Page 1 GAO-03-808R Forest Service Burnt Timber Removal Efforts

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

A

July 10, 2003 Letr

The Honorable Jeff Bingaman

Ranking Minority Member

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

United States Senate

Subject: Wildland Fires: Forest Service’s Removal of Timber Burned by 

Wildland Fires 

Dear Senator Bingaman:

Wildland fires burned over 8 million acres during the 2000 wildfire season, 

making it one of the worst in the past 50 years. As a result, a National Fire 

Plan was implemented beginning in 2001 to better prevent, prepare for, 

respond to, and repair damage caused by wildland fires. In fiscal years 2001 

through 2003, Congress provided $4.9 billion to the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture’s (USDA) Forest Service to implement the National Fire Plan 

on land that it manages. Of this amount, Congress earmarked $212 million 

to fund the rehabilitation of land burned by wildland fires. In general, 

rehabilitation covers long-term efforts to improve lands unlikely to recover 

naturally from wildland fire damage. In some cases, rehabilitation may 

include removing timber from burnt land to, among other things, reduce 

hazardous fuels. Questions have been raised, however, about whether it is 

appropriate to use rehabilitation funds for removing such timber, which 

can be sold. 

Trees that are removed from National Forest System land can be either 

green and healthy or dead or dying as a result of disease or wildland fire. 

Depending on their value, the trees may be disposed of or sold. In general, 

if the trees have little or no commercial value, the Forest Service will use 

service contracts to have the trees removed and disposed of. If the trees 

have commercial value, they are considered timber, and the Forest Service 

will use timber sale contracts to have the timber removed and sold. Timber 

sale contracts generally proceed through two phases—a planning phase 

and an implementation and award phase. The Forest Service can use 

different funding sources to have timber removed depending on the reason 

for removal. 

You asked us to determine (1) if the Forest Service uses wildland fire 

rehabilitation funding to remove timber from burnt land, and, if not, the 

source of funding the Forest Service uses as well as the types of contracts 
Page 2 GAO-03-808R Forest Service Burnt Timber Removal Efforts

used, and (2) why this timber is removed. For this review, we requested 

data from the Forest Service for calendar years 2000 through 2002, as of 

April 2003, on the sources of funding used to award contracts to have 

timber removed from burnt land, the numbers and types of contracts 

awarded to remove this timber, and the primary objective for removing the 

timber. We requested data on timber removed from burnt land in Forest 

Service regions 1, 3, and 4—the Northern, Southwestern, and 

Intermountain regions, respectively—because these three Forest Service 

regions received about 76 percent of the agency’s rehabilitation funds in 

fiscal years 2001 and 2002. We used April 2003 as our cut-off date because 

this date includes the most recent data available to respond to your 

request. 

In summary, we found the following:

• The Forest Service relied exclusively on timber sale funding, and did not 

use wildland fire rehabilitation funding, for implementing and awarding 

timber sale contracts to have timber removed from burnt land. As of 

April 2003, 88 timber sale contracts had been implemented and awarded 

to remove timber from burnt land in Forest Service regions 1, 3, and 4. 

• According to the Forest Service, it has timber removed from burnt land 

for several reasons—to reduce hazardous fuels, recover the economic 

value of the timber, protect public health and safety, and restore 

vegetation. While the Forest Service cited one primary reason for having 

timber removed for 69 of the contracts, it cited multiple reasons for 19 

contracts. 

In responding to a draft of this letter, the Forest Service agreed with the 

factual contents of the letter and provided us several technical changes that 

we incorporated, as appropriate. 

Background The Forest Service relies primarily on two types of contracts to remove 

trees—service contracts and timber sale contracts. Service contracts are 

used to remove and dispose of trees that have little or no commercial value. 

In contrast, timber sale contracts are used to remove and sell trees that are 

considered to have commercial value. Both service contracts and timber 

sale contracts are generally competitively bid. Winning contractors on 

service contracts are paid by the Forest Service to remove and dispose of 

trees, while winning contractors on timber sale contracts pay the Forest 

Service an agreed-upon price to remove and sell timber from land in the 
Page 3 GAO-03-808R Forest Service Burnt Timber Removal Efforts

National Forest System. A timber sale contract involves two phases—a 

planning phase and an implementation and award phase. The planning 

phase includes two steps: (1) initial planning and (2) project analysis and 

design, including appropriate environmental analysis and documentation. 

The implementation and award phase includes four steps: (1) preparing for 

the timber sale, (2) advertising the sale, (3) opening the bid(s), and (4) 

awarding the contract. 

