ONRI’s opposition to ODF’s Annual Operation's Plan 2027

To the Oregon Department of Forestry,

I am submitting this comment in strong opposition to the continued under-management of Oregon’s forests and the growing imbalance between wildfire destruction and active forest management. Oregon is at a tipping point—environmentally, economically, and fiscally—and current management levels are not meeting the moment. Our forests are not just landscapes; they are working lands that fund communities. On state forest lands, approximately two-thirds of timber revenue goes directly to counties and local taxing districts, including schools. On federal O&C lands, recent federal policy changes now direct 75% of timber revenue to counties—up from 50%—resulting in a 50% increase in revenue share. This change underscores how essential timber revenue is to keeping counties functioning. In fact, one Oregon county received nearly $2 million in timber payments in a single year, and local officials have publicly stated they are in “desperate straits,” cutting staff and even reducing jail operations due to lack of funding. Timber revenue is not optional—it is essential to the stability of rural communities, public safety, and education.

At the same time, Oregon is burning far more forest than it is actively managing. In recent years, the state has experienced between approximately 500,000 and 750,000 acres burned annually, with catastrophic years exceeding 1 million acres. Meanwhile, timber harvest typically affects only about 200,000 to 300,000 acres annually. This means Oregon is burning two to three times more forest each year than it is managing. That is not a sustainable model—it is a management failure. The financial consequences of this imbalance are equally alarming. Wildfire suppression costs have reached roughly $50 to $60 million in 2024 and over $40 million in 2025 after reimbursements, with state wildfire funds dropping to dangerously low levels. In major fire years, total costs escalate into the hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. The contrast is clear: wildfire is a cost, while timber harvest is a renewable source of revenue.

Oregon is increasingly replacing a revenue-generating system with a taxpayer-funded emergency response system.

This situation is the direct result of reduced active forest management over time. Since the late 1980s, federal timber harvest in Oregon has declined by nearly 90 percent. At the same time, forest density and fuel loads have increased, and fire severity has intensified. These trends are not coincidental—they are connected. Reduced management has contributed directly to larger, hotter, and more destructive wildfires. Yet current Oregon Department of Forestry plans do not reflect the urgency of this reality. The Fiscal Year 2027 Annual Operations Plans show limited harvest levels, entire units with no harvest planned, restrictions within Habitat Conservation Areas, and long delays between planning and implementation. This is not the scale of action required to address the problem. It is incremental action in the face of exponential risk.

When timber harvest is reduced, the financial burden does not disappear—it shifts to taxpayers. Counties lose revenue, schools lose stable funding, rural economies shrink, and taxpayers are forced to backfill the loss while also paying escalating wildfire suppression costs. Even the federal government has recognized this imbalance, which is why O&C revenue sharing was increased to 75 percent. If timber revenue did not matter, that policy change would not have been necessary. Compounding the issue, ODF acknowledges that timber harvest may not occur until one to three years after planning. These delays further postpone revenue, allow forest conditions to worsen, and increase wildfire risk. Oregon cannot afford to continue planning without timely implementation.

In addition to the current revenue being generated, there is also significant untapped potential. Analyses of O&C lands have indicated that increased, sustainable timber harvest levels could generate on the order of $100 million to $200 million annually for Oregon counties and local services. These lands were specifically designated to provide a sustained yield of timber revenue to support counties that cannot tax federal lands. Instead of realizing that potential, we are leaving critical funding on the table while simultaneously spending tens to hundreds of millions of dollars on wildfire suppression. That is not a resource limitation—it is a management choice.

Oregon must take a different approach. The state must increase timber harvest to sustainable, science-based levels, expand active forest management to reduce wildfire risk, restore reliable revenue streams for counties and schools, support family-wage jobs in rural communities, and reduce the delays between planning and action. These are not competing priorities—they are aligned solutions that support both environmental health and economic stability.

Oregon cannot continue down a path where we burn hundreds of thousands of acres each year while managing only a fraction of that land, and then ask taxpayers to cover the cost. Timber is a renewable resource that funds counties, schools, and communities. Wildfire is a liability that destroys them. The current imbalance is not sustainable—and it is not responsible.

Sincerely and with concern,

Jen Hamaker

President

Oregon Natural Resource Industries

Oregon Natural Resource Industries opposes ODF’s Annual Operations Plans

Public Comment on Draft 2026 Annual Operations Plans – Oregon Department of Forestry

Oregonians deserve an honest, fact-based accounting of how our state forests are being managed—and whether current policies are increasing risk, reducing revenue, and shifting costs onto taxpayers.

The Draft 2026 Annual Operations Plans reflect a clear and measurable departure from Oregon’s long-standing model of active, sustainable forest management, and Greatest Permanent Value.

1. Harvest Reductions Are Clear and Widespread

District-level data shows a consistent decline in harvest levels under HCP implementation.

2022 (Pre-HCP Baseline)

Western Lane: 9.9 MMBF
Klamath-Lake: 10.6 MMBF
North Cascade: 6.5–8 MMBF
Southwest Oregon: 2.3 MMBF

2026 Draft Plans (Projected)

Western Lane: 5–7 MMBF
Klamath-Lake: 6–8 MMBF
North Cascade: 4–6 MMBF
Southwest Oregon: 1–2 MMBF

This is not a minor adjustment. This is a systemic reduction.

Across districts, fewer acres are being actively managed and more land is being placed into designations where management is restricted or eliminated.

2. Reduced Management = Increased Risk

ODF’s own data shows:

2.7 million acres impacted by insects, disease, and drought (2022)

At the same time, the Draft 2026 Plans propose:

Less thinning
Less harvest
Less fuel reduction

This is a direct contradiction.

When forests are stressed and overstocked, reducing management does not stabilize conditions—it accelerates decline and increases wildfire severity.

Fuel accumulates. Mortality increases. Fire intensity rises.

This outcome is not hypothetical—it is predictable.

3. Financial Self-Sufficiency Is Being Replaced by Taxpayer Dependence

For over a century, Oregon’s state forests:

Generated their own operating revenue
Funded counties and public services
Sustained rural economies

The Draft 2026 Plans move away from that model.

Reduced harvest levels mean:

Reduced revenue
Reduced contributions to counties
Reduced ability for ODF to fund its own operations

The result is unavoidable: taxpayers will be asked to cover the shortfall.

This is not a natural outcome—it is the result of policy decisions that deliberately reduced the revenue base.

4. The Trade-Off Is Being Ignored

ODF is required by law to provide:

Economic benefits
Environmental benefits
Social benefits

The Draft 2026 Plans reduce:

Economic output
Active forest management
Revenue to counties

While increasing:

Forest health risks
Wildfire exposure
Long-term financial liabilities

This is not balance. This is imbalance.

5. Climate Claims Do Not Match Management Reality

The IPCC recognizes that:

Managed forests
Harvest + replanting
Wood products that store carbon are essential climate solutions.

Reducing management increases:

Dead and dying biomass
Wildfire emissions
Carbon loss from large-scale fire events

Unmanaged forests do not store carbon when they burn.

6. Questions That Require Direct Answers

The Draft Plans raise serious questions that must be addressed:

How does reducing harvest improve forest health in already stressed conditions?
How will ODF maintain operations without increased taxpayer funding and obligating future legislatures for generations?
How does reduced management align with wildfire risk reduction?
How are statutory obligations for economic benefits being met under declining revenue?

7. ODF forgot about Greatest Permanent Value

Oregon law requires that state forests be managed for Greatest Permanent Value (GPV)—a balanced, three-legged framework of environmental protection, recreation, and economic sustainability. That balance is not optional; it is the law. The Draft 2026 Annual Operations Plans disrupt that balance by disproportionately emphasizing preservation while reducing active management and revenue-generating activities. When one leg of the GPV framework is weakened, the entire system becomes unstable. In forest management, that instability does not remain theoretical—it manifests as overstocked stands, increased fuel loads, declining forest health, and ultimately, more severe wildfire. A lopsided GPV approach does not protect forests—it puts them at greater risk with predictable outcomes of increased fire, lost habitat, lost revenue, and increased cost to taxpayers.

Conclusion

The Draft 2026 Annual Operations Plans reflect a clear policy direction:

Less harvest
Less management
Less revenue
More risk
More taxpayer burden

This is a fundamental shift away from Oregon’s proven model of working forests.

