State vs. Federal Forest Land Management
States Achieve Maximum Value from Active Forest Management

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 10, 2013 - Tomorrow, the Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation will hold a legislative hearing on the Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act. This bill would renew the federal government’s commitment to manage forest resources for the benefit of rural schools and counties by requiring active forest management.

This proposal follows an oversight hearing the Subcommittee held in February that examined why states are able to do a much better job of actively managing forest lands compared to the federal government and provided lessons for better management of federal forests. For example, Washington state produces 30 times more volume per acre than the U.S. Forest Service and produces 1283 times more revenue per acre, even though the U.S. Forest Service has 20 times the acreage in forest lands than the state of Washington.

Timber Harvests on Washington State Forest Lands vs Federal Forest Lands

Profitability of Washington State Forest Land vs Federal Forest Land

Washington is not the only state where state forest management is more productive and profitable. Montana produces 19 times more volume per acre than U.S. Forest Service and makes 178 times more revenue per acre. Idaho produces 52 times more volume per acre than the U.S. Forest Service and makes 917 times more revenue per acre.

###


Contact: Committee Press Office 202-226-9019

CONNECT