The Forest Service has several funding sources available for selling timber. 

Its Salvage Sale Fund provides funding for selling dead, damaged, or down 

timber. Salvage sale funds are intended to cover the costs of preparing for 

and supervising the removal of timber damaged through natural events 

such as insect infestation, strong winds, and wildland fires. The Forest 

Service uses salvage sale funds for timber sales whose sole or primary 

purpose is to salvage dead or dying trees, as well as those portions of sales 

that include salvage timber. In addition to the salvage sale fund, the Forest 

Service can use National Forest System and, in particular, forest product 

monies,1

 for timber sales that have no salvage component. A timber sale 

that includes both healthy and dead or dying trees may be funded entirely 

with forest product monies, or the funding may be split between forest 

product monies and salvage sale funds, in proportion to the healthy and 

salvage components of the sale. 

In response to the 2000 wildland fire season, the administration asked 

USDA and the Department of the Interior to recommend how best to 

respond to the fires and how to reduce the effects of such fires in the 

future.2

 The resulting report—the National Fire Plan—recommended 

increased funding for several key activities, including rehabilitating burnt 

land. USDA’s Office of Inspector General’s report on the Forest Service’s 

implementation of the National Fire Plan included a review of, among other 

things, rehabilitation projects at the Bitterroot National Forest in Montana.3

1

The Forest Service is in the process of revising its handbook on the terminology used for 

categorizing funding sources. One of the revisions is the use of the term “forest product” in 

lieu of “timber sales management” as a funding source. This funding source is to be used for 

expenses necessary to prepare National Forest System timber for sale and for expenses 

necessary to administer timber sales from the date of award to closing. 

2

We did not include the Department of the Interior in our review because it was not a basis 

for your request. 

3

USDA, Office of Inspector General, Forest Service National Fire Plan Implementation, 

Western Region Audit Report No. 08601-26-SF (Washington, D.C.: November 2001).
Page 4 GAO-03-808R Forest Service Burnt Timber Removal Efforts

In reviewing an environmental analysis that the forest selected to fund, 

which was an analysis of alternative rehabilitation treatments, the Office of 

Inspector General noted that the environmental analysis contained, as an 

alternative treatment, salvaging timber burned by wildland fires during the 

2000 season. While the Office of Inspector General did not question the use 

of rehabilitation funds for conducting the environmental analysis of 

alternative treatments, it had concerns as to whether rehabilitation funds 

should be used on projects whose primary purpose was selling timber. 

According to the Forest Service, because the environmental analysis had 

not been completed for activities on the Bitterroot National Forest, and 

because projects such as timber sales had not been selected for 

implementation, the Forest Service had not used rehabilitation funds to 

plan or administer a commercial timber sale on the forest. 

The Forest Service 

Relied on Timber Sale 

Funds to Have Timber 

Removed from Burnt 

Land

From January 2000 through April 2003, the three Forest Service regions we 

reviewed used timber sale funding to implement and award 88 timber sale 

contracts for removing timber from burnt land. The 88 contracts were 

valued at about $8 million to remove and sell about 279,000 hundred cubic 

feet of timber. 4

 Of these contracts, 78 were financed with salvage sale 

funds, while 10 were financed with forest product monies. Forests in

region 1—the Northern Region—awarded most of these contracts, as 

shown in table 1. No rehabilitation funds were used to carry out these 

activities. (The enclosure to this letter provides more detailed information 

on the timber sale contracts awarded by the three regions and the sources 

of funding that they used.) 

4

The Forest Service estimates that in 1998, an average sized single-family home consisting of 

2,190 square feet of living area required about 1,730 cubic feet of wood products to 

construct. USDA, Forest Service, Domestic Market Activity in Solid Wood Products in the 

United States, 1950-1998, PNW-GTR-524 (Portland, Oreg.: 2002). 
Page 5 GAO-03-808R Forest Service Burnt Timber Removal Efforts

Table 1: Number of Contracts Funded, Source of Timber Sale Funding, Value of Contracts, and Timber Included in Contracts 

Used in Regions 1, 3, and 4 to Have Timber Removed from Land Burned during 2000, 2001, and 2002, as of April 2003

Source: USDA’s Forest Service.

According to Forest Service officials, either salvage sale funds or forest 

product monies are to be used for implementing and awarding timber sale 

contracts. This approach is consistent with the Forest Service’s “primary 

purpose policy,” which the Forest Service adopted in fiscal year 2000. The 

policy requires that the Forest Service fund an activity, including any 

associated coordination or support activities, from the designated source 

of funding—the budget line item—as provided by Congress. If no specific 

budget line item exists to fund the activity, then the activity is to be funded 

according to the primary purpose or objective of the activity. Because 

timber sales have designated sources of funding, these sources are to be 

used. 