We have created a system where management is restricted, revenue declines, wildfire risk increases, and taxpayers are left paying the bill.

That outcome is not accidental—it is the direct result of policy choices reflected in these plans.

ODF should fully and transparently account for these trade-offs before moving forward.

Oregonians deserve forests that are actively managed, financially sustainable, and resilient—not forests that cost more, produce less, and burn hotter.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Jen HamakerPresidentOregon Natural Resource Industries

Video

Commercial bringing awareness to the Habitat Conservation Plan

This HCP will shut down 53% of our state forests for 70years. 220 public services like fire departments, law enforcement, schools, emergency response, etc will lose critical funding. 512 special taxing districts within the HCP that almost entirely rely on property tax and timber harvest revenue to operate will be devastated. The 15 counties that heavily rely on timber harvest revenue and the jobs the forests provide will be crippled…FOR 70 years. STOP THE HCP!

June 6 Testimony to the Board of Forestry OPPOSING the HCP

Pivotal testimony given by ONRI in opposition to the HCP. Being engaged and having our voices heard has made an impact.

KCBY Interview HCP Petition

Gold Meadows of KCBY Interviews ONRI’s President, Jen Hamaker about the Habitat Conservation Plan and its devast impacts.

Hampton Lumber Closes their Mill in Banks due to HCP and FMP

We protect Oregon's Natural Resources & Industries

ONRI advocates for the working men and women whose livelihoods are based on natural resource industries, including foresters, loggers, ranchers, truckers, miners, fishers, and farmers. This includes their families, rural and urban along with their communities.

We work to bring viable solutions to the table.

We fight against senseless legislation that will hurt jobs in our industries.

We watch legislation and policies that are on the table and eduate the public on what's coming down the pipeline. We teach our members the process of testifying at all levels, so their voice can be heard. Industry workers, and communities who depend on those jobs for their families and their economies deserve a seat at the table, and proper representation at the table, with honesty and transparency.

We roll up our sleeves and shine a spotlight on what's hidden and hushed.

STOP the HCP

Oregon Board of Forestry’s 70 year HCP will cripple communities, devastate special taxing districts, take away critical funding from over 220 public services like fire, police, schools, and emergency services.

This HCP will shut down 57% of our state forests and reduce harvest levels 34% more than promised. New numbers show that nearly 100,000 acres more than what is required for the HCP is being shut down. This 70 year forest policy threatens to destroy Oregon’s timber industry. Hampton’s mill in Banks has already closed.

This 70-year plan will reduce timber harvest levels to the point of making Oregon’s Department of Forestry insolvent, meaning they won’t receive enough timber revenue to keep their lights on, let alone pay for fighting fires.

Learn more

HCP is a 70 Year Mistake!

Timber harvest money is vital to Oregon’s Economy a 40% reduction in timber harvest for 70 years is an Economic Disaster!

Facts:

*70 year HCP

*57% of or state forests will be shut down to management

*40% reduction in timber harvest levels. *ODF promised harvest level of 250mmbf annually, the new numbers show harvest level will be at 165mmbf annually = 40% reduction in harvest levels.

Experts Stand Against the HCP

7 counties and 2 county commissioners, which represent hundreds of thousands of people, signed proclamations opposing the HCP.

learn more

About Us

We support Farmers & Ranchers

Our Vision

ONRI's vision is an Oregon where the people can enjoy economic growth while utilizing their natural resources in

an environmentally sustainable way that protects our communities for generations to come.

We support Hunting

We protect our herds

We support Mining

We protect the lively hoods of miners

We support Logging & the Timber Industry

We will not stand by and watch our forests burn

We support Fishing

We support hatch-box programs and support Oregon STEP's

Our Goals

Bring solutions to the table to solve some of the most pressing natural

resource problems facing our State

Broad diversity, with different natural resource industries being

represented all having a voice at the table

To preserve natural resource jobs and advocate for affected businesses

To restore pride, dignity and enthusiasm in Oregon's future

Educate and inform our members of legislation that affects their natural resource industries

Protecting rural Oregon's way of life and culture

Find out more

Welcome to Oregon Natural Resource Industries where we like to get ONRI

ONRI’s opposition to ODF’s Annual Operation's Plan 2027

Oregon Natural Resource Industries opposes ODF’s Annual Operations Plans