The multi-faceted proposal also includes a wild rice seeding project, improvements to campgrounds and lake access and attempts to bolster habitat for the protected Kirtland\u2019s warbler. The whole thing is projected to last around 30 years, with periodic reviews. <\/p>\n
Unlike national parks, national forests serve multiple purposes. They\u2019re set aside for recreation, wildlife habitat and to provide timber. Ottawa National Forest officials say the Silver Branch project is not primarily about logging, it\u2019s about getting the right tree mix for forest maintenance and health. <\/p>\n
However, the project has drawn concerns from a wide range of groups, from environmentalists to off-roaders<\/a>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n \u201cIt involves 25,000 acres of national forest clear-cutting and yet the determination has been that there would be no significant impacts from such activities. That\u2019s just not plausible,\u201d said Kelly Thayer, a senior policy advocate at the Environmental Law & Policy Center, a Midwest-based legal advocacy group. <\/p>\n That group and a loose coalition of organizations and businesses expressed concerns about the project in a letter<\/a> and a 73-page document<\/a> sent to the US Forest Service. They\u2019re worried that logging would spread invasive species, increase water runoff and impact habitat for protected animals found in the area like gray wolves and northern long-eared bats. They also don\u2019t like that trees more than 100 years old would be taken out.<\/p>\n \u201cThe mature forest is most important for sequestering carbon and helping to stabilize our climate,\u201d Thayer said. \u201cReplanting with young trees in their place will not replicate the kind of benefits that the public receives now.\u201d<\/p>\n The groups want to see the project boundary changed to better preserve current and proposed protected wilderness areas<\/a>. They also want to see an environmental impact statement produced. <\/p>\n The federal government already put together an environmental assessment<\/a> and determined there would be \u201cno significant impact\u201d from the project. If the Forest Service pursued an environmental impact statement, it would need to answer tough questions about environmental concerns and potentially propose alternatives.<\/p>\n The Forest Service previously offered a 30-day comment period for the project beginning Dec. 23. It\u2019s planning to open a window for objections in March, though an exact date is not posted. It\u2019s currently anticipating making a decision on the project that same month. <\/p>\n If the project is approved, it is expected to begin in June.<\/p>\n The project as it stands involves a mix of logging: about 1,500 acres of clear-cutting and around 24,000 acres of a kind of clear-cutting that leaves certain trees. These sections are dispersed throughout the project area (see proposed north<\/a>, middle<\/a> and south<\/a> maps). There would also be around 57,000 acres of other kinds of more-targeted logging. Add up the areas slated to have tree removal and they equal about 130 square miles.<\/p>\n The district ranger in the Bessemer, Iron River and Watersmeet Ranger Districts of the Ottawa National Forest, Trevor Hahka, told Bridge Michigan in an email it\u2019s unclear how much money the project would generate from logging.<\/p>\n \u201cRevenue from timber sales depends on market conditions,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Who would do the logging has not been decided but would be offered to private contractors through a competitive bidding process. Selected logging companies would then pay fees to the federal government for the timber they harvest and the companies would keep any profits. The money from the fees would go into federal accounts and not stay solely within the Ottawa National Forest. Contracts for gravel mining would also be competitively bid but the gravel would not be sold but used for Forest Service roads.<\/p>\n Hahka said the proposed logging is \u201cnot the primary goal\u201d and restoring ecological balance to the woods is. He said there are too many hardwoods, aspen trees that are getting older than desired and conifers that are declining.<\/p>\n \u201cActive management in overstocked or aging stands prevents decline and promotes long-term forest health,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n The Forest Service, Hahka said, recognizes many of the concerns outlined by the coalition and have included measures to address them. He noted there are protective buffers around known northern long-eared bat roosts, they\u2019re following best practices to reduce water runoff issues and limit the spread of invasive species, and that the project, through thinning and prescribed burns, would increase forest resilience to pests, disease and wildfire, issues amplified by climate change.<\/p>\n Thayer, with the Environmental Law & Policy Center, said that sometimes invasive species spread happens unintentionally during the logging process, when plants and seeds get stuck in equipment tread. He also pointed to findings in the Forest Service\u2019s own environmental assessment<\/a> that seemed to suggest some fire risk from logging: <\/p>\n \u201cThere is a potential for the accrual of hazardous surface fuels after a timber harvest due to limbs, tops, and dead material within a stand after harvesting,\u201d the environmental assessment reads. \u201cThis potentially heightens wildfire risk in stands that contain spruce and fir that have been affected by the spruce budworm and in areas with a heavy conifer component.\u201d<\/p>\n In response to the groups\u2019 asks, Hahka said no activities are proposed in designated wilderness areas, but the Forest Service does not anticipate putting together a full environmental impact statement.<\/p>\n David Carter, a forestry professor at Michigan State University, said the Silver Branch proposal \u201cdidn\u2019t really raise any red flags.\u201d He said it looked like a run-of-the-mill Forest Service project that involved some timber harvests, road maintenance and a lot of habitat restoration work.<\/p>\n He said Forest Service officials often become \u201cpunching bags\u201d for people who have their hearts in the right place but who are misguided.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s just so stinking hard to do the work, period, but let alone have the additional hurdle of people thinking you\u2019re trying to do harm to the landscape when usually it\u2019s the exact opposite,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Carter said that, when residents oppose projects like this, it\u2019s mostly a \u201cnot in my back yard\u201d-type situation.<\/p>\n \u201cPeople\u2019s demand for wood products has not gone down. It only goes up,\u201d he said. \u201cAnd so if we don\u2019t harvest it here, we\u2019re just going to harvest it from somewhere else.\u201d<\/p>\n He said increasingly that ends up being places like Brazil, South Africa or southeast Asia, where \u201cthe regulatory infrastructure is not what it is here\u201d in the United States.<\/p>\n ___<\/p>\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/1772317091_641_.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n