Camping in clearcuts: The impacts of timber harvesting on Forest Service campground utilization
Camping and recreation are major sources of revenue for the USDA Forest Service and communities surrounding national forests that provide tourism and other local services to visiting recreators. So are timber sales. Are these multiple uses - recreation and timber harvest - in conflict?
A father and son rest in a camping area after a morning of fishing in one of the rivers of Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest.
A recent study asks whether forest management practices in areas close to campsites have an impact on campsite reservations. Decreases in reservations could translate to fewer visitors to drive economic activity in communities surrounding national forest recreation areas. They found that all types of timber harvest near campgrounds caused a drop in campsite reservations. Compared to other types of management strategies such as brush disposal, hazardous fuel reduction, and integrated resource restoration, timber harvest had the greatest impact. In part, this may be because logging reduces the “natural” aesthetic of a forest, which campers tend to seek when they recreate in forestlands. However, other potential management impacts may factor into their decisions - for example, reduced chances of seeing local wildlife. Dips in campsite reservations lasted about one year after harvest, but the researchers remained unsure whether campers made fewer reservations because of the lasting impacts of harvests like aesthetics or because harvest operations continued after the one-year mark. Campers were more deterred by timber harvest in some regions more than others. Campgrounds in the Northern Region which includes the panhandle of Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, and small areas in Wyoming and South Dakota and the Rocky Mountain Region which includes most of Wyoming and South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, and Colorado suffered the greatest decrease in reservations.
Public land managers may strategically locate timber harvesting operations further from campgrounds. Instead, they could conduct less intensive types of forest management in these areas. This shift would prevent disruptions to campground usage and economic activity in nearby communities supported by tourism and recreation. On the other hand, situations in which timber will be harvested near campgrounds could be treated as opportunities to engage local communities in the harvest planning process to avoid potential economic losses from fewer visitors.