Proposed NWFP Changes Move It in the Wrong Direction

The Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) could be better but has been somewhat beneficial as is. Unfortunately, it turns out that it could also be a lot worse. The National Forest Service is supporting changes to the plan, some of which are alarming. The NWFP covers 24 million acres of federal forests across western Washington, Oregon, and northern California. It was established in 1994 to create balance between logging activity and protection of old-growth forest ecosystems. It led to forest restoration, cleaner water, and watersheds; protected wildlife habitat, and has been one of our most useful tools for carbon capture and storage. The suggested amendments would remove many protections for mature and old-growth forests and emphasize logging over wildlife and habitat protections.

Currently, trees more than 80 years old are given some levels of protection from logging. Under the proposed amendments, trees between 80 and 120 years old would lose this protection. Allowing logging in “Late Successional Reserves” (LSRs) that are up to 120 years old would open up an additional 824,000 acres to logging. On the dry forest side, logging would be rapidly increased, targeting more than 964,000 acres in just 15 years. Proposed changes would double or even triple current logging levels. Moreover, instead of using stand age to determine protection (for example, trees less than 120 years old are on the chopping block), they will turn to using stand establishment dates (for example, stands established after 1905 are not protected). What this will mean on the ground is that these forest stands will never age into protection, and the recruitment of old-growth forest will be grossly inhibited.

The ability of mature and old-growth trees and forests to store large amounts of carbon is a significant natural climate solution. Under the new plan, much of this protection would be removed under the guise of “wildfire resiliency.” This doesn’t make much sense, since scientific research has demonstrated that mature forests are more fire-resistant than are younger, logged, or plantation-style forests.

The NWFP was always a compromise between logging and environmental protections, but the new amendments lean much more heavily toward allowable extraction. Another rationale for the increase in logging is economic security. Yet, in the US Forest Service’s own words, “Viewed in terms of total jobs supported, recreation visitation is the largest contributor to the regional economy, supporting an estimated 12,551 jobs, followed by agency operations (7,070 jobs), and forest products (5,091 jobs).” Yet the pitch for the amendments is based on allowing more logging to help local economies.

Not all of the amendment suggestions are bad. Some advocate increasing tribal involvement, which we heartily support. The importance of forest stand improvements is noted, as is the operations jobs that would be created. Many well-meaning words are in the release, but the reality of what the amendments will mean for our magnificent forests is worrisome.

The Forest Service needs to hear from us. It is accepting comments until March 17 at 8:59:59 PM (Pacific Standard Time). We will soon post talking points on our website and social media pages.

Submit comments here on the Forest Plan page.

Oregon Wild has posted an online petition, should you care to sign on.

It’s good to do so, but honestly, the more individual comments received, the better.