U.S. officials would allow increased logging on federal lands across the Pacific Northwest in the name of fighting wildfires and boosting rural economies under proposed changes to a sweeping forest management plan that’s been in place for three decades.
The U.S. Forest Service proposal, released Friday, would overhaul the Northwest Forest Plan that governs about 38,000 square miles (99,000 square kilometers) in Oregon, Washington and California.
The plan was adopted in 1994 under President Bill Clinton amid pressure to curb destructive logging practices that resulted in widespread clearcuts and destroyed habitat used by spotted owls. Timber harvests dropped dramatically in subsequent years, spurring political backlash.
But federal officials now say worsening wildfires due to climate change mean forests must be more actively managed to increase their resiliency. Increased logging also would provide a more predictable supply of trees for timber companies, officials said, helping rural economies that have suffered after lumber mills shut down and forestry jobs disappeared.
This is a very complicated issue. It’s absolutely true that there has been decades to centuries of forest mismanagement in the western US, which, combined with extreme heat and drought from climate change, has led to increased wildfire severity.
Logging potentially could help manage the forest in a better way, but only if it’s done correctly. Unfortunately, I have little faith this will be done. The thinning that’s needed should be focused on smaller trees and shrubs while leaving larger trees to grow—large, well spaced trees are actually extremely fire resistant. It’s usually dense stands of smaller trees that create intense wildfires.
The issue arises in that these smaller fuels are not particularly valuable to harvest, and the larger trees are where the money is. For-profit companies will always lobby for taking more larger trees which can actually make things worse by opening space for smaller plants to grow.
So overall the devil is in the details here. Especially as the forest service shifts to a more pro-industry leadership under Trump I doubt they will too careful to follow the science over profits.