The Northwest Forest Plan (Plan) was designed to address human and environmental needs served by the Federal forests of the western part of the Pacific Northwest and northern California. The development of the Plan was triggered in the early 1990’s by the listing of the northern spotted owl and marbled murrelet as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Over a dozen lawsuits and court injunctions were filed against the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) related to management practices affecting the northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet, and old-growth timber harvest.

In April 1993, the President convened a conference in Portland, Oregon to end the impasse over management of Federal forest lands in the Pacific Northwest. Later that year, the President announced the Plan as a comprehensive forestry, economic development, and agency coordination package.

This effort was unique in many ways. It represented the culmination of an unprecedented effort in public land management and was developed over a relatively short period of time. More than 100,000 public comments were received on the draft supplemental environmental impact statement. The Northwest Forest Plan was the largest ecosystem management plan developed in the United States at that time, covering nearly 25 million acres. The Plan included very significant scientific involvement and leadership responsibilities, requiring a coordinated implementation effort by multiple agencies within the Federal government and directing Federal agencies to work cooperatively with the affected States and Tribes.

Despite the balanced objectives identified by the Plan, timber sale activities continue to be delayed or stopped through administrative appeals and lawsuits. Responding to these actions has driven up the costs of all management activities under the Plan. Increased costs and delay in implementation of activities due to litigation have resulted in the Federal agencies not being able to achieve the balance envisioned by the Plan.

In his August 2002 tour of the Squires Fire in southwestern Oregon, President Bush committed to fulfilling the promise of the Northwest Forest Plan as part of his "Healthy Forests - An Initiative for Wildfire Prevention and Stronger Communities" strategy. Specifically, the Administration is working with elected officials, community leaders, and interest groups to identify ways to fulfill all of the Plan's goals and resolve pending litigation.

Forestry: To implement the forest management objectives of the Plan, an environmental impact statement and record of decision were issued in April 1994.* These amended the Forest Service Land Resource Management Plans and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Resource Management Plans for all or portions of 19 National Forests in Washington, Oregon, and northern California, and BLM-managed public lands in Oregon and California within the range of the northern spotted owl. In 1994, Judge William Dwyer, U.S. District Court, found the Record of Decision (ROD) and Standards and Guidelines consistent with key Federal laws.

The Plan Area: The Plan area includes lands administered by the Forest Service, BLM, National Park Service, and lands of other Federal agencies within the range of the northern spotted owl in Oregon, Washington, and northern California. The direction included in the Plan’s ROD and Standards and Guidelines applies only to lands managed by the Forest Service and BLM.

Forest Management: The management direction within the ROD and Standards and Guidelines consists of designated land allocations and extensive standards and guidelines that describe how land managers should treat the forest lands within the range of the northern spotted owl.

Land Allocations: Federal land within the Plan area is classified as one or more of several "land allocations." Major land allocations and acreages include:

The remaining 16 percent of Federal land, outside of the six categories above, is categorized as Matrix land. This is the area in which most timber harvest and other silvicultural activities are conducted.

Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS): The ACS is an integral part of the Plan and applies to all the Forest Service and BLM lands within the Plan area. This strategy protects habitat for fish and other riparian-dependent species on land managed by the Forest Service and BLM within the range of the northern spotted owl. The strategy includes nine management objectives and four key components to assist the agencies in meeting the strategy’s objectives, as follows.

Confusion related to language in the ROD about the ACS and Standards and Guidelines hindered Federal land managers’ ability to plan and implement projects needed to achieve Plan goals. In 1997, the first Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Association lawsuit stopped some timber sales within the Plan area from proceeding. The court determined that NOAA-Fisheries biological opinions on Forest Service and BLM projects were "arbitrary and capricious" due to their inability to prove that the sales covered by the biological opinions were consistent with the ACS. In October, 2003, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was completed which clarifies how the Forest Service and BLM should design projects to follow the ACS.

Survey and Manage: Plan Standards and Guidelines provided "Survey and Manage" mitigation measures for approximately 400 old growth-related species where there was concern for their distribution and where little knowledge existed on the species themselves. None of these species were listed under the Endangered Species Act.

In 1998, timber sales were stopped by a lawsuit from the Oregon Natural Resources Council that alleged failure to follow the Plan in implementing survey and manage mitigation measures and other requirements. A settlement was reached whereby the government agreed to perform certain surveys to proceed with the timber sales listed on the agreement, while completing a Survey and Manage EIS.

The first supplemental EIS amending Survey and Manage was completed in 2001. A second Supplemental EIS was completed in March 2004, in response to a lawsuit settlement with Douglas Timber Operators and the American Forest Resource Council. This EIS/ROD removed the Survey and Manage Standards and Guidelines from Forest and District plans and transferred selected Survey and Manage species to Forest Service and BLM Special-Status Species Programs.

Research and Monitoring: An important component of the Plan was the facilitation of research activities to gather information and test hypotheses in a range of environmental conditions. One of the key functions of the research divisions is to help science and management interface with one another. A variety of research activities have occurred in the Plan area including evaluating the fundamental questions underlying its basic assumptions, development of research and monitoring plans, communicating scientific findings, facilitating adaptive management, and performing independent scientific review, evaluation, and analysis.

Monitoring ensures that management actions meet the prescribed standards and guidelines and that the actions comply with applicable laws and policies. Information obtained through monitoring, together with research and other new information provides a basis for adaptive management changes to Forest Service and BLM land management. The Plan identified three types of monitoring:

In April 2005, key findings and suggested implications from the first 10 years of monitoring were presented in a series of reports and a conference. This information is being used to guide future management actions and research and monitoring activities.

Adaptive Management: Adaptive management was considered the cornerstone of the Plan. It is the continuing process of action–based planning, monitoring, research, evaluating, and adjusting with the objective of improving the implementation and achieving the goals of the Plan. This approach helps resource managers determine how well management actions meet their objectives and what steps are needed to modify activities to increase success or improve results. The adaptive management goal of the Plan has not been met. The Regional Interagency Executive Committee is focusing on improving implementation.

Agency Coordination: The Plan calls for a high level of coordination and cooperation among agencies. To implement the system for federal agency coordination, an interagency Memoran-dum of Understanding (MOU) was signed by the heads of five Cabinet-level departments and agencies in 1993. This MOU has been renewed twice and continues to be in effect. The ROD and Standards and Guidelines also provide direction regarding the coordinating groups, which include: