ABSTRACT
In eastern Oregon, National Forests represent sixty-five percent of total commercial forest land, other public five percent, private forests thirty percent. Supply restricting Forest Service policies are neither the only nor primary cause of community instability. Market prices could account for cyclical variations in the number of sales below cost. Care will be required in land use decisions on a regional, forest, and even site basis. Non-monetary benefits of resource-dependent communities seem not to have been often analyzed explicitly. Reductions in potential forest lands due to wilderness expansion or sales below cost could be balanced by increased management of the remaining parts of the same National Forest. Timber in western Oregon is also undergoing competition from other uses so that increased prices for timber land might keep the land in timber use. Selective perception of any given set of values will only make final resolution of the conflict more difficult.
