Forest Focus - November 24, 1998

Larry Caldwell larryc at
Sun Nov 29 01:45:54 EST 1998

In article <3660846d.0 at>, dhogaza at writes: 

> Ummm...reading closely, I see that the claim is that $1.2 billion was
> spent on the TIMBER SALES PROGRAM, not the forest service budget in its
> entirety.

That was sort of how the article was written.  In fact, the USFS sold 
$1.2 billion in timber, and retained $1.05 billion for administration of 
local programs, like reforestation, wildlife habitat enhancement, 
biological research, stream bank improvement and road funds.  They 
returned approximately $150 million to the general fund.  From the 
article, you would think the money was wasted.  It was just spent on 
other stuff.

You are right though, that is not the total USFS budget.
> Most of the other stuff you're mentioning aren't part of the timber
> sales program, and are accounted for separately, I believe.

That's where the money went.  Essentially the same article, except 
several times as long and with more detail, was published in the News 
Review on Friday.  There is some criticism that the funds form little 
personal fiefdoms, but that is a matter for public debate.  You can make 
just as good a case for allowing individual national forests to manage 
funds locally, where administrators can take advantage of local 

-- Larry

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list