The use of forest product monies was limited to those timber sales where 

salvage sale funds were not available or where the timber being sold did 

not qualify for such funding. For example, according to region 1’s Gallatin 

National Forest in Montana, it used forest product monies to administer 

two contracts for removing timber from land burned by the 2001 Purdy and 

Fridley fires because the forest had no funds available in its salvage sale 

fund. A forester at region 1’s Helena National Forest in Montana said that 

this forest used forest product monies to administer two contracts used to 

remove and sell timber on land burned by the 2000 Maudlow Toston and 

Cave Gulch fires because the timber did not meet the requirements for 

using salvage sale funds. The timber being sold was healthy prior to the 

sale, as opposed to being dead or dying. The healthy timber was quickly 

felled and sold in advance of the fires to create fire lines intended to slow 

or stop the fires. 

Number of contracts funded with 

timber sale funding

Region

Salvage sale 

funds 

Forest

product monies Value of contracts

Timber included in the contracts 

(hundred cubic feet)

1 60 10 $7,289,751 231,005

3 11 0 322,797 35,719

4 7 0 447,159 12,348

Total 78 10 $8,059,707 279,072
Page 6 GAO-03-808R Forest Service Burnt Timber Removal Efforts

Even though none of these sales were funded during the implementation 

and award phase with funds other than those from timber sales, under 

certain circumstances the Forest Service could have used other funding 

sources, such as wildland fire rehabilitation funds, in the planning phase 

associated with the sales. During the planning phase, the Forest Service 

may have to conduct an environmental analysis, such as an environmental 

impact statement, before deciding on the need for and extent of a sale. The 

environmental analysis, however, may include numerous proposed 

activities, only one of which may be a timber sale. Depending on the 

purpose of and need for the environmental analysis, under the Forest 

Service’s primary purpose policy adopted in fiscal year 2000, funding 

sources other than salvage sale or forest product may have funded the 

analysis. For example, if the purpose of and need for the environmental 

analysis was wildland fire rehabilitation, those monies could be used.5

 Of 

the 88 contracts, 38 required the preparation of an environmental impact 

statement.6

 It is not known if funds other than salvage sale funds or forest 

product monies were used to fund planning activities because the Forest 

Service’s accounting system does not track actual sale-by-sale planning or 

implementation and award costs.7

The Forest Service 

Cited a Variety of 

Objectives for Having 

Timber Removed from 

Burnt Land

The Forest Service cited a variety of objectives for having timber removed 

from burnt land. While it cited one primary objective for having timber 

removed for 69 of the contracts, it cited more than one objective for the 

remaining 19 contracts. The most frequently cited objective was to reduce 

hazardous fuels. Table 2 provides information on the primary objective 

cited for having timber removed. (The enclosure to this letter also includes 

more detailed information on the specific objective[s] cited.)

5

According to a Forest Service budget official, the Forest Service is considering developing 

guidance for allocating the cost associated with completing an environmental analysis to 

different programs and budget line items if the environmental analysis includes multiple 

proposed actions that have more than one purpose and need.

6

One environmental impact statement at a national forest could result in multiple timber 

sale contracts. 

7

We reported on the Forest Service’s tracking of salvage sale costs in Forest Service: Actions 

Needed to Ensure That Salvage Sale Fund Is Adequately Managed, GAO/RCED-97-228

(Washington, D.C.: Sept. 26, 1997). 
Page 7 GAO-03-808R Forest Service Burnt Timber Removal Efforts

Table 2: Primary Objective Cited by Regions 1, 3, and 4 for Having Timber Removed 

from Land Burned in 2000, 2001, and 2002

Source: USDA’s Forest Service.

Scope and 

Methodology

To conduct this review, we requested information from the Forest Service 

on contracts awarded to have timber removed from land that burned in 

Forest Service regions 1, 3, and 4—the Northern, Southwestern, and 

Intermountain regions, respectively—as of April 2003. We limited our 

request to these three regions because they accounted for about 76 percent 

of the funding provided to the Forest Service for rehabilitation in fiscal 

years 2001 and 2002. We also limited our request to contracts awarded to 

remove timber from land burned by wildland fires that occurred in 

calendar years 2000, 2001, and 2002 because the National Fire Plan, 

adopted in fiscal year 2001, began to provide additional funds for wildland 

fire activity, including reducing hazardous fuels and rehabilitating burnt 

land. We asked for the number of contracts awarded by national forest and 

wildland fire name, the funding source used for the contract, the type of 

contract, the acreage included in the wildland fire and the contract, the 

value of the contract, and the amount of material that could be removed 

under the terms of the contract. We did not request information on the 

source of funding that the Forest Service may have used in advance of 

awarding the timber sale contracts, such as funding used to conduct any 

required environmental analyses because, as previously noted, USDA’s 

accounting system does not track actual sale-by-sale planning or 

implementation and award costs. 

