Alaska Forest Association Sues Forest Service Over Old-Growth Logging Restrictions on Tongass National Forest

---

Summary

• The Tongass National Forest’s old-growth trees form one of the world’s last intact temperate rainforests.
• Timber groups are suing the U.S. Forest Service, demanding more old-growth timber sales from the Tongass Forest.
• The Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act framework gives the Forest Service discretion to rebalance uses and decrease old-growth logging.

Sierralara via Getty Images

---

---

The Tongass National Forest, located in Southeast Alaska and encompassing 17 million acres, contains about 5.6 million acres of old-growth forest. These old trees help regulate stream temperatures, provide habitat for diverse wildlife, and serve as massive carbon sinks. The Tongass National Forest holds nearly a third of the world’s remaining old-growth temperate rainforests. For much of the 20th century, these tracts of old-growth temperate rainforest have been caught between competing legal and political interests. Federal policy and forest planning documents for decades treated the Tongass National Forest as a reliable source of high-volume timber and have created the expectation that old-growth logs would continue to come out of the forest indefinitely. Recently, however, concerns about biodiversity, Indigenous rights, and the long-term health of the forest ecosystem have pushed the U.S. Forest Service to emphasize conservation, young-growth logging, restoration, and recreation projects that support fishing and tourism. But these shifts have provoked resistance from timber interests, like the Alaska Forest Association (AFA), Viking Lumber Co., and other timber companies, who argue that the agency’s evolving approach fails to meet the industry’s need, demanding more old-growth timber sales from the Tongass National Forest. This raises the question of whether the Forest Service violated its governing statute or is exercising lawful discretion when the agency reduces old-growth timber harvest in the Tongass National Forest? ****

---

---

---

---

The answer lies in The Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act (MUSYA). MUSYA requires that the Forest Service manages national forests for a range of purposes including timber, wildlife, watershed, and recreation purposes without prioritizing one use over the others. The multiple-use framework gives the agency considerable flexibility to adapt and rebalance its priorities, and under MUSYA, the Forest Service has broad discretion to prioritize old-growth preservation in the Tongass National Forest over timber sales.

Old growth forests are characterized by a combination of ecological characteristics and structural features. Moist forests such as those on the Tongass develop over centuries with minimal human disturbance, shaping complex and dynamic ecosystems that support levels of biodiversity not typically found in younger forests. This forest stores large amounts of carbon, regulates watershed function, and provides cultural subsistence values for Indigenous communities and other residents in Southeast Alaska. The forest also provides habitats for numerous species and has a robust wildlife population. Because of the size and intactness of the Tongass National Forest, it plays a significant role in regional biodiversity, climate regulations, and has historically supplied high-value logs compared to other national forests.

The legal framework for managing the competing interests on the Tongass is built in part on MUSYA. Congress didn’t specify one use over another and instead directed the Forest Service to coordinate management of one use with another by balancing them in light of changing conditions and public demands. In practice, even when old-growth logging dominated in Tongass National Forest, MUSYA and related statutes envision a process in which the agency weighs timber production against conservation, recreation, and other uses over time.

In the past, the Tongass National Forest management heavily leaned toward timber production, with long-term contracts and forest plans focused on continuing the flow of old-growth logging. These decisions fostered a strong expectation in the timber community that large-scale old-growth harvesting would continue indefinitely. But shifts in public opinion and national forest law has progressively made the matter more complicated, pushing the agency to reconsider the balance between the uses. Now old-growth preservation, climate change concerns, and non-timber economies play a central part alongside the traditional goal of sustained timber yields.

Forest plans and related programmatic documents are central tools through which the Forest Service implements multiple use. These plans identify desired future conditions, outline standards and guidelines, and project timber harvest levels. Courts, however, have generally distinguished between broad planning documents and discrete final agency actions that carry immediate legal consequences. Forest plans are typically understood to guide future decisions, not to guarantee specific levels of timber harvests. In the Tongass National Forest, forest plans have often included estimates of how much timber, including old growth, could be offered and many industry groups have treated these projections as promises of future supply. These groups have now filed suit in federal court, seeking an order compelling the Forest Service to increase the volume of old growth timber sales.

