Pacific Northwest

Research Station

Forest 

Service

United States 

Department of 

Agriculture

General Technical Report

PNW-GTR-679

July 2006

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic 

National Forest and Three Local Communities

Northwest

Forest Plan

The First 10 Years (1994–2003)

Lita P. Buttolph, William Kay, Susan Charnley, Cassandra Moseley, and

Ellen M. Donoghue
Authors

Lita P. Buttolph is a research social scientist, Institute for Culture and Ecology, P.O. 

Box 6688, Portland, OR 97208; William Kay is an independent community development consultant, P.O. Box 464, Ithaca, NY 14851; Susan Charnley and Ellen M. 

Donoghue are research social scientists, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, P.O. Box 3890, Portland, OR 97208-3890; 

and Cassandra Moseley is director, Ecosystem Workforce Program, Institute for a 

Sustainable Environment, 5247, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-5247.

The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of 

multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of wood, 

water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the 

States and private forest owners, and management of the National Forests and National 

Grasslands, it strives—as directed by Congress—to provide increasingly greater service 

to a growing Nation.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and 

activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, 

sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic 

information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is 

derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of 

program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET 

Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write 

USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, 

DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an 

equal opportunity provider and employer.
Northwest Forest Plan—The First 10 

Years (1994–2003): Socioeconomic 

Monitoring of the Olympic National 

Forest and Three Local Communities

Lita P. Buttolph, William Kay, Susan Charnley, Cassandra Moseley, 

and Ellen M. Donoghue

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

Pacific Northwest Research Station

Portland, Oregon

General Technical Report PNW-GTR-679

July 2006
ii

Buttolph, Lita P.; Kay, William; Charnley, Susan; Moseley, Cassandra; Donoghue, 

Ellen M. 2006. Northwest Forest Plan—the first 10 years: socioeconomic monitoring 

of the Olympic National Forest and three local communities. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR-679. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. 84 p. 

This report examines socioeconomic changes that occurred between 1990 and 2000 associated with implementation of the Northwest Forest Plan (the Plan) in the Olympic National 

Forest in western Washington. We used a combination of quantitative data from the U.S. 

census and the USDA Forest Service, historical documents, and interviews from Forest 

Service employees and members of three case study communities—Quilcene, the Lake 

Quinault area, and the Quinault Indian Nation. We explore how the Plan affected the flow of 

socioeconomic benefits associated with the Olympic National Forest, such as the production 

of forest commodities and forest-based recreation, agency jobs, procurement contract work 

for ecosystem management activities, grants for community economic assistance, payments 

to county governments, and opportunities for collaborative forest management. 

The greatest change in socioeconomic benefits derived from the forest was the curtailment of timber harvest activities. This not only affected timber industry jobs in local 

communities, but also resulted in declining agency budgets and staff reductions. Mitigation 

efforts varied. Ecosystem management contracts declined and shifted from labor-intensive 

to equipment-intensive activities, with about half of all contractors from the Olympic Peninsula. Economic assistance grants benefited communities that had the staff and resources 

to develop projects and apply for monies, but provided little benefit to communities without 

those resources. Payments to counties served as an important source of revenue for rural 

schools and roads. 

We also examine socioeconomic changes that occurred in the case study communities, 

and the influence of forest management policy on these changes. Between 1990 and 2000 all 

three communities showed a decrease in population, an increase in median age, a decline in 

timber industry-related employment, and an increase in service-industry and government 

jobs. Quilcene’s proximity to the larger urban centers has attracted professional and service 

industry workers that commute to larger economic hubs. Lake Quinault area residents are 

increasingly turning to tourism, and its growing Latino population works in the cedar shake 

and floral greens industries. For the Quinault Indian Nation, employment in tribal government and its casino has helped offset job losses in the fishing and timber industries. Many 

changes observed in the communities were a result of the prior restructuring of the forest 

products industry, national economic trends, and demographic shifts. However, for Quilcene 

and Lake Quinault, which were highly dependent on the national forest for timber and served 

as Forest Service district headquarters, the loss of timber industry and Forest Service jobs 

associated with the Plan led to substantial job losses and crises in the economic and social 

capital of these communities. 

Keywords: Socioeconomic, monitoring, Northwest Forest Plan, Olympic National 

Forest, Quilcene, Lake Quinault, Quinault Indian Nation.
iii

Preface

In the early 1990s, controversy over harvest of old-growth forests led to sweeping 

changes in management of federal forests in western Washington, Oregon, and northwest California. These changes were prompted by a series of lawsuits in the late 1980s 

and early 1990s, that effectively shut down federal timber harvest in the Pacific Northwest. In response, a Presidential summit was held in Portland, Oregon, in 1993. This 

summit led to issuance by President Clinton of a mandate for federal land management 

and regulatory agencies to work together to develop a plan to resolve the conflict. The 

President’s guiding principles followed shortly after the summit in his Forest Plan for a 

Sustainable Economy and Sustainable Environment (Clinton and Gore 1993), now called 

the Northwest Forest Plan (the Plan). 

Immediately after the summit, a team of scientists and technical experts were 

convened to conduct an assessment of options (FEMAT 1993). This assessment provided 

the scientific basis for the environmental impact statement and record of decision (ROD) 

(USDA and USDI 1994) to amend Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management 

planning documents within the range of the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis 

caurina). 

The ROD, to be implemented across the 24 million federal acres (9.7 million 

hectares), put in place a whole new approach to federal land management. Key components of the ROD included a new map of land use allocations–late-successional reserves, 

matrix, riparian reserves, adaptive management areas, and key watersheds. Plan standards and guidelines provided the specific management direction regarding how these 

land use allocations were to be managed. In addition, the Plan put in place a variety of 

strategies and processes to be implemented. These included adaptive management, an 

aquatic conservation strategy, late-successional reserve and watershed assessments, 

survey and manage, an interagency organization, social and economic mitigation initiatives, and monitoring. 

Monitoring provides a means to address the uncertainty of our predictions and compliance with forest management laws and policy. The ROD clearly states that monitoring 

is essential and required: 

Monitoring is an essential component of the selected alternative. It ensures that 

management actions meet the prescribed standards and guidelines and that they 

comply with applicable laws and policies. Monitoring will provide information 

to determine if the standards and guidelines are being followed, verify if they are 

achieving the desired results, and determine if underlying assumptions are sound. 

Finally, Judge Dwyer reiterated the importance of monitoring in his 1994 decision 

declaring the Plan legally acceptable (Dwyer 1994): 

Monitoring is central to the [Northwest Forest Plan’s] validity. If it is not funded, 

or done for any reason, the plan will have to be reconsidered.
iv

The ROD monitoring plan provided a very general framework to begin development of an interagency monitoring program. It identified key areas to monitor, initial 

sets of questions, types and scope of monitoring, the need for common protocols and 

quality assurance, and the need to develop a common design framework. In 1995, 

the effectiveness monitoring program plan (Mulder et al. 1995) and initial protocols 

for implementation monitoring (Alegria et al. 1995) were approved by the Regional 

Interagency Executive Committee. Approval of the effectiveness monitoring plan led 

to the formation of technical teams to develop the overall program strategy and design 

(Mulder et al. 1999) and monitoring protocols for late-successional and old-growth 

forests (older forests) (Hemstrom et al. 1998), northern spotted owls (Lint et al. 1999), 

marbled murrelets (Brachyramphus marmoraturs) (Madsen et al. 1999), tribal (USDA 

and USDI 2002), and watershed condition (Reeves et al. 2004). Socioeconomic monitoring protocols continue to be tested (Charnley 2006).

Periodic analysis and interpretation of monitoring data is essential to completing 

the monitoring task. This important step was described in the overall monitoring strategy (Mulder et al. 1999), and the regional interagency executive committee approved a 

5-year interpretive reporting cycle. In 2005 and 2006, 10-year reports were published 

that contain the first comprehensive analysis and interpretation of monitoring data since 

the ROD.

This report is linked to the socioeconomic monitoring 10-year interpretive report 

(Charnley 2006). It contains detailed results from one of four case-study areas in which 

local-scale monitoring was conducted to complement regional-scale monitoring, the 

focus of the interpretive report.
v

Contents

1 Chapter 1: Overview of the Northwest Forest Plan Socioeconomic 

 Monitoring Program

3 Methods

3 Analytical Framework

4 Selection of Case-Study Forests

4 Selection of Case-Study Communities

5 Census Statistics

6 Interviews

7 Archival Data

7 Analysis

7 Limitations of the Study

8 The Olympic Peninsula: An Overview

8 The Case-Study Communities

8 Quilcene

10 Lake Quinault Area

13 The Quinault Indian Nation

19 Chapter 2: Trends in Socioeconomic Benefits From the Olympic National 

 Forest, 1990–2002, and the Impact of the Northwest Forest Plan

19 The Olympic National Forest

20 Resource and Recreation Outputs

21 Timber

23 Nontimber Forest Products

25 Grazing

25 Recreation

27 Forest Jobs and Budget

27 Changes in Jobs With the Forest Service

27 Trends

28 Impacts of Budget and Staff Changes

28 Contracting for Land Management

28 Overview

29 Changes in Spending and Contracted Activities

31 Concentration and Turnover of Contractors

32 Location of Olympic National Forest’s Contractors

32 Awards to Contractors in Affected Counties
vi

35 Community Economic Assistance

35 The Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative

36 Rural Community Assistance Program

36 Type of Grants

37 Trends in Granting Awards

37 Payments to County Governments

40 Chapter 2 Summary

41 Chapter 3: Community-Level Change and the Impact of the 

 Northwest Forest Plan

41 Quilcene

41 Community Change and the Effects of Forest Management Policy

45 Community Adaptation to Change

47 The Role of the U.S. Forest Service in Helping to Adapt to Change

47 Changing Relations Between Quilcene and the Olympic National Forest

48 Lake Quinault Area

48 Community Change and the Effects of Forest Management Policy

53 Adaptation to Change and the Role of Forest Service Assistance

55 The Role of the U.S. Forest Service in Helping to Adapt to Change

57 Changing Relations Between the Lake Quinault Area Communities 

 and the Olympic National Forest

58 The Quinault Indian Nation

58 Community Change and the Effects of Forest Management Policy

64 Adaptation to Change and the Role of Forest Service Assistance

65 The Role of the U.S. Forest Service in Helping to Adapt to Change

66 Changing Relations Between the Quinault Indian Nation and the 

 Olympic National Forest

67 Chapter 3 Summary`

69 Chapter 4: Communities and Forest Management

69 Collaboration and Joint Forest Stewardship

69 Who Are the Collaborators?

69 Benefits of Collaboration

70 Collaboration With Communities

71 Protecting Forest Values and Environmental Qualities

72 Issues and Concerns Relating to Forest Management

72 Forest Health

72 Access to the Forest
vii

73 Economic Benefits

73 Law Enforcement

74 Local Views of the Northwest Forest Plan

74 Benefits of the Northwest Forest Plan

74 Areas for Improvement

77 Chapter 5: Conclusions—Meeting Northwest Forest Plan Goals 

 and Expectations

77 Monitoring Questions and Socioeconomic Goals: An Evaluation

77 Timber

77 Nontimber Forest Products (NTFP)

77 Recreation

79 Lessons Learned for Adaptive Management

79 Timber Production

79 Nontimber Forest Products

79 Recreation and Tourism

79 Contracting

80 Community Economic Assistance

80 Collaboration

80 Metric Equivalents

80 Acknowledgments

80 Literature Cited

83 Appendix
viii
Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

Chapter 1: Overview of the Northwest Forest Plan 

Socioeconomic Monitoring Program

This case study was undertaken as part of the Northwest Forest Plan (the Plan) Socioeconomic Monitoring 

Program. It is one of four case studies conducted during 

2003 for the purpose of assessing the effects of the Plan 

on rural economies and communities within the range 

of the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina). 

This document is a supplement to Charnley (2006), which 

presents socioeconomic monitoring results for the Plan 

area from 1990 to 2003. It contains details not found in 

that report, and is intended to be useful to the Olympic 

National Forest and surrounding communities. The three 

case “communities” associated with the Olympic National 

Forest are (1) the community of Quilcene, (2) the Lake 

Quinault area, and (3) the Quinault Indian Nation (fig. 1). 

This case study was developed to respond to two 

socioeconomic effectiveness monitoring questions posed 

in the Northwest Forest Plan record of decision (ROD). 

The first focuses on use levels of natural resources: “Are 

predictable levels of timber and non-timber resources 

available and being produced?” (USDA and USDI 1994: 

E-9). The second evaluation question relates to rural 

economies and communities: “Are local communities 

and economies experiencing positive or negative changes 

that may be associated with federal forest management?” 

(USDA and USDI 1994: E-9). 

The evaluation questions posed in the ROD are based 

on a set of goals and expectations that were associated 

with the Plan when it was designed. One goal was to 

produce a predictable and sustainable supply of timber 

sales, nontimber forest resources, and recreation opportunities that would help meet a second goal: to maintain 

the stability of local and regional economies on a predictable, long-term basis (USDA and USDI 1994: 26), and to 

contribute to community well-being. Third, where timber 

sales could not proceed, the goal was to minimize adverse 

impacts on jobs by assisting with long-term economic 

development and diversification opportunities in those 

rural communities most affected by the cutbacks (USDA 

and USDI 1994: 3). The Northwest Economic Adjustment 

Initiative aimed to promote this goal and was expected to 

provide both immediate and long-term relief to rural people, 

businesses, and communities suffering from reductions in 

federal timber harvests (Tuchmann et al. 1996: 155–156). 

The fourth socioeconomic goal of the Plan was to establish 

a system of terrestrial and aquatic reserves that would 

protect forest values and environmental qualities associated 

with late-successional and old-growth forest ecosystems 

that members of the public cared deeply about (Clarke et al. 

1999: 15, Clinton and Gore 1993, USDA and USDI 1994: 

8–10). Fifth, the Plan aimed to usher in a new approach to 

federal forest management. In particular, federal agencies 

were called on to collaborate with one another in managing 

federal forests in the Pacific Northwest (Clinton and Gore 

1993, Tuchmann et al. 1996: 6, 44–48). Greater collaboration in forest management was also expected between 

agencies and citizens (Danks and Haynes 2001: 54). 

One component of the monitoring program uses case 

studies to investigate how the Plan has been implemented 

on individual forests within the Plan area, and how resultant 

shifts in forest management have affected forest users 

and surrounding communities. This document reports the 

results of one of these case studies. Specifically, we looked 

at how the flow of socioeconomic benefits associated with 

the Olympic National Forest has been affected by the 

Plan. The socioeconomic benefits we examined include 

the production of forest commodities (timber, nontimber 

forest products) and forest-based recreation; agency jobs; 

procurement contract work (focusing on ecosystem management activities); grant money for community economic 

assistance; benefits associated with payments to county 

governments; and opportunities to engage in collaborative 

forest management and stewardship activities, including 

partnership agreements. 

The remainder of chapter 1 provides a description of 

our methods, followed by a brief background description 

of the Olympic Peninsula and the three case-study communities. Chapter 2 focuses on the flow of socioeconomic 

benefits from the Olympic National Forest between 1990 

and 2002, and how the Plan has influenced that flow. Chapter 3 turns to the three communities and examines changes 
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Port

 Angeles

McCleary

Hoh River

i

Taholah

Cosmopolis

Hoquiam Montesano

Elma

Taholah

Sitkum River

Soleduck River

Ocean

 Shores

Westport

Quinault

 Indian

 Nation

Sitkum River

Sekiu River

Hoko River

Sooes River

Dickey River

Bogachiel River

Queets River

Pysht River

Soleduck River

Elwha River

Gray Wolf River

Duckabush River

Humptulips River

U.S. Highway 101

U.S. Highway 101

Shelton

Sequim

Olympia

Quinault River

Tumwater

Friday Harbor

Shelton

Quilcene

Sequim Port

 Angeles

Lake

Quinault

Area Quinault River

Friday Harbor

Olympic National Forest

Olympic 

National 

Park Clearwater River

Olympic 

 National 

 Forest

I-5

Neah Bay

Skokomish

Cosmopolis

Hoquiam Montesano

Elma

Forks

Sekiu River

Hoko River

Sooes River

Dickey River

Pysht River

Clearwater River

Elwha River

Gray Wolf River

Duckabush River

Humptulips River

U.S. Highway 101

U.S. Highway 101

Bogachiel River

0 5 10 Miles o

Olympic 

 National 

 Forest

Case-study

 national forest

Case-study community 

 boundaries

Northwest Forest Plan 

 region

National Park Service

Major lakes and rivers

State Highway 100 State Highway 109

P A C I F I C

O C E A N

Figure 1—The Olympic National Forest and three case-study communities. 
Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

that took place in those communities between 1990 and 

2003 and the influence of forest management policy; ways 

the communities have adapted to change, and the role of the 

forest in providing assistance; and, changing relationships 

between the forest and the communities over time. Chapter 

4 looks at issues relating to the management of the Olympic 

National Forest. It discusses collaboration and joint forest 

stewardship between the forest and the communities, how 

well forest management under the plan is providing for the 

forest values and environmental qualities local residents 

care about, current issues and concerns relating to forest 

management, and the views of community interviewees 

regarding what has and has not worked well about the Plan. 

Chapter 5 concludes by discussing the two monitoring 

questions and the five socioeconomic goals of the Plan. It 

assesses how well these goals have been met and attempts 

to answer the monitoring questions within the context of 

the Olympic case study.

Methods

Analytical Framework

The monitoring team relied on quantitative and qualitative 

data to develop the case studies and regional report. The 

baseline year for the socioeconomic monitoring program is 

1990. To answer the first evaluation question—Are predictable levels of timber and nontimber resources available and 

being produced?—we obtained quantitative and qualitative 

data on timber sales, special forest products, grazing, mining, and recreation from Forest Service and Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) databases, planning documents, and 

resource specialists. All of the monitoring teams associated 

with the Pacific Northwest Interagency Regional Monitoring Program were directed to obtain agency data from 

corporate databases, publications, or other sources available 

from agency national, regional, or state offices rather than 

requesting data from individual Forest Service and BLM 

field units (unless warranted by special circumstances). For 

the Olympic National Forest, we had access to their monitoring reports from their Web site, but consistent data were 

only available from 1999 onward. Thus, we relied primarily 

on the data from the national database, which set limitations 

on data availability and data quality. 

The analytical framework adopted by this module 

calls for showing that changes reflected by the trend data 

were caused by management actions under the Plan, or for 

providing alternative theories that could explain the changes 

observed. The team investigated links between trends in 

resource and recreation outputs, management actions under 

the Plan, and other explanatory variables by using a casestudy approach. We selected four forests from four different 

planning provinces in the Plan area for detailed study: the 

Olympic National Forest, the Mount Hood National Forest, the Klamath National Forest, and the Coos Bay BLM 

District. For this case study, we interviewed 24 Forest 

Service employees from the Olympic National Forest. We 

discussed trends in the indicator data for each resource area 

with program specialists, asking their perspectives on the 

reasons behind the trends observed and the role of the Plan 

in influencing them. 

Fully researching the causes of trends in resource and 

recreation outputs from federal forest lands since the Plan 

was adopted was beyond the scope of this exploratory study. 

However, the interview results provide a starting point for 

developing and testing hypotheses about how the Plan has 

affected the ability of the Forest Service and BLM to produce predictable quantities of timber sales and nontimber 

resources. Our team believes that understanding how the 

Plan has contributed to the observed trends is necessary for 

making informed policy decisions that address undesirable 

trends.

Our ability to answer the monitoring question (“Are 

predictable levels of timber and nontimber resources available and being produced?”) and to evaluate the Plan goal 

(“produce a predictable and sustainable level of timber sales 

and nontimber resources”) was limited by the availability 

and quality of agency data. For some resource indicators 

(such as much of the recreation data), we could obtain status 

but not trend data. We report the status data to provide a 

baseline for future monitoring. In some cases (such as minerals and special forest products), the resource data tracked 

by the agencies did not serve as adequate indicators for 

answering the monitoring question directly. Nonetheless, 

we believe that providing some information about trends in 

these resource areas is better than providing no information 
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

at all. Thus, we made the most of the available data, assessing what we could learn related to the monitoring question 

and goal. 

The second evaluation question has two components 

(Are local communities and economies experiencing 

positive or negative changes that may be associated with 

federal forest management?). Finding direct connections 

between changes in forest management policy and socioeconomic change is difficult. To assess whether social and 

economic change in local communities and economies was 

associated with the Plan, we examined trends in socioeconomic benefits from federal forests that potentially affect 

the well-being of residents of forest-based communities. 

These benefits included jobs and income associated with 

forest resources and recreation, agency jobs, and procurement contracting opportunities. We examined local-scale 

trends for the four case-study forests by using quantitative 

data from agency databases and other secondary sources. 

In addition, we evaluated the success of Plan mitigation 

measures designed to support rural communities and 

economies dependent on jobs in the wood products industry during a period of economic transition. These mitigation measures included creating new jobs in ecosystem 

restoration, the Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative, 

and providing a safety net for payments to counties to help 

compensate for the loss of revenue sharing based on timber 

receipts.

To supplement the quantitative monitoring data, the 

team employed a community case-study approach to 

gather and analyze qualitative data from interviews with 

Forest Service employees and a diverse set of community 

members. The qualitative data provided a more detailed 

understanding of the social and economic conditions and 

trends described by the quantitative data, how changes 

in the flow of forest benefits had contributed to change in 

local communities, and how the Plan affected the flow of 

socioeconomic benefits. These data describe the social 

and economic effects of the Plan on local communities, 

and how agency efforts to mitigate Plan impacts did or did 

not help communities adapt to change. Using the qualitative data, we identify key patterns, themes, and insights 

that emerge from the cases and use them to advance our 

understanding of how federal forest management policy is 

linked to socioeconomic well-being in forest-based communities. These interviews are also the main source of data for 

evaluating progress in agency-citizen collaboration under 

the Plan, and how effective the Plan has been in protecting 

forest values and environmental qualities associated with 

older forest and aquatic ecosystems.

Selection of Case-Study Forests

Case-study forests were chosen to represent one national 

forest in each of the three states that lie within the Plan area, 

and one BLM unit in Oregon, the only place that the BLM 

has significant land holdings inside the Plan area. They 

were also chosen to represent different provinces (the Plan 

area is broken up into 12 planning provinces). The monitoring program team leader sent a letter to all of the national 

forests and BLM districts in the Plan area and asked for 

volunteers to participate in socioeconomic monitoring. We 

adopted this approach because the monitoring effort was 

considered a pilot program, and we wanted to conduct it 

on forests that were interested in participating and making 

use of the resulting information. Two of the four case-study 

forests volunteered to participate and were chosen for that 

reason (the Olympic and the Mount Hood National Forests). 

We chose the Klamath National Forest because it was previously a high timber-producing forest, and the forest supervisor was supportive of social science work. We selected the 

Coos Bay District because the BLM Oregon state office 

recommended it, and the district manager was supportive of 

social science work. The Coos Bay District also had been a 

high timber-producing district prior to the Plan.

Selection of Case-Study Communities

Case-study communities associated with each forest were 

chosen on the basis of a number of criteria. First, the team 

identified a sampling frame of communities that included 

all of the census block group aggregates (BGAs) whose 

polygons lay, at least partially, within a 10-mile radius 

of the case-study forest boundaries. The team chose this 

distance because it wanted to focus the monitoring work in 

forest-based communities and assumed that communities 

near federal forests would have social, economic, or cultural 
Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

ties to those forests. We then met with agency employees 

from each case-study forest and showed them our sample 

frame. We discussed which of the communities within our 

sample frame currently or historically maintained some 

kind of relations with the case forest and the managing 

agency, and which did not exhibit any relationship with the 

forest. This process narrowed our sample frame. 

We selected three communities associated with each 

case-study forest from the sample frame for monitoring 

because time and budget constraints did not allow for a 

larger community sample. We recognize, however, that in 

only choosing three communities around each forest, we 

might not capture all of the variation in community “types,” 

or in community-forest relations in each case-study area. 

We initially chose case-study communities randomly from 

a stratified sample. We stratified communities within the 

sample frame on the basis of their socioeconomic wellbeing measure in 1990, by using three categories: high, 

medium, and low. We randomly chose one community 

from each stratum, unless there were no communities in 

one of the strata. 

Once in the field, however, it soon became apparent that 

the communities initially selected through this approach 

would provide only a very limited understanding of the 

impacts of the Plan on communities within the Olympic 

National Forest (i.e., they had very few connections to the 

forest, were not located on the Olympic Peninsula, or only 

covered a very narrow geographic range). We thus drew 

upon the advice of key informants at the Olympic National 

Forest, as well as upon our own observations during 

preliminary fieldwork, to identify three communities that 

would illustrate a broader range of responses to the socioeconomic changes taking place on the Olympic Peninsula 

during the 1990s. We then used the census block group 

delineations that encompassed the selected communities for 

the purposes of bounding the communities and analyzing 

census data.

For this case study, the three communities selected 

were Quilcene, the Lake Quinault Area (Quinault-NeiltonAmanda Park), and the Quinault Indian Nation (TaholahQueets). We were also interested in including communities 

that had potentially different orientations to the forest. 

Preliminary field visits and discussions with Forest Service 

employees and local residents led us to believe that the 

three communities—Quilcene, Lake Quinault Area, and the 

Quinault Indian Nation—corresponded to timber, recreation, and tribal orientations, respectively. Only later did we 

discover that Quilcene and the Lake Quinault communities 

were probably more highly dependent on timber from the 

Olympic National Forest than most other peninsula communities, thus potentially biasing our results toward greater 

impacts on timber workers. Our results may be also biased 

toward greater impacts from Forest Service downsizing 

owing to the presence of district offices at both Quilcene 

and Lake Quinault. For the Quinault Indian Nation, we 

found that because of the tribe’s relatively large land base, 

its relationship with the Forest Service was quite different 

from other communities (both tribal and nontribal), and 

thus was not necessarily representative of other peninsula 

tribes. We included the Quinault Indian Nation case because 

we felt that it illuminated the variability among peninsula 

communities, the relationship with Olympic National Forest, and responses to the Plan. 

Once we selected the case communities, we used the 

interview process to determine how the communities should 

be defined for case-study purposes. The census BGA delineations were used for initially selecting case communities; 

however, the model we used did not necessarily correspond 

geographically to the place that community members considered to be “their community.” Thus the BGA community 

delineations were starting points for defining study communities, but we adjusted those definitions once we got to the 

field and learned how local residents conceptualized their 

community. Chapter 3 provides a more detailed description 

of the final community boundaries for each case study. 

Census Statistics

We compared U.S. census statistics from 1990 and 2000 

for the case study communities (i.e., census BGAs) to 

determine changes in socioeconomic conditions. We 

selected demographic indicators, such as total population, 

median age, school enrollment, percentage of population 

that completed high school, percentage of population with 

a bachelor’s degree or greater, age distribution, ethnicity, 
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

population by race, and Hispanic population. We also 

looked at economic indicators, such as median household 

income, percentage of unemployed, percentage living in 

poverty, household income distribution, and employment 

by industry. In addition to comparing changes over time 

within communities, we also compared how the community 

indicators had changed relative to the same indicators at the 

county level.

Interviews

We selected interviewees purposefully, rather than 

randomly, because we wanted to interview local experts 

who could provide information relevant to the monitoring 

questions posed in this chapter. We chose interviewees so as 

to capture as much of the potential range of variation in the 

populations under study as was feasible given funding and 

time constraints. We interviewed 19 people from Quilcene, 

14 people from Lake Quinault, and 17 people from the 

Quinault Indian Nation. Not all interviewees were residents 

of the communities.1 Some represented individuals who 

worked in the community or had a connection to either the 

community or the portion of the national forest that surrounded the community. In addition, several Forest Service 

employees were familiar with, worked in, or were long-term 

residents of the case-study communities, and were thus 

interviewed about management and resource output changes 

on the forest as well as changes in community-forest 

relations and socioeconomic conditions for the case-study 

communities. A general description of the interviewees 

from the three communities and forest is provided in the 

appendix. Because of the potentially sensitive nature of 

some of the interview questions, the names of interviewees 

are confidential and are omitted from the list. 

After identifying categories of informants to be 

interviewed in each community and on the forest, we used 

a snowball sampling approach to locate interviewees. This 

approach entails locating key individuals in a community, 

and asking them to identify people who would be appropriate to interview about the topics under study. Snowball sampling is an effective method of building a sampling frame 

where there is a relatively small population of people who 

know of and come into contact with one another (Bernard 

2002), as was the case in most of the communities and all of 

the forest units that we sampled. However, to avoid selecting interviewees belonging to only a narrow segment of the 

community (a hazard of snowball sampling as pointed out 

by Jackson et al. [2004]), we also reviewed planning documents and newspaper articles to identify interviewees likely 

to be knowledgeable about various aspects of community 

change. The criteria we used to develop our sample frame 

included people who represented one of the informant 

categories initially identified; people who had lived in the 

case community or worked on the case forest at least since 

1994, when the Plan was adopted; people who were knowledgeable about the topics under study; people who were 

considered able to provide a window into the community or 

the forest; and people who were willing to talk with us. 

The team gathered names of potential interviewees 

and contacted those people whose names were repeatedly 

mentioned to set up an interview time and location. We 

conducted semistructured interviews by using an interview 

guide that contained a list of questions and topics to be covered during the interview (see Charnley 2006). Interviews 

with community members covered the following topics: 

• The role of forest management policy in the 

socioeconomic changes occurring in their 

communities between 1990 and 2000 

• How their communities have responded to 

those changes 

• How well the Plan has provided the forest values 

stakeholders consider important 

1Social scientists have engaged in debates over the concept of 

community for more than a century. Numerous definitions of 

community exist; all of them are problematic from the standpoint 

of how to operationalize them in field studies (Jackson et al. 2004). 

As noted by Jackson et al. (2004: 226), “Conceptualizations of 

community range from the conventional community of place 

(a town) to communities of interest (people sharing common 

interests), and occupational communities (people united by shared 

identification and interactions within an occupation).” Drawing 

on Wilkinson (1991), they point out that a local community can 

encompass multiple social fields (i.e., place, occupation, membership in civic groups, religious affiliation, etc.). For the purposes of 

this case study, we adopted a broad definition of community that 

encompassed social fields in addition to residency in a particular 

location (e.g., occupation, civic action, forest management 

interests). 
Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

• Current issues and concerns relating to 

management of the forest

• Trends in Forest Service-community collaboration

During the interviews, we also showed interviewees 

charts of quantitative data from the U.S. census comparing 

socioeconomic conditions in 1990 and 2000, and asked 

them to comment on both the accuracy of the data relative 

to their community and possible explanations for observed 

changes. Interviewers took handwritten notes during 

the interviews and transcribed the notes into a computer 

word processing file for later analysis. Interviews ranged 

in length from 45 minutes to 2 hours, depending on the 

interviewees range of involvement in community activities of relevance to this study and knowledge of forest 

management and policy. We adopted Mishler’s (1986) 

approach to interviewing, in which interviews are viewed 

as discourse, or “meaningful speech between interviewer 

and interviewee as speakers of a shared language” (Mishler 

1986: 10–11). Interviews of this sort tend to take on the form 

of a conversation between the interviewer and informant 

(Riessman 1993).

Archival Data

We also gathered archival data, including community and 

agency planning documents, Web sites, newspaper articles, 

and historical documents to shed light on the types of 

changes occurring in the communities and potential causes 

of those changes. The archival data served as an important 

cross check to interview data, allowing us to verify, clarify, 

and contextualize statements made by interviewees.

Analysis

In preparing for the initial phase of fieldwork, the entire 

socioeconomic assessment team, which initially consisted 

of eight case-study researchers and one database-development specialist, selected the topics listed above for inclusion 

in the interviews. We conducted data gathering and analysis 

simultaneously in an ongoing iterative process while in the 

field. We then refined the analysis after completing the fieldwork, drawing upon archival data and followup clarifying 

interviews to provide context and to address inconsistencies 

and contradictions within the interview data for each case. 

In analyzing the interview data, researchers first sorted 

the transcribed interview data into the broad analytical 

categories listed above, a form of closed coding (Emerson 

et al. 1995). The researchers then used an open coding 

technique (Emerson et al. 1995: 150–155) to mark reoccurring analytical categories within each of the broad topic 

areas. 

In presenting our data, we used a style that Emerson 

et al. (1995: 170–174) referred to as a thematic narrative. 

In thematic narratives, the “writer organizes some of these 

themes into a coherent ‘story’ about life and events in the 

setting studied” (Emerson et al. 1995: 173). In developing 

thematic narratives, the writer selects “only some small 

portion of the total set of field notes and then [links] them 

into a coherent text representing some aspect or slice of the 

world studied” (Emerson et al. 1995: 173). Thematic narratives allow the researcher to illustrate “distinctions and 

interconnections between related phenomena” (Emerson 

et al. 1995: 173). 

Limitations of the Study

The scope of this study was limited by two main factors:

(1) We did not design this study with the objective of 

testing specific causal hypotheses relating to the 

monitoring trends, or to the effects of forest management policy on local communities. Rather, we 

conducted this study to develop an indepth contextualized understanding of the effects of agency 

management actions, policies, and programs on 

forest-based communities in different locations. 

As such, the case-study findings cannot be used 

(nor were they intended to be used) as the basis 

for making generalized statements about socioeconomic changes and the ways in which those 

may have been affected by the Plan in the entire 

universe of communities located within the Plan 

area. However, the results do serve as a foundation 

for developing hypotheses to be tested in future 

research projects. We view the case communities 

as an initial sample that will form part of a larger 
GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

community sample to be monitored in the future as 

part of the Northwest Forest Plan socioeconomic 

effectiveness monitoring program.

(2) Because most of the people we interviewed lived in 

and around the three case-study communities, the 

findings tend to privilege the perceptions of members of these particular communities of place over 

the perceptions of other citizens (e.g., members of 

more distant communities of place who may, nonetheless, have been affected by the Plan). As a result, 

the impacts of the Plan on people living at a distance (i.e., farther than 10 miles) from the Olympic 

National Forest (e.g., residents of Aberdeen/

Hoquiam, Seattle/Tacoma/Olympia metropolitan 

areas, the Interstate 5 corridor, and other areas of the 

United States) are not addressed in this study. We 

recognize that from an economic impact standpoint 

alone this is problematic, given that wood products 

processing activities were already shifting away 

from the Olympic Peninsula prior to the Plan. It is 

quite possible, and indeed probable, that mill workers outside the immediate area around the Olympic 

National Forest were affected by the decreased 

levels of timber harvest on the forest. Similarly, it 

is also possible that the forest’s focus on ecosystem restoration has benefited residents outside the 

immediate area in terms of recreation and tourism 

opportunities, improved water and air quality, and 

other noncommodity outputs. Timing and funding 

constraints, however, did not permit us to utilize a 

design that would have allowed us to describe the 

impacts of the Plan on people located at a distance 

from the forest.

The Olympic Peninsula: An Overview

The Olympic Peninsula is located in northwestern Washington and includes the counties of Clallam, Grays Harbor, 

Jefferson, and Mason. The peaks of the Olympic Mountains 

form the central core of the Peninsula and are primarily 

under the management of the Olympic National Park. 

Olympic National Forest forms a ring around Olympic 

National Park. Other major landownership categories on 

the Olympic Peninsula include State Trust Lands, managed by the Washington Department of Natural Resources, 

private industrial timberland, and tribal lands. Major 

population centers include Port Angeles (with a population 

of 18,397 in 2000), on the northern tip of the peninsula; Port 

Townsend (population 8,334), on the northeastern tip of the 

peninsula; Shelton (population 8,442), on the southeastern 

portion of the peninsula; and Aberdeen (population 16,461) 

and Hoquiam (population 9,097), on the southwestern end 

of the peninsula. 

The climate of the peninsula can be characterized 

as temperate and rainy, although rainfall can be quite 

variable between the western and eastern sides of the 

Olympic Mountains. The western portion of the Peninsula 

receives an average of up to 140 inches of rain per year. 

The climax vegetation on the western peninsula consists of 

temperate rain forests composed of western hemlock (Tsuga 

heterophylla (Raf.) Sarg.), western redcedar (Thuja plicata

Donn ex D. Don), and some Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis

(Bong.) Carr) at lower elevations. Currently, Douglas-fir 

(Pseudotsuga menziesi (Mirb.) Franco) composes an 

important component of west-side stands. The Olympic 

Mountains create a rain shadow effect on the eastern slopes, 

where precipitation can often average as low as 40 inches 

per year. Douglas-fir and western hemlock forests are more 

characteristic on the drier, eastern side, with a higher proportion of Douglas-fir than on the west side (FEMAT 1993). 

The Case-Study Communities

Quilcene

Quilcene is a community of 375 residents located along 

Hood Canal adjacent to the eastern boundaries of the 

Olympic National Forest, on the Olympic Peninsula (fig. 2). 

Quilcene’s downtown core lies on Highway 101, a welltraveled tourist route, 25 miles south of the Jefferson 

County seat, Port Townsend, 73 miles north of the state 

capital, Olympia, and less than 2 hours from Seattle. 

Expanding out from the downtown core there are limited 

commercial and industrial areas, a public school, and 

residential development to the north, southeast, and east. 
Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

For the purposes of this study, census BGAs data 

were used to describe Quilcene. Block Group Aggregation 

6307 includes the downtown commercial core, marine 

industrial areas along Hood Canal, and residential areas in 

proximity to downtown Quilcene. The BGA 6307 closely 

approximates the village of Quilcene boundaries established 

for planning purposes by the Jefferson County Planning 

Department and reflects a narrow definition of the community. Depending on their affiliations or occupations, 

area residents variously think of Quilcene as business core, 

fire district, postal code, or school district boundaries. 

Fire district, school district, and ZIP code boundaries are 

more expansive and include portions of BGAs 6308 and 

6304. Census information for BGAs 6304 and 6308 is not 

included in this report. However, this case-study report 

draws its information from and describes a community that 

encompasses this broader area of roughly 84 square miles 

that is sparsely populated. The broader area, as defined by 

ZIP code 98376, was populated by 1,644 at the time of the 

1990 census and increased to 1,767 in 2000. The area that 

is BGA 6308—East Quilcene, Dabob, Camp Discovery, 

Coyle—includes the people—about 400 in 1996—on the 

Bolton (Coyle) and Dabob Peninsulas. The area’s small but 

growing population has, for the most part, little relationship 

with the study area. The BGA 6304, Leland (population 

about 800), is north and northwest of the downtown area. 

Leland consists of old homesteads in pasturelands adjacent 

to forest lands. Historically, there was a close social and 

Big Quilcene River

Little Quilcene River

U.S. Highway 101

Dabob Bay

Quilcene

Bay

Tarboo 

Bay

Thorndyke Bay

Jackson

Cove

Squamish

Harbor

Hood Canal

Center Road

Dabob Road

Thorndyke Road

Bridgehaven

Camp

Discovery

Dabob

East

Quilcene

Bees Mill

Leland

U.S. Highway 101

Vinland

State Highway 104

Coyle Road

Bridgehaven

Camp

Discovery

Dabob

East

Quilcene

Bees Mill

Leland

Vinland

State Highway 104

Coyle Road

Case-study national forest

Case-study community 

 boundaries

Northwest Forest Plan region

Major lakes and rivers

 Roads

 Major roads

0 1 2 Miles o

Quilcene

Olympic

National

Forest

Figure 2—Quilcene case-study community boundaries.
10

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

economic relationship between the Leland population 

and Quilcene. 

Quilcene was initially settled in the 1860s and by 1880 

had a population of about 65 (Jefferson County Historical 

Society). It received considerable investment in the late 

1880s when railroad enthusiasts and Port Townsend boosters speculated on the transcontinental railway running up 

the Olympic Peninsula and terminating at Port Townsend. 

Investments were made, but the rail was never developed. 

Nevertheless, Quilcene remained firmly rooted. Located 

along Hood Canal, it has maintained a marine orientation 

since its early days and still has an active shellfish industry. 

The area is particularly renowned for its rich oyster beds, 

established in the 1930s. Quilcene is adjacent to forest lands 

to the west, nearly all within the Olympic National Forest 

and Olympic National Park. The local economy has relied 

on forest resources, with a longstanding orientation toward 

logging since the 1920s. Additionally, lush pastures in 

small valleys north of Quilcene once sustained a number of 

agricultural enterprises. 

Quilcene’s commercial center has long served as a 

goods and service hub for the Hood Canal region of the 

Olympic Peninsula, serving the largely dispersed population of a broad geographic area, including the community 

of Brinnon to the south. Hadlock, a town north of State 

Route 104, 15 miles from Quilcene, now serves as the local 

commercial center for the southern portion of the county. 

A larger grocery store, hardware store, and other retail and 

professional services are located in Hadlock.

By all accounts, Quilcene was a traditional timber 

town. Most male residents worked at least part of the year 

in logging. The downtown core comprised small business 

such as restaurants, grocery stores, and gas and service 

stations. The community also served as the headquarters 

for the Forest Service’s Quilcene Ranger District (now the 

Hood Canal Ranger District), and a number of residents 

worked for the Forest Service. Although there are state and 

private lands in proximity to Quilcene, the main source of 

employment was working for one of several local timber 

contractors who bought or logged sales on the Olympic 

National Forest.

Given its central role in the economy, the Forest Service was a predominant force in the community, providing 

timber sales, contracts, and receipts to support the local 

economy. One resident noted that in the 1950s, one local 

logging company employed over 100 men and the work was 

almost entirely on the Olympic National Forest. As late as 

the early 1990s there were two logging companies, Peterson/Bellingham Logging and Hanley and Philips Logging. 

These companies provided seasonal employment to local 

residents, logging primarily Forest Service timber. 

Lake Quinault Area

The Lake Quinault area includes the communities of 

Quinault, Neilton, and Amanda Park in the southwestern 

portion of the Olympic Peninsula (fig. 3). The three communities are approximately 40 miles north of Hoquiam, along 

the western loop of Highway 101, and about 30 miles east 

of the Pacific coast, in Grays Harbor County, Washington. 

Referred to as the Quinault Rain Forest, the area receives 

an average of about 140 inches of rain a year. Adding to the 

scenic beauty of the area is Lake Quinault, a natural lake 

created by glacial runoff from the Olympic Mountains. 

The town of Quinault is located on the south shore of Lake 

Quinault; Neilton is located approximately 5 miles south of 

the lake along Highway 101; and Amanda Park is located 

along the northwest end of the lake. Amanda Park lies 

within the boundaries of the Quinault Indian Reservation, 

although it is considered a nontribal community. All three 

communities are unincorporated, and are within 10 miles of 

one another, sharing services and resources. For example, 

the school (kindergarten through 12th grade) is located 

in Amanda Park, whereas the health clinic is in Neilton. 

Residents consider Quinault, Neilton, and Amanda Park 

to be part of one “community.”

Census data, collected at the level of census BGAs, 

were used to measure changes in socioeconomic condition 

between 1990 and 2000. For this study, the BGA is defined 

as Quinault-Neilton-Weatherwax (6109), which includes 

the communities of Quinault and Neilton. Amanda Park, 

however, is located within the Quinault Indian Reservation 

(BGA 6101). Although it is possible to break the BGA down 
11

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

into individual block groups and look only at the Amanda 

Park block group, the boundaries of this block group were 

changed between 1990 and 2000, making comparisons 

between years difficult at this level. Thus, for the purposes 

of this case study, qualitative data from interviews include 

changes that have taken place in the area as a whole (including Amanda Park), whereas quantitative census statistics 

will only include the communities of Quinault and Neilton 

(BGA 6109). 

The three communities abut the southwestern portion 

of the Olympic National Forest. Quinault is surrounded 

by the national forest to the south, east, and west, and is 

bounded by Lake Quinault to the north (which is under the 

jurisdiction of the Quinault Indian Nation). The Quinault 

Ranger Station, which is now part of the Pacific Ranger District, is located at Quinault. The Olympic National Forest 

surrounds Neilton on all sides. Amanda Park, as mentioned 

previously, lies within the boundaries of the Quinault 

Indian Reservation, and borders the Olympic National Park 

to the north. The north shore of Lake Quinault and the 

adjoining uplands are part of the Olympic National Park. 

Other major landowners in the area include the Quinault 

Indian Nation, which owns or manages lands downstream 

of Lake Quinault; the Washington Department of Natural 

Resources, which also manages timberlands; and private 

industrial timberland owners, such as Rayonier, Weyerhaueser, and Merrill-Ring.

Figure 3—Lake Quinault case-study community boundaries.

Quinault River

West Fork Humptulips River

Wynoochee River

Wynoochee 

Lake

Quinault River

Wynoochee

Quinault

Lake

Amanda Park

Neilton

Quinault

Norwood

Weatherwax

Grisdale

U.S. Highway 101

Salmon River

U.S. Highway 101

Moclips Highway

Lake Quinault Area

Olympic National Forest

Case-study national forest

Case-study community boundaries

Northwest Forest Plan region

National Park Service

o

Major lakes and rivers

 Roads

 Major roads

0 5 Miles
12

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Prior to Euro-American settlement, the area was 

historically part of the territory of the Quinault and Queets 

Indians. Although today the population is predominantly 

Caucasian, the Native American presence is still evident 

in the area, owing to the proximity of the Quinault Indian 

Reservation. The Quinault Tribe manages a fish hatchery 

on the lake, and some tribe members live and work in the 

communities. Also, students from Queets, one of the two 

tribal villages on the Quinault Reservation, attend middle 

and high school at Lake Quinault School. 

Anglo settlement of the area began in the late 1880s and 

1890s. The early pioneers were homesteaders who cleared 

the forest to establish farms and raise cattle. Others were 

attracted to the area in search of gold and other minerals. 

The Quinault town site was cleared in the 1890s. A farm 

site was settled in Neilton in the 1860s but was destroyed 

by fire in 1885. E.E. Fishel, the first Forest Service Ranger 

at Quinault, eventually settled the Neilton area in 1910 

(Righter 1978). 

As timber became a more important commodity in 

the early 1900s, a new group of settlers arrived in the 

Lake Quinault area to establish timber claims. The timber 

industry subsequently became an important part of the local 

economy. Small mills were established in the area as early 

as 1914 (Righter 1978). As the timber industry became more 

consolidated, with larger companies purchasing land or 

Forest Service timber sales, railway lines were established 

to ship logs to Hoquiam. Logging in the area increased after 

World War II, as the national demand for housing increased. 

Timber harvest data available between 1965 and 2001 

show that of the four counties on the Olympic Peninsula, 

Grays Harbor County harvested the greatest amount of 

timber, with an average of about 600 million board feet per 

year (mmbf) for all timberlands, and a peak of 981 mmbf 

in 1988. Between 1965 and 2001, the majority of timber 

harvested came from private lands (an average of 427 

mmbf), with an average of approximately 80 mmbf coming 

from tribal lands (i.e., the Quinault Indian Reservation), 

23 mmbf from state, and 50 mmbf from federal lands. At 

one time, the Port of Grays Harbor was the largest timber 

exporting port on the Pacific coast. The average harvest 

from federal land was 72 mmbf until 1989, after which the 

average declined to 5 mmbf. A Congressional agreement 

signed with Grays Harbor County created the Grays Harbor 

Sustained Yield Unit, which specified that 50 percent of the 

timber harvested from the Quinault District be processed 

within the county. The federal timber supplied logs to both 

the small local mills in the Quinault area, as well as the 

large mills in Aberdeen and Hoquiam. During the 1970s 

and 1980s, cedar shake mills, in addition to small sawmills, 

sprung up along Highway 101, many of which were highly 

dependent on Forest Service timber. Thus, up until the late 

1980s, the timber industry served as a key source of jobs for 

residents of the Lake Quinault area.

Although timber fueled the economic engine of the 

community, tourism has always been important to the area. 

Some early pioneer families became involved in guide 

services, as well as the development of lodges, inns, and 

chalets in and around the lake. In 1890, Alfred Higley, one 

of the first Anglo settlers to the area, opened the Quinault 

Lodge (Righter 1978). Although he closed it a year later, a 

new lodge was built in 1903. This lodge burned in 1923, but 

was rebuilt in 1924, and continues to operate today, attracting tourists from around the world. A chalet, built by the 

pioneer Olson family, was constructed in the 1920s along 

the east drainage of the Quinault River at Enchanted Valley, 

which is now part of Olympic National Park. 

The lives of the Lake Quinault residents have continuously been intertwined with the USDA Forest Service 

almost since the area was first settled. In 1897, the Olympic 

Forest Reserve was created, and the forest was surveyed, 

cruised, and mapped between 1898 and 1900 (Rooney 

1997). In 1909, the Forest Service took over the Quinault 

town site and temporarily used the Quinault Lodge as its 

district headquarters (Righter 1978). Between 1910 and 

1911, the Forest Service surveyed the Quinault town site 

and established summer lots. By 1916, a ranger station was 

established and served as the district headquarters for the 

Quinault Ranger District until 1998, when the district was 

consolidated into the Pacific District. The Quinault Ranger 

District covered about 130,000 acres in the southwest portion of the Olympic National Forest. Half of the district was 

located to the north of Lake Quinault, and another portion 

to the south of the lake, and included the south shore of 
13

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

Lake Quinault. In 1998, the Quinault Ranger District was 

consolidated with the Sol Duc Ranger District to become 

the Pacific Ranger District, and the main headquarters 

moved to Forks. Although the Quinault office remains open, 

the staff has been reduced. The district ranger shares his 

time between Forks and Quinault, but is primarily at Forks.

The Quinault Indian Nation

The Quinault Indian Nation is the sovereign nation of the 

Quinault people, and six other tribes (Queets, Quileute, 

Hoh, Chehalis, Cowlitz, and Chinook) that were relocated 

to the reservation in mid and late 1800s. Tribal enrollment 

is currently about 3,000 members, with half of the population living on the Quinault Indian Reservation. Many of 

those living off of the reservation reside in the Aberdeen/

Hoquiam area, about 45 miles south of the reservation. The 

reservation covers 208,150 acres of land, and is the third 

largest Indian reservation in the state of Washington (fig. 4).

Most residents living on the Quinault Indian Reservation reside in the Indian villages of Taholah and Queets, 

with a smaller segment of the population residing in the 

nontribal community of Amanda Park. Taholah is a coastal 

fishing community located at the mouth of the Quinault 

River. Located at the terminus of a remote section of State 

Route 109 in Grays Harbor County, with a population of 

about 871, Taholah is home to most of the Quinault tribe 

members, and all government and administrative offices

are there. The village of Queets is on the northern part 

Figure 4— Quinault Indian Nation case-study community boundaries.

i

West Fork Humptulips River

Quinault River

Quinault

Lake

Amanda Park

Neilton

Quinault

Norwood

U.S. Highway 101

Salmon River

Moclips Highway

Moclips

Taholah

Queets

Clearwater

Kalaloch

Queets River

U.S. Highway 101

Lake 

Quinault 

Area

Quinault

Indian

Nation

P A C I F I C

O C E A N

Case-study 

 national forest

Case-study 

 community 

 boundaries

Northwest Forest 

 Plan region

National Park 

 Service

Major lakes 

 and rivers

 Roads

 Major roads 0 5 Miles

o State Highway 100 State Highway 109

Humptulips

Olympic National Forest
14

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

of the reservation off of Highway 101 at the mouth of the 

Queets River, a few miles inland from the Pacific Ocean. 

Queets falls just within the boundary of Jefferson County, 

and has a population of about 149 residents. Although 

Queets is only about 15 miles north of Taholah “as the crow 

flies,” no direct route exists between the two communities. 

Instead, from Taholah one must travel inland 45 miles 

to Lake Quinault and continue northwest along highway 

101 for another 30 miles to Queets. Consequently, Queets 

has been fairly isolated from much of the employment 

opportunities and tribal activities taking place in Taholah. 

Amanda Park is located inland at the eastern boundary of 

the reservation, along Highway 101 on the western shore 

of Lake Quinault. 

For this study, we focused primarily on the communities of Taholah and Queets, as the majority of tribe 

members reside in these communities. Although some tribe 

members reside in Amanda Park, the community identifies 

itself more closely with the Quinault-Neilton communities. 

Qualitative information for Amanda Park is thus presented 

with the Lake Quinault Area data. Because BGAs were 

used to measure changes in socioeconomic condition 

between 1990 and 2000, data from the entire reservation 

(including Amanda Park) were combined. We attempted 

to disaggregate the data into individual block groups; 

however, the block group boundaries changed between 

1990 and 2000, making comparisons difficult. Thus, for this 

study, census statistics represent the entire BGA, defined 

as Taholah census designated place (CDP)-Quinault Indian 

Reservation (BGA 6101).

The Quinault Indian Reservation is west of the 

southwestern portion of the Olympic National Forest. The 

Quinault Indian Nation shares many of its watersheds with 

the Olympic National Forest and the Olympic National 

Park, with the headwaters located within the park or forest, 

and the lower portions of the watersheds located within the 

reservation. The Quinault Indian Nation also owns Lake 

Quinault, and manages a fish hatchery on the lake. 

The Quinault people have resided along the Quinault 

River for thousands of years. They lived in permanent 

villages along the river and also in temporary settlements 

across large portions of the southwestern Olympic Peninsula. Livelihoods were based on fishing (primarily salmon 

and steelhead), hunting, and gathering. Elaborate trade 

networks were established between the Quinaults and other 

peninsula tribes, primarily by canoe travel, but also over 

land. 

The Quinault’s first contact with non-Indians was in 

the late 1700s, when Spanish explorers arrived in the area. 

Contact with non-Indians increased through the early and 

mid-1800s as more Anglo explorers, traders, and settlers 

came to the area. In 1853, the Washington Territory was 

created. To secure land for Anglo settlement and restrict 

Indian claims to land, Governor Isaac Stevens began to 

negotiate treaties with the Washington tribes. Many of the 

tribes, whose populations had been decimated by smallpox, measles, and influenza introduced by Anglo traders, 

reluctantly signed these treaties in an effort to secure access 

to their primary villages or ancestral rivers. In addition 

to having a reservation homeland, the U.S. government 

promised to provide education, medical care, and maintain 

the right for tribes to hunt, fish, and gather in their usual 

and accustomed areas (i.e., ancestral territories). In 1855, 

the Quinaults, along with the Queets, Quileutes, and Hohs, 

signed the Quinault River Treaty, which relinquished all 

claims to the tribes’ vast ancestral lands in exchange for 

land on a reservation. Stevens selected the area around 

the Quinault River as an appropriate place for a reservation, owing to the dense forests that made it unsuitable for 

farming by Anglo settlers. Although the Quinaults were 

content to maintain access to their native river, other tribes 

were forced to move away from their ancestral lands to the 

Quinault Reservation. In 1873, the Quinault Reservation 

was enlarged to include members of other tribes that never 

signed treaties.

The U.S. government used a number of strategies to 

try to assimilate Indians into Euro-American culture and 

society. Early attempts were through religious proselytizing, compulsory education for children at boarding schools 

operated by the USDI Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and 

privatization of land. This last approach was an effort to 

convert Indians into farmers, and was initiated in 1887, 
15

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

when Congress passed the General Allotment Act (or the 

Dawes Act),2 which divided reservation land into private 

allotments for farming. The Quinault Reservation was 

divided into over 2,300 80-acre private allotments (Stocks 

2003). Most of the land, however, was heavily forested 

and unsuitable for farming. 

Although the Quinaults were never converted to 

farmers, the privatization of their reservation resulted in 

loss of the majority of their land to non-Indians. Individual Indian families, unable to make a living on their 

80-acre allotment, were often forced to sell their land. 

As the market for timber increased in the late 1800s and 

early 1900s, the value of the forested land of the Quinault 

Reservation increased, attracting large timber companies. 

In 1922, the Aloha Corporation began railroad logging on 

the Quinault Reservation, initiating a pattern of largescale logging that would last for the next 50 years. The 

BIA, which managed the land in “trust” for individual 

Indian families, established long-term contracts (or 

“block sales”) with a few logging companies. Stocks 

(2003) described the logging practices between the early 

1950s to mid-1970s: “Whole watersheds were logged off, 

streams jammed, and landowners received poor prices for 

their trees.” It was not until 1971, following protests and 

roadblocks by Quinault tribe members, that these practices received public attention (Stocks 2003). 

The division of the reservation into private allotments 

left a legacy of fragmented land ownership that continues 

to create land management and jurisdictional problems 

for the tribe. Today, land ownership consists of a 

checkerboard pattern of trust, fee, and tribal land. Trust 

land is land owned by individual Indian families and 

held in trust by the BIA; fee land is privately owned 

by non-Indians; and tribal land is owned by the Quinault 

Indian Nation. In 1980, the Quinault Indian Nation owned 

only 2 percent of the land on the reservation. Through an 

aggressive land acquisition program, the tribe now owns 

65,000 acres (31 percent of all Quinault Indian Reservation 

lands), with 70,000 acres of trust land and 73,150 acres 

of fee lands. Because the trust lands cannot be divided, 

many are owned by multiple generations of families (one 

source reported that in some cases, 250 people own a parcel 

jointly). Large timber companies, such as Rayonier, and 

Anderson and Middleton, own a large proportion of the 

fee lands (Stocks 2003).

Development of a more autonomous tribal governance 

structure began in 1934, with the passage of the Indian 

Reorganization Act, which established federally recognized 

tribal governments. The Quinault had already established 

its bylaws in 1922. However, more restrictive policies 

during the 1950s and early 1960s delayed any further movement toward a self-governing structure until the late 1960s. 

In 1975, the tribe approved its constitution, following the 

Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, 

which called for maximum Indian participation in setting 

the direction of federal services to Indian communities. The 

tribe began to develop programs and provide services to 

tribe members, such as subsidized housing, which offered 

affordable housing and encouraged people to move back 

to the reservation. In 1988, the U.S. government initiated 

a demonstration project for tribal self-rule. In 1990, the 

Quinault Indian Nation was one of seven tribes in the 

United States to participate in a demonstration project in 

which the tribe governed its own operations. Based on 

the success of these demonstration projects, Congress 

passed the Tribal Self-Governance Act3 in 1993. Federal 

appropriations could then be passed directly to tribes 

(rather than through the BIA and Indian Health Services), 

and tribal governments expanded. Currently, the Quinault 

Indian Nation administers five departments: Administrative 

2The General Allotment Act of 1887 (referred to as the Dawes 

Act) privatized reservation land, which was held in common by 

tribe members. Land allotments were granted to individuals and 

families ranging from 30 to 120 acres. “Surplus” land not allotted 

or otherwise reserved for the tribe was sold to the government and 

made available for homesteading. The result of the Dawes Act and 

the “Allotment Era” was the loss of 64 percent of tribally owned 

land between 1887 and 1933. Although originally the Dawes Act 

claimed to protect Indian property rights during the land rushes 

of the 1890s, in reality, the goal, according to the BIA (2000), 

was to “break up the tribal mass,’ abolish tribal governments, 

and assimilate the Indians into the larger society.”

3The Tribal Self-Governance Act of 1993 amended the Indian 

Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act. It established 

a program of self-governance within the U.S. Department of the 

Interior, directing the Secretary of the Interior to enter into annual 

funding agreements with each participating tribe, and authorized 

appropriations.
16

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Services, Natural Resources, Social Health and Educational 

Services, Community Services, and a health clinic. 

Prior to the late 1980s, there was little interaction 

between the Quinault Indian Nation and Olympic National 

Forest at an administrative level. The Olympic National 

Forest, however, did serve as a source of jobs for tribe 

members. For example, tribe members who were loggers 

harvested timber from the Olympic National Forest, and 

many worked as seasonal employees on fire crews. 

Following the passage of the Self-Governance Act and 

the Self-Determination Act, the sovereign nation status of 

tribes became more widely recognized and acknowledged. 

As the tribe took greater control over managing its own 

land and resources, it began to take legal action against past 

injustices. One case was with the reservation boundary, 

which was incorrectly surveyed when the reservation was 

originally delineated in the 1800s. To compensate for the 

surveying error, the U.S. government transferred approximately 11,000 acres from the Olympic National Forest to 

the Quinault Indian Nation in 1988–89. The transferred 

area is called the North Boundary Expansion Area (referred 

from now on as the “North Boundary”). Because some of 

the land included in the surveying error had become part 

of the Olympic National Park or was private land, it could 

not be returned to the tribe. This led to the establishment of 

the Quinault Special Management Area (or Section 2 lands) 

under Public Law (PL) 100-638. This is an area of 5,260 

acres on the Olympic National Forest southeast of the reservation for which allocation of 45 percent of all revenues to 

the tribe is specified. 

The Quinault’s relatively large land base and location 

have enabled many tribe members to continue to base much 

of their livelihoods on natural resources. The forests, rivers, 

and ocean continue to provide the tribe with the resources 

to meet their subsistence, cultural, and economic needs. 

Interviewees mentioned that although they may have grown 

up “poor” from an income standpoint, they always had 

plenty of food owing to the availability of seafood, 

wild game, and locally harvested plants. 

Fishing, particularly salmon and steelhead, has 

always been important to the culture and economy of the 

Quinault Indians. The ability of tribe members to engage 

in traditional livelihoods was enhanced in the 1970s with 

the Boldt Decision,4 which reaffirmed treaty fishing rights 

for Washington tribes. Tribe members began to commercially fish off-reservation. Many fishers expanded their 

efforts to include the ocean fisheries for salmon, halibut, 

tuna, and Dungeness crab. The Quinault Indian Nation 

constructed a fish processing plant in Taholah and established the Quinault Pride Seafood Enterprise. The Quinault 

Pride Seafood Enterprise purchases fish from tribe 

members to sell on the open market. The fish processing 

plant has a smokehouse and cannery, producing smoked 

salmon, clams, and other processed seafood. In fiscal year 

2001–2002, the enterprise purchased over 2.75 million 

pounds of fish and shellfish from tribe members, which 

included salmon, steelhead, sturgeon, halibut, cod, crab, 

and clams. Quinault Pride Seafood employs approximately 

20 full-time and 20 seasonal workers. The number of tribe 

members employed in commercial fishing includes 135 

river fishers, 150 to 200 razor clam diggers, and about 84 

ocean fishers (or 24 ocean fishing vessels) (Stocks 2003). 

The Quinault Indian Nation is one of two self-regulating 

tribes in Washington for fisheries management, with its 

own hatcheries located on the Quinault and Queets Rivers, 

and at Lake Quinault.

In addition to fishing, the timber industry has served 

as the economic backbone of the region for the past 100 

years. Although most revenues from logging in the area 

went to non-Indians, many Quinault tribe members worked 

in the timber industry as loggers and mill workers. One 

interviewee stated that in Queets, all men worked as 

4As part of the original treaties signed in Washington in the 1850s, 

tribes were reserved the right to fish “at all usual and accustomed 

grounds and stations in common with the citizens of the territory.” 

Over time, however, the state limited Indian fisheries to subsistence fishing only on rivers that passed through reservation lands. 

In the 1970s, U.S. District Court Judge George Boldt reaffirmed 

treaty fishing rights and established tribes as co-managers of the 

fisheries resource. The Boldt Decision entitled the tribes to harvest 

50 percent of the salmon on all usual and accustomed fishing 

grounds. In 1996–97 the Boldt decision was expanded to include 

shrimp, crab, and groundfish.
17

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

loggers at one time. Many were “gyppo” (or independent) 

loggers who did contract work for the Forest Service or 

private companies. With the decline in the regional timber 

industry, many Quinault members were forced to shift to 

other types of work. Some of those who have remained in 

the business have been able to become owners and operators of timber companies and mills. There are currently 

two logging companies owned by Quinault tribe members. 

Because much of the work is mechanized, they employ 

very few people. Much of the work requiring manual labor, 

such as precommercial thinning, is now subcontracted out 

to Hispanic crews. There are also three cedar shake mills 

currently owned by tribe members in Amanda Park, and a 

few other shake mills that institute tribal preference when 

hiring. During much of the heavy logging in the early part 

of the 20th century, cedar was not a valued species and was 

left on the ground following a harvest. Today, most of the 

cedar that feeds the shake mills is salvaged from trees that 

have been buried. The Quinault Indian Nation has an active 

cedar salvage program, and supplies much of the cedar for 

the local shake mills. 

Timber has also become an important source of revenue for the tribe, particularly with regard to efforts to buy 

back reservation land for the Quinault Indian Nation. Of the 

208,150 acres of reservation land, about 165,000 acres (or 

80 percent) is suitable for commercial timber production. In 

1988, the Quinault Indian Nation created Quinault Land and 

Timber Enterprises (QLT) as a timber and land acquisition 

program. The QLT purchases timber from willing sellers of 

trust and fee lands on the reservation, and subcontracts with 

logging companies to log the land. The QLT then finds mills 

that will purchase the timber. Revenues generated from the 

sale of timber are then used to purchase property for the 

Quinault Indian Nation. The ultimate goal is to purchase as 

much land on the reservation as possible so that the tribe 

can properly administer and manage its natural resources. 

Nontimber forest products (NTFPs), also known as 

special forest products or minor forest products, constitute 

another important resource for the Quinault people, in 

terms of their commercial, medicinal, and cultural value. 

Species such as western redcedar, used for making canoes, 

and beargrass (Xerophyllum tenax (Pursh) Nutt.), used 

in basket weaving, are particularly important both culturally and economically. Other important species include 

licorice-fern (Polypodium glycyrrhiza D.C. Eat.), swordfern (Polystichum spp.), Pacific yew (Taxus brevifolia Nutt.), 

white pine (Pinus monticola Dougl. ex D. Don), hemlock, 

Douglas-fir, cottonwood (Populus L.), Oregon grape 

(Berberis spp. L.), wild cherry [bitter cherry] (Prunus 

emarginata (Dougl. ex Hook.) D. Dietr.), bigleaf maple 

(Acer macrophyllum Pursh), salal (Gaultheria shallon

Pursh), and huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.) (Quinault Indian 

Nation 1993). Tribe members are allowed to harvest NTFPs 

from the reservation for personal use, and may harvest 

for commercial use by obtaining a permit. A few timber 

contractors also have contracts that allow them to harvest 

NTFPs for commercial purposes. Beargrass, salal, and 

sword-fern are especially important products for the floral 

greens industry. In the mid-1990s, the Quinault Indian 

Nation attempted to develop a tribal agroforestry enterprise, including the processing and sale of NTFPs, but was 

unsuccessful. The Quinault Indian Nation is continuing 

to look for opportunities to better market NTFPs from the 

reservation. 

Finally, hunting for big game species for food, such as 

elk and deer, continues to be an important activity for many 

tribe members. 
18

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675
19

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

The Olympic National Forest

The Olympic National Forest covers approximately 632,000 

acres on the Olympic Peninsula, in northwestern Washington. The forest is divided into two ranger districts: the 

Hood Canal, which covers the eastern half of the forest; and 

the Pacific, which covers the western half. The Hood Canal 

District Office is located in the town of Quilcene, with a 

smaller office located at Hoodsport. The Pacific District 

Office is located at Forks, with a smaller office located at 

Lake Quinault. The forest headquarters/Supervisor’s Office 

is in Olympia, Washington, the state capital. 

The forests on the Olympic National Forest at the time 

the Northwest Forest Plan (the Plan) was initiated consisted 

of a mixture of plantation forests, clearcut areas, and natural 

forests ranging from early- to late-successional (i.e., greater 

than 80 years old) stands (FEMAT 1993). Prior to 1990, the 

Olympic National Forest operated under a collection of unit 

management plans focused heavily on timber production. 

The forest’s timber harvesting approach focused primarily 

on regeneration harvest to maximize timber production. 

This approach included the application of precommercial 

thinning treatments to enhance tree growth and prevent 

early stagnation.5 The forest had a long-term agreement 

with Simpson Timber Company, under the Sustained Yield 

Management Act (Public Law [PL] 273) of 1944, to jointly 

manage the southeastern portion of the forest, designated 

as the Shelton Cooperative Sustained Yield Unit. The 

unit included 111,000 acres of national forest and 250,000 

acres of Simpson’s private holdings to be managed jointly 

on a “sustained yield” basis for 100 years. The agreement 

enabled Simpson to log 135 million board feet (mmbf) per 

year from the unit. Much of the national forest portion of 

the Shelton Cooperative Sustained Yield Unit was clearcut 

between 1960 and 1985 (FEMAT 1993). Simpson ceased 

logging on the national forest in 1985, and the agreement 

was formally terminated in 2004.

In 1990, the Olympic National Forest completed a comprehensive management plan (Olympic Land and Resource 

Management Plan or Olympic forest plan). A primary 

emphasis for developing the forest plan was to consolidate 

the existing unit plans and integrate new management priorities to protect sensitive species, such as the spotted owl. 

The Plan set an allowable sale quantity (ASQ)6 for timber 

of 110 mmbf per year, down from the average of 250 mmbf 

harvested per year in the 1980s. 

The Plan, launched in 1994, functioned as an amendment to the Olympic forest plan, overlaying its land use 

allocations and standards upon those developed in the 

Olympic forest plan. In most cases, the Plan standards were 

more restrictive than the Olympic forest plan. For example, 

the probable sale quantity (PSQ)7 of timber was reduced 

to 10 mmbf per year (a drop of more than 90 percent). The 

Olympic forest plan continues to serve as the foundation for 

management direction regarding issues not covered by the 

Plan, such as the location of recreation areas and municipal 

water systems. The most significant change made under 

Chapter 2: Trends in Socioeconomic Benefits From the 

Olympic National Forest, 1990–2002, and the Impact of 

the Northwest Forest Plan

5U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Olympic 

National Forest. 2000. Forest Plan Monitoring Report. 

Fiscal years 1997–2000. Unpublished document. On file 

with: Olympic National Forest, 1835 Black Lake Blvd. SW, 

Olympia, WA 98512-5623.

6The term “allowable sale quantity” or ASQ was first introduced 

under the National Forest Management Act (1976) and the Federal 

Land Policy and Management Act (1976) to define the first decade 

of sustainable harvest, and was based on all lands on a given forest 

that are suitable and designated for timber production as defined 

by the individual forest’s management plan. It is the maximum volume of timber that can be harvested from a given national forest or 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) district, and is the presumed 

level that can be sustained in perpetuity given the timber attributes 

of a forest. By the 1980s, new information on the habitat requirements of the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) 

forced the agencies to redefine their assumptions about sustainable 

harvest levels, resulting in a decrease in the ASQ of many forests 

(Tuchmann et al. 1996). 

7The PSQ was the term developed under the Plan as an alternative 

to the ASQ that reflects the uncertainty in the amount of harvest 

that can be sustained. The PSQ is based on lands that are only 

suitable for timber production. Under the Plan, timber-suitable 

lands are only those designated as matrix or adaptive management 

areas. Although harvest activities, such as commercial thinning 

for habitat improvement, may occur on other types of lands (e.g., 

late-successional reserves), timber removed from these lands are 

not included in the PSQ calculation (Tuchmann et al. 1996). 
20

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

both the Olympic forest plan and the Plan was to shift 

land management priorities away from timber extraction 

to protection of endangered species via protection of 

aquatic systems, watershed restoration, development of 

late-successional/old growth8 forest habitat, and road 

system management (see footnote 5). 

One significant component of the Plan was the 

designation of land into specific land use types. These 

land allocations included the following: congressionally 

reserved areas, late-successional reserves (LSRs), adaptive 

management areas, (AMAs) administratively withdrawn 

areas, riparian reserves, and matrix.9 Scheduled timber 

harvests (i.e., harvests contributing to PSQ) are allowed 

only in AMAs and matrix lands. Salvage harvest is allowed 

in LSRs under a limited set of conditions, and thinning 

in LSRs to promote the development of late-successional 

characteristics in stands less than 80 years old is also permitted. Thinning within riparian reserves is also allowed 

if it supports the attainment of the Aquatic Conservation 

Strategy objectives. 

The Olympic National Forest has no matrix lands 

(the Plan allocation in which the bulk of timber harvest 

is expected to occur). Matrix lands were not assigned 

to the forest because of the highly fragmented status of 

late-successional and old-growth forests on the Olympic 

Peninsula.10 The rapidly growing urban population in 

the Puget Sound area further separated and isolated the 

northern spotted owl populations found on the Olympic 

Peninsula from populations in the Cascades. As a result, 

a high priority was placed on protecting what remained 

of owl habitat on the Olympic National Forest under the 

Plan. The need to maintain late-successional habitat for 

marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) was also a 

key factor in the development of the land allocations on the 

Olympic National Forest.11

About 66 percent of the forest is in LSRs (420,000 

acres), about 20 percent is in AMAs (125,000 acres), and 

the remaining 14 percent (90,000 acres) is congressionally 

reserved areas (i.e., wilderness and the Quinault Research 

Natural Area). Of the 125,000 acres of AMA lands, only 

about 51,000 acres are available for timber harvesting to 

meet the average annual PSQ of 10 mmbf. The remaining 

acreage is designated as riparian reserves (65,000 acres), 

forest plan administrative withdrawals (2,000 acres), and 

areas unsuitable for timber harvests (7,000 acres) (USDA 

FS 2004). About 50 percent of the total volume of timber 

offered on the forest since implementation of the Plan has 

been on nonriparian AMA lands. 

Within the LSRs, about 14 percent of the land was 

administratively withdrawn under the Olympic forest plan 

and cannot be harvested. Silvicultural treatments on the 

remaining 357,000 acres are restricted to commercial and 

precommercial thinning on stands less than 80 years old for 

the purpose of promoting late-successional and old-growth 

stand structure. About half the timber offered from the 

forest has been on LSR and riparian reserve lands. Wood 

removed through commercial thinning on these lands 

contributes to volume offered, but it is not part of the PSQ 

calculation. The forest’s performance, however, is evaluated 

by the total timber volume offered (including harvests on 

LSR lands), and not just the volume that contributes to PSQ.

Resource and Recreation Outputs

One of the socioeconomic goals of the Plan was to produce 

a predictable and sustainable supply of timber and nontimber forest products, and recreation opportunities on federal 

forest lands within the plan area. Consistent with this goal, 

one of the monitoring questions posed in the Northwest 

Forest Plan record of decision (ROD) was, “Are predictable 

levels of timber and non-timber resources available and 

8 “Old-growth” forests, as defined by the Forest Ecosystem 

Management Assessment Team (FEMAT), are the mature, 

diverse final stage of late-successional forests, characterized 

by a significant number of large, dominant trees; the presence 

of standing dead or downed trees; and multiple canopy layers. 

Late-successional forests are those with trees at least 80 years 

old. Old-growth forests are defined as trees that are at least 200 

years old (Tuchmann et al. 1996).

9See USDA and USDI 1994 for a detailed description of each 

land use type.

10Much of the Olympic Peninsula, including the Olympic 

National Forest as well as private, state, and Indian reservation 

lands, has been clearcut over the past 80 years (FEMAT 1993).

11Additional vertebrate species associated with late-successional/

old-growth forests found on the Peninsula include goshawks 

(Accipiter gentiles), and American marten (Martes americana) 

(FEMAT 1993). 
21

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

being produced?” (USDA and USDI 1994: E-9). To answer 

this question, the ROD specifies that timber harvest levels, 

special forest products, livestock grazing, mineral extraction, recreation, scenic quality, and commercial fishing 

be monitored. We did not monitor scenic quality or commercial fishing. The following sections examine whether 

predictable levels of timber and nontimber resources 

and recreation opportunities have been produced on the 

Olympic National Forest since 1990, the baseline for this 

monitoring program.

Timber

Overview—

The timber program on the Olympic National Forest 

currently consists of commercial thinning on LSR and 

AMA lands. 

Trends—

Timber harvest levels have dramatically decreased since 

implementation of the Plan (fig. 5). Prior to the spotted owl 

injunctions (i.e., between 1978 and 1989), harvest levels 

ranged from about 200 to 300 mmbf, with most of the 

harvest involving regeneration harvest (i.e., clearcutting) of 

old-growth timber. Under the Olympic Forest Plan, initiated 

in 1990, the ASQ dropped to 110 mmbf, but actual harvest 

volumes continued to decline below this level. Under the 

Plan, the PSQ was set to 10 mmbf per year, whereas actual 

volume harvested has fluctuated between 2 and 20 mmbf 

per year. 

Changes to the program—

Although the acreage available for timber harvests is 

limited, the Olympic National Forest has been relatively 

successful compared to other forests in meeting its PSQ. 

One key factor that has contributed to this success is the 

lack of litigation and the small number of appeals. Because 

of the forest staff’s emphasis on the commercial thinning 

of young stands, rather than regeneration harvesting, there 

has been very little litigation by environmental groups. This 

allows timber sales on the forest to flow smoothly compared 

to other forests where litigation has stalled sales and led to 

administrative gridlock. This is largely a result of the lack 

of matrix land on the Olympic National Forest, combined 

with strong efforts made by Forest Service staff to work 

closely with environmental groups.

Despite the relative success at achieving the forest’s 

average annual PSQ in the majority of years, the staff 

believes a more extensive program is desirable. Specifically, 

managers believe the forest could 

sustain a commercial thinning 

harvest volume of roughly 20 

mmbf. In addition, a precommercial thinning program of about 

3,000 acres per year is desirable 

by forest managers to attain both 

late-successional characteristics 

and maximize the economic 

benefits of future commercial 

thinning activities. Factors that 

have limited the forest’s ability to 

reach these levels of management 

0 include the following: 

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

19781980

1982

19841986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

19982000

2002

Year

Timber (million board feet)

Timber sold

Timber harvested

Figure 5—Timber harvested and sold on the Olympic National Forest, 1978–2002. 

(Source: USDA FS 2004).
22

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

• Insufficient funding and staffing. Forest budget 

and staffing levels have declined dramatically 

since the mid-1980s, particularly within the forest’s 

timber program. Despite the decline in workforce, 

the workload has increased for employees owing to 

the increased complexity of work associated with 

implementing the Plan (see footnote 5). Although the 

forest’s thinning program has been very aggressive, 

many precommercial- and commercial-age stands 

have gone untreated owing to a lack of staff and 

funding to identify, analyze, and prepare thinning 

projects on all potential treatment areas (see footnote 

5). The failure to conduct precommercial thinning 

can limit future stand development options, leading 

to overstocked, stagnant stands that halt or slow 

development of late-successional stand structure and 

features, and limit future timber production options 

on AMA lands (see footnote 5). This lack of funding 

and staffing is likely to be the most important 

limiting factor in the future, as the forest’s budget 

likely will continue to decline.

• Access. Another factor that has limited precommercial and commercial thinning is reduced physical access to sites where these activities could take 

place. Several roads washed out as a result of flood 

events in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Repair 

of these roads has been slowed by the procedural 

requirements of the Plan, timing restrictions under 

the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and lack of 

funding. Money to undertake road repairs is scarce 

(the road program was tied to the timber program, 

and with the disappearance of the timber program, 

road money has also disappeared), and comes 

mainly from the Emergency Relief for Federally 

Owned Roads (ERFO) program. In addition, a lack 

of road maintenance dollars has made maintenance 

of the full forest road system unrealistic. Finally, an 

aggressive program of road decommissioning has 

occurred as a central strategy for restoring watershed health on the forest, a goal emphasized by the 

Plan. Meanwhile, few new roads are being built on 

the forest. All of these factors have combined to 

reduce access to stands in which commercial and 

precommercial thinning are desirable.

• Survey and manage.

12 The most abundant survey and manage species on the Olympic National 

Forest are mollusk, lichen, and bryophyte species. 

Extensive survey requirements for some species 

prior to implementing projects have caused delays 

with timber sales and harvests. One species in 

particular—the warty jumping slug (Hemphillia 

glandulosa)—delayed a number of timber sales on 

the forest between 1999 and 2000. This slug was 

listed as a survey and manage species, as it was 

thought to be rare on the Olympic Peninsula. After 

extensive surveying, the slug was found to be fairly 

abundant and, in 2001, was removed from the survey 

and manage list on the Olympic National Forest. 

This allowed timber sales and other activities to proceed without having to protect all of the sites where 

the slug had been found, although management 

would still be done to provide habitat for these and 

other mollusks.

Apart from the warty jumping slug, survey and 

manage requirements have not had a significant 

impact on forest management activity. In 2004, the 

survey and manage list was eliminated and all of the 

listed species were moved to the sensitive species 

list. This change in the survey and manage requirements should reduce its impacts on commercial and 

precommercial thinning programs in the future.

• Endangered Species Act. Implementation of the 

ESA has led to timing restrictions on all grounddisturbing activity (including timber harvests) on 

national forests that could potentially harm listed 

12A “Survey and Manage” mitigation measure was developed 

as part of the Standards and Guidelines of the Northwest Forest 

Plan. The measure required that certain rare species be surveyed 

prior to any ground-disturbing activities on the national forest 

so that the location of these rare species could be considered and 

mitigated for in the design of the projects (ONRC 1999). About 420 

of these species were included in one or more of the survey and 

manage categories. Most of these species were plants and other 

invertebrates, such as wildflowers, mollusks, fungi, moss, lichens, 

and insects.
23

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

species (i.e., northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), marbled murrelet, native salmon 

[Oncorhynchus spp.] and trout [Oncorhynchus

spp.]). For example, activities can only occur during certain times of day and year such as nonnesting periods for spotted owls and marbled 

murrelets. As a result of these timing restrictions, 

the work season is often dramatically compressed. 

The shortened work window has meant that it 

commonly takes longer to complete projects (such 

as timber harvesting). Projects that previously 

were completed in a year are now often carried 

over multiple years. It is important to note that 

these restrictions are associated with the ESA and 

would have occurred with or without the Plan. 

Nevertheless, these timing restrictions will most 

likely continue to affect project implementation, 

which can reduce the volume of timber harvesting 

that can be carried out.

Nontimber Forest Products13

Overview—

Nontimber forest products (NTFPs; also known as 

“special forest products”) include floral greens (e.g., salal 

[Gaultheria shallon Pursh], beargrass [Xerophyllum tenax

(Pursh) Nutt.], ferns, moss), mushrooms, medicinal plants, 

firewood, Christmas trees, poles and posts, limbs and 

boughs, transplants, and other nonconvertible and plant 

products obtained from the forest. Nontimber forest products are harvested for recreational, cultural, medicinal, 

subsistence, and economic purposes. For example, many 

people living in communities surrounding the Olympic 

National Forest rely on firewood collected from the forest 

for heating their homes. Plants such as beargrass, ferns, 

and cedar bark are critical for basketry and other cultural 

products for peninsula tribes. Mushrooms, especially 

chanterelles (Cantharellus spp.), are important commercially on the peninsula. Floral greens obtained from 

the Olympic Peninsula represent a multimillion dollar 

industry, supplying an international market.14 Because 

of the growing economic importance of NTFPs and 

increased commercial demand, management and control 

over the harvest of NTFPs has become a growing concern 

on the Olympic National Forest. 

Trends—

The demand for salal and other plants used in floral 

arrangements (e.g., beargrass, sword-fern [Polystichum

spp.]) on the Olympic National Forest increased between 

1990 and 2002. In contrast, the quantity of permits sold 

for other NTFPs remained the same or declined. The 

number of Christmas trees steadily declined, with the 

exception of a large number of sales in 1998 (fig. 6). 

The quantity of mushrooms sold remained relatively 

stable, with the exception of a large number of sales in 

1998 (fig. 7). Fuelwood sales have gradually declined 

since 1994 (fig. 8). The sale of mosses went from 30,000 

to 40,000 pounds per year in the late 1990s to the termination of permits in 2002 (fig. 9). 

Changes to the program—

The Olympic National Forest has been divided in its 

approach to managing the harvest of floral greens, 

particularly salal. The forest had been issuing individual 

permits to anyone wanting to harvest salal and a few 

other species since at least 1994. In 2000, the Hood Canal 

District stopped selling individual permits, and initiated 

a contract model in which individual contractors lease a 

large area of land. Reasons for this shift include budget 

and personnel reductions that made the contract model 

13The nontimber forest products data come from the Forest Service 

Automated Timber Sale Accounting System. The data are displayed 

by fiscal year. The Forest Service did not track permit data for 

different categories of nonconvertible special forest products prior 

to 1995. The most recent year for which data were available at the 

time we collected data for this project was 2002. The Forest Service 

did track permit data for fuelwood, posts and poles, and Christmas 

trees (all convertible products) prior to 1995. We provide these data 

for 1990 onward, to include the whole study period. 

14A growing Hispanic population, many of whom are recent 

immigrants, does the majority of harvesting. The Hispanic community on the Olympic Peninsula has grown substantially, in part 

owing to the availability of jobs picking brush for the floral greens 

market. The growth in the Hispanic population has changed the 

face of many communities on the peninsula. Long-time residents 

describe some racial tensions that have developed and an increased 

burden on social services, but also talk about the importance of the 

Hispanic population in supporting local businesses and helping 

to keep school enrollment relatively stable, despite a loss of many 

families from the area.
24

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

easier and less costly to administer. The district was also 

having problems with NTFP theft; and this was a way to 

ensure that only contractors and their employees were 

harvesting in designated areas. The contract model requires 

contractors to pay up front, which precludes most individual 

harvesters (most of whom are Hispanic immigrants) from 

submitting bids. The result of this new contract model is 

that there have been few bids for contracts. In contrast to 

the east side, the Pacific Ranger District continues to issue 

individual permits to harvesters. 

The forest also stopped issuing permits for bough 

harvesting in 2002 owing to theft problems and tree 

damage. Moss harvesting was also terminated in 2002 for 

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

1990

1991

1992

19931994

1995

19961997

1998

1999

2000

20012002

Year

Christmas trees

Figure 8—Fuel wood sold, Olympic National Forest, 1990–2002 

(thousand board feet × 2.5 = cords).

Figure 6—Christmas trees sold, Olympic National Forest, 

1990–2002.

100,000

90,000

80,000

70,000

60,000

50,000

40,000

30,000

20,000

10,000

0

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Year

Mushro

o

ms sold (p

ounds)

Figure 7—Mushrooms sold, Olympic National Forest, 1995–2002. 

Figure 9—Mosses sold, Olympic National Forest, 1995–2002.

1990

1991

19921993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Year

Fuel wood sold (cords)3,500

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Year

45,000

40,000

35,000

30,000

25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

0

Mosses sold (p

ounds)

two reasons: (1) monitoring indicated that moss that had 

been harvested needed a longer time to grow back; and 

(2) the presence of important moss-associated species, 

including potential species of concern under the Plan, made 

it important to evaluate the effects of moss harvest on these 

species. In the absence of methods and funding to do so,

 the forest ended the legal harvest. 

Demand for floral greens has increased over the past 

10 years. The Plan has had little to do with this change; 

however, the increase in road closures, road washouts, and 

road decommissioning that are in part associated with the 

Plan have reduced access for harvesters. Although ecosystem changes as a result of the Plan have yet to have an 
25

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

impact on the ecology of NTFPs, some interviewees were 

concerned that in the future, as the forest matures and less 

light penetrates the tree canopy, the availability of important NTFP species (such as salal) may decline. 

Changes in the administration of NTFPs on the forest 

are connected to funding cuts associated with declining 

timber harvests. Sources stated that there are simply not the 

resources and staff available to devote to the NTFP program. The timber program currently administers all NTFP 

harvest activities. According to Lynch and McLain (2003), 

Knutson-Vandenberg (KV) funds (i.e., funds set aside 

from timber receipts) traditionally funded NTFP activities. 

With the drop in timber harvesting and associated timber 

revenues, KV funding for other activities has also dramatically decreased. Furthermore, revenues generated from the 

sale of NTFP permits go to the general treasury, rather than 

being available locally to help fund the program (Lynch and 

McLain 2003).15

The Olympic National Forest has made efforts to 

communicate and work with brush harvesters. These efforts 

include trying to sensitize law enforcement officers to some 

of the issues facing harvesters, providing pamphlets and 

information to harvesters in Spanish, and working directly 

with the harvesters or nonprofit groups to improve communication and understanding and promote responsible harvest 

practices. 

Grazing

The Olympic National Forest currently has no permits to 

graze livestock. Grazing has been negligible on the forest 

over the past 10 years, with a maximum of 12 head of cattle 

grazing on the forest. 

Recreation

Overview—

The recreation potential on the Olympic National Forest 

is especially high owing to the presence of the Olympic 

National Park, which draws tourists from around the world, 

and the forest’s proximity to the Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia 

15At the time this report was written, legislation was being 

developed to change this. 

metropolitan areas. Compared to other national forests in 

the Plan (i.e., spotted owl) region, however, the recreation 

program for the Olympic National Forest is relatively 

small in terms of its budget and staff. Because the forest 

has historically been a timber-producing forest, very little 

investment went into the development of a recreation 

infrastructure. 

Trends—

Recreational use on the Olympic National Forest has 

steadily increased to a modest degree since the 1980s. The 

increase can be explained largely by the growing urban 

population in the Puget Sound area. Table 1 shows that 

the number of total recreation visitor days increased from 

1.47 million in 1986 to 1.71 million in 2000 (or about 16 

Table 1—Recreational use on the Olympic National 

Forest, 1986, 1998, and 2000

Developed Dispersed

recreation recreation Total recreation

Year (visitors) (visitors) visitor days 

1986 370,000 1,100,000 1,470,000

1998 391,000 1,279,000 1,670,000

2000 430,000 1,280,000 1,710,000

percent). Figure 10 shows that revenues for recreation have 

steadily declined since 1996. In 1996, however, the Forest 

began to implement the Recreation Fee Demonstration 

Program (PL 104-134), which requires visitors to purchase 

a permit—the Northwest Forest Pass—for vehicle parking 

0

100

200

300

400

500

1988

1989

19901991

19921993

1994

1995

19961997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Year

R

e

v

enue fro

m recreation

(thousands of d

ollars)

Figure 10—Revenue from recreation on the Olympic National 

Forest, 1988 to 2002. 
26

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Changes to the program—

Impacts of the Plan on the recreation program include 

relocation of campsites out of flood zones, reduced access 

to recreational areas owing to removal or decommissioning 

of roads, and relocation or decommissioning of recreation 

facilities to meet habitat protection/ecosystem management 

goals (see footnote 5). The forest has also experienced 

delays in the completion of recreation projects owing to the 

shortened period of operation, as well as from survey and 

manage requirements. For example, as with other activities 

on the forest, recreation projects have had to comply with 

all the requirements under the Plan, including disturbance 

issues surrounding ESA-listed species, survey and manage 

requirements, and protection of aquatic habitats. Consequently, the work season to carry out projects is considerably shorter than in the past, lengthening the time it takes 

to complete projects. As with many of the programs on the 

forest, budget cuts and staff reductions over the past decade 

have left the recreation program understaffed making it 

more difficult to complete recreation projects. 

One of the consequences of the staff reductions and 

budget cuts is the lack of a Forest Service presence in the 

forest, resulting in less maintenance of facilities, roads and 

trails; less face-to-face contact with campers; and less law 

enforcement capability. Forest 

Service employees reported an 

increase in uncontrolled, unmanaged recreation. 

Because of the staff reductions and small budget, the forest 

depends heavily on volunteers 

to accomplish work such as trail 

maintenance. Volunteer groups 

include Volunteers for Outdoor 

Washington, and Washington 

Trails Association. Others include 

the Mount Ellinor Trail Crew, 

composed of 6 to 10 retirees 

between the ages of 60 and 80. 

The recreation program also 

partners with various groups 

including the Interagency for 

Table 2—Revenues generated from the Recreation 

Fee Demonstration Program, Olympic National 

Forest

Total

Fees collected Fees collected collected from

for recreation for recreation Recreation Fee

Year maintenance administration Demo Program

Dollars

1999 117,219 117,219

2000 134,423 134,423

2001 176,838 16,831 193,669

2002 281,170 8,460 289,630

2003 261,092 31,377 292,469

Table 3—Recreation use and opportunities, Olympic National Forest, 

1990 and 2000–2003

1990a 2000–2003b

Recreation indicator Number Daily capacity Number Daily capacity

Annual forest visits 456,000c

Campgrounds 20 2,285 25 2,730

Picnic sitesd 1 15 2 45

Trails (1990), trailheads (2003) 81 88

Miles of trails 226.7 270.6e

Miles of roads 2,600 2,254f

Recreation residences 68 58g

Hotels and resorts 1 416 1 416

aData taken from the Olympic National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan final environmental 

impact statement.

bData taken from INFRA for 2003 unless otherwise noted.

cNational visitor use monitoring data, 2000.

dDoes not include picnic sites located within campgrounds.

eNorthwest Forest Pass Fee Demo Program fiscal year 2002 Accomplishments Report.

f

Olympic National Forest Final Access and Travel Management Plan Summary Report, 2003.

gData from USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region recreation staff, Jim Sauser (2002 data).

at certain trailheads, picnic areas, boat launches, and other 

designated recreation areas. Eighty percent of the revenues 

collected from the program stay within the local area and 

fund recreation maintenance and administration, and public 

health and safety improvements (see footnote 5). Table 

2 shows that funds collected through the program have 

increased steadily from just over $117,000 in 1999 to around 

$292,000 in 2003. Revenues generated from this program 

have helped to offset some of the budget declines of the 

recreation program. Table 3 shows that the number of trails 

and campgrounds has increased on the forest since 1990, 

although there are fewer miles of roads. 
27

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

1993 and 2003. One FTE can represent one full-time 

job, or a combination of part-time positions, counted in 

aggregate. They include permanent, temporary, and term 

tenures. 

Changes in Jobs With the Forest Service

The budget for the Olympic National Forest was historically (and still remains) heavily linked to its timber output. 

Declining timber revenues have thus resulted in significant 

budget and staff reductions for the forest overall and 

especially within the timber and roads programs. These 

declines can be attributed to several factors including the 

termination of harvest on the national forest portion of 

the Shelton Cooperative Sustained Yield Unit in 1985 by 

Simpson Timber Company; the 1990 spotted owl injunction that significantly decreased timber harvesting on the 

forest; and implementation of the Plan, which continued 

to maintain low harvests levels (see footnote 5). Another 

important factor has been the overall decline in federal 

budgets during the late 1980s, 1990s, and into the 2000s 

(see footnote 5).

Trends

The workforce on the Olympic National Forest has 

declined dramatically since the 1980s. In 1985, prior to the 

termination of timber harvesting by Simpson Timber 

Company on the Shelton Cooperative Sustained Yield 

Unit, the forest employed 470 FTEs, of which approximately 70 percent were permanent employees and 30 

percent were temporary/seasonal employees (see footnote 

5). By 1994, the workforce had declined to 235 FTEs, of 

which over 90 percent were permanent employees (see 

footnote 5). By 2001, the workforce was down to 115 

FTEs, with 17 being nonpermanent employees (fig. 11). 

Thus, the total number of employees decreased by over 

75 percent since 1985, with temporary/seasonal employees 

disproportionately affected. The total budget for the 

Olympic National Forest has declined by about 50 percent 

since the implementation of the Plan, from approximately 

$21 million in 1993 to $10.6 million in 1993 (fig. 12). 

In addition to budget and staff declines, in 1999 the 

forest consolidated its four districts into two. The Forks 

Outdoor Recreation, an organization that funds trail work 

and recreation development; the Backcountry Horsemen’s 

Association; and Tacoma Urban League. 

As mentioned above, the Recreation Fee Demonstration 

Program has helped to offset many of the budget and staff 

reductions—providing funding for recreation operations 

and maintenance. The Forest Service has made efforts to 

create more hiking trails, improve campsites, and regularly 

maintain facilities in certain areas of the forest, such as the 

Lake Quinault area, which has historically drawn tourists to 

the lake and historic lodge. 

Forest Jobs and Budget

National forests are an important source of quality jobs for 

people in forest-based communities. Forest employees earn 

good wages, receive benefits, enjoy relatively safe working 

conditions, have training opportunities to develop new skills, 

and have opportunities for advancement within the organization. Figure 11 shows the number of full-time equivalent 

(FTE) positions on the Olympic National Forest between 

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

19931994199519961997199819992000

Fiscal year

Number of FTE employees

Total FTEs

Other

Permanent full-time

200120022003

Figure 11—Number of full-time equivalent (FTE) employees on 

the Olympic National Forest, 1993–2003. (Source: USDA Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Region).

Note: Data classifying FTEs into permanent full-time and other positions 

were not readily available for the Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region 

for 1993 and 1994. Aggregate staffing for Forest Service Northwest Forest 

Plan units for these years is therefore enumerated as FTEs only. Data 

enumerating positions by series (e.g., wildlife biologist, budget specialist) 

and grade level/pay scale (e.g., GS-9) were not readily available. This 

limitation precluded a more detailed evaluation of workforce composition, or an analysis of the economic benefits of local agency employment 

to individual communities. The agencies and regions also differ in their 

handling of staffing and data. For example, in 2003, field-unit positions 

in information resources management began to be tracked under regional 

staffing. The effect of this change on the staffing data described here is 

unknown.
28

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

(i.e., Sol Duc) and Quinault Districts merged to become 

the Pacific District, and the Hoodsport and Quilcene Districts merged to become the Hood Canal District. Despite 

these mergers, the forest still operates its four district 

offices, as well as the main supervisor’s office in Olympia. 

District rangers share their time between the two district 

offices, and a small staff still remains at each office. 

Impacts of Budget and Staff Changes

Many interviewees reported that the budget and staff 

declines and district consolidations have reduced their 

ability to complete all of their work. For example, many 

interviewees noted that more precommercial and commercial thinning could be taking place on the forest for 

the development of late-successional and old-growth 

stands, but there is simply not the staff and resources to 

prepare and implement these projects. Workloads and job 

complexity have actually increased for most employees 

owing to the new rules and requirements surrounding the 

implementation of the Plan (see footnote 5). 

Reductions in staff have also been felt most heavily 

in the lower ranking positions (e.g., at the GS-5 through 

GS-9 levels), as the job retention preference is toward 

those with seniority. The result has been fewer field-level 

employees to implement projects on the ground and fewer 

administrative and support staff. Reductions in these 

staff positions have meant that remaining Forest Service 

employees are now responsible for more administrative 

work, adding to their workload and overhead costs. In 

addition, most senior employees have worked on the forest 

for many years and are reaching retirement age. The loss 

of these long-term employees will likely have a significant 

impact on the institutional memory and future capacity of 

the forest (see footnote 5). 

Staff reductions and district consolidations have also 

affected the level of outreach and interaction the Forest 

Service has with the public and neighboring communities. 

Many interviewees felt that the lack of staff, particularly 

field staff, has reduced the forest’s ability to interact with 

the public, particularly with regard to law enforcement and 

security issues around recreation and NTFP harvesting. 

Historically, many of the lower ranking and seasonal jobs 

also provided important job opportunities for community 

members. The impact of these changes to communities will 

be discussed in more detail in chapter 3.

Contracting for Land Management16

Overview

One of the goals of the Plan was to increase the level of 

contracting for ecosystem management-related activities to 

help create jobs and offset job losses from declining timber 

harvests. Procurement or service contracts include a wide 

range of activities that can be broken into three categories: 

technical work (i.e., surveying, monitoring), equipmentintensive work, and labor-intensive work. From 1990 

through 2002, the Olympic National Forest spent $46.7 

million procuring land management services. Overall, 

the amount of money spent on contracting since 1990 

has declined, with the exception of a spending spike in 

200117 (fig. 13). Not only did the amount of money spent on 

contracting decrease over the study period, but the type of 

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Fiscal year

Bud

g

et allocations 

(thousands 

of inflation-adjuste

d dollars) 

Total allocations

Allocations excluding

 fire and fuels

Figure 12—Olympic National Forest Budget Allocations, 1993–

2003. (Source: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region).

16An explanation of the methods used to collect and analyze the 

procurement contracting data can be found in Moseley (2006).

17 In 2001, the Olympic National Forest spent a considerable sum 

on road maintenance as well as additional technical activities such 

as surveys and inspections. Much of this spending was a result of 

a series of floods in the late 1990s and early 2000s. In 2001, emergency flood relief monies became available to fund road repairs.
29

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

In addition, riparian 

restoration and stream 

restoration involving 

heavy equipment increased 

(fig. 16). 

Spending on stand 

exams and tree survival 

surveys declined noticeably, while spending on 

biological and watershed 

surveys increased. Species 

surveys may be grouped 

in “other natural resource 

management and conservation,” along with many 

other types of activities. 

In addition, the forest 

increased its procurement 

spending on watershed 

analysis and management plans, although it is likely that 

inhouse staff performed most of these activities (fig. 17).

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Fiscal year

Contract award (thousands of 2002 dollars)

Technical

Equipment

Labor

Figure 13—Annual land management procurement spending (adjusted for inflation) by work type, 

Olympic National Forest, fiscal years 1990–2002.

work contracted also shifted from labor-intensive activities (such as tree planting) to more heavy-equipment and 

technical work. For example, when the forest was actively 

harvesting timber, the forest contracted out large amounts 

of reforestation and other pre- and postharvest activities. 

Changes in Spending and Contracted Activities

Spending on labor-intensive activities declined over time, 

falling from $6.8 million in 1990–92 to $1.3 million by 

2000–200218 (fig. 14). Among labor-intensive activities, 

tree planting and land treatment practices, and slash piling 

declined most noticeably, while tree thinning declined 

more slowly (fig. 15). By contrast, spending on equipmentintensive activities and technical work dipped during the 

mid-1990s, but partially recovered during 2000–2002 

(fig. 14). 

Equipment-intensive activities associated with timber 

management, such as aerial fertilization, declined, but 

road maintenance increased throughout the study period. 

18For this analysis, we examined three periods: 1990–1992, 

1995–1997, and 2000–2002 (refer to Moseley 2006) for more 

details).

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

Equipment Labor Technical

Work type

Contract award

(thousands of 2002 dollars)

1990–1992

1995–1997

2000–2002

Figure 14—Land management procurement spending (adjusted 

for inflation) by work type, Olympic National Forest, fiscal years 

1990–1992, 1995–1997, and 2000–2002.
30

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Work type

Tree thinning

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Contract award 

(thousands of 2002 dollars)

Forest tree planting

Land treatment practices

Trail maintenance and construction

Slash piling

Other forest and range improvements

Tree seeding and 

grass production

Restoration

Vegetative mat installation

Pruning and brushing

Fish and wildlife management

1990–1992

1995–1997

2000–2002

Figure 15—Labor-intensive contracting (adjusted for inflation) by detailed work type, Olympic National Forest, 

fiscal years 1990–1992, 1995–1997, and 2000–2002.

Maintenance, repair, alteration/ 

road, streets, bridges

Construction/highways, roads, streets, bridges

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

Contract award 

(thousands of 2002 dollars)

Work type

Restoration, riparian

Brushing, roadside

Unknown

Construction, recreation

Slash piling, machine

Aerial fertilization, 

seeding and mulching

Construction, other conservation

Range seeding, 

ground equipment

1990–1992

1995–1997

2000–2002

Figure 16—Equipment-intensive contracting (adjusted for inflation) by detailed work type, Olympic National Forest, 

fiscal years 1990–1992, 1995–1997, and 2000–2002.
31

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

Figure 17—Technical contracting (adjusted for inflation) by detailed work type, Olympic 

National Forest, fiscal years 1990–1992, 1995–1997, and 2000–2002.

Although procurement spending on the Olympic 

National Forest did not decline as much as on other national 

forests, it shifted noticeably from activities associated with 

timber management to those associated with ecosystem 

restoration, including spending on species 

surveys and road restoration. 

Concentration and Turnover of 

Contractors

The number of contractors working for the 

forest decreased by 54 percent (from 110 

to 51) between 1990–92 and 2000–2002. 

This decline was much faster than the rate 

of decline in spending, which declined 

by only 28 percent. Consequently, the 

forest’s average total award per contractor increased from $155,000 in 1990–92 

to $237,000 by 2000–2002. Among the 

remaining 51 contractors, 

however, the relative market 

concentration did not change 

particularly. In 1990–92, 

8.2 percent of contractors 

captured 50 percent of the 

forest’s procurement spending and in 2000–2002, 7.8 

percent captured 50 percent, 

a minor difference. However, 

in 1990–92, the 8.2 percent 

amounted to nine contractors 

whereas in 2000–2002 the 

7.8 percent amounted to four 

contractors, because the 

contractor pool was half as 

large as before (table 4).

Of the 110 contractors 

working for the Olympic 

National Forest in the early 

1990s, 100 of them were no 

longer working for the forest 

a decade later, and new contractors replaced only 41 of them. Ten contractors worked 

in both periods. On average, these returning contractors 

captured more contract value on the forest than the rest of 

the contractor pool.

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

 Work type

Contract award

(thousands of 2002 dollars)

Other natural resource 

management and conservation

Land surveys, cadastral

Snag creation

Other environmental studies

Watershed analysis/ management plans

Study/geotechnical

Survey/stocking, survival, growth, stand exam

Inspection

1990–1992

1995–1997

2000–2002

Table 4—Contractors by size of award, Olympic National Forest, 

fiscal years 1990–1992 and 2000–2002

1990–1992 2000–2002

Number of Percentage of Number of Percentage of

contractors contractors contractors contractors

Percent Percent

1st quartile 2 1.82 1 1.96

2nd quartile 7 6.36 3 5.88

3rd quartile 15 13.64 7 13.73

4th quartile 86 78.18 40 78.43

Total 110 100.00 51 100.00

Note: This table groups contractors by size of contractors’ awards. The largest contractors 

that together capture one fourth of the contract value are in the first quartile. The smallest 

contractors that together capture one fourth of the contract value are in the 4th quartile. Thus, 

for example, the largest two contractors in 1990–1992 captured the same total value as the 

smallest 86 contractors. Chi square: p < 1.000.
32

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Location of Olympic National Forest’s Contractors 

Between 1990 and 2002, the Olympic National Forest 

largely awarded contracts to contractors in Oregon and 

Washington, with a small number of awards to contractors 

in northern Idaho and northwestern Montana. Laborintensive and equipment-intensive contracts went to both 

local and distant contractors (fig. 18). However, the forest 

awarded more equipment-intensive contracts to nearby 

contractors than labor-intensive contracts. 

On average, local contractors did not capture more contracts in the early 2000s than they did a decade earlier. The 

Olympic did award proportionately more contracts to rural 

contractors (people living in communities with populations 

of less than 5,000 people) by 2000–2002. However, contractors located in communities with populations between 

5,000 and 10,000 people captured somewhat less contract 

value between the two periods (table 5). This suggests that 

when considered together, contractors from rural communities and small towns captured slightly less contract value 

(decline from 66.9 percent to 63.7 percent) than the previous 

decade. Given the general decline in contract awards, rural 

and small town contractors captured considerably less 

contract value in 2000–2002 than they did in 1990–92 

(a decrease of $3.7 million). 

Over the study period, contract awards to contractors 

located in the Willamette Valley and southern Oregon 

decreased, and by 2000–2002, the majority of contractors 

were located in either northwest Washington or along 

Interstate-5 in Washington (fig. 19). Given the noticeable 

Table 5—Percentage of contract value by contractor’s community 

size, Olympic National Forest, fiscal years 1990–1992 and 2000–2002

Community population

(1998) 1990–1992 2000–2002

Real dollars Percent Real dollars Percent

<5,000 3,203,000 18.8 3,487,000 28.8

5,000–9,999 8,201,000 48.1 4,215,000 34.9

10,000–50,000 2,010,000 11.8 2,495,000 20.6

>50,000 2,388,000 14.0 872,000 7.2

Unknown 1,260,000 7.4 1,025,000 8.5

 Total 17,061,000 100.0 12,095,000 100.0

Chi square: p < 0.057.

Chi square: p < 0.02 (excluding unknown category). 

cluster of contract awards in the Puget Sound area, it might 

be expected that urban contractors would have captured 

a large percentage of the forest’s contract offerings. However, urban contractors received only 14.0 percent and 7.2 

percent of the forest’s contracts in 1990–92 and 2000–2002, 

respectively. This suggests that although the contractors 

who work on the Olympic were clustered around Puget 

Sound, they were typically located in the area’s small- and 

medium-size towns rather than in the urban areas such as 

Seattle, Tacoma, or Olympia.

Awards to Contractors in Affected Counties

Excluding contracts awarded to contractors in unknown 

locations, from 1990 through 2002, the forest awarded 

87.1 percent of total contract value to contractors located 

in affected counties (fig. 20). Interestingly, the Olympic 

National Forest’s awards to contractors located in affected 

counties was lower in 1995–97 compared to 1990–92 and 

2000–2002. One explanation for this is that funding was 

exceptionally high in both the 1990–92 and 2000–2002 

periods. In 1990–92 the forest initiated an aggressive 

watershed restoration program. In 2000–2002, funding was 

also high owing to an influx of federal funds (through the 

ERFO fund) for repairs to roads damaged by floods in the 

late 1990s and early 2000s. 

Contractors located along the Interstate-5 corridor in 

Washington and Oregon captured more contract value than 

contractors from the Olympic Peninsula. Most interviewees felt that although some of the contracts went to local 

contractors, there was no hiring preference for locals. Some 

people attributed this to restrictions in 

federal contracting laws that prohibited 

preferential hiring based on locality. 

Others felt that there was some flexibility 

toward local preference under the Plan 

and Title II of the Secure Rural Schools 

and Community Self-Determination 

Act19 through a preapproval process. 

Some interviewees noted that, although 

19See “Payments to County Governments” 

in chapter 2.
33

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

Figure 18—Comparison of labor-intensive and equipment-intensive contractor locations by ZIP code, Olympic National Forest, 

fiscal year 1990–2002.
34

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Figure 19—Location of contractors by ZIP code and total contract awards, Olympic National Forest, fiscal years 1990–1992 

and 2000–2002.
35

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

there may have been local preference written in the new 

contracting regulations under the Plan, contracting officers 

had reservations about adopting a new set of criteria.

Procurement spending on the Olympic National Forest 

declined less than for the Forest Service as a whole during 

this study period. The Olympic National Forest rapidly 

moved away from labor-intensive activities and activities 

associated with intensive timber management; spending on 

these activities had already diminished before 1995. However, not until the late 1990s and early 2000s did spending 

on technical and equipment-intensive activities associated 

with contracted surveying and restoration increase. One 

possible explanation is that road damage caused by floods 

in the late 1990s and early 2000s created the need for more 

technical and equipment-intensive activities. Flood relief 

funds (ERFO) became available for road repairs during this 

period. 

The Olympic National Forest’s contracting pool was 

clustered around the Puget Sound and along the Interstate-5 

Figure 20—Contract awards (adjusted for inflation) to Northwest Forest Plan-affected counties, Olympic National Forest, fiscal year 

1990–2002.

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Fiscal year

C

ontract award (thousands of 2002 d

ollars)

Unknown

Other areas

Affected counties

0

corridor. This pattern did not change throughout the study 

period. Local contractors did not capture proportionately 

more of the contracts in the early 2000s than they did 

a decade earlier. It is also striking that the number of 

contractors working for the forest declined by 50 percent, 

but procurement spending only dropped by 28 percent. 

Consequently, by the end of the study period, contractors 

working for the Olympic National Forest were capturing 

more money on average than the decade prior. 

Community Economic Assistance

The Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative

To help offset the jobs losses and economic downturns 

associated with reductions in access to timber on the 

Olympic National Forest, the Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative (NEAI) was also launched in 1994, as the 

socioeconomic companion plan to the Plan. Approximately 

$1.2 billion was awarded to counties and communities in 

the spotted owl region between 1994 and 2000. Because a 
36

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

separate assessment of the NEAI was recently completed 

(see Forest Community Research 2003), this report covers 

only grants administered by the Forest Service—namely 

Rural Community Assistance (RCA) Grants offered through 

the RCA Program, a program of the Forest Service’s State 

and Private Forestry Division, under the administration of 

the Regional Office.20 Since passage of the Secure Rural 

Schools Bill (Title II) in 2000, the Forest Service has also 

begun to award Title II grants, along with RCA grants. 

Additional grants are also now available from the National 

Fire Plan. 

Rural Community Assistance Program

The RCA program was created with the passage of the 1990 

Farm Bill (Title 23, Subtitle G, Chapter 2), which authorized the Forest Service to provide technical and financial 

assistance to natural resource-dependent rural communities, tribes, counties, municipalities, and unincorporated 

areas in and around national forests. With the passage of the 

Plan, RCA funds were dedicated to communities eligible 

under the NEAI to help improve economic opportunities, 

build capacity, and develop high skill family wage jobs. 

Eligible entities submitted applications to State Community 

Economic Revitalization Teams (SCERTs).21

Type of Grants

Although RCA funds have always been flexible to meet 

local community needs, prior to the Plan, RCA funds went 

primarily to projects that were oriented toward natural 

resource outputs and products, such as recreation planning 

projects and development of value-added forest products 

and NTFPs. Because eligibility for RCA funds required 

communities to develop strategic action plans with Forest 

Service involvement, as well as annual action plans that 

prioritized community needs, much of the funding also 

went to strategic action planning. In addition to the grants, 

the RCA program also provided technical assistance in 

project planning and leadership training.

With the Plan/NEAI, the RCA program changed its 

emphasis to funding high-priority projects identified by the 

communities themselves. The SCERT process (the WACERT in Washington) was the mechanism through which 

projects were awarded funding by state and federal agencies 

as part of the NEAI. Each county or tribe submitted a list 

of prioritized projects to the WA-CERT based on proposals 

and priorities submitted by communities and other eligible 

entities. 

Because of this community-based orientation, many of 

the RCA grants went to projects that had little or nothing 

to do with the national forest or natural resources. Initially, 

much of the funding went to support basic infrastructure 

projects. Because many Washington communities had 

outdated water and sewer systems, they often faced moratoriums on growth by the Washington State Department 

of Ecology. Without the basic infrastructure in place, 

many communities found it impossible to do any type of 

economic development. Thus, RCA grants (usually matched 

or supplemented by other state, federal, or local funds) were 

often awarded to help upgrade water and sewer systems. In 

the mid-1990s, economic development efforts also focused 

on industrial recruitment, i.e., trying to attract outside 

businesses to a community through tax incentives, and 

available industrial space. Industrial park construction or 

renovation was thus viewed as a high-priority need by many 

communities. The RCA funds also went to these types of 

projects, primarily for the planning, engineering, and design 

phases, but also, at least early on in the Plan/NEAI, for 

construction. The RCA has also continued to be available 

for strategic action planning and leadership training. 

Currently, development models have shifted to “development from within,” that is, encouraging communities 

and businesses within communities to develop and expand 

as well as network and coordinate with other local businesses. The RCA grants have supported training efforts and 

workshops to help promote this type of development. 

One advantage of the RCA funds has been its 

flexibility. With funds available for planning, including 

20Another source of Forest Service funding came through the Old 

Growth Diversification Fund. Because these funds went directly to 

each state, and were administered and awarded by state agencies, 

they are not included in this assessment. 

21Note that in this report, we limit our analysis of Forest Service 

financial aid to the types of projects and amount of funds awarded, 

and not to the effectiveness of these projects/monies. Because a 

more detailed assessment of the effects of individual grants/loans 

(under NEAI) was conducted in a previous study (FCR 2003), it 

was not included in this study. 
37

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

preplanning, project design and engineering, the RCA 

funds often served as seed money to get a project off of 

the ground. Once set in motion, other state and federal 

funds, such as large construction grants, would be 

awarded to a project. 

Trends in Granting Awards

Funding for the RCA program increased as a result of the 

Plan/NEAI. For communities, counties, and tribes surrounding the Olympic National Forest, the Forest Service 

RCA program awarded about $12 million in NEAI grants 

and loans, 1992–2003. These funds also helped leverage an 

additional $30 million (fig. 21). Funding remained relatively 

high, peaking in 1999, but since then has been decreasing 

(fig. 22). In 2003, the RCA program received no appropriated funds but was able to survive on $600,000 in carryover 

funding. The average amount awarded has also decreased. 

In the early years of the Plan, RCA would award up to 

$200,000 for a project. At the time of this study, grants 

were limited to $50,000 for a project. 

Payments to County Governments

Under the Payments to States Act of 1908, county governments received 25 percent of National Forest revenues 

generated through collection receipts. Timber receipts 

(including purchaser road credits, 

Knutson-Vandenberg 

collections, and salvage sale fund payments) were by far the largest source of 

revenue to the Olympic National Forest 

during the 1970s and 1980s. The 25 

percent of payments to counties were 

used to fund public schools and roads. 

In 1993, Congress passed the Omnibus 

Budget Reconciliation Act, which 

provided an alternative payment to 72 

counties in Washington, Oregon, and 

northern California affected by the drop 

in federal timber harvest and associated timber revenues that resulted from 

administrative and judicial decisions 

designed to protect the northern spotted 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Base Noncompetitive NEAI

RCA funds (millions nominal dollars)

Forest Service dollars

Leveraged dollars

Figure 21—Dollars leveraged with community economic 

assistance, Olympic National Forest, 1992–2003. RCA = 

Rural Community Assistance. NEAI = Northwest Economic 

Adjustment Initiative.

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

1992

19931994

1995

19961997

1998

1999

2000

20012002

2003

RCA funds (million nominal dollars)

Base program

Noncompetitive

NEAI

Year

Figure 22—Community economic assistance funding, Olympic National Forest, 

1992–2003. RCA = Rural Community Assistance. NEAI = Northwest Economic 

Adjustment Initiative.

owl. These payments were known as “spotted owl safety 

nets” or “owl guarantee payments.” Under this act, counties were to receive a declining percentage of the average 

annual payment they received between 1986 and 1990. 

This percentage would decline until 2003, when it would 

have reached 58 percent of the 1986–90 average. The owl 

guarantee payments then expired. 

In 2000, Congress replaced the spotted owl safety net 

measures with the Secure Rural Schools and Community 
38

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Self-Determination Act, which expires in 2006. Under this 

act, counties receive money each year equal to the average 

of the payments received during the three highest years 

between 1986 and 1999. At least 85 percent of this money 

must be used to fund education and transportation projects 

(Title I). The remaining 15 percent is used to fund Resource 

Advisory Committees (RACs) and their activities (Title II) 

and the general county budget (Title III). The RACs were 

established by the act to promote collaborative relationships 

and to advise the Secretary of Agriculture on the use of 

Title II money. A committee is composed of 15 members 

that represent a balance between the environmental community; industry, commodity, and recreation interest groups; 

and government officials, educators, and general members 

of the public. The RACs review and recommend projects 

and associated funding that are proposed by members of the 

public. These projects must focus on enhancing or restoring 

forest ecosystem health (including water quality), promoting land stewardship, or maintaining or improving existing 

infrastructure. The projects can occur on federal land, or 

on nonfederal land where they would benefit federal land. 

Not only do RACs promote collaborative relationships 

between members of the public and federal agencies, the 

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

Year

Timber revenues 

(thousand dollars)

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994 1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000 2001

2002

Figure 23—Collection receipts for timber revenues, Olympic 

National Forest, 1988–2002.

0

100

200

300

400

500

19881989

1990

19911992199319941995

1996

1997

1998

1999200020012002

Year

Nontimber program revenues 

(thousand dollars) 

Recreation

Land use

Minerals

Power

Grazing

Figure 24—Collection receipts for nontimber program revenues, Olympic National Forest, 1988–2002.

projects they fund provide employment opportunities for 

local residents.

Figure 23 summarizes the downward trend in timber 

collection receipts that occurred on the Olympic National 

Forest between 1988 and 2002. Revenues generated by nontimber programs were meager compared with those that had 

come from the timber program (fig. 24). This demonstrates 

the importance of mitigation measures. Figure 25 shows 

the amount of money county governments received from 

the Olympic National Forest between 1990 and 2002. The 
39

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

Figure 25—Olympic National Forest payments to county governments, 1990–2002. The lower line represents the 

amount that county governments would have received based on 25 percent of the Olympic National Forest collection 

receipts alone, without the mitigating legislation. The upper line indicates the amount of money that county governments actually received under the spotted owl safety net payments and the Secure Rural Schools Act.

0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

19951996

1997

1998

1999

2000

20012002

Million dollars

Not adjusted

Owl-adjusted

Year

Figure 26—Distribution of Olympic National Forest payments to counties across the five counties that surround the 

Olympic National Forest.

Clallam

34%

Grays Harbor 10% 

Jefferson

46%

Mason

11%

Thurston 0%

lower line on the graph represents the amount that county 

governments would have received based on 25 percent 

of the Olympic National Forest collection receipts alone, 

without the mitigating legislation. The upper line indicates 

the amount of money that county governments actually 

received under the owl safety net payments and the Secure 

Rural Schools Act. The spotted owl safety net measures 

resulted in substantially higher payments to counties than 

they would have received through forest revenue sharing 

alone, in many cases more than doubling the revenues. The 

Secure Rural Schools Act has provided the highest level 

of payments to counties since 1990. Figure 26 shows how 

these payments have been distributed among the counties 

that contain Olympic National Forest lands.

In addition to being an important source of revenue to 

support roads and schools countywide, payments to counties under the Secure Rural Schools Act have contributed 

a significant amount of money to support local resourcerelated projects on and around the Olympic National 

Forest. There are two RACs on the Olympic Peninsula: the 

Olympic Peninsula Resource Advisory Committee, which 

includes Clallam, Jefferson, Mason, and Thurston Counties; and the Grays Harbor RAC, which covers only Grays 

Harbor County. These RACs serve as an important source 

of funding for joint forest stewardship projects between the 

forest and the public. The RAC money not only promotes 

joint forest stewardship, but also is an important source 

of new grant money to communities that have seen NEAI 

funds largely disappear. 
40

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Chapter 2 Summary

In terms of resource outputs, the most significant change 

on the Olympic National Forest has been the drop in timber 

harvest activity from an average of 250 mmbf per year in 

the 1980s, to an average of 10 mmbf per year since 1990. 

Associated with that decline was a substantial drop in timber revenue generated by the forest, from over $30 million 

in 1989 to under $2 million in 2002. Timber was the single 

biggest driver behind the forest budget prior to the Plan. 

The recreation program has remained fairly stable, and 

revenues generated by the Recreation Fee Demonstration 

Program have helped raise funds for recreation maintenance 

and development to meet the growing demand for recreational outputs by the forest. 

Two additional important mitigation measures designed 

to offset the negative economic effects of declining timber 

harvests on communities were associated with the Plan. 

Owl guarantee payments caused payments to county 

governments to decrease slowly rather than abruptly during 

the 1990s. The Secure Rural Schools and Community 

Self-Determination Act has stabilized these payments. 

Both measures have helped buffer the impacts of declining 

timber receipts on county governments. 

The Forest Service community economic assistance 

increased substantially between 1994 and 1998 owing to 

the NEAI. Now that RCA funds have dwindled, economic 

assistance money available to communities through the 

forest has essentially returned to pre-Plan levels. However, 

forest communities have the opportunity to benefit from a 

new source of funds made available through RAC as part of 

the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act. 

In chapter 3, we examine how these changes on the 

forest have affected social and economic well-being in three 

communities around the Olympic National Forest.
41

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

This section focuses on three case-study communities that 

are located within a 10-mile radius of the Olympic National 

Forest. Using quantitative data from the U.S. census, 

combined with qualitative information from interviews 

with community stakeholder and local Forest Service 

employees, we observed (1) how communities around the 

Olympic National Forest have changed since 1990, and 

how changes in forest management and the flow of socioeconomic benefits from the forest under the Northwest 

Forest Plan (the Plan) have contributed to that change; (2) 

how communities have adapted to change, and the role the 

forest has played in helping them do so; and (3) changing 

relationships between the Olympic National Forest and the 

case-study communities since 1990. 

Quilcene

Community Change and the Effects of 

Forest Management Policy

As mentioned in chapter 1 of this report, the economy of 

Quilcene was highly dependent on the timber industry, particularly Forest Service timber sales until the early 1990s. 

The curtailment of logging activity and forest management 

activities on the Olympic National Forest set in motion 

the changes in Quilcene prior to the Plan. The Plan has 

not restored logging activities to levels seen in the 1980s, 

nor has it restored management activities to the extent 

that local contractors are getting contracts or sales. One 

logging company went out of business, and the remaining 

logging company in the area employs one resident from 

Quilcene, a tree-faller, and contracts almost exclusively on 

private lands. As a result of the declines in federal timber 

sales, the local economy has stagnated, and the community 

has struggled to adapt to the change and replace the role 

that the timber industry played in the community. In the 

vacuum that resulted, residents and county agents reported 

three primary trends in the 1990s: the outmigration of 

timber industry workers and their families, the inmigration 

of three distinct populations who found the newly vacated 

houses and properties affordable and the community 

Chapter 3: Community-Level Change and the 

Impact of the Northwest Forest Plan

attractive, and the rapid growth of service—particularly 

leisure—industries. The increase in service industry 

employment is not reflective of growth in this sector for 

Quilcene itself, but reflects regional growth in surrounding communities, such as Port Townsend, Bremerton, and 

Silverdale. 

The 1990s marked a period of major economic recession for the community. More recently, however, there is 

little unanimity about the meaning of social and economic 

trends in the community. Although respondents generally acknowledged that the area is not doing very well, 

some report that the area has been and remains stagnant, 

others believe the area is still in a steady decline, whereas 

another group believes that the area is rebounding. Typical 

responses within the different groups in the community are 

fairly consistent. Many older residents said that the community was in decline. At the same time, many residents 

who moved into the area in the 1990s perceived conditions 

more optimistically. On the other hand, people affiliated 

with natural resource industries usually responded that the 

area is not doing well but that things have been status quo 

for some time. 

These divergent views can be explained by the varying 

degree to which different sectors of the local economy and 

community members have been affected. Census data, 

interview responses, and researcher observations confirm 

the uneven effect of the changes in national forest management on the area’s change between 1990 and 2000. The 

following data broadly describe the demographic, social, 

and economic status and trends in Quilcene and Jefferson 

County. 

Demographic change—

While Jefferson County experienced moderate growth 

between 1990 and 2000, Quilcene lost more than 20 

percent of its population, declining from 478 in 1990 to 

375 in 2000 (table 6). Interviewees attribute this loss in 

population to the outmigration of timber industry workers 

and their families as well as Forest Service employees after 

the reduction in logging on the Olympic National Forest. 
42

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

During the same period, the area’s median age 

increased and school enrollment declined. The median 

age increased by more than 23 percent, from 32.1 to 

39.7 (table 6). The median age of Quilcene’s population 

increased more rapidly than the county’s population as a 

whole, but it remains low compared to 46.9 for Jefferson 

County. The 45 to 64 age category increased by almost 55 

percent in Quilcene, compared with an 85-percent increase 

for Jefferson County (table 7). All other age categories 

declined in Quilcene. The 5 to 19 age cohort declined the 

least, losing 4.8 percent—five individuals. The same age 

group increased by over 20 percent in Jefferson County. 

In Quilcene, the causes are threefold: natural aging of the 

population, an outmigration of younger families, and an 

inmigration of an older population. When the curtailment of 

logging activity occurred in the late 1980s and early 1990s, 

many younger people who were still in 

their peak earning years left the area to 

enter retraining programs or get jobs 

elsewhere. They were a key demographic that supported the local goods 

and services economy, and school. 

Not surprisingly, with changes in 

the age distribution and the increase 

in median age in Quilcene, school 

enrollment declined. Enrollment 

declined 7.92 percent in Quilcene, 

whereas enrollment increased 32.56 

percent in Jefferson County (table 6). 

Between 1990 and 2000, educational 

attainment22 increased by 13.5 percent, from 78.5 percent to 

89.1 percent (table 6). This change is attributable to a change 

in the area’s population rather than a change in the area 

schools’ performances. 

Economic change—

The change in population and the shift away from a timber 

economy has also affected the economic composition of 

the community. Residents described the community as 

composed of two distinct populations: those with very high 

incomes and those with very low incomes. Overall, however, 

median incomes have increased among Quilcene residents. 

In 1990, the median household income for Quilcene was 

$25,378, 80 percent of the county average. In 2000, median 

Table 6—Population, median age, school enrollment, and educational 

attainment for Quilcene (measured at the census block group aggregate 

[CBGA] level) and Jefferson County, 1990 and 2000 

1990 2000 Change

Percent

Total population, Quilcene CBGA 478 375 -21.55

Total population, county 20,146 25,953 28.82

Median age, Quilcene, CBGA 32.1 39.7 23.68

Median age, county 41.1 46.9 14.11

School enrollment, Quilcene CBGA 101 93 -7.92

School enrollment, County 3,292 4,364 32.56

Completed high school, Quilcene CBGA (percent) 78.55 89.10 13.43

Completed high school, county (percent) 82.69 91.57 10.74

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census 2000.

Table 7—Age distribution for Quilcene (measured at the census block group 

aggregate [CBGA] level) and Jefferson County, 1990 and 2000 

Age distribution

0 to 4 5 to 19 20 to 29 30 to 44 45 to 64 65 and up

Number of people

1990 Quilcene CBGA 29 104 76 126 71 72

2000 Quilcene CBGA 16 99 31 71 110 48

Change (percent) -44.83 -4.81 -59.21 43.65 54.93 -33.33

1990 county 1,139 3,753 1,562 4,983 4,542 4,167

2000 county 1,051 4,518 1,678 4,834 8,411 5,461

Change (percent) -7.73 20.38 7.43 -2.99 85.18 31.05

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census 2000. 

22We define “educational attainment” as the number of residents 25 

and older that have completed high school or beyond.
43

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

household income increased by 58 

percent to $40,094, exceeding the 

county average of $37,869 (table 8). 

No households earned more than 

$75,000 annually in 1990, but nearly 

18 households reported earnings 

more than $75,000 in 2000 (table 9). 

The percentage of the population living in poverty fell nearly 25 

percent, from 19.5 percent in 1990 to 

14.9 percent in 2000 (table 8). This 

represents a more sizable decrease 

than what took place across the county. However, the 

percentage of the population living in poverty in Jefferson 

County stood lower than in Quilcene, at 11.3 percent in 

2000. 

Unemployment also dramatically decreased by 64.8 

percent from 20.3 percent in 1990 to slightly above 7 

percent in 2000 (table 8). Countywide unemployment was 

at 7.2 percent in 1990 and 6.7 percent in 2000, indicating a 

marginal shift in unemployment in Jefferson County. 

To capture the socioeconomic changes occurring in 

the communities located within the northern spotted owl 

region, Sutton and Donoghue (in press) developed an index 

of socioeconomic well-being. This index was constructed 

using educational attainment, unemployment, poverty, 

employment diversity, commuting time, and the household 

income inequality ratio. In 1990, Quilcene had a score of 

46.47 on the socioeconomic well-being index, which placed 

it in the “very low” category in terms of well-being among 

the region’s communities. By 2000, this index had markedly 

Table 8—Economic indicators, Quilcene and Jefferson County, 

1990 and 2000

1990a 2000 Change

Percent

Median household income, Quilcene CBGA (dollars) 25,378 40,094 57.98

Median household income, county (dollars) 31,270 37,869 21.10

Poverty, Quilcene CBGA (percent) 19.46 14.93 -23.28

Poverty, county (percent) 13.47 11.26 -16.41

Unemployed, Quilcene CBGA (percent) 20.31 7.14 -64.84

Unemployed, county (percent) 7.17 6.68 -6.83

CBGA = census block group aggregate. 

The 1990 median household income has been adjusted for inflation.

Table 9—Household income distribution, Quilcene, 1990 and 2000

Household income distributiona

$10,001– $15,000– $25,000– $35,000– $50,000– $75,000– $100,000– $150,000

<$10,000 $14,999 $24,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 $149,999 and up

Number of households

1990 Quilcene CBGA 26 33 68 30 11 22 0 0 0

2000 Quilcene CBGA 15 9 24 18 27 33 11 3 4

1990 county 1,429 1,029 1,821 1,499 1,504 839 271 177 53

2000 county 1,073 937 1,740 1,650 2,078 2,218 991 636 326

CBGA = census block group aggregate.

aThese data are not adjusted for inflation and are reported in 1990 dollar values and 2000 dollar values, respectively.

increased to 64.20, placing Quilcene within the “medium” 

category. 

These statistics suggest that economic conditions have 

markedly improved in Quilcene. Nevertheless, interviewees noted that a segment of the community continues to 

live in poverty. One resident noted there were many poor 

people living in the area, many of whom lived in their cars. 

Some relied on disability income. Others sold illicit drugs 

to make a living. Interviewees noted a high incidence of 

drug (particularly methamphetamine) use in Quilcene. 

Some felt that those with more education have moved 

away, while those that have remained have not been able to 

adapt—entering a cycle of poverty, particularly with a lack 

of living wage jobs.

Change in employment by industry trends in Quilcene 

and in Jefferson County also provides some insight into 

how the economy changed between 1990 and 2000 (table 

10). Although it represented a 1.5 percent decline as a 

percentage of the population employed in these industries, 
44

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

employment in agriculture, forestry, fishing, and mining increased from 33 to 35 individuals. In contrast, 

employment in manufacturing declined by 68 percent, 

from 41 people in 1990 to 15 in 2000. Employment in 

transportation, warehousing, and utilities increased from 

5 to 17 individuals between 1990 and 2000. There was 

a substantial growth in the construction industry, where 

25 people reported employment in construction in 2000, 

compared to only 5 in 1990. There was increased employment in all service industries. Employment in finance and 

real estate in Quilcene increased from one in 1990 to six 

in 2000. Employment in education, health and human and 

other services increased from 5 in 1990 to 23 in 2000. 

Both finance and real estate and arts and entertainment 

based employment are reflective of countywide trends 

(i.e., an active real estate market, increases in tourism, and 

a larger presence of an older nonworking population). One 

area resident noted that the local real estate market was flat 

in the early 1990s but that it picked up substantially late in 

the decade. Beyond real estate and finance, and construction, employment trends in Quilcene are not indicative of 

the development of new industries but rather reveal the 

extent to which Quilcene is a bedroom community. 

Table 10—Employment by industry, Quilcene, 1990 and 2000 

Number of employees

1990 2000

Industry Quilcene CBGA Quilcene CBGA

Agriculture, forestry, fishing, hunting, and mining 33 35

Construction 5 25

Manufacturing 41 15

Wholesale trade 5 4

Retail trade 9 17

Transportation, warehousing, and utilities 5 17

Finance, insurance, real estate and rental, and leasing 1 6

Education, health, and social services 5 23

Arts, recreation, accommodations and food services 8 17

Public administration 15 6

Professional and other services 26 11

Total 153 176

CBGA = census block group aggregate.

Key social and economic changes—

There have been a number of different types of individuals 

drawn to the area by low housing costs, inexpensive land, 

and its location in proximity to urban areas on the other 

side of Hood Canal. Many people noted that Quilcene is 

an inexpensive place to live. Residents variously said that 

“people come to Quilcene because they can afford to” or 

that Quilcene is the “last cheap place to buy [land].” Without exception residents are cognizant of the shift from a 

dependence on natural resource-based industries, to more 

of a bedroom and retirement lifestyle community.

To an extent, Quilcene is a bedroom community. A 

sizable number of the population lives in Quilcene and 

travels to work in the larger cities of Port Townsend, 

Bremerton, and Silverdale. Many of the people who 

commute to work bought property in Quilcene because 

it is relatively inexpensive, close to employment centers, 

and because of the area’s scenic beauty. Inmigrants were 

generally of two types, professionals who moved in from 

the Seattle area, and service industry workers buying the 

cheaper housing stock left by the timber workers who left 

the community in the late 1980s and early 1990s. 

Although some of the recent higher income immigrants bought homes and commute to work, a number 
45

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

bought land and built homes either as investments or for 

future retirement. One county agent, when reflecting on 

the median age and income distribution, remarked on the 

number of wealthy people moving into the area.

Some view the new landowners, especially the 

second-home owners and retirees, as an important 

component of Quilcene’s local economy. Indeed, several 

area residents commented on who was moving into 

the area and made several observations about their 

impacts, including bringing in a sense of optimism and 

entrepreneurship. Many of the recent immigrants were 

thought to be highly educated and affluent retirees. 

County agents, local residents, and area business people 

view the immigrants as outsiders but see them having 

positive impacts on the community. Some complain that 

many of the commuters do not invest or spend money in 

the community. The loss of basic local goods and service 

businesses are a testament to this claim. However, the 

growth of the service industries and employment in 

construction point to fairly substantial financial impacts. 

There is a population of immigrants that is not affluent. A number of immigrants who moved to Quilcene were 

taking advantage of low-cost real estate left behind by 

the residents who left in the wake of the timber industry’s 

downturn in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Whether the 

lower income population commutes or is employed locally 

is unclear. One long-time resident commented on the 

change in population and the appearance of the community, stating that many nice homes were sold to people who 

are letting them run down.

Business trends in the community mirror the changes 

in composition of the community: some businesses are 

doing well, some are just getting by, and many have 

closed. Many businesses that had been in the community 

for years have closed including a gas station, grocery 

store, and restaurant. On the other hand, there has been 

an increase in other small businesses over the past several 

years, many of which are tourism related. There are also 

four small organic farms in the area that have started up 

within the last 10 years. 

Community Adaptation to Change

Factors promoting adaptation to change—

A segment of the community has made efforts to adapt 

to changing circumstances. Purposeful and significant 

strategies have been undertaken by individuals, local 

entities, including the school, and outside organizations. 

These strategies included small business startups, 

community planning activities, and infrastructure 

development. In the end, however, the change in 

composition of the local population—the out- and inmigration, and the resulting changes in the local economy 

have had the most direct and lasting impacts on the 

community’s ability to adapt to changing circumstances 

and social and economic conditions.

Several residents identified the efforts of various 

agencies that worked in Quilcene to mitigate some of the 

negative results of the loss of timber industry jobs. Social 

service agencies, such as Olympic Community Action 

and United Good Neighbors, provide access to a number 

of programs including Head Start and heating assistance 

programs. Olympic Community Action was contracted by 

Jefferson County to manage the community center in Quilcene. The Quilcene Community Center, in turn, is a facility 

that provides a meeting place for various organizations such 

as Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Lion’s Club, and the 4-H 

Club, as well as providing space for the area’s food bank. 

Staff at the community center provide referrals to residents 

who need the services provided by Olympic Community 

Action. In addition, the school district pursued and received 

grant funds, most notably from the Gates Foundation. 

County agents and Quilcene residents both noted that 

the small business development efforts made by individuals 

were an important component of the community’s ability 

to adapt to the changing circumstances. Although much 

of the entrepreneurial activity has been taken on by recent 

inmigrants to the community, long-time residents have 

initiated some. 

Finally, residents noted that there were a number of 

community meetings over the past 5 to 10 years to address 

issues specifically addressing needs resulting from changing social and economic conditions. Several residents 
46

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

recalled meetings for expanding the community center and 

the subsequent planning activities. Nearly all residents and 

county agents recalled community meetings held to address 

a community water system. The water system was intended 

to facilitate economic development in the downtown. The 

meetings drew a range of individuals, including long-time 

residents, business owners, the Forest Service, and Jefferson 

County agents.

Despite the numerous strategies employed by residents 

in the community and outside entities, Quilcene has not 

had much success adapting to change. There have been 

some successes with programs serving specific needs in 

the community, such as services provided by the Olympic 

Community Action Program. Many residents do not see 

that the community has done anything to adapt to changing 

circumstances and attribute it to the lack of cohesion within 

the community. Paradoxically, the very cause of the lack of 

cohesion—the change in population—has also been key in 

spurring positive change in the community. Most notable 

has been the financial investment made through entrepreneurial activities of many recent immigrants.

Factors preventing adaptation to change—

The ability of residents of Quilcene to adapt to the socioeconomic changes that have taken place owing to the reduction 

in federal timber harvesting has been mixed. As mentioned 

above, many individuals employed in the timber industry 

found work elsewhere or moved on to new careers. For 

the community as a whole, however, residents and county 

officials who were interviewed identified several significant 

factors that contributed to the area’s continued lack of 

ability to adapt to the changes resulting from loss of timberrelated jobs. The main factors identified included lack of 

cohesion in the community, lack of physical infrastructure, 

land use regulations imposed by Washington’s Growth 

Management Act, and acts of nature.

Nearly all residents and county officials remarked 

on the lack of cohesion and insular attitude found in 

Quilcene. Generally, they expressed a negative view of the 

community’s “personality,” including the community’s fear 

of government and outsiders, a culture of victimization, 

and attitude of hopelessness. One interviewee felt that the 

bipolar income distribution characterized the two very 

different populations, and the difficulty in getting them to 

agree on anything. After struggling for nearly 10 years to 

change and reestablish itself, the community has changed 

little. What successes have been achieved are more a result 

of the change in the composition of the community and have 

less to do with any intention of community effort. 

However, county and state regulations have also 

imposed significant barriers that affect the community’s 

ability to adapt to new social and economic conditions. 

The most significant according to local residents is the lack 

of infrastructure, including the lack of a sewer and public 

water system. The physical infrastructure is an obstacle 

to any significant industrial development and more intensive commercial development in the downtown. Efforts 

to develop the community’s water system have been the 

subject of intense local debate since at least 1994. In the 

end, the water system has not been developed because of the 

community’s inability to agree on the need for the system 

and support for its development.23

Another significant barrier to change identified by 

area residents is Washington’s Growth Management Act. 

Washington enacted the Growth Management Act (GMA) 

of 1990 to channel growth into incorporated areas or areas 

readily served by infrastructure. In Jefferson County, there 

was practically no zoning prior to 1990. Then in 1991, 

there were restrictions on commercial development outside 

incorporated areas. The county also established designations for resource lands and minimum 5-acre lots in rural 

areas. The planning process took several years, concluding 

in 1998. The process was very contentious and took place at 

the same time as the spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) issues were affecting national forest use and regulations. Many residents believe the act has been applied “very 

stringently” to Quilcene. Most residents believe the GMA 

has made development more difficult because it has limited 

subdivision and commercial zoning. One area business 

23Since the interviews for this report were conducted, there has 

been action affecting the development of the water system. The 

State Department of Ecology reversed a prior decision and effectively enabled the development of a water system by the Jefferson 

County Public Utility District No. 1.
47

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

owner commented that if the water infrastructure were in 

place, the restrictions placed on development by the GMA 

would be lessened. 

Finally, one factor that has contributed to the area’s 

struggles has been natural climatic events. Heavy rains in 

the late 1990s and early 2000s caused landslides that temporarily closed Highway 101, cutting off access to Quilcene 

from the south, and closing Dosewallips Road, a popular 

and unique point of departure into the Olympic National 

Forest, Buckhorn Wilderness, and Olympic National Park. 

The results of the road closures has been reduced tourist 

traffic and reduced sales at local businesses.

The Role of the U.S. Forest Service in 

Helping to Adapt to Change

The Forest Service’s direct and indirect contributions to the 

community are far fewer and much less important to Quilcene than in the past. Historically, the Forest Service played 

a central role in the work, recreation, social, and economic 

life of the community. The Forest Service does maintain a 

staff in Quilcene at the Quilcene Ranger Station. The Forest 

Service also provides grants to Jefferson County and the 

community to support community development efforts, and 

offers educational programs for local youth. The following 

describes these efforts in greater detail:

Grants—

Forest Service records indicate that the community received 

$25,000 in 1994 to explore the possibility of developing a 

water system in Quilcene. The water system belongs to the 

Forest Service, and they have been looking for mechanisms 

to transfer the system to the community. Most residents and 

county agents were familiar with the grant and recall the 

effort with a great deal of disillusionment. 

Residents recalled various projects that may or may not 

have been funded by the Forest Service, including funding 

to write a community plan and to expand the community 

center. Several residents noted grants were awarded to 

organizations like the Resource and Conservation District 

for habitat restoration and demonstration projects but no 

specific records were found. Most of these projects related 

to the 1998 Salmon Recovery Act that channeled funds to 

support the development and management of collaborative 

efforts.

Other programs—

Several people noted that although part-time summer 

positions with the Forest Service were scarce, there were 

still programs to get local youth involved in forest-related 

activities. One person referred to the Youth Ranger Corps, 

a program organized for 12- and 13-year-olds to do trail 

maintenance in the summer. The program received funds 

through the Olympic Resource Advisory Council (RAC) 

in 2003.

However, most area residents had little awareness of 

Forest Service programs, and they appear to have done 

little to help Quilcene adapt to changes brought about by 

changing federal forest management policies.

Changing Relations Between Quilcene 

and the Olympic National Forest

The Forest Service played a relatively small role in 

Quilcene’s efforts to adapt to the shift away from timber 

dependency. There is a growing disconnect between the 

Forest Service and the community as the economic relationship with the Forest Service and cultural relationship 

with the national forest lessens. Individuals and businesses 

that once relied on the Forest Service for their livelihoods 

have either left the area or are pursuing other activities 

to support themselves. Institutions that once relied on 

Forest Service funds or resources now look elsewhere for 

support. Individuals who have moved into the area over 

the past 10 years tend not to use the forest for economic 

purposes or do not rely otherwise on the Forest Service. 

Although the Forest Service has tried to support local 

efforts to adapt to the new economic and social realities 

through grants, contracts, sales, employment, and other 

programs, these efforts have not amounted to much in the 

eyes of area residents. Because many local entrepreneurs 

are focusing on tourism development, there is still a need 

and interest in working with the Forest Service.
48

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Many residents felt that the local Forest Service was 

caught between the community and the federal bureaucracy. 

They were cognizant of the staff cutbacks, budget constraints, and “red tape” that employees had to cut through 

to get their work done. Many felt that local Forest Service 

employees make a great effort to be part of the community, are supportive of the school system and the chamber 

of commerce, and make important contributions to the 

quality of life in the community. The loss of Forest Service 

employees owing to downsizing and outsourcing has been 

a great loss to the community. Many residents noted how 

the reduction in Forest Service staff in Quilcene negatively 

affected the volunteer base, affecting such institutions as 

the volunteer fire department. 

Lake Quinault Area

Community Change and the Effects of 

Forest Management Policy

Demographic change—

The population for the Lake Quinault communities declined 

by 12 percent between 1990 and 2000, from 705 to 622 

(table 11). This is in contrast to the 5-percent increase for 

Grays Harbor County. Most residents stated that there had 

been an outmigration of timber workers and their families 

from the area in the late 1980s and early 1990s. 

The median age of residents has also increased by 17 

percent, from 33 to 39, which supports the observation that 

younger working families have left the area, and older residents have remained (table 11). For the county, the median 

age increased by 9 percent. The change in age distribution 

further supports the observed trend, with decreases in the 

age categories between 0 to 44 as well as 65 and older (table 

12). Only the age range from 45 to 64 showed an increase: 

37-percent increase, from 142 to 194. One explanation is 

that the middle-aged group was established in the area 

and could continue to make a living, whereas the younger 

aged groups (perhaps those with fewer assets or options for 

making a living) were forced to leave. Similar declines in 

the 20- to 44-age categories, and the 0- to 4-age category 

were observed for the county (which was also undergoing economic hardship owing to declines in the timber 

economy). The county similarly showed growth in the 

45- to 64-age category, while the 65-and-over population 

remained relatively stable. 

Census data also show that not only is the population getting older but is more educated (table 11). In 1990, 

74 percent of the population had completed high school, 

whereas in 2000 the percentage of the population to complete high school had increased to 78 percent. The percentage of people with bachelor’s degrees or higher, however, 

Table 11—Population, age, school enrollment, and educational attainment for the Lake Quinault (measured 

at the census block group aggregate [CBGA] level), and Grays Harbor County, 1990 and 2000 

1990 2000 Change

Percent

Total population, Lake Quinault CBGA 705 622 -11.77

Total population, county 64,175 67,194 4.70

Median age, Lake Quinault CBGA 33 38.7 17.27

Median age, county 35.3 38.6 9.35

School enrollment, Lake Quinault CBGA 169 170 0.59

School enrollment, county 12,755 14,390 12.82

Completed high school, Lake Quinault CBGA (percent) 74.09 78.72 6.25

Completed high school, county (percent) 73.97 81.09 9.63

Bachelor of arts, graduate, professional degrees, Quinault-Neilton CBGA (percent) 8.64 12.60 45.83

Bachelor of arts, graduate, professional degrees, county (percent) 10.97 12.66 15.41

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census 2000.
49

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

Table 12—Age distribution, Lake Quinault and Grays Harbor County, 1990 and 2000

Age distribution

0 to 4 5 to 19 20 to 29 30 to 44 45 to 64 65 and up

Number of people

1990 Lake Quinault CBGA 61 176 82 172 142 72

2000 Lake Quinault CBGA 24 169 55 121 194 59

Change (percent) -60.66 -3.98 -32.93 -29.65 36.62 -18.06

1990 county 4,722 14,171 7,813 14,787 12,492 10,190

2000 county 4,239 14,833 7,130 13,784 16,876 10,332

Change (percent) -10.23 4.67 -8.74 -6.78 35.09 1.39

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census 2000. 

CBGA = census block group aggregate.

was relatively low: 9 percent in 1990 and 13 percent in 

2000. Similar statistics were found for the county. 

Despite the decline in population, school enrollment 

was the same in 1990 and 2000 (169 and 170, respectively) 

(table 11). Residents of the area, however, say that enrollment actually declined dramatically in the early 1990s, 

owing to the outmigration of many families from the 

area. The apparent stability of school enrollment can be 

explained by the growth of the Latino population in the area 

during the late 1990s. The Hispanic population increased 

from 0 to 6 percent between 1990 and 2000 as compared 

to from 2 to about 5 percent for the county. Interviews 

with those affiliated with the school district indicate that 

the increase in Latino children attending the local school 

has been an important factor in maintaining the stability of 

school enrollment. Although school enrollment has been 

stable for the Lake Quinault area, it is interesting to note 

that for the county, it has increased by 13 percent.

The Native American population also showed an 

increase from 1 to 46 between 1990 and 2000. Overall, the 

racial composition of the area, although still predominantly 

white, was more diverse in 2000 (table 13).

Economic change—

According to census data, the economic situation for residents of Lake Quinault improved between 1990 and 2000. 

Median household income increased by 30 percent, from 

$27,507 to $35,893 per year (table 14), slightly higher than 

the county average, which increased from $28,596 in 1990 

to $34,160 in 2000. Some interviewees felt that the increase 

in median household income could be attributed to demographic changes in the community—that is, families that 

owned land could afford to stay in the community, whereas 

Table 13—Population by race, Lake Quinault and Grays Harbor County, 1990 and 2000

Population by racea

African Native Asian and 2+ races

Caucasian American American Pacific Islands Other (2000 only)

Number of people

1990 Lake Quinault CBGA 700 0 1 4 0

2000 Lake Quinault CBGA 547 0 46 2 13 14

1990 county 60,308 45 2,665 740 417

2000 county 59,544 172 3,325 762 1,313 2,078

CBGA = census block group aggregate.

aThe race question was changed in the 2000 census to allow individuals to choose two or more races, whereas in 1990 they were only 

allowed to choose one race. Hence, some individuals choose a particular race in 1990 and then in 2000 choose two or more races (see 

2+ races 2000 only column). No percentage change was calculated for population by race owing to this change
50

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

working class logging families were forced to move away. 

Others felt that the increase in income was due to the 

higher percentage of government employees (i.e., Forest 

Service, Park Service, state (Washington Department of 

Natural Resources, Washington Department of Transportation), county, and school district), who were eligible 

to receive cost-of-living salary increases. Some felt that 

economic conditions were actually worse, and that census 

figures were incorrect or under-reported, (particularly for 

the Latino and Native American populations).

The percentage of people living in poverty decreased 

from 18 to 16 percent, though it remained relatively high 

(table 14). The poverty rate was similar for the county 

in 2000. Household income distribution shifted upward, 

with 80 households making $50,000 or more per year in 

2000, compared to 36 in 1990 (table 15). Those making 

$10,000 or less decreased from 43 to 24, and those making 

$15,000 to $24,999 decreased from 82 to 40. This shift in 

household income distribution further suggests that the 

population of the area has changed (i.e., poorer households 

moving away, and wealthier ones remaining or moving in), 

rather than an increase in income for the same individuals 

over time. Interestingly, unemployment increased from 

6.8 percent to 7.2 percent for the community, whereas it 

decreased for the county (table 14).

Interestingly, Donoghue and Sutton’s (2006) socioeconomic well-being index showed very little change in 

socioeconomic well-being between 1990 and 2000. In 

1990, the Lake Quinault census block group aggregate 

(BGA) ranked among communities in the “low” category 

of socioeconomic well-being, with a score of 59.33. In 

2000, the area remained in the “low” category, with a 

score of 60.03. Most interviewees felt that this lack of 

change in socioeconomic well-being was more reflective 

of the actual situation in the community.

The types of jobs that people are employed in have 

also changed (table 16). Interestingly, employment in 

agriculture, forestry, fishing, and mining remained steady. 

The number employed in construction, manufacturing, 

and retail trade declined between 1990 and 2000. Jobs 

in transportation and utilities, wholesale trade, services 

(i.e., arts, recreation, accommodation, and food services), 

health and education, and public administration increased 

during this period. 

Key social and economic changes—

Based on interviews with community members, some key 

social and economic changes that have taken place in the 

Lake Quinault area include the following:

Shift in population—Residents felt that the population of 

the community had changed over the past 10 years. This 

change was due partly to an outmigration of loggers and 

other timber workers from the area owing to the decline in 

the industry. Neilton, in particular, housed many loggers 

and was heavily affected by the loss of timber industry 

jobs.

The Forest Service downsizing and district consolidations also resulted in the loss of Forest Service employees 

from the community. In the late 1980s, the Quinault office 

had 65 full-time employees and over 150 seasonal/parttime employees. Currently, 

there are 13 employees 

stationed at Quinault.

At the same time, there 

has been an inmigration of 

Latinos into the community. 

Initially, many came to work 

as tree planters, and more currently work in precommercial 

tree thinning, the cedar shake 

Table 14—Economic indicators, Lake Quinault and Grays Harbor County, 

1990 and 2000

1990a 2000 Change

 Percent

Median household income, Lake Quinault CBGA (dollars) 27,507 35,893 30.49

Median household income, county (dollars) 28,596 34,160 19.46

Unemployed, Lake Quinault CBGA (percent) 6.81 7.22 6.02

Unemployed, county (percent) 9.31 8.32 -10.63

Poverty, Lake Quinault CBGA (percent) 18.30 16.01 -12.51

Poverty, county (percent) 16.37 16.10 -1.65

CBGA = census block group aggregate.

aThe 1990 median household income has been adjusted for inflation.
51

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

Table 15—Household income distribution, Lake Quinault and Grays Harbor County, 1990 and 2000

Household income distributiona

$10,001– $15,000– $25,000– $35,000– $50,000– $75,000– $100,000– $150,000

<$10,000 $14,999 $24,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 $149,999 and up

Number of households

1990 Lake Quinault CBGA 43 30 82 36 46 28 3 3 2

2000 Lake Quinault CBGA 24 20 40 35 46 41 23 13 3

1990 county 5,156 3,216 5,254 4,086 4,416 2,512 511 264 188

2000 county 3,260 2,389 4,128 3,916 4,921 4,883 1,951 984 375

CBGA = census block group aggregate.

aThese data are not adjusted for inflation and are reported in 1990 dollar values and 2000 dollar values, respectively.

Table 16—Employment by industry, Lake Quinault, 1990 and 2000 

Number of employees

1990 Lake 2000 Lake

Industry Quinault CBGA Quinault CBGA

Agriculture, forestry, fishing, hunting, and mining 37 38

Construction 19 9

Manufacturing 92 45

Wholesale trade 1 11

Retail trade 40 28

Transportation, warehousing, and utilities 7 21

Finance, insurance, real estate and rental, and leasing 1 3

Education, health, and social services 29 53

Arts, recreation, accommodations, and food services 23 43

Public administration 13 19

Professional and other services 39 21

Total 301 292

CBGA = census block group aggregate.

and shingle industry (as bolt cutters, and in shake mills), 

and brush picking for the floral greens industry. These types 

of jobs are highly labor-intensive, and generally offer few, 

if any, fringe benefits, making them unattractive to locals. 

The growth in the Latino population has been important 

in keeping school enrollment at a stable level, as well as 

providing business to local stores and gas stations. 

Lack of private land for residential and commercial 

development—Many residents felt that the lack of private 

land in the area was a major constraint in terms of attracting 

more residents to the area or creating new possibilities for 

economic development. The communities are surrounded 

by federal, state, tribal, and private industrial timberlands, 

with little private land available for housing and other 

development. Interviewees felt the community was suffering from a housing shortage, particularly for people 

such as school teachers, who often commute to work from 

Aberdeen/Hoquiam. Many of the trailer homes and lower 

cost homes that housed loggers and their families in the 

past have been destroyed. Some were bitter toward the 

National Park Service, which has been purchasing many of 

the homes on the north shore of the lake to return the land 

to wilderness. 

Shift in economic base—The economic base of the community has also changed over the past 10 years. In the 

1980s, the local economy was highly dependent on timber, 

and at least two to three mills in the local area were highly 

dependent on timber from the Olympic National Forest. 
52

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

The cedar shakes industry was particularly important. 

In the mid-1980s, residents estimate that about 15 shake 

mills were in operation in the local area. Today, about 

six remain. “There used to be a shake mill every 100 feet 

along Highway 101,” describes one resident. In the 1970s 

and early to mid-1980s, the Forest Service had large 

cedar block sales, as well as salvage sales, which fed 

the numerous shake mills in the area. Many small mill 

owners are struggling to keep their businesses viable, 

and fewer jobs are available overall. One interviewee 

states, “The standard of living has dropped considerably 

compared to the early to mid-1970s. People are making 

less money. Cedar mills are not making any more money 

than they did 20 years ago, nor are people who work in 

the woods.” 

The impact of the curtailment of logging on the 

Olympic National Forest was felt disproportionately 

more by the small- to mid-size timber companies and 

related businesses in the local area. Many of the smaller 

companies relied on up to 50 to 75 percent of their timber 

to come from the national forest. Some mills that processed Forest Service timber in the Aberdeen/Hoquiam 

area also suffered. The decline in the timber economy, in 

turn, affected other local business such as stores and gas 

stations, as well as the school. 

A growing segment of the population is employed 

in the service industry, specifically recreation tourism. 

“One of the reasons there is a community is because of 

tourism. If it wasn’t for the lake and the beauty of the 

area, there wouldn’t be a community here,” said one 

interviewee. The number of visitors to the Quinault 

Ranger Station increased from about 600 in the mid1990s to 1,000 in 2003. The majority of local jobs are 

in the hotel industry, with the Quinault Lodge being 

the largest employer (with about 150 employees). Some 

people feel, however, that since the lodge was purchased 

by Aramark Corporation, a large national corporation 

based in Philadelphia, its ties to the community have 

somewhat diminished. Nevertheless, the lodge still 

supports community events, donating gift certificates for 

raffles, free dinners, etc. A few other resorts and motels 

surround the lake. Some residents started guiding operations, taking visitors fishing and boating on the lake. 

Many of the local grocery stores and gas stations depend 

on tourism to survive. 

Employment in tourism, however, is highly seasonal. 

Hotels are generally at maximum capacity during summer, 

and occupancy is low in the winter. Salaries for hotel 

employees are also relatively low compared to those in 

timber industry jobs. 

One explanation for the increase in income for the area 

is a higher proportion of government employees. Although 

the number of Forest Service employees has declined for the 

area, government jobs still account for a large proportion 

of the local jobs. For example, the Lake Quinault School 

District is the second largest employer in the area, with 

about 100 employees. Other government employers include 

the Forest Service, the National Park Service, Washington 

Department of Natural Resources, the Quinault Indian 

Nation, and Grays Harbor County. 

There is also a segment of the population that commutes, particularly to Aberdeen/Hoquiam or other parts 

of the peninsula. Most professional-level jobs are in these 

larger communities. 

Retirees make up yet another group of residents. Many 

retirees have lived in the community all their lives, whereas 

a smaller proportion has moved to the area more recently. 

Many of the old timers used to raise cattle to supplement 

their retirement income, although for the past 20 years, this 

has become less common. Compared to other communities 

on the Olympic Peninsula that have experienced a large 

influx of retirees, the Lake Quinault area has yet to become 

a destination for retirees. 

Finally, employment in the wild floral greens industry 

has been increasing over the past 10 years. The Latino 

population has been the primary source of labor for this 

industry, working in brush harvesting, transporting, and 

other postharvest preparation. Some residents mentioned 

that a large segment of the brush pickers are from Hoquiam 

and make daily trips up the peninsula. Large, multinational 

companies based in Shelton ultimately purchase the brush, 

which is often exported abroad or distributed across the 

Nation to florists. Although many of the harvesters purchase 

brush picking permits from the Forest Service as well as 
53

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

with the state Department of Natural Resources and private 

landowners, there is also a growing problem with theft of 

floral greens.

Shift in community capacity—Many interviewees noted 

that the economic and demographic changes to the community have had a detrimental effect on community capacity. 

We use the term “community capacity” as consisting of the 

physical, financial, human, cultural, and social capital of 

a community (Kusel 1996).24 In the 1980s, the school, for 

example, had an active Parent-Teacher Association (PTA), 

a large number of volunteers, including “room mothers” 

(mothers that would volunteer to help teachers in the classrooms). Today, the level of volunteerism in the schools is 

low, with both parents often having to work to survive. One 

interviewee affiliated with the school felt that many of the 

parents also do not feel comfortable at the school or do not 

feel they could adequately be of help. At the same time, the 

school faces greater demands for supplemental programs 

and services, such as remedial programs, special education 

classes, and before- and after-school reading programs.25

Much of this loss of capacity is due to the general 

outmigration of residents, particularly Forest Service 

employees and their families. As logging came to a standstill and management priorities changed, the timber and 

roads programs for the Olympic National Forest (which 

historically were the largest programs), faced dramatic cuts 

in their budget and staff, resulting in the downsizing of 

Forest Service staff, as well as district consolidations. Many 

Forest Service employees and their spouses and other 

family members were active in community affairs, service 

clubs, volunteer fire department, and the school (e.g., PTA). 

Many took on leadership positions in the community. 

The loss of timber industry workers and their families 

also contributed to the drain in social capital. Many of 

these workers were also active in community affairs, 

members of the volunteer fire department, service clubs, 

etc. Family wage jobs in the timber industry gave workers a certain level of leisure time that enabled them to 

participate in community activities. It also allowed spouses 

to stay at home with the children and play an active role in 

the school and community.

One positive effect on the community’s capacity is 

the increase in the percentage of students completing high 

school. In the past, many students dropped out of school 

because they were able to get well-paying jobs in the timber industry. Because of fewer jobs possibilities, students 

are encouraged to finish school, and pursue higher education. Unfortunately, there are few positions for college 

graduates in the area, and many who leave to go to college 

are unable to return owing to the lack of local jobs.

Lack of a tax base—Because the majority of land surrounding the three communities is either under federal, 

state, or tribal ownership, some residents mentioned their 

concern over the lack of a tax base to support the school 

and other infrastructure needs in the community. The 

transfer of private homes along the north shore of the lake 

over to the national park has further reduced the income to 

the school through taxes. 

Adaptation to Change and the Role of 

Forest Service Assistance

The community’s ability to adapt to these changes has 

been mixed. A segment of the population continues to try 

to make a living in the timber industry, although many 

have had to substantially downsize their operations. One 

interviewee involved in the timber industry was down 

to 3 employees, compared to 30 that he employed in the 

1980s. Other shake mills simply went out of business. 

Many people involved in the timber industry are resigned 

to the fact that they cannot depend on Forest Service 

24More detailed descriptions of the five types of “capital” that 

comprise community capacity are as follows: (1) physical 

capital is the physical infrastructure of a community (e.g., 

sewer systems, business parks, capital assets such as equipment, 

housing, and schools); (2) financial capital is the money, credit, 

and other financial resources available for local use; (3) human 

capital is the skills, education, experiences, and general abilities 

and capabilities of residents; (4) cultural capital is the myths, 

beliefs, norms, and lifeways that serve to organize groups and 

facilitate survival; and (5) social capital is the willingness of 

residents to work together toward community goals (and not just 

self-interested goals) (Kusel 1996).

25Studies have shown that student performance in school is 

associated with social capital: with a higher level of performance 

found in communities with greater social capital (Lee, R.G. 

September 2005. Personal communication. R.G. Lee, Professor 

of Forest Sociology, College of Forest Resources, University 

of Washington, P.O. Box 352100, Seattle, WA 98195-2100). 

boblee@u.washington.edu.
54

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

timber for their livelihoods. Some were able to obtain jobs 

with the large private timber companies, or shift their work 

to private land. The Quinault Indian Nation has also been 

an employer in the region. Although the tribe has a policy 

of Indian preference when hiring, some nontribal people 

were able to find work with the tribe. When the local Forest 

Service office began to downsize, some of the staff were 

also able to get jobs with the tribe. 

A few residents have shifted to tourism, working as 

fishing guides, opening up a small golf course, or selling 

outdoor gear and equipment. Three general stores in the 

area cater to both tourists and locals, as well as three or 

four restaurants. When asked if tourism was important for 

the community, one interviewee said, “It’s probably their 

lifeblood right now. Especially those businesses right here 

along this side of the lake.... We have the lake to draw the 

people here, so that’s a good thing.”

Despite the high number of visitors to the area, there 

are relatively few retail establishments aimed specifically 

at tourists. One explanation for this is that many of the 

resorts have their own restaurants and gift shops, as well 

as guide services. Most visitors to the area either stay in 

these resorts and eat and shop at the resort, or camp and 

bring their own food. The tourists that come to the area also 

remain segregated from the local residents. For example, the 

restaurant at the Quinault Lodge caters almost exclusively 

to the tourists. 

Some interviewees mentioned that there has been some 

resistance by the community to become exclusively a tourist 

community, owing to the seasonality of work, low wages 

of service sector jobs, as well as the differences in values 

between many tourists and locals. For example, many visitors come to the area for its natural beauty and do not like to 

look at forests that have been clearcut. Those in the timber 

industry often feel criminalized by tourists with more preservationist values. Many residents resent the National Park 

Service for eliminating the homes on the north shore of the 

lake. Some worry that the national-park-style management 

will soon extend to the national forest, further restricting 

extraction-related activities in the area. Nevertheless, many 

interviewees feel that tourism has helped keep the community alive. 

One segment of the community has taken a more 

proactive approach to these changes through community 

organization, planning, and development. As economic 

conditions declined in the mid-1980s, community members 

felt they needed a stronger voice in government. With 

assistance from the county and the Forest Service, the 

community formed the Lake Quinault Community Action 

Forum, a nonprofit economic and community development 

group. The forum received a $5,000 grant from the Forest 

Service to develop a community economic revitalization 

plan. Some accomplishments since then include eliminating 

the toll charge for phone calls to Aberdeen, cleaning up 

the Amanda Park area to help promote tourism, working 

with the National Park Service and the Youth Conservation 

Corps to clean up the park trails. The forum also worked 

with the National Park Service and the county tourism 

board to help market and promote the Quinault Rain Forest 

as a destination area. A segment of the road around Lake 

Quinault had washed out and was left in disrepair for about 

6 years, preventing visitors from being able to take the 

scenic drive around the lake. The forum, working with their 

state senator, was able to secure $750,000 to repair and pave 

the road. The forum also worked with the county to change 

some of the zoning regulations. A more recent project has 

been the development of a historic museum. 

Factors promoting adaptation to change—

The individuals that had been working in the timber industry prior to the spotted owl injunctions and the Northwest 

Forest Plan have “adapted” to these socioeconomic changes 

by using various approaches. Some left the community 

either to continue to work in the timber industry someplace 

else (e.g., Alaska), or to find other jobs in other sectors 

(e.g., construction, transportation). Others remained in the 

community but found work in other fields (e.g., working 

at the resorts, school, the Quinault Indian Nation). A third 

group of timber workers continue to operate but may have 

downsized or diversified in their work. For example, one 

contractor now extracts downed cedar logs from private 

land for shakes, but also works on road decommissioning 

and other restoration work on the national forest. One factor 

that has helped sustain a timber economy in the area, albeit 
55

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

a much smaller one than in the past, is the presence of other 

private, state, and tribal forest lands that continue to provide 

a supply of timber.

The existence of the Quinault Lodge and other resorts 

and hotels, the school, and Forest Service contracts have 

been important factors in the ability of the Quinault community to provide local jobs. Many interviewees felt that 

the Quinault Lodge has served as somewhat of a buffer for 

the community by providing stable (albeit seasonal) jobs. 

Apart from providing jobs, the Quinault Lodge has also 

been important in providing other amenities to community 

members. It offers its swimming pool for use by community 

members and donates funds to help the local school. In 

1999, one long-term resident and lodge employee organized 

a dance and dinner at the Quinault Lodge for community 

members as a way of bringing the community together. The 

lodge closed its doors to outside visitors and charged $19.99 

for rooms and dinner and $1.99 for drinks. Since then, the 

dance has become an annual event. 

The ability for those that remain in the community 

to come together to help one another and organize around 

issues such as the forum, speaks to the level of capacity that 

still remains. Many people mentioned that the people that 

remained in the community are the old-timers, and many 

are the descendents of some of the original pioneer families. 

They are the people with strong roots in the community, 

and they are the ones that remain highly involved in community affairs. Many of those people that were interviewed 

sit on several committees, are involved in service clubs, the 

school board, the forum, etc. 

Factors preventing adaptation to change—

Although the spirit of the remaining residents remains 

strong, most people admitted that the community continues to suffer economically. Some of the factors that have 

prevented the community from moving forward include 

the loss of many of its residents over the past 15 years. The 

loss of Forest Service employees in particular has been 

noteworthy, in that they generally represented people with 

stable incomes, education, and active involvement in the 

community.

Some interviewees felt that the strong timber culture of 

the area has prevented the community from embracing and 

promoting tourism to a greater extent. Some complained 

that the forum has become somewhat exclusive, excluding 

those whose ideas or values may not match the majority. 

The Role of the U.S. Forest Service in 

Helping to Adapt to Change

Contracting—

Since the inception of the Plan, the Quinault District has 

awarded contracts for heavy construction work, such as 

culvert installation, construction of trail bridges, road 

decommissioning, and road stabilization. Five of the seven 

projects funded over the past 5 years were flood damage 

projects, one was a trail bridge replacement project, and 

one was a road decommissioning project. The storm events 

in the late 1990s and early 2000s have kept the number of 

contracts up. Without the flood work, sources say that there 

would have been a large decline in contracts for the area. “I 

can tell you that we rely heavily on these RFL [flood work] 

contracts...we got hit heavily over a 5- or 6-year period with 

storms. We haven’t had any storms in the past couple of 

years, so our contracts are going to go way down, because 

most of it’s repaired now.”

When asked if contractors were able to survive solely 

on Forest Service contracts, respondents said no. This was 

due to the lack of contracts available, as well as the very 

short work season for Forest Service contacts. The work 

season is officially from July 16 to October 15 (and sometimes extended in October if the weather is dry), but can be 

as short as 2 months. “We get to go to work mid-July, but 

ordinarily it’s August 6 that we can start up any contracts 

because of noise issues and the murrelet and the spotted 

owl. And they do the fisheries restrictions, [so] we can’t 

work in any water after September 30, so basically we have 

August and September,” said one interviewee. Other restrictions include the hours of day that work can be carried out. 

“You can’t start until 2 hours after sunrise, and have to quit 

2 hours before sunset. So if they can’t work from dawn ‘til 

dusk, and then they can only work from August through 

September, and then you have the fisheries shutdown....” 

Because of the short work window, many contracts take 
56

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

multiple years to complete. One contractor relied on the 

Forest Service contracts for only about 25 to 30 percent of 

his income, owing to the short season of work. 

Three contractors living in the local area have been 

successful at obtaining contracts with the Forest Service 

for ecosystem management work. Other contractors came 

either from other parts of the Olympic Peninsula or the 

Interstate-5 corridor. According to interviewees, local 

preference did exist as a criterion for awarding contracts. 

For projects over $100,000, a pool of 20 contractors was 

selected for multiaward contracts over a 5-year period. This 

limited pool of contractors was part of a program called 

Hub Zone Certification (which limited contracts to those 

coming from depressed timber communities). Contracts 

under $100,000 are open to anyone. 

One local contractor who had been working with the 

Forest Service for the past 12 years said that his business 

was doing well because he was able to get in early. He said 

newer contractors are struggling more. “[In the beginning,] 

road decommission was difficult to bid on because nobody 

knew how to do it. But I was able to get experience by 

getting some of the first bids. It was also new for the Forest 

Service back then, so we worked together. We went by trial 

and error.” 

One interviewee mentioned that the paperwork 

involved with the federal government can be intimidating 

for contractors, particularly those with little experience 

working on government contracts. Nonetheless, this 

contractor said that he would prefer to work with the federal 

government rather than with private companies:

Their [Forest Service] contracts protect you versus 

private contracts that protect the private company 

only. With the feds, if you run into something 

unforeseen, there is money for it. They will pay for 

it. The private sector will bid anyone out of it. The 

feds are not allowed to try to pressure you to do 

things outside of the contract. With the private sector, you run into that a lot. I did a lot of road building 

for logging companies in the past. If you ran into a 

problem sometimes you don’t make a profit.

When asked about the Jobs-in-the-Woods training 

program, most interviewees said that there was some 

activity early on in the Plan, but ultimately, no new 

contractors were created. 

In terms of precommercial thinning contracts, the 

forest has developed some contracts with the Quinault 

Indian Nation, funded through the RAC. Latino crews 

carry out much of the thinning work. 

Jobs with the Forest Service—

As a result of budget cuts, agency downsizing, and 

district consolidations, the number of employees working 

for the Forest Service at Quinault has declined dramatically over the past 10 to 15 years. Many of the district 

employees were from the community, especially those 

that worked as seasonal employees (e.g., on fire crews). 

There are currently no seasonal employees on the district. 

Thus, the downsizing of staff not only affected community capacity (as mentioned earlier), but also reduced 

employment opportunities for local residents. 

Grants and loans—

As part of the Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative 

(NEAI), the Quinault area received a total of $65,505 in 

grants, all from the USDA Forest Service Rural Community Assistance (RCA) program, and leveraged $42,409 

in additional funds. The community also received $8,000 

in non-NEAI funds from the Forest Service. Table 17 lists 

the grants awarded to the community. In addition to the 

grants, the Forest Service provided grant-writing assistance to the Lake Quinault Community Action Forum. 

The largest award ($36,500) went to the Neilton water 

system project. 

Despite the benefits of the NEAI grants, most 

residents interviewed were unaware that these projects 

were funded by the Forest Service and were part of the 

Plan/NEAI. Because the communities are unincorporated, it is likely that the county filed most of the grant 

applications, which could explain the community’s lack 

of awareness about the grants.
57

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

Helping to promote local tourism—

To help promote tourism in the area, as well as shift the 

focus of the forest from timber production to recreation and 

environmental protection, the forest has worked on improving trails and campsites around Lake Quinault. 

The Forest Service Visitor’s Center, located next to the 

Quinault Lodge, serves as an important stopping point for 

many tourists to the area. In 2003, about 1,000 people came 

through the doors of the visitor’s center. The Forest Service 

staff at the front desk provides information not only about 

the forest, but visitor information about the area in general, 

including the national park, beaches, and scenic travel 

routes around the peninsula. The staff also issues permits 

to harvest nontimber forest products (NTFPs) (such as salal 

(Gaultheria shallon Pursh) and mushrooms). The office 

serves a critical role with regard to interfacing with the 

public, and creating a link among the local community, the 

Forest Service, and visitors to the area. 

Changing Relations Between the Lake 

Quinault Area Communities and the 

Olympic National Forest

Most interviewees felt that the relationship between the 

community and Forest Service had changed over the past 10 

to 15 years as a result of the curtailment of logging, agency 

downsizing, and the consolidation of the Lake Quinault 

District with the Forks (Sol Duc) District. Because the new 

district office is now headquartered in the town of Forks, 

the district ranger spends much of his time there. The lack 

of a permanent district ranger at Quinault has resulted in 

a greater disconnect between the community and Forest 

Service. “It doesn’t work well being based in Forks,” says 

one local resident, “[the district ranger] is a good guy, but 

he has too many things to do. Without the ability to make 

decisions locally, it’s been harder to get things done.” 

The loss of Forest Service employees from the community has meant fewer interactions between the community 

and the agency. Connections, however, are still maintained 

through personal relationships with the remaining staff, 

simply by the fact that they are long-term members of the 

community. New connections between the Forest Service 

and community have also been made through partnerships 

and committees, such as the Grays Harbor RAC, and the 

Lake Quinault Community Action Forum. Another place 

where connections are made is with the school. Each 

summer, the Forest Service provides jobs to high school 

students to help with trail and campsite maintenance and 

repair. One interviewee mentioned that by working with 

these students, it made the students understand what the 

Forest Service does, and relationships improved between 

the Forest Service staff and students and their families.

Table 17—Funding awarded by the U.S. Forest Service Rural Community Assistance Program to the 

Lake Quinault area

 Base economic Base economic

 programs programs NEAIb NEAI

Fiscal FSa leveraged FS leveraged

year Applicant Grant name award funds award funds

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dollars - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

1993 Grays Harbor Chamber Amanda Park Visitor’s Center 3,000 7,569

 of Commerce

1994 Grays Harbor County Lake Quinault Community Plan 12,205 5,231

1996 Grays Harbor County Neilton Water System 36,500 20,000

1997 Grays Harbor County Lake Quinault Spirit Award 5,000 1,000

1998 Grays Harbor County Lake Quinault Land Use Plan 16,800 17,178

Total 8,000 8,569 65,505 42,409

aFS = Forest Service Rural Community Assistance Program.

bNEAI = Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative.
58

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

The Quinault Indian Nation

Community Change and the Effects of 

Forest Management Policy

Demographic change—

According to the U.S. census, 65 percent of the population 

of the Quinault Indian Reservation was Native American 

in 2000 (959 people) (table 18). About 28 percent of the 

population is Caucasian, most of whom reside in the 

Amanda Park area (table 18). The population declined by 

about 5 percent (from 1,542 to 1,471) between 1990 and 

2000. This is in contrast to a 5-percent growth in population 

for Grays Harbor County. In terms of racial composition, 

the Caucasian population has declined the most from 546 in 

1990 to 410 in 2000, most likely owing to an outmigration 

of displaced timber workers from the Amanda Park area. 

The Native American population also declined slightly, 

from 980 to 959. About 7 percent of the population in 2000 

was of Hispanic origin, up from 4 percent in 1990. Most of 

the Hispanics live in the Amanda Park area. 

The median age is also decreasing on the Quinault 

Indian Reservation, as it is with the county and buffer 

BGAs. It is interesting to note, however, that the median 

age on the Quinault Indian Reservation is about 10 years 

younger than that of the county (30 versus 39) (table 19). 

The greatest declines were in the age category between 0 

and 4 and 20 and 29, both by 34 percent (table 20). The 20- 

to 29-age group may be those that have left the community 

to go to college or expand their career options. In contrast, 

Table 18—Population by race, Quinault Indian Nation and Grays Harbor County, 1990 and 2000

Population by race

African Native Asian and 2+ racesa

Caucasian American American Pacific Islands Other (2000 only)

Number of people

1990 Quinault Indian Nation CBGA 546 3 980 7 6

2000 Quinault Indian Nation CBGA 410 0 959 12 62 28

1990 county 60,308 45 2,665 740 417

2000 county 59,544 172 3,325 762 1,313 2,078

CBGA = census block group aggregate.

aThe race question was changed in the 2000 census to allow individuals to choose two or more races, whereas in 1990 they were only allowed 

to choose one race. Hence, some individuals choose a particular race in 1990 and then in 2000 choose two or more races (see 2+ races 2000 only 

column). No percentage change was calculated for population by race owing to this change.

Table 19—Population, age, school enrollment, and educational attainment for the Quinault Indian Nation 

(measured at the census block group aggregate [CBGA] level), and Grays Harbor County, 1990 and 2000 

1990 2000 Change

Percent

Total population, Quinault Indian Nation CBGA 1,542 1,471 -4.60

Total population, county 64,175 67,194 4.70

Median age, Quinault Indian Nation CBGA 26.9 29.7 10.41

Median age, county 35.3 38.6 9.35

School enrollment, Quinault Indian Nation CBGA 401 443 10.47

School enrollment, county 12,755 14,390 12.82

Completed high school, Quinault Indian Nation CBGA (percent) 64.59 73.52 13.83

Completed high school, county (percent) 73.97 81.09 9.63

Bachelor of arts, graduate, professional degrees, Quinault Indian Nation CBGA (percent) 8.28 11.27 36.11

Bachelor of arts, graduate, professional degrees, county (percent) 10.97 12.66 15.41
59

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

the 45- to 64-age category has increased by 40 percent. 

This is also the fastest growing age category for the county, 

which grew by 35 percent. 

School enrollment has increased by 10 percent, which 

mirrors the county increase of 13 percent (table 19). The 

percentage of students completing high school has also 

increased by 14 percent from 65 percent to 74 percent, 

although the percentage is still lower than the county average (81 percent). Educational attainment has also increased 

by 36 percent, with 11 percent of the population holding a 

Bachelor of Arts or greater in 2000 compared to 8 percent 

in 1990. This rate is comparable to that of the county, 

which has an average of 13 percent of the population with a 

Bachelor of Arts or greater (table 19). 

Economic change—

In terms of economic changes, median household income 

on the Quinault Indian Reservation increased by 10 percent, 

from $25,724 in 1990 to $28,171 in 2000 (table 21). Compared to the county average, however, which increased by 

19 percent (from $28,596 to $34,160), median household 

income on the Quinault Indian Reservation is low. Unemployment showed a 29-percent decline, from 19 percent to 

13 percent, although some interviewees felt that this was 

an underestimation (table 21) of actual employment. Also, 

because many tribe members work seasonally in fishing, 

unemployment is highly seasonal. According to statistics 

from the Bureau of Indian Affairs, unemployment on 

the Quinault Indian Reservation was 45 percent in 2000 

(Stocks 2003). 

The poverty rate declined between 1990 and 2000, 

although it still remains high (28 percent), compared to 

the county (16 percent) (table 21). The distribution of 

income has shifted upward, with a growth in the number 

of people earning between $35,000 and $100,000, from 

104 to 171 (table 22). 

Table 20—Age distribution, Quinault Indian Nation and Grays Harbor County, 1990 and 2000

Age distribution

0 to 4 5 to 19 20 to 29 30 to 44 45 to 64 65 and up

Number of people

1990 Quinault Indian Nation CBGA 194 410 266 351 235 86

2000 Quinault Indian Nation CBGA 128 438 175 319 328 83

Change (percent) -34.02 6.83 -34.21 -9.12 39.57 -3.49

1990 county 4,722 14,171 7,813 14,787 12,492 10,190

2000 county 4,239 14,833 7,130 13,784 16,876 10,332

Change (percent) -10.23 4.67 -8.74 -6.78 35.09 1.39

CBGA = census block group aggregate. 

Table 21—Median household income, unemployment, and poverty, Quinault Indian Nation 

and Grays Harbor County, 1990 and 2000

1990a 2000 Change

Percent

Median household income, Quinault Indian Nation CBGA (dollars) 25,724 28,171 9.51

Median household income, county (dollars) 28,596 34,160 19.46

Unemployed, Quinault Indian Nation CBGA (percent) 19.07 13.45 -29.47

Unemployed, county (percent) 9.31 8.32 -10.63

Poverty, Quinault Indian Nation CBGA (percent) 32.33 28.24 -12.65

Poverty County (percent) 16.37 16.10 -1.65

CBGA = census block group aggregate.

aThe 1990 median household income has been adjusted for inflation.
60

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Table 22—Household income distribution, Quinault Indian Nation and Grays Harbor County, 1990 and 2000

Household income distributiona

$10,001– $15,000– $25,000– $35,000– $50,000– $75,000– $100,000– $150,000

<$10,000 $14,999 $24,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 $149,999 and up

Number of households

1990 Quinault Indian 83 51 110 73 60 40 4 3 6

Nation CBGA

2000 Quinault Indian 73 55 71 71 80 64 27 9 1

Nation CBGA

1990 county 5,156 3,216 5,254 4,086 4,416 2,512 511 264 188

2000 county 3,260 2,389 4,128 3,916 4,921 4,883 1,951 984 375

CBGA = census block group aggregate.

aThese data are not adjusted for inflation and are reported in 1990 dollar values and 2000 dollar values, respectively.

According to the socioeconomic well-being index, 

socioeconomic well-being on the Quinault Indian Reservation has changed very little. In 1990, the area ranked among 

communities in the “very low” category, with a socioeconomic index score of 45.56. In 2000, the score decreased 

slightly to 44.18.

In terms of employment by industry, the manufacturing 

sector lost the greatest number of jobs between 1990 and 

2000, from 125 to 35 (table 23). Many of these jobs were 

probably with the numerous shake mills that once lined 

Highway 101 around Lake Quinault, as well as the tribal 

shake mill that operated in Taholah. Public administration 

had the greatest gain in employment, more than doubling 

from 63 in 1990 to 142 in 2000. These jobs are most likely 

with the Quinault Indian Nation. Increases were found for 

jobs in health/education, the arts/recreation/accommodation/food services, construction, and agriculture/forestry/

fishing/mining. 

Key social and economic changes (as told by 

community residents)—

Based on interviews with community members, some key 

social and economic changes that have taken place on the 

Quinault Indian Reservation include the following:

Table 23—Employment by industry, Quinault Indian Nation, 1990 and 2000 

Number of employees

1990 Quinault 2000 Quinault

Industry Indian Nation CBGA Indian Nation CBGA

Agriculture, forestry, fishing, hunting, and mining 45 65

Construction 26 42

Manufacturing 125 35

Wholesale trade 23 20

Retail trade 23 20

Transportation, warehousing, and utilities 2 12

Finance, insurance, real estate and rental, and leasing 4 12

Education, health, and social services 87 106

Arts, recreation, accommodations and food services 25 56

Public administration 63 142

Professional and other services 65 32

Total 488 540

CBGA = census block group aggregate.
61

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

Decline in the fishing industry—Not captured in the 

census statistics is the loss of income by tribal fishers owing 

to declines in the salmon runs, coupled with competition 

from farm-raised salmon, and state and federal regulations 

restricting salmon harvests. Fishing has been the lifeblood 

of the Quinaults for millennia. Since the late 1970s, 

commercial fishing has also been critical to the economy 

of many tribe members. For the past 20 years, however, declining salmon runs and poor prices have stressed the local 

fishing economy. Between 1982 and 1986, employment in 

the fishing industry declined dramatically. Within the past 5 

years, the prices received for salmon have also plummeted 

to as low as $0.20 per pound (compared to the 1970s, when 

fishermen were receiving up to $2.00 per pound). Although 

many tribe members still fish, prices are often so low that 

many have dropped out of commercial sales—fishing 

primarily to meet subsistence, nutritional, nor ceremonial 

needs. In 2002, conditions were so bad that the Quinault 

Indian Nation began to develop and implement a salmon 

disaster relief plan to assist individuals and families meet 

basic subsistence needs, promote economic diversification 

in the community, and work toward improving salmon 

and steelhead (Oncorhynchus spp.) runs through scientific 

research and fish management (Stocks 2003). The tribe has 

also made efforts to hire displaced fishers in its natural 

resources programs, such as monitoring fish populations, 

and working on watershed restoration projects.

The loss of income in fishing cannot be linked to the 

Plan. The principal cause is low fish populations. An additional factor is Endangered Species Act (ESA) listings of 

certain salmon species, which have restricted the allowable 

harvest. Some interviewees mentioned that the Plan might 

have helped to improve fish populations through habitat 

improvement resulting from the curtailment of logging, the 

focus on watershed restoration, and the Aquatic Conservation Strategy. The decline in fisheries-related income is 

more likely due to competition from farmed salmon. 

Decline in timber industry—During much of the mid1900s through the 1970s, a very high proportion of tribal 

men were employed as loggers or mill workers, particularly 

in the village of Queets. Many timber workers (both tribal 

and nontribal) lost their jobs with the decline in the regional 

timber economy beginning in the 1980s.

The loss of manufacturing jobs has been due in part to 

the closure of many shake mills, particularly in the Amanda 

Park area. Although about a half dozen shake mills continue 

to operate in the area, and a few are even owned by tribe 

members, at least six to eight have closed, and those that 

continue to operate have significantly downsized their 

operations. The Quinault Indian Nation also had its own 

tribal shake mill in Taholah for 20 years, but recently closed 

it for relocation and renovation 

The Quinault Indian Nation continues to actively log 

on the Quinault Indian Reservation, and logging serves as 

one of the prime sources of revenue for the Quinault Indian 

Nation. Nevertheless, harvest levels have dropped off, 

most recently owing to the low price of timber. The annual 

volume of timber harvested from the reservation declined 

dramatically in the early 1980s to around 50 mmbf, compared to 100 to 250 mmbf of volume harvested per year in 

the 1960s and 1970s. Since the 1980s, the annual harvested 

volume has continued to decline to around 25 mmbf. Cedar 

salvage is also important on the reservation. Currently, 13 

tribal contractors have contracts with the Quinault Indian 

Nation to harvest cedar blocks. These contractors sell the 

cedar to the local shake mills. Most now subcontract the 

work out to Hispanic crews. 

Forest management changes on the Olympic National 

Forest may have displaced some tribal timber workers, particularly in the Amanda Park area. In addition, the closure 

of several cedar shake mills along Highway 101 around 

Lake Quinault can be partially attributed to the decline 

in availability of cedar trees from the Olympic National 

Forest. Other factors, however, also affected the cedar shake 

industry, such as competition from Canadian imports and 

federal requirements for fireproofing shakes and shingles. 

Although some tribe members may have been affected by 

these changes, most interviewees felt the impact to tribe 

members who worked in the timber industry was fairly 

minimal, either because there were not that many working 

in the industry by the late 1980s/early 1990s, or that many 

were able to continue to work on reservation lands. 
62

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

More likely causes of change include the overall 

decline in the timber economy of the region, particularly 

for Grays Harbor County, that preceded the Plan, and was 

exacerbated by the Plan and timber harvest restrictions 

on state and private lands as a result of ESA listings. This 

decline initially began as a result of structural changes 

within the timber industry (i.e., increased mechanization, 

retooling mills, laying off of union employees, national 

recession, changes in the export market, etc.). More 

recently, the prices for timber have also declined owing 

to competition from imports. Activities related to forest 

management, such as tree planting and thinning, which 

were once carried out by tribe members, have also shifted 

to Hispanic crews. 

Decline in revenues from North Boundary and Section 

2 lands—As mentioned above, in 1988–89, the Forest 

Service returned 11,000 acres of land (North Boundary 

Expansion Area) to the tribe owing to a surveying error 

from the 1800s. Active timber sales were occurring on 

this land when it was transferred, and the Quinault Indian 

Nation’s intentions were also to harvest the timber from 

the land (much of it old growth) as part of its program of 

generating revenue for land acquisition. As part of the 

land transfer agreement, the Quinault Indian Nation had to 

submit an operating plan to the Bureau of Indian Affairs 

and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service about its timber harvest 

plans. The initial plan was rejected, and while the Quinault 

Indian Nation was in the process of reworking the plan, 

ESA restrictions came into play, first with the spotted 

owl, followed by the marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus 

marmoraturs), bull trout (Salvenius confluentus), and bald 

eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). To comply with specifications by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the 

ESA, the original logging plans had to be modified, which 

precluded most of the logging activity originally proposed. 

The original timber value of the property was $100 million. As time passed, the value of the timber decreased. 

Many of the local mills closed or retooled for smaller 

diameter timber. Eventually, there were no longer any local 

mills left to process the old-growth trees proposed to be 

harvested from the North Boundary. The small volume of 

large-diameter timber that was harvested had to be shipped 

to California for milling. The Quinault Indian Nation renegotiated for a $50 million settlement, but negotiations were 

set back by changes in federal administration. The case 

remained in litigation at the time of this study.

In addition to the expected revenues from the North 

Boundary land, the Quinault Indian Nation also anticipated 

revenues from the Section 2 lands (PL 100-638) on the 

Olympic National Forest. As mentioned previously, as part 

of the land transfer agreement, the U.S. Forest Service 

agreed to share 45 percent of the revenues generated 

from the Section 2 lands with the Quinault Indian Nation. 

Because this agreement was made in 1988–89, that is, prior 

to the Plan, the tribe anticipated substantial revenues generated from commercial logging activities. Active clearcutting 

and old-growth logging were occurring on the site when the 

law was passed. When the Plan was launched, the Section 2 

land was designated as adaptive management area (AMA) 

lands. Although the Plan significantly decreased logging 

activities on the forest (from about 250 to 10 mmbf per 

year), the land use practices designated for the AMA lands 

allowed for commercial thinning. As commercial thinning 

activities were being planned for the site, however, a survey 

and manage species—the warty jumping slug (Hemphillia 

glandulosa)—was identified in the area, and commercial 

thinning harvests were suspended. After more extensive 

surveying, the slug was found to have a healthy population, 

and was removed from the threatened list of species. With 

a backlog of projects and thinning activities, the level of 

activity on the land has been relatively small. The Quinault 

Indian Nation has received from $0 to $1,200 in quarterly 

payments from the Section 2 lands, primarily from some 

gravel mining activities and through the sale of NTFP 

permits (such as for harvesting salal). The Forest Service is 

currently working on a new plan for commercial thinning 

that would gradually result in $30,000 per year in revenues 

to the Quinault Indian Nation.

Growth of jobs in tribal government—The growth in the 

number of jobs with the Quinault Indian Nation has been 

a result of the expansion in tribal government. In 1990, 

the number of people employed in the Quinault tribal 
63

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

government was around 50 to 75. Currently, the Quinault 

Indian Nation employs about 350 full-time employees. 

The Quinault Indian Nation has also developed a number 

of business enterprises, including Quinault Pride Seafood 

(seafood purchasing, marketing, and processing plant), 

Quinault Land and Timber (timber purchasing and land 

acquisition), Quinault Beach Resort and Casino, Quinault 

Maritime Resort (yet to be constructed), and the Quinault 

Mercantile (stores in Taholah and Queets). The Quinault 

Beach Resort and Casino, located about 25 miles south of 

Taholah at Ocean Shores, has been in operation since 1999, 

and employs about 325 people year-round, with slightly 

more in summer. The combination of these enterprises together with jobs in tribal government has made the Quinault 

Indian Nation the second largest employer in Grays Harbor 

County,26 and contributes $20 million in wages annually to 

the local economy. 

In addition to the growth of jobs in tribal administration (within Quinault Indian Nation) and tourism (associated with the Casino/Resort), several interviewees spoke of 

new job opportunities in firefighting. Although the Quinault 

Indian Nation has always maintained a small firefighting crew, employed through the Quinault Department of 

Natural Resources, within the last 3 years, the demand and 

available funding for firefighters has increased. In 2003, 

there were over 30 people on the tribe’s fire crew. The 

Quinault Indian Nation serves as the dispatch center for 

all tribes on the peninsula, and sends crews to fight fires 

nationwide, as well as to assist with national emergencies. 

Several interviewees mentioned that firefighting suited 

many tribe members because of the relatively good salary 

(over $10 per hour plus substantial overtime), and seasonality of work (the fire season generally does not overlap with 

the fishing season).

The development of the tribal government and the 

increase in employment within the Quinault Indian Nation 

are in large part due to the implementation of tribal selfgovernance and the capacity of the tribal administration 

and staff to develop partnerships and obtain grant funding, 

and to the longevity and competency of the Quinault Indian 

Nation employees. 

Poverty and unemployment remain high—Poverty and 

unemployment continue to remain high among residents, 

as does the incidence of social problems linked to poverty, 

such as substance abuse and domestic violence. In a housing 

survey of 353 households conducted by the Quinault Housing Authority in 1999, results showed that overcrowding 

of houses was a major problem (191 households had more 

than one family living in the house); the condition of many 

homes was inadequate (11 percent lacked a cook stove or 

refrigerator, 35 percent had plumbing problems, 34 percent 

had electrical problems, and 23 percent had inadequate 

heat); and there were not enough houses to meet people’s 

needs (102 families reported that their house was inadequate) (Stocks 2003). The survey also found that 58 percent 

of families had incomes less than $20,000, and 20 percent 

reported incomes below $5,000. Income levels for residents 

of Queets were lower than the rest of the reservation, with 

48 percent of the population having incomes below $15,000 

compared to 36 percent for the rest of the reservation. The 

survey also found that 64 percent of the residents of Queets 

would prefer to live elsewhere compared to 22 percent for 

the rest of the reservation.

Despite the high poverty rates on the Quinault Indian 

Reservation (100 percent of the students receive free lunch), 

a greater proportion of students are completing high school 

and going to college than in the past. Improvements in high 

school graduation rates have been attributed to programs 

such as GEAR UP (Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs), which encourage youth 

to attend college, and to greater support and encouragement 

by parents and the community as a whole for children to go 

to college. The Evergreen State College, located in Olympia, has a satellite program at Taholah, which has allowed 

more people to complete college degrees while remaining 

on the reservation. As with other natural resources-dependent rural communities, in the past, well-paying jobs for 

young people were readily available in fishing or logging. 

Thus, there was little incentive for youth to finish high 

school and go to college. Also, in 1990, there was no local 

26Weyerhaeuser is the largest employer in the county.
64

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

high school in Taholah, which likely contributed to the low 

school attendance and lack of community support at that 

time.

Adaptation to Change and the Role of 

Forest Service Assistance

Tribe members and the Quinault Indian Nation as a whole 

have developed several strategies for adapting to changing 

socioeconomic conditions. Many have had to shift away 

from natural-resources-based work, such as fishing and 

forestry, to employment in the service sector (e.g., at the 

casino) or in tribal administration. Several tribe members 

have returned to school to pursue college degrees. 

Some tribe members have continued to try to make a 

living in the timber industry. Some have started shake mills. 

Currently tribe members own three shake mills in Amanda 

Park. One interviewee noted that in the past, tribe members 

worked as laborers but are now becoming mill owners and 

operators. Some mills also institute tribal preference when 

hiring. 

Others have had to move away from the reservation to 

find work. Many tribe members now live and work in the 

Aberdeen/Hoquiam area. 

The Quinault Indian Nation has also made a strong 

effort to diversify its local economy both by exploring 

new approaches to prosper from its natural resources and 

by developing economies that are less dependent on these 

resources. Providing employment opportunities within 

the Quinault Indian Nation has been by far the most direct 

approach to helping to offset job losses in natural-resourcesbased industries. Some displaced fishers and timber workers 

were able to obtain jobs within the Quinault Department of 

Natural Resources. The Quinault Indian Nation has temporarily employed displaced fishers to carry out fish monitoring and watershed restoration work. Others obtained work 

in firefighting. Jobs outside of natural resources include 

work in tribal administration, as well as with the casino. 

The Quinault Indian Nation is also actively pursuing 

other economic development opportunities. In its 2003 

Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Report 

(Stocks 2003), the Quinault Indian Nation identified six economic development strategies: food processing, aquaculture 

and fisheries, forest products (timber and NTFPs), international trade, light industry, and tourism/visitor services. 

The first three focus on the refinement and value-added 

processing of its natural resources. Specific projects include 

upgrading and remodeling the existing fish buying station 

in Queets, as well as the fish processing plant in Taholah. 

Another proposed project is to develop an enterprise or 

cooperative to process and market NTFPs, along with opening a buying station in Taholah; creating a cranberry bog for 

development of that industry; and relocating and upgrading 

the tribal shake mill. Prospective tourism-based industries 

include guided ecotours and fishing trips in the Queets 

area; developing a historic district, with a cultural center 

and museum; developing an RV park and campground at 

Queets; and developing the Ocean Shores Marina. Other 

proposed projects include developing a tribal construction 

company to meet the future demand for 600 new homes on 

the Quinault Indian Reservation over the next 20 years. 

Factors promoting adaptation to change—

One factor that has helped residents of the Quinault Indian 

Reservation and the Quinault Indian Nation as a whole 

adapt to changing socioeconomic conditions has been the 

tribe’s relatively large land base and natural resource base. 

The ability to harvest and market timber from the Quinault 

Indian Reservation has allowed the tribe to generate capital 

to help finance not only land acquisition but also economic 

development projects, such as the resort/casino. 

Also, as one of the earliest tribes to implement selfgovernance, the Quinault Indian Nation had the time to 

develop the institutional capacity and longevity among 

its employees to successfully obtain grant monies, garner 

support for projects, and collaborate with various agencies 

and entities on projects. 

Factors preventing adaptation to change—

The high poverty and unemployment rates among Quinault 

Indian Reservation residents indicate that many residents 

still struggle to get by. One factor that has been a barrier to 

improved socioeconomic conditions has been the relative 

isolation of both Taholah and Queets from larger centers of 

social activity and commerce that could provide more job 

opportunities. On the other hand, some residents mentioned 
65

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

that they preferred to be isolated from main transportation 

routes in order to help preserve the Quinault culture. 

The Role of the U.S. Forest Service in 

Helping to Adapt to Change

The Quinault Indian Nation’s success in building its tribal 

government and economic development enterprises has 

been a result of the tribe’s own efforts and internal capacity 

to raise funds and engage in partnerships. The U.S. Forest 

Service has played a supporting role in helping the tribe 

adapt to changing socioeconomic circumstances and move 

forward in its endeavors, primarily through the NEAI, the 

economic development component of the Plan. The tribe 

was able to successfully compete for grant monies from the 

U.S. Forest Service RCA program and other funding entities 

(more details are provided below in the Grants section). 

In addition, the Quinault Indian Nation and the Olympic 

National Forest have worked in close partnership on watershed analyses, and hold quarterly meetings to update and 

communicate to each other on forest management issues. 

Specific details are provided in the following sections:

Contracting—

Very few, if any, tribe members have engaged in or benefited from either contract logging (i.e., commercial thinning) or service contracts (all procurement contracts such as 

precommercial thinning, surveying, watershed restoration, 

road decommissioning, etc.) on the Olympic National 

Forest. Tribe members who are contractors generally focus 

on contracts with the Quinault Indian Nation on reservation land. There have been a few agreements between the 

Quinault Indian Nation and the U.S. Forest Service for 

precommercial thinning contracts, paid for through RAC 

monies. The Forest Service is also discussing the possibility 

of establishing a contract with the tribe that would allow the 

tribe to lease the Section 2 lands for the commercial harvest 

of NTFPs. 

Forest Service jobs—

Interviewees mentioned that some tribe members formerly 

worked as seasonal employees for the Forest Service, 

mostly on fire crews. Many tribe members prefer seasonal 

work because it allows them to also devote certain times 

of year to fishing. One interviewee estimated that in the 

early 1980s, there were over 100 people employed on fire 

management crews on the Quinault Ranger District. About 

40 to 50 percent of the Forest Service fire crews were 

Native American, and about 20 percent were Quinault tribe 

members. With the reductions in logging on the Olympic 

National Forest, the need for fire crews to conduct slash 

burning virtually disappeared, and the budget for fire 

management declined accordingly. By 1989, one interviewee estimated that there were only 10 employees in fire 

management on the district. Today, there are only a handful 

of employees in fire management for the entire Olympic 

National Forest. The Forest Service now has a cooperative 

agreement with the Washington Department of Natural 

Resources to carry out most fire-related activities. Thus, the 

downsizing of employees at Olympic National Forest has 

meant fewer job opportunities for both tribal and nontribe 

members of the local area. 

Interestingly, several former Forest Service employees 

who lost their jobs on the Olympic National Forest as a 

result of the agency downsizing have obtained jobs with the 

Quinault Indian Nation. At least five employees from the 

Quinault District now work for the Quinault Indian Nation. 

Thus, it is the Quinault Indian Nation that has helped the 

Forest Service adapt to changes brought about by the Plan. 

The presence of former Forest Service employees on the 

Quinault Indian Nation staff has helped contribute to a close 

working relationship and collaborative culture between the 

two entities.

Grants and loans—

One of the most significant contributions from the U.S. 

Forest Service and the Plan to the Quinault Indian Nation 

has been grants or leveraging of other monies under the 

NEAI. The Quinault Indian Nation received over $5 million 

in funds through the NEAI, including grants from USDA 

Rural Development, U.S. Forest Service Community 

Assistance Program, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs Jobsin-the-Woods. Most of the funds required a match from the 

Quinault Indian Nation. Table 24 lists the projects funded 

through NEAI dollars. Projects included construction of the 

Quinault tribal administrative building; and construction of 
66

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

of the rivers on the Quinault Indian Reservation and implement subsequent restoration activities. For example, the 

culvert analysis was one of the recommendations that came 

out of the watershed analysis. One interviewee said that he 

expected more work to be available in the future as “spinoffs” of the watershed analyses.

Additional funding provided through the state’s 

Jobs-for-the-Environment27 program funded stream type 

verification studies in the Quinault watershed, allowing for 

10 dislocated timber workers to conduct field surveys. In 

2000, the project expanded to cover the entire Usual and 

Accustomed28 territory of the Quinault Indian Nation. 

Changing Relations Between the Quinault Indian 

Nation and the Olympic National Forest

Prior to the late 1980s, there was little interaction between 

the Quinault Indian Nation and Olympic National Forest 

at an administrative level. The Olympic National Forest, 

however, did serve as a source of jobs for tribe members. 

For example, tribe members who were loggers harvested 

timber from the Olympic National Forest. Many tribe 

members also worked as Forest Service seasonal employees 

on fire crews. Budget cuts have significantly reduced the 

Forest Service’s seasonal workforce, thus eliminating most 

temporary fire crews. Over the past 10 years, the Quinault 

Indian Nation’s own fire crew has grown substantially. 

Ironically, the tribe in recent years has become a source of 

jobs for former Forest Service employees. 

Table 24—Projects awarded to the Quinault Indian 

Nation through the Northwest Economic Adjustment 

Initiative

 Amount

Year Project title funded 

 Dollars

1994 Administrative Bldg. Consolidation 2,300,400

1994 Queets Community Store 517,250

1994 Jobs in the Woods 300,000

1994 Lake Quinault Interpretive Center 60,000

1995 Salmon River Restoration 183,000

1996 5th Ave. Mini-Mall Business Center 813,267

1996 Jobs in the Woods 348,092

1997 Rural Business Enterprise Grant 100,000

1998 Salmon River Watershed Analysis 249,677

2001 Seafood Business and Marketing Plan 177,063

Total 5,048,749

the only market and gas station at Queets; and construction 

of the 5th Avenue Mini Mall in Taholah, where the current 

planning and economic development offices are housed, 

along with a small museum. 

Jobs-in-the-Woods grants, administered by the Bureau 

of Indian Affairs, provided funding for watershed analyses 

and restoration on the Quinault Indian Reservation. In 1994, 

Jobs-in-the-Woods monies paid for six dislocated timber 

workers and fishers to remove debris and other logging 

waste from rivers on the reservation. In 1996, the Quinault 

Indian Nation received $280,000 in Jobs-in-the-Woods 

monies to help fund a watershed analysis of the Quinault 

River. Jobs-in-the-Woods funds also helped pay for watershed analyses of the Salmon River and Raft River, and an 

inventory and analysis of culverts on the reservation. Four 

tribe members were hired and trained to conduct the culvert 

analysis. Although the initial intent of Jobs-in-the-Woods 

was to retrain displaced timber workers to obtain training 

and jobs in ecosystem restoration, relatively few tribe members benefited from these funds (about 10 displaced timber 

workers or fishers were directly hired to work on these 

projects). Nevertheless, some interviewees said that without 

the Bureau of Indian Affair’s Jobs-in-the-Woods dollars, it 

would have been impossible to conduct watershed analyses 

27Washington’s Jobs-for-the-Environment (JFE) program was 

created through a house bill passed by the Washington state 

legislature in 1993, and served as the template for the federal Jobsin-the-Woods program. The program recruited dislocated natural 

resource workers (originally forest workers, but later expanded to 

include fisheries workers), providing them with restoration training 

and certification. Funding was provided through state legislative 

appropriations and disbursed through competitive JFE grants, the 

Competitive Watershed Restoration Partnership Program grants, 

allotments to Department of Natural Resources regional offices 

for work on trust lands, and Washington State Department of 

Ecology’s Conservation Corps. Between 1995 and 1997, the JFE 

program collaborated with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s 

Jobs-in-the-Woods program, pooling funds and resources. In 2000, 

the JFE program was terminated. State funds that went to JFE 

are now being directed to the Washington State Salmon Recovery 

Fund.

28Usual and Accustomed lands include all lands that fell within 

the territory of a tribe prior to Euro-American settlement. 
67

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

Overall, the relationship between the Quinault Indian 

Nation and the U.S. Forest Service has improved over the 

past 10 years. One of the most important factors in developing a closer working relationship was the increased national 

emphasis on government-to-government relationships 

between federal agencies and tribes in the late 1980s and 

early 1990s. The growth of the Quinault Indian Nation’s 

tribal government and resource management departments have enabled tribal employees and Forest Service 

employees to work closely together on projects, building a 

relationship based on mutual collaboration, rather than one 

of dependency of one entity upon another. Quarterly meetings held between the two entities also ensure that there is 

regular communication about resource management issues 

and decisions. Details of this collaborative relationship will 

be discussed in chapter 4.

Improvements in the relationship between the tribe 

and U.S. Forest Service have also been brought about by 

the changes in management priorities on federal forest 

lands. The location of the Quinault Indian Reservation 

downstream of U.S. Forest Service land means that the tribe 

is highly affected by management decisions made by the 

Olympic National Forest. The Plan’s emphasis on resource 

protection thus directly benefits the tribe by focusing on 

improving water quality and restoring habitat for salmon 

and other aquatic species—something that is of vital interest to the tribe. 

The relationship that actual tribe members have with 

the Olympic National Forest, however, has been mixed. The 

Olympic National Forest is part of the ancestral territory or 

Usual and Accustomed Lands of the Quinault people. Thus, 

tribe members have always used the forest for hunting, fishing, gathering of NTFPs, and spiritual purposes. Many tribe 

members had favorite hunting spots within the Olympic 

National Forest where they would regularly hunt for deer 

and elk. With the Plan and closure of many roads, access 

to hunting grounds has been reduced. Some tribe members 

said they no longer hunt on the Olympic National Forest 

because the only access to their hunting grounds is by foot 

owing to road closures. The Forest Service has also put in 

locked gates on many of its existing roads, further limiting 

access by tribe members. Hunting season for tribe members 

begins on July 30th (versus October for non-Indians), and 

many of the gates are locked until October. 

Tribe members have also traditionally used the Olympic National Forest to gather NTFPs. One interviewee 

states, “In the past, families would identify a location to 

harvest, and would maintain the landscape so that they 

were able to return to the area year after year...” The ability 

for tribe members to gathering NTFPs on the forest was 

significantly hindered when large-scale timber harvesting 

began. Over the past 30 years, additional pressure on NTFP 

resources has come from the floral greens industry. Thus, 

tribal access to NTFP harvesting on the Olympic National 

Forest was hindered long before the implementation of the 

Plan. More recently, however, as with hunting, the closure 

of more roads has meant reduced access to traditional 

gathering sites. Many of the gatherers are elderly and unable 

to walk long distances to collect NTFPs. The requirement 

of a Forest Service permit to gather NTFPs, albeit free, also 

deters some tribe members from gathering on the Olympic 

National Forest.

Chapter 3 Summary

The three case-study communities illustrate the types of 

changes occurring in forest-dependent communities on the 

Olympic Peninsula during the 1990s. All three communities 

showed a decrease in population and an increase in median 

age between 1990 and 2000. Key changes observed for all 

of the communities include demographic shifts in population, including an increase in older residents (owing to both 

the emigration of younger, working families, and the immigration of retirees) and an increase in the Latino population. 

All three communities also showed a shift in their economic 

base, with a decline in timber-industry-related employment, and an increase in service-industry and government 

(including schools) jobs. Quilcene’s proximity to the Puget 

Sound metropolitan area and affordable housing market 

has attracted a new population of professional and service 

industry workers that commute to larger economic hubs. 

For the Lake Quinault area, residents are increasingly turning to tourism for their livelihoods, commuting to Aberdeen/Hoquiam for work, or working at the school. A large 

proportion of the Latino population of the area is employed 
68

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

both regionally and on the Olympic National Forest. For 

example, contracts in ecosystem restoration on the Olympic 

National Forest were insufficient to keep local contactors 

employed year-round, much less encourage new contractors 

into the business. For grants and loans offered under the 

NEAI, the Quinault Indian Nation was the most successful 

of the three case-study communities in obtaining monies, 

owing largely to the presence of a paid economic development staff person to develop projects, apply for funds, and 

network with funding entities.

Relationships between the Forest Service and casestudy communities have also changed. The curtailment 

of timber harvesting activities on the Olympic National 

Forest combined with the loss of Forest Service employees 

from Quincene and Lake Quinault have weakened the ties 

between the Forest Service and these communities. Despite 

the diminished economic importance and lack of physical presence of the Forest Service in these communities, 

remaining Forest Service employees still make an effort to 

participate in community affairs and assist with community 

planning and economic development efforts. In contrast, the 

relationship between the Forest Service and the Quinault 

Indian Nation has grown and improved owing in part to the 

recognition of the tribe as a sovereign nation, (which institutionalized formal communication channels), the growth of 

the tribal government and its resource management departments, and collaboration on watershed assessments under 

the Plan. On a more formalized level, multiparty advisory 

committees (i.e., Provincial Advisory Committees and 

Resource Advisory Committees) have enabled community 

members to have a greater voice in management decisions 

on the Olympic National Forest. 

in the cedar shake and the floral greens industries. For the 

Quinault Indian Nation, employment in tribal government 

or at the casino has helped offset job losses in the fishing 

and timber industries.

The role of the Plan in affecting these changes is 

variable. Many of the changes observed in communities are 

a result of the restructuring of the forest products industry 

that began in the 1980s, national economic trends during 

the 1990s, and demographic shifts (such as the immigration 

of the Latino population). On the other hand, for communities such as Quilcene and Lake Quinault, which were highly 

dependent on the national forest for timber and also served 

as Forest Service district headquarters, the impacts of the 

Plan were significant. The loss of timber industry and Forest 

Service jobs not only affected individual workers and their 

families, but also had a profound affect on the social capital 

of these communities. The loss of Forest Service employees 

from these communities effectively removed many of the 

communities’ leaders and active participants, reversing a 

policy of community building and community participation that had been operating for a century. Secondary and 

tertiary businesses that served the timber and Forest Service 

workers (e.g., gas stations, grocery stores) also suffered. 

In addition to the economic and social impacts, the loss of 

jobs and emigration of both working class and professionals 

from these communities left a psychological scar on the 

communities, resulting in feelings of anger and depression, 

and often leaving remaining residents feeling victimized, 

criminalized, and filled with a sense of hopelessness.

The mitigation measures implemented under the Plan 

to offset job losses (e.g., contracting, grants and loans, 

partnerships) were overall insufficient, owing largely to 

the Forest Service budget declines that were occurring 
69

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

Chapter 4: Communities and Forest Management

Chapter 3 focused on the links between changes in socioeconomic benefits from the Olympic National Forest under 

the Northwest Forest Plan (the Plan), and community-level 

change and adaptation. Chapter 4 examines current forest 

management issues of concern to communities, and the role 

of the Plan in shaping those issues. It also looks at the role 

of communities in collaborating with the forest to address 

management issues and joint forest stewardship, and at 

how the Plan has influenced this collaborative relationship. 

Chapter 4 aims to address two of the socioeconomic goals 

of the Plan: (1) to improve collaboration between agencies and communities and (2) to protect forest values and 

environmental qualities associated with late-successional, 

old-growth, and aquatic ecosystems. Chapter 4 is based 

on interviews with both forest employees and community 

members.

Collaboration and Joint Forest Stewardship

One goal of the Plan was to improve collaboration between 

land management agencies and communities in forest 

management and joint forest stewardship activities. This 

section examines how collaborative relationships between 

the Olympic National Forest and the three case-study communities have evolved since the Plan was implemented. 

Most interviewees felt that the forest was engaging in 

more collaboration and collaborative stewardship activities 

with the public than in the past. Some, however, felt that 

the level of collaboration had not necessarily increased, but 

that the people that the forest was collaborating with had 

changed from timber industry interests to recreation, fish 

and wildlife, and watershed-oriented interests. 

Who Are the Collaborators?

The Plan’s emphasis on ecosystem management and 

protection of fish, wildlife, and watersheds has attracted 

these special interests. The establishment of multiparty 

organizations, such as watershed councils (called “Lead 

Entity Groups” in Washington), has also helped promote a 

climate of collaboration. Some examples of collaborating 

partners include tribes, watershed councils (Lead Entity 

Groups), volunteer recreational groups (e.g., Volunteers for 

Outdoor Washington, and Washington Trails Association, 

Interagency for Outdoor Recreation, Backcountry Horsemen’s Association), community and economic development 

groups (Tacoma Urban League, Columbia Pacific Resource 

Conservation and Development Program), educational institutions (e.g., Grays Harbor College), environmental groups 

(Olympic Forest Coalition, NW Ecosystem Alliance), wildlife conservation groups (Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, 

American Birders Association, Audubon Society, Pacific 

Coast Salmon Coalition, Trout Unlimited), conservation 

districts, state agencies (State Fish and Wildlife, Department of Ecology, Department of Natural Resources), and 

industrial timberland owners (Simpson Timber Company, 

Rayonier).

The establishment of the Province Advisory Committees (PACs)29 and more recently, the Resource Advisory 

Committees (RACs) has also been an important mechanism 

for promoting collaboration. There are two RACs on the 

Olympic: the Grays Harbor RAC, and the Olympic Peninsula RAC (which includes Clallam, Jefferson, and Mason 

Counties). The Community Economic Revitalization Teams 

(WA-CERT in Washington) under the Northwest Economic 

Adjustment Initiative (NEAI) have also promoted collaboration among different state and federal agencies as well as 

between the agencies and communities. 

Benefits of Collaboration

Much of the Forest Service’s “culture” of collaboration 

developed out of necessity. With budget cuts and staff 

reductions, the ability to carry out the work that needs to 

be done depends on labor and funds from other sources. 

The Forest Service collaborates with several special interest 

groups around watershed, wildlife, and fisheries protection issues, and with volunteer groups on trail projects 

29Under the Plan, PACs were established to allow nonfederal 

officials and the public to have a voice in how federal forests 

were to be managed. The PACs serve as advisory bodies to the 

12 Provincial Interagency Executive Committees, the group 

responsible for land management activities within each province. 

The PAC members include representatives from federal, state, 

county, and tribal governments, the timber industry, environmental organizations, recreation and tourism groups, and the general 

public (Tuchmann et al. 1996). The Olympic Province Advisory 

Committee (OPAC) is the PAC for the Olympic National Forest. 

The OPAC members play an advisory role in assisting the Forest 

Supervisor in implementing the Plan (USDA FS 2004). 
70

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

and recreation projects. Partnerships with various groups 

provide opportunities for cost sharing on projects, as well 

as volunteer labor, supplies, or services. For example, the 

State Recovery Fund for salmon (called the “SuRF Board”) 

provides funding for watershed enhancement projects, 

but does not allow the Forest Service to apply directly for 

funds. A third party (such as a Lead Entity Group) must 

apply for funds, which can then be carried out on the 

national forest. The forest is also engaged in an Americorps 

program with the Washington Conservation Corps and the 

Washington Department of Ecology. These partners provide 

labor and funding/support for watershed restoration work 

on the forest. The Washington Conservation Corps brings 

in disadvantaged youth, ages 18 to 25, to work on various 

projects such as noxious weed removal and other restoration 

activities. 

Within recreation, volunteer groups help with trail 

maintenance, and cost-sharing programs help fund trail 

work and recreation development. Joint funding on projects is common on recreation as well as restoration-type 

activities. For example, the forest regularly works with the 

Backcountry Horsemen’s Association, which helps support 

volunteers working on trail projects by packing tools, equipment, and food to project sites. The group also provides 

feedback, guidance, and support for trail projects by making them accessible to horses and other pack animals. 

Many Forest Service employees also reported that 

developing relationships with different collaborating groups 

was also beneficial, if not more important, than the financial 

benefits. “Building relationships—a benefit that outweighs 

the funding. It allows local communities to have a voice in 

what happens on National Forest lands.” Another comment 

was, “Well, monetarily it’s significant; I mean, we can 

actually get some good work done, but building community 

relations is also very important.” In particular, collaborative efforts have improved relationships between the Forest 

Service and the regional environmental community as well 

as with the peninsula tribes. 

Forest employees are encouraged to form collaborative 

relationships. However, some employees noted that it takes 

time to develop collaborative partnerships, and as staffing 

resources decline and the workload increases, some people 

find it harder to find the time and energy to do so. 

Collaboration With Communities

Quilcene—

There has been very little collaboration between the Forest 

Service and the community of Quilcene. Many locals 

involved in the timber industry lost faith in the Forest 

Service and have consequently been unwilling to reestablish connections with the agency. What little collaboration 

that has taken place has focused on helping the community 

develop its public water system. Much of the district’s focus 

has been on communicating with outside interests, such 

as environmental groups, and entities from the county and 

Port Townsend. The headwaters for the water supply for 

Port Townsend are in the Quilcene portion of the Hood 

Canal Ranger District. As a result, there is ongoing involvement in water quality issues by groups from Port Townsend 

and Jefferson County. There are also some county and 

regional groups concerned with watershed health issues and 

salmonid populations. The relationship between the Forest 

Service and these groups is increasingly collaborative. 

There has been no known involvement of Quilcene community members with these issues. 

Lake Quinault area—

Collaborative efforts between the community and the Forest 

Service include participation by the Forest Service with 

the Lake Quinault Community Action Forum, participation by community members on the Grays Harbor RAC, 

and service contracts and other types of work offered by 

the Forest Service to local residents. Most of the agency’s 

collaborative relationships in the Quinault area have been 

with the Quinault Indian Nation, other organizations and 

agencies, and special interest groups from the region (but 

not necessarily local). 

Quinault Indian Nation—

The level of collaboration between the Forest Service 

and the Quinault Indian Nation has been high for the past 

decade, particularly following the transfer of the North 

Boundary land and the sharing of revenues on the Section 
71

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

2 lands. Most of the Quinault Indian Nation’s interactions 

have been with the Quinault Ranger District (now the 

consolidated Pacific Ranger District), although representatives from the Supervisor’s Office also attend meetings. As 

mentioned above, the Quinault Indian Nation and Olympic 

National Forest meet on a quarterly basis to discuss topics 

of mutual interest. These include management and revenues 

from Section 2 lands and the south shore of Lake Quinault, 

which is under the jurisdiction of the Forest Service (while 

Lake Quinault is owned by the Quinault Indian Nation). 

Additional topics of discussion include trails, home sites 

on the south shore, campgrounds, commercial facilities, 

sewage treatment, the Quinault Indian Nation fish hatchery, 

updates on timber sale activities, and road use and maintenance.30 The Quinault Indian Nation also participates in 

the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process, 

reviewing Forest Service projects to see if they have a 

detrimental effect on cultural resources.

The Quinault Indian Nation and the Olympic National 

Forest have also collaborated on watershed analyses. 

Between 1995 and 1997, the Forest Service, Quinault Indian 

Nation, and U.S. Geological Society worked together on 

watershed analysis for the Quinault River. The Quinault 

Indian Nation used Jobs-in-the-Woods funds to pay for 

Forest Service staff time on part of the project. The Forest Service and Quinault Indian Nation also collaborated 

on watershed analyses for the Salmon River and Boulder 

Creek/Cook Creek.

Another area where collaboration has occurred is 

through the Grays Harbor RAC. At the time of this study, 

the tribal representative serves as the RAC president. 

Interviewees felt that the RAC was not only beneficial in 

terms of funding projects, such as for noxious weed eradication, culvert replacement, precommercial thinning, etc., but 

was also helpful in improving the relationship between the 

Forest Service and local communities. One interviewee also 

felt that the RAC has helped the Quinault Indian Nation 

develop a better working relationship with other nontribal 

entities that also serve on the RAC. The one drawback 

mentioned with the RAC was that there was a $100,000 

funding limit per year, thus limiting the size of projects or 

forcing projects to take 2 to 3 years to be funded. 

Several factors have helped contribute to the relatively 

high level of collaboration between the Quinault Indian 

Nation and the Olympic National Forest. One reason why 

the relationship between the Forest Service and the Quinault 

Indian Nation has been so strong is due to the stability of 

the individuals that meet, that is, the same people have been 

involved in meetings since the early 1990s. An additional 

factor mentioned earlier is the presence of former Forest 

Service employees who now work for the Quinault Indian 

Nation. These individuals tend to be good resources and 

liaisons for both the tribe and the Olympic National Forest 

because of their knowledge of both entities. Finally, the 

large land base of the Quinault Indian Nation has meant 

that the tribe has been less dependent on the national forests 

for resources, and can interact with the Olympic National 

Forest as a neighbor and an equal. At the same time, the 

presence of shared resources (such as watersheds and 

Section 2 land revenues) have helped to maintain a working 

relationship between the entities.

Protecting Forest Values and 

Environmental Qualities 

Another goal of the Plan was to protect the forest values and 

environmental qualities associated with late-successional, 

old-growth, and aquatic ecosystems. The biophysical monitoring modules that compose the Plan monitoring program 

examine how well this goal has been achieved from the 

biological and ecological standpoints. Here we discuss 

peoples’ perceptions of how well noncommodity forest 

values and environmental qualities on the Olympic National 

Forest have been managed for under the Plan. 

Opinions tended to depend on an individual’s background and orientation, but were consistent across communities. For example, many community members who were 

or had been associated with the timber industry expressed 

concerns about the health of the Olympic National Forest, 

particularly with regard to the high density of young trees 

and the potential risk of disease or catastrophic fire. Many 

felt that the current second-growth stands were becoming 

30The Forest Service still manages roads that border the 

North Boundary. 
72

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

decadent and in need of thinning, both to create healthy 

habitat for fish and wildlife, as well as to establish stands 

that could be commercially thinned in the future. 

Another forest health issue was the perceived change 

in patterns of gathering nontimber forest products (NTFPs). 

Several people noted that in the past the harvesting was 

small scale, but the current trend is toward very intensive 

harvesting that is negatively affecting the resource. In 

addition to the intensity of harvesting, some community 

members commented about the possibility of changes in the 

availability of NTFPs, particularly commercially important 

species such as salal (Gaultheria shallon Pursh), as the 

forest’s composition and structure change owing to the 

management practices prescribed under the Plan. 

Another perception of community members was of a 

decline in the elk populations on the forest as a result of the 

loss of grazing lands from cutover lands. 

On the other hand, community members whose views 

were more in line with environmental protection felt that 

the changes brought about by the Plan were improving 

water quality and wildlife habitat. Most tribe members and 

employees of the Quinault Indian Nation felt that the Plan 

has helped protect aquatic and riparian environments. Water 

quality and riparian function are critical issues facing tribal 

fisheries, and the curtailment of logging combined with 

restoration activities to reduce sedimentation from roads 

on the Olympic National Forest has thus been seen very 

positively by the Quinault Indian Nation. One comment 

was, “The Northwest Forest Plan has helped to prevent 

landslides with road decommissioning, removing side casts, 

replacing culverts, and providing better shade.” Another 

tribal member commented on how important it was for his 

children and grandchildren to know what a mature forest 

looks like, and was happy to see the forest preserved on 

the Olympic National Forest, since about 90 percent of the 

reservations land had been logged. 

Issues and Concerns Relating to 

Forest Management

Many of the issues and concerns raised by community 

members relating to the management of Olympic National 

Forest relate to topics described above such as forest health, 

reduced access to the forest owing to road closures and 

decommissioning, and the ability to derive economic benefit 

from the forest. Again, interviewees from all three communities raised similar issues and concerns. There were 

also separate issues that were very specific to a particular 

community. These issues are discussed in greater detail 

below.

Forest Health

Interviewees from all three communities raised concern 

over what they perceived to be the unhealthy state of many 

tree stands on the Olympic National Forest. Residents from 

Quilcene were particularly concerned about the risk of fire 

from overcrowded, decadent stands. Fire poses a greater 

threat to the east-side communities owing to the drier 

climatic conditions and an urban interface that is encroaching on the forest. Staff from the Quinault Indian Nation 

also expressed concerns about the high density of stands 

and lack of thinning on the forest. In this case, the concern 

was related to the spread of disease or fire from the Olympic National Forest to the forests on the Quinault Indian 

Reservation. Residents of the Lake Quinault area also stated 

that many of the stands looked unhealthy and felt there were 

economic opportunities for precommercial and commercial 

thinning that were being lost on account of the lack of more 

active management. 

Access to the Forest

Tied to forest management is access to locations within 

the national forest. Many residents voiced concern about 

the lack of road maintenance and management for access. 

The lack of funding for road maintenance and repair and 

the short work season, combined with the shift in focus to 

road decommissioning, have resulted in fewer roads being 

accessible to the public. One local resident observes, “Many 

residents were irate because the Forest Service was putting 

money into road decommissioning, when there were so 

many miles of roads that needed maintenance.” In addition, 

flood events that occurred in the late 1990s and early 2000s 

left many Forest Service roads severely damaged, resulting 

in several road closures, some of which were important 

access routes to the forest and national park. Increased 
73

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

procedural requirements associated with the Plan combined 

with the lack of funding resulted in major delays in repairing these roads. Access issues affect both local tourism as 

well as recreational opportunities for local residents, such 

as hunting. As mentioned above, road closures have also 

reduced access to NTFPs and other cultural resources for 

Quinault tribe members.

Economic Benefits

All three communities felt that changes in the management 

of the Olympic National Forest brought about by the Plan 

had reduced economic opportunities for their communities. Given the forest’s proximity to these communities and 

its former role as the economic engine for the area, many 

residents felt that there should be more economic benefits 

available to surrounding communities via timber sales, 

service contracts, and recreational development. 

Residents of Quilcene spoke of their desire to see more 

timber sales on the Quilcene portion of the Hood Canal 

District, but were resigned to the likelihood that this would 

not happen. Nevertheless, several residents saw the development of small-scale forest-based industries as an economic 

opportunity that should be explored. Quilcene residents and 

county agents also expressed concern about their ability 

to exploit and rely on the national forest for tourism. One 

business owner, commenting about the closure of the Forest 

Service Dosewallips road, a major access route to Olympic 

National Park, states, 

The washed out road directly affects the businesses 

and people who rely on tourists who would normally 

use that road. The Dosewallips was one of the few 

places of access into the National Forest for people 

with handicaps. Now there is just no way for those 

people to get in. Once that access is cut off, people 

just stop coming. Well they stopped the timber 

industry... So first of all, no more cutting trees, so 

there goes the timber industry. Then tourism can 

come in—we can do the parks. Well now they are 

not letting you into the park. You have to pay to park 

in the park—that’s a big problem, nobody wants to 

do that. Then when you get on the trails, they are not 

kept up anymore because they don’t have the money 

to do that or for whatever reason. They are closing the roads—so then we don’t have the tourism. 

We lost 25,000 people last summer because of the 

Dosewallips closure...It’s like every which way you 

turn you are being stopped. 

The reduction in timber harvesting on the forest 

continues to remain an important issue for Lake Quinault 

area residents. There have been few timber sales (i.e., commercial thinning) in the Quinault area since the Plan was 

implemented. Some projects have been delayed. Although 

most residents are resigned to the fact that the forest is no 

longer managed primarily for timber production, there 

is still resentment and frustration among some residents, 

particularly those that continue to try to make a living in 

the timber industry. 

For the Quinault Indian Nation, one of the primary 

issues and concerns is the low level of revenue from the 

Section 2 lands. The transfer of the North Boundary lands 

and the revenue sharing from the Section 2 lands held 

the promise of substantial generation of revenue for the 

Quinault Indian Nation. With the effect of Endangered 

Species Act (ESA) listings on the North Boundary and 

the limitations of the Plan Section 2 lands, however, the 

Quinault Indian Nation has not realized much economic 

benefit that would have come from timber harvesting on the 

Olympic National Forest (Section 2 lands) and the North 

Boundary lands. 

Law Enforcement

Finally, community members from each of the three communities raised the issue of law enforcement on the forest. 

Quilcene residents voiced concerns about tree poaching and 

nonforest related activities, including methamphetamine 

laboratories. Residents from all three communities also 

described NTFP theft and the hiring of harvesters who were 

undocumented citizens as compounding the difficulty of 

enforcing Forest Service regulations. 
74

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Local Views of the Northwest Forest Plan

We asked community interviewees about their views of 

what was working well and not working well with the Plan. 

Many interviewees did not feel familiar enough with the 

Plan to comment. Many of the comments we did receive 

are reported in the preceding discussions. We sum up the 

observations here.

Benefits of the Northwest Forest Plan

Protection of waterways /restoring and 

protecting riparian habitat—

Most interviewees regardless of their background or 

political orientation agreed that the Plan has been effective at protecting watersheds and improving conditions in 

riparian zones by reducing timber harvest activities and 

road construction, as well as through active restoration 

efforts such as road decommissioning, culvert replacement, 

revegetation, etc. One comment was, 

It’s [the Plan] actually put emphasis back on watersheds; initially, when the Forest Service was formed 

in the early part of the century, that was one of the 

main issues was managing watersheds... National 

Forests were the watersheds for towns and cities, 

and protecting them was a big thing back in the 

early part of the century... And that part is working 

pretty well; that’s what we need to be doing. 

Although it is difficult to determine whether restoration 

efforts have resulted in an increase in salmon and steelhead runs, the overall change in management priorities is 

initiating a long-term process of fish recovery. This process 

of recovery can only be seen as a positive contribution to 

the economy and culture of people such as the Quinaults 

and other tribes and individuals that depend on the salmon 

fishery for their livelihoods.

Areas for Improvement

More thinning—

As mentioned in previous sections, many interviewees 

across all three communities felt that the forest is currently 

in an unhealthy state. Perceptions were that the lack of 

thinning and other activities on the Olympic National Forest 

was detrimental to the forests, increasing the risk of fire 

and disease, as well as reducing opportunities for economic 

benefits to communities that could come from commercial 

thinning sales. The dense growth of even-aged stands was 

preventing light from entering the forest understory, thereby 

reducing species diversity and wildlife habitat. Most interviewees felt that there should be more thinning and other 

types of active management to help restore the forest to a 

healthy state. Even some individuals that were more aligned 

with environmental conservation felt that more thinning 

was needed on the forest to help develop late-successional 

and old-growth habitat for wildlife species. One comment 

was, 

If you really want a healthy forest and to have our 

forest be more like the old-growth type forest with 

uneven-age trees, openings, large woody debris, 

all those kinds of things, they need to get out into 

some of these areas that were previously altered and 

do some work out there—commercial thinning as 

an example....A lot of these harvest units, the trees 

come in at the same size, and are very thick, and 

nothing’s growing on the forest floor, and wildlife 

avoids those areas, as an example. They need to try 

to figure out how to get our forest fully functioning so that it will benefit the woodpeckers and the 

insects and the deer and the elk, as well as people.

Although the forest has undertaken an aggressive thinning program since 1990, with between 20,000 and 30,000 

acres precommercially thinned and about 10,000 acres commercial thinned by 2000, it has been precluded from doing 

more thinning owing to the lack of budget and staffing.

More economic benefits to communities—

To many residents, the Plan solidified the fact that timber 

harvesting activities would not return to previous levels. 

Nevertheless, many individuals employed in the timber 

industry still expected and anticipated a consistent level of 

timber sales on an annual basis. These sales never materialized at the steady, consistent rate anticipated. Because of the 
75

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

lack of constant or reliable sales, individuals with a longstanding involvement in the timber industry believe the Plan 

is not working well. However, these individuals do not fault 

the Plan directly, but rather attribute the lack of sales to 

court challenges that have continued despite the Plan. Since 

2002, however, the annual sale volume on the Olympic 

National Forest has stabilized at or above the probable sale 

quantity. This stability is expected to continue.

 In addition, the lack of service contracts for restoration activities has made it difficult for contractors to make 

their living on Forest Service contracts alone. Bundling 

contract work in a way that allows contractors to maintain a 

viable business would help support a “restoration economy” 

initially envisioned under the Plan. 

Impacts of Endangered Species Act and survey-andmanage restrictions on management activities—

Many people felt that the Forest Service was paralyzed from 

doing any activities because of restrictions associated with 

the ESA and survey and manage requirements. The survey 

and manage strategy has been heavily modified, and its 

effects on project development and implementation have 

been greatly reduced. However, ESA restrictions continue 

to delay projects owing to the short work window available for carrying out projects. Although most community 

members were unaware of the specific details associated 

with project planning, many felt that in general the planning 

process for timber sales and other projects had become 

extremely cumbersome. 
76

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675
77

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

To conclude, we draw on the data presented in chapters 

2 through 4 of this document to assess how well the 

socioeconomic goals and expectations of the Northwest 

Forest Plan (the Plan) have been met over the last 10 years 

on the Olympic National Forest. We also evaluate the two 

monitoring questions posed in the “Introduction” to this 

report: “Are predictable and sustainable levels of timber 

and non-timber resources available and being produced?” 

and “Are local communities and economies experiencing 

positive or negative changes that may be associated with 

federal forest management?” We then identify lessons 

learned from the monitoring work that may be useful in 

the adaptive management context. Our findings from the 

Olympic case study will be used, together with findings 

from other federal forests and communities within the Plan 

area, to draw broader conclusions about the effectiveness 

of the Plan in meeting its socioeconomic goals at a larger, 

regional scale. This larger, regional analysis is presented in 

Charnley (2006).

Monitoring Questions and 

Socioeconomic Goals: An Evaluation

Goal 1: Produce a predictable and sustainable supply 

of timber sales, nontimber forest resources, and 

recreation opportunities.

Timber

Most respondents felt that the goal of producing a predictable and sustainable supply of timber had not been met. 

Some interviewees felt that timber sales were predictable 

and sustainable (apart from the period during which the 

jumping slugs [Hemphillia glandulosa] halted all action), 

but were so low that they were of no economic importance 

to the region. Others felt that the timber output levels were 

too low to provide for sustainable community well-being 

or forest health. Although the probable sale quantity (PSQ) 

target of 10 mmbf had been met on the forest overall, 

interviewees perceived that the distribution of those sales 

was unbalanced. 

Nontimber Forest Products (NTFP)

Most interviewees felt that the availability of NTFPs have 

not been affected by the Plan. Although demand and harvest 

of many NTFPs, such as salal (Gaultheria shallon Pursh), 

has increased over the past 10 years, interviewees attributed this increase to market demand rather than anything 

associated with the Plan. There have been some restrictions 

on the harvest of more sensitive types of products, such as 

moss, ferns, and cedar boughs, but the demand for these 

species tends to be much lower than salal. Some interviewees reported that access to NTFPs has decreased since the 

implementation of the Plan owing to road closures, reduced 

road maintenance, and road decommissioning. 

Recreation

Opinions about recreational opportunities on the forest 

were mixed. Most interviewees felt that overall recreational 

opportunities have been predictable and sustainable. On 

the other hand, many community members who used the 

national forest for hunting and fishing felt that access to 

fishing and hunting grounds had diminished owing to road 

closures and road decommissioning. Some hunters also 

felt that the big game populations were negatively affected 

by growth of dense forest stands associated with the lack 

of timber harvesting and thinning. In contrast, around 

Lake Quinault, some interviewees noted improvements in 

Forest Service trails and campsites. Fees collected from the 

Northwest Forest Pass (required for parking and camping on 

Forest Service land) have helped finance improvements to 

recreational facilities in this area. 

Goals 2 and 3: Maintain community stability, contribute 

to community well-being, and assist with long-term 

economic development and diversification in communities affected by cutbacks in federal timber harvests.

Most interviewees agreed that the Plan had a minimal 

impact in terms of contributing to local or regional economies. The general sentiment among interviewees was that 

the Plan offered too little and came too late. Some community residents recognized the efforts made by the Forest 

Chapter 5: Conclusions—Meeting Northwest Forest Plan 

Goals and Expectations
78

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Service and other governmental and nongovernmental 

entities under the Plan and Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative (NEAI) to help affected communities. 

Payments to Counties, NEAI, and Title II were viewed as 

having some stabilizing effect. Quilcene and Lake Quinault 

communities received very few NEAI grants or loans, and 

most residents who were interviewed from these communities were unaware that these funds were associated with 

the Plan. The Quinault Indian Nation received a significant 

sum in grants and loans through the NEAI that have made 

important contributions toward infrastructure development 

and economic diversification for the tribe. Although these 

funds and efforts helped ease the transition, their impact 

has been minimal compared to the economic losses experienced by the reduction in Forest Service timber sales and 

the decline in social capital owing to loss of Forest Service 

employees from these communities. Most interviewees felt 

that any economic stability that did exist was due to the 

continued (and more recent increased) harvest of timber on 

private land.

Goal 4: Protect forest values and environmental 

qualities associated with late-successional, oldgrowth, and aquatic ecosystems.

As discussed in previous sections, opinions about the 

effectiveness of this goal were mixed. Some interviewees 

felt that the Plan was very effective in protecting watersheds 

and improving environmental quality. Others mentioned 

concern over the lack of sufficient thinning, and the economic effects of lost commercial thinning potential, as well 

as the ecological effects of potential problems of disease or 

increased risk of fire. Some also mentioned how the focus 

on protecting a few species by closing the operating season 

in the summer (e.g., during nesting periods for murrelets 

[Brachyramphus marmoraturs]) could have a negative 

impact on other species, water quality, and the ecosystem as 

a whole. 

Goal 5: Promote agency-citizen collaboration in 

forest management.

Opinions were also mixed regarding collaboration. As 

discussed previously, some people mentioned how collaboration had not necessarily improved but that the people 

the agency was collaborating with had changed. In the past, 

collaboration had been with the timber industry, whereas 

today it was with recreation or fish/wildlife interests. 

Others felt that the relationship between communities and 

district-level staff had remained the same, and was based on 

personal relationships between long-term residents. Some 

noted improved relationship as a result of forums such as 

the Province Advisory Committees (PAC) and Resource 

Advisory Committees (RAC), as well as efforts made by the 

Forest Service to work with the environmental community. 

In Quilcene, residents were encouraged by the district ranger’s participation in meetings and keeping them 

apprised of Forest Service activities. However, many longtime residents stated they had more distant relationships 

with the Forest Service now than in the past. 

For the Lake Quinault area, most interviewees felt that 

their relationship with the remaining Forest Service employees was good, but that the lack of a permanent district 

ranger had helped to create a greater distance between the 

community and the agency. 

For the Quinault Indian Nation, collaboration with 

the Forest Service has been high. The Plan requirement 

for watershed assessments led directly to a high level of 

cooperation on a number of watershed analyses. Other 

factors, however, have also contributed to the collaborative 

relationship, such as sharing of revenue from the Section 

2 lands, the transfer of employees from the Forest Service 

to the Quinault Indian Nation, and the increased federal 

emphasis on government-to-government relationships. 

More recently, the RAC has also played an important role 

in further connecting the Quinault Indian Nation and other 

local communities to management activities and priorities 

on the Olympic National Forest. 
79

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

Lessons Learned for Adaptive Management

It is unrealistic to think that Plan mitigation measures 

could have compensated for the dramatic downturn in the 

timber economies of the Olympic Peninsula that had been 

ongoing since the 1980s, as some expected. By the time the 

Plan was signed, the region’s timber sector had already lost 

a substantial portion of its job base. Even if the Plan had 

successfully met its goals and expectations, communities 

would have experienced dramatic changes associated with 

the timber industry decline. The question now is, How can 

the Olympic National Forest provide communities with 

socioeconomic benefits that will help them better adapt to 

change, and that will contribute to community well-being?

The monitoring data gathered through this study 

have a number of management implications. The intent 

of this discussion is not to provide recommendations per 

se. Rather, it is to summarize the ideas expressed by the 

interviewees and the authors regarding how the forest could 

interact better with local communities, and provide more 

community benefits.

Timber Production

Many interviewees believe the forest should not only meet 

its PSQ of timber, but that the PSQ of 10 mmbf could be 

increased while still protecting wildlife habitat, promoting 

the development of late-successional forests, and providing 

a predictable and sustainable supply of wood products to 

support community economic development efforts. Many 

felt that increased thinning in overly dense stands was 

necessary for improved forest health, and at the same time 

would help provide jobs to local communities. The greatest 

impediment to increasing the level of timber harvesting was 

the lack of funding and staffing at the forest to prepare and 

implement thinning projects. Increased funding for thinning 

projects was recommended to meet this need. 

Nontimber Forest Products

Nontimber forest products are collected from the Olympic 

National Forest for recreational, cultural, medicinal, subsistence, and economic purposes. Harvesting of floral greens 

alone supplies a multimillion dollar industry. Observations 

made by community members included the lack of law 

enforcement capacity by the forest to prevent NTFP theft, 

insufficient information on the ecological impacts of NTFP 

harvesting, and the need to better control the level and 

methods of harvesting. Interviewees who were involved 

in NTFP harvesting mentioned reduced access to harvest 

locations owing to road closures, road washouts, and road 

decommissioning as a growing impediment to harvesting. 

The forest is currently experimenting with different permitting systems (i.e., open bid leases versus individual permits) 

to better manage their NTFP program. Because funding for 

the NTFP program is still connected to revenues generated 

from timber receipts, budget and staffing resources have 

been insufficient to meet the growing demand for these 

resources. The forest has been trying to improve communication with NTFP harvesters, particularly with Latino 

groups, to benefit both the forest ecosystem and the groups 

and communities that depend on these resources. 

Recreation and Tourism

Despite increases in recreational use and tourism on the 

Olympic National Forest, budget and staffing cuts have 

limited the forest’s ability to fully develop its recreation 

program. Interviewees mentioned road closures, washouts, 

and decommissioning as affecting access to traditional fishing and hunting sites for local residents. Road closures have 

also negatively affected tourism in surrounding communities. Some interviewees also felt that the closure and relocation of some trails and campsites to meet Plan requirements 

has reduced tourism in some areas. Safety has also become 

a concern for some interviewees, who cited the lack of Forest Service personnel and law enforcement on the ground to 

control unmanaged recreation. The use of volunteer labor 

and collaborative agreements with outside entities has been 

important to the forest in meeting its recreational needs. 

Funding obtained from the Recreation Fee Demonstration 

Program (i.e., Northwest Forest Pass) has proven to be an 

important source of revenue for the recreation program.

Contracting

The most common comment regarding procurement 

contracting for the Forest Service was that the number 

of contracts is insufficient to keep local contractors in 
80

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

business. The forest spent $6.8 million on labor-intensive 

contracts between 1990 and 1992, but only $1.3 million 

between 2000 and 2002 (when most of the contract value 

went to equipment-intensive work). The number of contractors working on the Olympic National Forest decreased 

from 110 in the 1990–92 period to 51 in the 2000–2002 

period. Most contracts that went to local contractors were 

for heavy equipment (versus labor intensive) work. Thus, 

compared to the early 1990s, the economic impact of 

contracting on local communities has declined dramatically. 

Interviewees familiar with the contracting process felt that 

strong leadership was needed at the regional level to support 

local preference in awarding bids. 

Community Economic Assistance

The ability for communities to receive economic assistance 

funds was strongly related to the capacity of the community 

to apply for funds. Communities and entities that were successful in receiving grant monies had a designated (professional) grant-writer, were actively networking with funding 

agencies, and had a clear vision of what they wanted. Forest 

Service Rural Community Assistance Program (RCAP) 

funds were highly effective at providing seed money for 

projects and leveraging additional funds. 

Collaboration

Interviewees felt that over the past 10 years, the Forest 

Service has increased its level of collaboration with 

recreation, fish and wildlife, and watershed-oriented 

interests as well as peninsula tribes, while decreasing its 

interaction with timber interests. For communities that 

were once heavily dependent on Forest Service timber, 

such as Quilcene and Lake Quinault, this has meant less 

interaction and collaboration. Forest Service staff cutbacks 

and district consolidations have also reduced the level of 

communication and interaction that takes place between 

the agency and these communities. Structured forums for 

collaboration, such as the Olympic PAC and the Olympic 

and Grays Harbor RAC have helped to keep communities 

connected to the Forest Service and enabled communities 

to have a voice in some of the management activities that 

take place on the forest.

Metric Equivalents

When you know: Multiply by: To get:

Inches 2.54 Centimeters

Feet .3048 Meters

Miles 1.609 Kilometers

Acres .405 Hectares

Square miles 2.59 Square kilometers

Pounds .454 Kilograms

Board feet, log scale .0045 Million cubic meters

Acknowledgments

We are grateful for the contributions of data compilation 

and consultation by Lynnae Sutton, Candace Dillingham, 

Claudia Stuart, and Dick Phillips. Many thanks also to 

Dr. Rebecca Mclain and Ward Hoffman for their thorough 

review of this report in its preliminary draft. We would 

also like to thank our three peer reviewers Dr. Robert G. 

Lee, Dr. John Calhoun, and Dr. Annabel Kirschner for their 

feedback and suggestions on improving this report. Any 

findings and interpretations expressed in this report are 

those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views 

of the reviewers. Finally, we thank all of our interviewees, 

particularly the Forest Service employees of the Olympic 

National Forest and the community members of Quilcene, 

Lake Quinault, and the Quinault Indian Nation for sharing 

their experiences, struggles, and insights with us. 

Literature Cited 

Alegria, J.; Hyzer, M.; Mulder, B.; Schnoes, B.; Tolle, 

T. 1995. Guidance for implementation monitoring for 

management of habitat for late-successional and oldgrowth-related species within the range of the northern 

spotted owl. Draft. On file with: Regional Ecosystem 

Office, 333 SW First Avenue, Portland, OR 97204.

Bernard, H.R. 2002. Research methods in anthropology: 

qualitative and quantitative approaches. Walnut Creek, 

CA: Altamira Press. 752 p.

Charnley, S., tech. coord. 2006. Northwest Forest 

Plan—the first 10 years (1994–2003): socioeconomic 

monitoring results. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-649. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 6 vol.
81

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

Clark, R.N.; Philpot, C.W.; Stankey, G.H. 1999. 

Overarching assumptions underlying the Northwest 

Forest Plan: imbedded implications for research at the 

PNW Research Station. Seattle, WA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 46 p.

Clinton, W.J.; Gore, A., Jr. 1993. The Forest Plan for a 

sustainable economy and a sustainable environment. In: 

Tuchmann, E.T.; Connaughton, K.P.; Freedman, L.E.; 

Moriwaki, C.B. 1996. The Northwest Forest Plan: a 

report to the President and Congress. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of Forestry and 

Economic Assistance: 231–238. App. A. 

Danks, C.; Haynes, R.W. 2001. Socioeconomic research. 

In: Haynes, R.W.; Perez, G.E., tech. eds. Northwest 

Forest Plan research synthesis. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

PNW-GTR-498. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station: 52–62.

Donoghue, E.M.; Sutton, N.L. 2006. Socioeconomic 

conditions and trends for communities in the Northwest 

Forest Plan region, 1990 to 2000. In: Charnley, S.; 

Donoghue, E.M.; Stuart, C.; Dillingham, C.; Buttolph, 

L.P.; Kay, W.; McLain, R.J.; Moseley, C.; Phillips, R.H.; 

Tobe, L. 2006. Northwest Forest Plan—the first 10 years 

(1994–2003): socioeconomic monitoring results volume 

III: rural communities and economies. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

PNW-GTR-649. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station: 7–35. Chapter 2. 

Dwyer, W.L. 1994. Seattle Audubon Society, et al. v. James 

Lyons, Assistant Secretary of Agriculture, et al. Order 

on motions for Summary Judgment RE 1994 Forest Plan. 

Seattle, WA: U.S. District Court, Western District of 

Washington.

Emerson, R.M.; Fretz, R.I.; Shaw, L.L. 1995. Writing 

ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: The University of 

Chicago Press. 272 p. 

Forest Ecosystem Management and Assessment Team 

[FEMAT] 1993. Forest ecosystem management: an 

ecological, economic, and social assessment. Portland, 

OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture; U.S. Department of 

the Interior [et al.]. [Irregular pagination]. 

Forest Community Research. 2003. Assessment of the 

Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative. Taylorsville, 

CA: Forest Community Research. 

Hemstrom, M.; Spies, T.; Palmer, C.; Kiester, R.; 

Teply, J.; McDonald, P.; Warbington, R. 1998.

Late-successional and old-growth forest effectiveness 

monitoring plan for the Northwest Forest Plan. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-438. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. 37 p.

Jackson, E.J.; Lee, R.G.; Sommers, P. 2004. Monitoring 

the community impacts of the Northwest Forest Plan: 

an alternative to social indicators. Society and Natural 

Resources. 17: 223–233. 

Kusel, J. 1996. Well-being in forest-dependent 

communities. Part I: A new approach. In: Sierra 

Nevada Ecosystem Project: final report to Congress. 

Assessments and scientific basis for management 

options. Davis, CA: University of California, Centers for 

Water and Wildland Resources: 361–374. Vol. 2.

Lint, J.; Noon, B.; Anthony, R.; Forsman, E.; Raphael, 

M.; Collopy, M.; Starkey, E. 1999. Northern spotted 

owl effectiveness monitoring plan for the Northwest 

Forest Plan. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-440. Portland, 

OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Research Station. 43 p.

Lynch, K.A.; McLain, R.J. 2003. Access, labor, and wild 

floral greens management in western Washington’s 

forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-585. Portland, OR: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. 61 p. 
82

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Madsen, S.; Evans, D.; Hamer, T.; Henson, P.; Miller, S.; 

Nelson, S.K.; Roby, D.; Stapanian, M. 1999. Marbled 

murrelet effectiveness monitoring plan for the Northwest 

Forest Plan. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-439. Portland, 

OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Research Station. 51 p.

Mishler, E.G. 1986. Research interviewing: context and 

narrative. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 

206 p. 

Moseley, C. 2006. Northwest Forest Plan—the first 10 years 

(1994–2003): Procurement contracting in the affected 

counties. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-661. Portland, OR: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. 36 p.

Mulder, B.; Alegria, J.; Czaplewski, R.; Ringold, P.; 

Tolle, T. 1995. Effectiveness monitoring: an interagency 

program for the Northwest Forest Plan. Portland, 

OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service 

and U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management [et al.]; report; Monitoring Design Group, 

Intergovernmental Advisory Committee.

Mulder, B.; Noon, B.; Spies, T.; Raphael, M.; Palmer, C.; 

Olsen, A.; Reeves, G.; Welsh, H. 1999. The strategy and 

design of the effectiveness monitoring program for the 

Northwest Forest Plan. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-437. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 138 p.

Oregon Natural Resources Council [ONRC]. 1999. 

Web site http://www.onrc.org/press/002.faqnwfp.html. 

(August 15, 2004).

Quinault Indian Nation. 1993. The guide to agroforestry. 

Taholah, WA: Quinault Indian Nation. 11 p.

Reeves, G.; Hohler, D.; Larsen, D.; Busch, D.; Kratz, K.; 

Reynolds, K.; Stein, K.; Atzet, T.; Hays, P.; Tehan, 

M. 2004. Effectiveness monitoring for the aquatic 

and riparian component of the Northwest Forest Plan: 

conceptual framework and options. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

PNW-GTR-577. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 71 p.

Riessman, C.K. 1993. Narrative analysis. Qualitative 

Research Methods Series 30. Newbury Park, CA: Sage 

Publications. 79 p. 

Righter, E. 1978. Cultural resource overview of the 

Olympic National Forest, Washington. Washington, DC: 

Jack McCormick & Associates, Inc.; contract 006709N. 

Submitted to U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, OR. 253 p.

Rooney, J. 1997. Frontier legacy. Seattle, WA: Northwest 

Interpretive Association. 100 p. 

Stocks, M. 2003. Quinault Indian Nation: comprehensive 

economic development strategy. Taholah, WA: Quinault 

Indian Nation. 82 p. 

Tuchmann, E.T.; Connaughton, K.P.; Freedman, L.E.; 

Moriwaki, C.B. 1996. The Northwest Forest Plan: a 

report to the President and Congress. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of Forestry and 

Economic Assistance. 253 p.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2000. Census 2000. http://www.

census.gov/main/www/cen2000.html. (August 15, 2005).

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA 

FS] 2004. Olympic National Forest. http://www.fs.fed.

us/r6/olympic. (August 21, 2004).

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; 

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994. Record of 

decision for amendments to Forest Service and Bureau 

of Land Management planning documents within the 

range of the northern spotted owl. [Place of publication 

unknown]. 74 p. [plus attachment A: standards and 

guidelines].

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; 

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management [USDA and USDI]. 2002. Tribal 

monitoring under the Northwest Forest Plan. Interagency 

executive letter. http://www.reo.gov. (August 2004).

Wilkinson, K.P. 1991. The community in rural America. 

New York: Greenwood Press. 152 p.
83

Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities

Appendix: People Interviewed for This Study

Olympic National Forest 

Respondent’s positiona

Engineering program representative (3)

Forestry program representative (4)

District ranger (2)

Economic development representative

Public service representative

Forest planning representative

Forest supervisor

Aquatics program representative

Ecosystems/natural resources program representative

Wildlife biology program representative

Fire and aviation program representative

Operations staff representative

Timber contracting representative

Computer/mapping specialist

Botany/forest ecology program representative

Recreation program representative

Information specialist

Tribal relations representative

aActual names and titles were removed to protect the confidentiality of 

interviewees.

Quilcene

Respondent’s positiona Quilcene resident

Former logging contractor X

Former logging contractor, business owner X

Logging contractor, logging contractors’ association X

Local businessperson, recent immigrant (2) X

Firefighter X

Pastor X

School official X

County planning official (3)

County planning official X

Environmental interest group member

Social service provider X

Social service provider

Economic development agency official

County health and human services official (2)

Industrial timberland manager

aActual names and titles were removed to protect the confidentiality of interviewees. 

Forest Service employees working in Quilcene were also interviewed for the 

community case study and are included under the list of Forest Service employees 

interviewed.
84

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-675

Lake Quinault Area

Lake Quinault

Respondent’s positiona area resident

Former National Park Service employee, local tourism-based business owner X

Elected county official 

Fire district representative X

School official X

Waitress, school board member X

Owner of log truck company, pastor, member of community/economic development organization X

President of local chapter of a national recreation organization 

Local tourism-based business owner, school board member X

Retired rancher X

Shake mill owner X

Contractor for ecosystem management work on the forest X

Representative from regional economic development organization

Store owner X

Representative from a regional environmental organization

aActual names and titles were removed to protect the confidentiality of interviewees. 

Forest Service employees working at Lake Quinault were also interviewed for the community 

case study and are included under the list of Forest Service employees interviewed.

Quinault Indian Nation

Respondent’s positiona Taholah/Queets resident

Quinault tribal council member, tribe member (2) X

Quinault Indian Nation employee—forestry (2)

Quinault Indian Nation employee—forestry, tribe member X

Quinault Indian Nation employee—cultural historian, tribe member X

Quinault Indian Nation employee—natural resources

Retired logger, fisher, tribal elder X

Basket weaver, tribal elder X

School official

Quinault Indian Nation employee—environmental protection

Former Quinault Indian Nation employee—environmental protection

Quinault Indian Nation employee—economic development

Quinault Indian Nation employee—tribal liaison, tribe member X

Basket weaver, Quinault Indian Nation employee—cultural historian, tribe member X

Fisher, tribe member X

Fisher, tribal elder X

aActual names and titles were removed to protect the confidentiality of interviewees. 

Forest Service employees working at Lake Quinault were also interviewed for the community 

case study and are included under the list of Forest Service employees interviewed.
Pacific Northwest Research Station

Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw

Telephone (503) 808-2592

Publication requests (503) 808-2138

FAX (503) 808-2130

E-mail pnw_pnwpubs@fs.fed.us

Mailing address Publications Distribution

Pacific Northwest Research Station

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, OR 97208-3890
U.S. Department of Agriculture

Pacific Northwest Research Station

333 SW First Avenue

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, OR 97208-3890

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300