The U.S. Forest Service’s push to revise the Tongass National Forest management plan drew sharp criticism from Southeast Alaska residents, tribes and industry groups during a 45-day public comment period that closed in mid‑May. More than 300 comments were submitted, and community workshops across the region highlighted widespread concern that the agency is moving too quickly on a document that will govern the 16.7‑million‑acre forest for 30 years.
“The rushed plan timeline threatens all other uses and important worthy and cherished treasures, especially every creature on the Tongass, including humans,” wrote James Clare in a comment. “Please provide more time for plan development, as done in the past.”
Barb Miranda, deputy forest supervisor for the Tongass, acknowledged the fast pace but said the Forest Service is “being open under a quick timeline to receive as much public input as we can.” She stressed that the plan is still in its earliest stage and that no decisions have been made. “This is not your one and only time to provide input on the Tongass plan,” she said, adding that comments will be accepted through every phase leading to a final plan in 2028.
The mining and timber industries pushed back against protections they view as overly restrictive. Steve Ball, general manager of Coeur Alaska’s Kensington Mine, wrote that the revised plan should recognize the forest as a mining district, not solely a timber or conservation reserve. “The revised Forest Plan should affirm that responsible mineral exploration and development are fully compatible with ecological stewardship, subsistence values, and multiple use when properly planned and regulated,” Ball wrote. He also argued that the Forest Service’s Roadless Area Conservation Rule should not apply to mining operations.
The Alaska Forest Association urged the agency to keep old‑growth timber available for harvest. Tessa Axelson, the association’s executive director, wrote that “durable sources of OG” should be selected in areas where economically viable stands exist, and that any alternative making the industry dependent on young‑growth timber “should be excluded from consideration.” The association called the 2016 amendment that shifted toward second‑growth harvest an “error.”
Tribal and conservation groups focused on the ecological and cultural value of old‑growth forests. Jordynn Fulmer, a cultural ambassador with the Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska, said she attended a Juneau workshop “to stand strongly against clearcutting.” She noted that old growth is vital for protecting salmon streams. The tribe’s written comment said the Forest Service’s definition of old growth — based on timber‑age classifications of roughly 150‑ to 250‑year‑old trees — is inconsistent with tribal definitions that consider old growth “integrated cultural‑ecological systems characterized by multi‑century development (450–700+ years) and structural complexities overlain with layers of relationship‑based tribal, clan, and family relationships.”
Kathy Hansen, executive director of the Southeast Alaska Fishermen’s Alliance, wrote that the preliminary draft plan “does not adequately elevate the protection of fishery resources and habitat,” and argued that managing fish and wildlife should remain with the State of Alaska’s Board of Fish and the Federal Subsistence Board.
Recreation and tourism advocates also raised concerns. Nate Arrants, executive director of Haines Huts and Trails, said workshops in Haines and Skagway lacked maps of the broader forest, limiting feedback. “I think in general, people in Southeast, like Haines, care about the whole Tongass, and so they weren’t able to see on the big maps and provide feedback on those things, which was a huge issue,” Arrants said. He added that many participants were confused by the workshop’s feedback‑frame questions.
Miranda defended the outreach effort and noted that the Forest Service is trying to simplify the plan. The current 2016 amendment includes 19 management areas, which she called “very complicated and difficult to implement.” The new plan will be “less prescriptive,” she said, allowing rangers more discretion on individual projects while maintaining forest‑wide standards. “We’ll have standards and guidelines and a vision for the entire forest that we’ll have to follow forestwide, but then areas that need to be managed differently, because they are different,” Miranda said.
Residents at the Juneau workshop and in online comments also challenged the designation of certain areas as “commercial use.” James Taggart objected to the classification of public lands around Barnoff and Krusoff islands as commercial use zones.
The planning timeline calls for a draft environmental impact statement to be published this August, launching a 90‑day comment period. The final plan is expected in 2028. Miranda urged Southeast Alaskans to stay engaged. “This is the Tongass,” she said. “It is our backyards. It is also a national treasure. So there’s national interest in the outcomes here.”