If forest plans and policy statements about sustained yields were treated as enforceable commitments, the Forest Service's ability to adjust its approach in light of climate change, species conservation needs, or changing community preferences would be limited. Although industry interests are real, the law emphasizes agency discretion and adaptive management rather than, fixed, long-term use to harvest particular levels. In national forest litigation, strictly enforcing projections would make management inflexible when old-growth forests are under threat. While reliance on forest plans exists, the legal framework emphasizes adaptation, so these plans support, rather than restrict, efforts to prioritize old growth.

From the perspective of timber interest groups, the Forest Service’s move away from large-scale old growth logging in the Tongass Forest represents a sharp departure from decades of agency practice. For years, forest plans and environmental impact statements projected substantial timber harvest levels, including significant volumes of old growth logging. Industry timber groups argue that these planning documents created reasonable expectations of a sustained old growth supply and reflected what most Southeast Alaskans want for the region. The plaintiffs contend that the agency’s increasing emphasis on conservation and restoration undermines those expectations. Some advocates further assert that sharp reductions in old-growth harvest is inconsistent with statutory obligations to provide a stable timber supply, urging courts to interpret MUSYA, in combination with federal forest planning statutes, as requiring the Forest Service to continue offering old-growth timber levels sufficient to support existing operations.

Accepting timber industry arguments that prior forest plans effectively promised continued old-growth harvest at its historic levels would significantly constrain the Forest Service’s ability to adapt its management decisions to new scientific and ecological information. As science and ecosystems change, and new information comes online, the agency should be able to reasonably determine that conserving remaining old-growth trees better serves long-term forest health. If courts were to require the Forest Service to maintain past harvest levels in order to sustain timber operations and because that is what people in the region want, the agency would be effectively locked into outdated decisions, decisions that may no longer reflect present ecological conditions. Such a requirement would transform planning projections into rigid mandates that undermine the flexibility that the MUSYA framework was designed to give the agency. While the timber group’s interests are significant, they don’t justify turning planning projections for the forest into legally enforceable promises. Companies operating on public land have always done so conditionally, subject to change based on evolving statutes, regulations, and conditions. Timber jobs and infrastructure likewise operate in the same framework.

At its core, the dispute over old growth logging in the Tongass National Forest is conservation versus timber production. It’s a question about the scope of agency discretion under MUSYA. Ultimately, the framework governing federal forests rests on adaptability, not expectations. The Forest Service’s authority under MUSYA is meant to balance uses in response to current science and public need, not to preserve past harvest assumptions. A science-driven approach ensures that forest management can evolve to sustain old growth, restore ecosystems, and meet changing social and environmental priorities.

The Tongass National Forest shows the tension inherent in the multiple-use act. Timber is a recognized use of national forests, but it is not the only use or even the dominant one on many forests. Under MUSYA’s framework, the Forest Service has the authority to change its priorities, including reducing old-growth logging when it determines that conservation, watershed protection, or long-term sustainability warrant a greater emphasis. In this respect, the current litigation tests not only timber supply expectations, but the flexibility Congress intended to build into national forest management.

---

Author

Alekya Somisetty

Alekya Somisetty is a second-year student at Lewis and Clark Law School in Portland, Oregon. Originally from Washington, she developed an early interest in environmental law and looks forward to exploring a variety of legal...

View Bio →

---

Author

Alekya Somisetty

---

Committees

This content was produced by:

• Forest Resources Committee

Related Content

Courts & Practice of Law | Resources & Land Management | Tribes, Justice, & Community

Centering Indigenous Voices in the Northwest Forest Plan Amendment through Co-Stewardship

Jun 11, 2024

Air & Climate | Resources & Land Management

Playing with Fire: The Urgent Need to Radically Rethink National Forest Management

Dec 22, 2025

Air & Climate | Enforcement & Oversight | Resources & Land Management

Navigating the depths of preservation: A lawyer’s guide to the new Lake Ontario National Marine Sanctuary

Nov 20, 2025

Air & Climate | Courts & Practice of Law | Resources & Land Management | Site & Waste Management

EPA’s proposed Endangerment Finding rescission: Implications for state climate action

Nov 20, 2025

Air & Climate | Courts & Practice of Law | Resources & Land Management | Tribes, Justice, & Community

2024 Biodiversity Committee Report

Jun 20, 2025

Air & Climate | Courts & Practice of Law | Resources & Land Management

In “Harm’s” Way: Proposed Rulemaking Aims to Reshape the ESA

Jun 10, 2025