We also requested data on the primary objective for removing the timber. In 

addition, we met with officials from the Forest Service, including 

representatives from Forest and Rangeland Management, Policy and 

Budget Analysis, and the wildland fire rehabilitation program. We did not 

independently verify the accuracy of the reported data or otherwise 

Primary objective Region 1 Region 3 Region 4 Total

Reduce hazardous fuels 29 0 0 29

Recover economic value of the 

timber

12 10 1 23

Protect public health and safety 7 1 6 14

Restore vegetation 3 0 0 3

Multiple objectives 19 0 0 19

Total 70 11 7 88
Page 8 GAO-03-808R Forest Service Burnt Timber Removal Efforts

independently review contract administration or financial management 

data. However, we contacted officials within selected national forests to 

clarify data provided to us on the types of contracts and funding sources 

used. We conducted our work between April and June 2003 in accordance 

with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Agency Comments We provided a draft of this letter to the Secretary of Agriculture for review 

and comment and obtained oral comments from the Forest Service. In 

commenting on the draft, the Forest Service’s National Forest System 

Budget Coordinator and the Director of Forest and Rangeland stated that 

they agreed with the factual contents of the letter. The Forest Service also 

provided us several technical changes that we incorporated into the letter, 

as appropriate. 

As arranged with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents 

earlier, we plan no further distribution of this letter until 14 days after the 

date of this letter. At that time, we will send copies of this letter to 

interested congressional committees and others upon request. In addition, 

the letter will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at 

http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff have any questions about this letter, please call me at 

(202) 512-3841 or Chester Janik, Assistant Director, at (202) 512-6508. 

Major contributors to this letter include Marcia Brouns McWreath. 

Sincerely yours,

Barry T. Hill

Director, Natural Resources and Environment

Enclosure
Page 9 GAO-03-808R Forest Service Burnt Timber Removal Efforts

Enclosure

Forest Service Regions 1, 3, and 4 Timber 

Removal Contracts for Land Burned in 

Calendar Years 2000-2002 Encolsure

Information on Contracts Awarded by Forest Service Regions 1, 3, and 4 to Have Timber Removed from National Forest System 

Land Burned by Calendar Year 2000, 2001, or 2002 Wildland Fires, as of April 2003

National 

forest Fire name

Total 

acres 

burned 

by the 

fire

Acreage 

included

in the 

contract(s)

Contract 

type (and 

number of 

contracts) 

Contract 

value

Timber 

included in the 

contract(s) 

(hundred 

cubic feet)

Funding 

source

Primary objective for 

removing timber 

REGION 1

BeaverheadDeerlodgeMussigbrod 46,681 473 Timber sale 

(1)

$216,792 7,561 Salvage 

sale fund

Public health and 

safety

Mussigbrod 31 Timber sale 

(1) 

8,032 504 Salvage 

sale fund

Public health and 

safety

Mussigbrod 1 Timber sale 

(1) 

5,992 93 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce fuels

Mussigbrod 14 Timber sale 

(2) 

448 167 Salvage 

sale fund

Restore vegetation

Mussigbrod 5 Timber sale 

(10)

100 26 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce fuels

Middle Fork 5,000 14 Timber sale 

(1)

4,396 303 Salvage 

sale fund

Public health and 

safety

Middle Fork 1 Timber sale 

(1)

20,418 221 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce fuels

Bitterroot Blodgett 11,276 415 Timber 

salea

 (1)

12,294 3,034 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce fuels

Skalkaho 

Complex

55,252 910 Timber 

salea

 (1)

8,184 6,600 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce fuels

Skalkaho 

Complex

920 Timber sale 

(1)

42,777 10,780 Forest 

product 

monies

Reduce fuels

Skalkaho 

Complex

1,650 Timber sale 

(2)

278,519 17,693 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce fuels

Valley 

Complex

172,030 2,375 Timber 

salea

 (2)

