order calling for the "immediate expansion of American timber production" on federal lands. The executive order sets firm deadlines in 2025 for federal land management and wildlife agencies to:
- Develop guidance and submit legislative proposals to facilitate more logging on federal lands.
- Expedite Endangered Species Act review of Forest Service and BLM timber sales so logging can be approved more rapidly.
- Develop annual timber targets (likely to be even higher than they already are).
Immediate Expansion of American Timber Production Executive Order
How would implementing this executive order look like on the ground?
The last time Trump was in office, the Forest Service produced this graph in 2018 showing projections to increase the national timber target to at least 5 BBF. That is 25% higher than the current 4 BBF target.
And the Forest Service expected that nearly 1 BBF of that total would come from logging in the Pacific Northwest Region.
These were substantial projected increases in logging in 2018 so it is likely that there will be a similar push to increase logging to 5 BBF per year, if not higher.
Let's learn from history, not repeat it.
The Northwest Forest Plan has been largely successful in stopping the rampant loss of old-growth forests and beginning a longterm restoration process that can only be measured in centuries, not decades.
Just 30 years into this restoration process, however, the Forest Service is proposing to upend it.
The current proposed amendment to the NWFP would significantly weaken existing protections for old-growth forests and open the floodgates to more logging at precisely the same time the Forest Service is ratcheting up timber targets, with a specific focus on the Pacific Northwest.
And recent proposed legislation and executive orders threaten to increase those targets even more.
Speak Up!
- Drop its proposal to increase the age of young forests from 80 to 120 years old in LSRs.
- Drop its proposal to allow logging for the benefit of early seral species in LSRs.
- Drop its proposal to use arbitrary "established by" dates for defining old-growth on Matrix lands rather than stand age dates.
- Stop using arbitrary timber targets to pressure agency staff to increase logging on National Forests.Sign our petition to maintain existing projections for wildlife and watersheds in the NWFP!
For additional information from these FOIA documents about how the Forest Service is using the threat of wildfire to meet timber targets, check out this Columbia Insight article .
