Setting the record straight on Kootenai National Forest timber sales

To the Editor:

I read Jim Petersen’s Op-Ed in the Nov. 21, 2023, issue of the Western News, and found it an interesting approach to getting his point across about the value of modern forest management on our local forestlands. 

As a professional forester, I agree with much of what he has to say. I do, however, take issue with his “revisionist history” concerning the closure of the Stimson Mill in Libby. I continue to hear that the lack of Forest Service timber sales was responsible and that the Forest Service was unwilling to provide Stimson with more timber to keep the mill in operation. 

Since the Forest Service is either unwilling or no longer has the institutional knowledge to dispute this account, I’ll do it myself. First off, in the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I am retired from a 38-year career in timber management with the U.S. Forest Service and was the Timber Management Officer for the Kootenai National Forest from 1996 to 2004.

I believe it is time that people understand the role of the timber industry itself in the demise of logging and saw milling in Libby and Lincoln County as a whole. Why do I say that? Let’s start in the 1980s with Champion International Corporation’s acquisition of the St. Regis Paper Company and its mill complex and timberlands in Libby. 

People have forgotten that Champion completely stopped bidding on Forest Service timber in the mid 1980s so they could concentrate on the liquidation of the remaining stocks of old growth timber on their company lands. This policy followed a pattern of “cut out and get out” perfected by corporate buyouts and timber liquidation in southwest Oregon (Amalgamated Sugar’s acquisition of Medford Corporation’s mills and timber lands) and in the redwood country of northern California (Maxxam Corporation’s hostile takeover of Pacific Lumber and their vast reserves of old growth redwood.)

In addition, Champion made a corporate decision during this time frame to not invest in retooling the “small log” mill to enable it to deal with the inevitable smaller timber that would be available in the future. That decision seemed to indicate that they weren’t planning on being in Libby for the long run. They continued to run the large log sawmill and the plywood plant.

By 1993, Champion was ready to “get out” and looked for a buyer for the Libby mill and timberlands remaining after their real estate sales. The logical purchaser was Plum Creek Timber Company since they owned intermingled parcels of commercial timber land. 

Plum Creek already had plenty of milling infrastructure in the nearby Flathead Valley and really didn’t need another sawmill or plywood plant in Libby. I’m sure they also didn’t want the black eye that would come from being the ones to close the Libby mill. 

Enter Stimson Lumber of Portland, Oregon and soon a deal was secured where Stimson would purchase the mill complex in Libby and Plum Creek would acquire the remaining timberlands. To sweeten the pot, Plum Creek and Stimson entered into a 10-year fiber supply agreement under which Plum Creek would provide Stimson with 100 million board feet of timber a year. 

As soon as the ink was dry, Stimson announced the closure of the sawmill and only continued to run the plywood plant. Severing the mill from the timberlands seemed at the time to foretell the future fate of the mill as it would be completely dependent on Forest Service timber and whatever other purchase logs they could find.

Plum Creek fulfilled the 10-year agreement for 1 billion board feet of timber in just 7 years and in June of 2002, Stimson publicly threatened to close the mill unless the Kootenai National Forest awarded them a contract to harvest 25 million board feet of timber. 

This threat got the attention of the community, both Montana Senators and a bevy of other organizations and agencies. Pressure was brought to bear on the Forest Service to provide the timber. The problem was – the Forest was prohibited by law and regulation from entering into a direct sale of timber to Stimson in an area that had historic and ongoing competition for federal timber sales from other mills and timber companies. 

In addition, it should be noted that in the 7 years of the fiber supply agreement, Stimson showed little interest in purchasing Forest Service timber sales on the Kootenai. During this time, they submitted bids on only seven timber sales. Of those seven, they were the successful bidder on only three sales. 

Two of those sales were the dregs of the Forest Service’s fire salvage program following the 1994 wildfires on the Kootenai and the timber was of low quality and high defect. The other sale was for 500,000 board feet of quality peeler logs, but which required expensive helicopter yarding due to its location on the Sheep Range west of Libby.

All of the interested parties, including the then conservation group, Yaak Valley Forest Council, Stimson, Congressional staffers and local economic development agencies met with Forest officials to try to find a way to make additional timber available. 

The negotiations yielded a solution that neither the Forest Service nor Stimson was happy with. It included restrictions on location of the timber sales (they had to come from within the Wildland-Urban Interface) and on the size of the timber allowed to be cut (trees had to be smaller than 15 inches in diameter) and the sales would have to open to competitive bidding. 

While the Forest Service made no promises, they did negotiate in good faith and the Forest Supervisor agreed to approach the Regional Office to try to secure the additional funding it would take to increase the sale level above what the Forest was already budgeted for and committed to.

In late October of 2002, Stimson abruptly announced the closure of the Libby Mill. It should be noted that at the time, Andrew Miller, the President of Stimson was quoted in the Missoulian stating that the decision to close the Libby Mill had little to do with the amount of logs coming off the Kootenai National Forest. 

What drove the decision was severe economic losses that couldn’t be sustained. He further stated that no one, from environmentalists to forest leaders was to blame for the closure.

While there is plenty of blame to go around as to who is responsible for the lack of a sawmill in Libby, it is apparent that the timber industry itself, its corporate decisions and shortsightedness played a major role. 

I just thought it was time to set the record straight.

Thomas Maffei, Libby, Montana