After the U.S. Forest Service introduced a proposal aiming to ensure a steady timber supply from Montana’s national forests, questions arose about the plan’s applicability to modern forest management. The proposal, centered on the Tri-Forest Federal Sustained Yield Unit, aims to provide 35 million board feet of timber annually to local businesses from the Helena-Lewis and Clark, Beaverhead-Deerlodge, and Custer Gallatin forests. The goal is to bolster Montana’s lumber industry, especially after sawmill closures demonstrated its vulnerabilities.
The reception at a recent Helena hearing was mixed. Some supported the plan with reservations, doubting the Forest Service’s ability to achieve its goals. Opponents argued logging should not overshadow other forest functions like wildlife support and recreation. Others questioned the use of an outdated law to support Montana’s logging sector.
The Sustained Yield Forest Management Act of 1944 was designed to supply communities near national forests with lumber while discouraging unsustainable logging practices. The current proposal encompasses 925,000 acres, designated as “timber emphasis land,” and aims to sustain local businesses, including mills and fencing companies.
Chelsea Pennick from the University of Idaho highlights shortcomings in the sustained yield framework, pointing out the monopoly effect and reduced competition. Concerns also exist regarding potential influence from private companies over forest management.
HOW DOES A SUSTAINED YIELD UNIT DIFFER FROM STANDARD TIMBER SALES?
The new proposal won’t increase timber volume significantly but changes who can bid and where the wood is processed, according to industry and Forest Service sources. The plan uses areas already designated for timber production and won’t authorize logging in protected areas. Chiara Cipriano from the Helena-Lewis and Clark National Forest notes that the unit’s output currently aligns with existing levels.
Nick Horn from Sun Mountain Lumber emphasized the need for increased agency staffing and assurances against litigation and wildfire disruptions to maintain supply stability. “We’ll see when the final draft comes out,” he stated.
WILL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS CHANGE?
The Forest Service plans to adhere to federal environmental laws, including the ESA and NEPA, which have previously halted logging projects due to concerns over wildlife habitats. The proposal’s application in relation to these laws remains unspecified.
ENVIRONMENTALISTS’ REACTIONS
Environmental groups express cautious optimism and concern. Hilary Eisen of Wild Montana believes changes could prioritize timber over other forest goals. Michael Garrity from Alliance for the Wild Rockies anticipates significant environmental impacts and calls for a comprehensive review. Clint Nagel from Gallatin Wildlife Association worries about potential NEPA subversions and the prioritization of logging over other forest benefits.
WHAT’S NEXT?
Cipriano notes that the proposal is not enforceable as a directive but signifies a commitment to sustainable timber supply. The Forest Service anticipates deciding in the coming months. If approved, the unit would be active for 10 years, with the option for reevaluation or reauthorization.
—
Read More Montana News