84,246 14,073 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce fuels

Valley 

Complex

794 Timber sale 

(3) 

19,976 1,734 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce fuels

Valley 

Complex

2,516 Timber sale 

(5) 

304,410 17,884 Forest 

product 

monies

Reduce fuels

Clearwater Crooked 2,673 2 Timber sale 

(1) 

2,747 34 Salvage 

sale fund

Public health and 

safety

Flathead Moose 35,380 310 Timber sale 

(1)

117,557 1,418 Salvage 

sale fund

Public health and 

safety
Enclosure

Forest Service Regions 1, 3, and 4 Timber 

Removal Contracts for Land Burned in 

Calendar Years 2000-2002

Page 10 GAO-03-808R Forest Service Burnt Timber Removal Efforts

Moose 1,896 Timber sale 

(3) 

700,913 26,999 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce fuels, recover 

economic value, 

restore vegetation

Gallatin Purdy 3,621 19 Timber sale 

(1)

1,661 195 Forest 

product 

monies

Public health and 

safety

Fridley 15,577 77 Timber sale 

(1)

64,213 1,200b Forest 

product 

monies

Restore vegetation

Helena Maudlow 

Toston

10,678 1,700 Timber sale 

(1)

542,358 17,876 Salvage 

sale fund

Recover economic 

value

Maudlow 

Toston

40 Timber sale 

(1) 

57,335 287 Forest 

product 

monies

Reduce fuels

Cave Gulch 27,659 490 Timber sale 

(1)

173,137 4,909 Salvage 

sale fund

Recover economic 

value

Cave Gulch 10 Timber sale 

(1) 

5,500 74 Forest 

product 

monies

Reduce fuels

Kootenai Stone Hill 10,960 1,407 Timber sale 

(4)

811,554 16,615 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce fuels, recover 

economic value, 

restore vegetation, 

improve watershed 

health

Stone Hill 52 Timber sale 

(3) 

103,964 1,030 Salvage 

sale fund

Recover economic 

value

Lydia 

Mountain

5,434 1,603 Timber sale 

(3)

1,611,813 23,268 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce fuels, recover 

economic value, 

restore vegetation, 

improve watershed 

health

Lydia 

Mountain

22 Timber sale 

(2) 

69,388 618 Salvage 

sale fund

Recover economic 

value

Young J 825 406 Timber sale 

(1) 

57,832 5,698 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce fuels, recover 

economic value, 

improve watershed 

health

Young J 2 Timber sale 

(1) 

15,249 211 Salvage 

sale fund

Recover economic 

value

Cliff Point 6,627 17 Timber sale 

(2) 

81,505 652 Salvage 

sale fund

Recover economic 

value

(Continued From Previous Page)

National 

forest Fire name

Total 

acres 

burned 

by the 

fire

Acreage 

included 

in the 

contract(s)

Contract 

type (and 

number of 

contracts) 

Contract 

value

Timber 

included in the 

contract(s) 

(hundred 

cubic feet)

Funding 

source

Primary objective for 

removing timber 
Enclosure

Forest Service Regions 1, 3, and 4 Timber 

Removal Contracts for Land Burned in 

Calendar Years 2000-2002

Page 11 GAO-03-808R Forest Service Burnt Timber Removal Efforts

Cliff Point 30 Timber sale 

(1) 

8,742 109 Salvage 

sale fund

Public health and 

safety

Upper 

Beaver

9,017 675 Timber sale 

(2) 

433,501 8,187 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce hazardous 

fuels, recover 

economic value, 

restore vegetation, 

improve watershed 

health, promote old 

forest, provide access, 

maintain wildlife 

security, public health 

and safety

Kelsey 

Creek

2,769 473 Timber sale 

(4)c

644,190 10,174 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce hazardous 

fuels, recover 

economic value, 

restore vegetation, 

improve watershed 

health, promote old 

forest, provide access, 

maintain wildlife 

security, public health 

and safety

Lewis and 

Clark

Lost Fork 2,323 739 Timber sale 

(1)

143,160 5,349 Salvage 

sale fund

Recover economic 

value

Lolo Landowner 5,700 568 Timber sale 

(1)

122,907 8,599 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce fuels, restore 

vegetation

Idaho 

Gulch

9,500 49 Timber sale 

(1)

24,461 434 Salvage 

sale fund

Reduce fuels, recover 

economic value, 

restore vegetation, 

improve watershed 

health

Nez Perce Burnt Flats 22,500 800 Timber sale 

(1) 

489,480 16,396 Salvage 

sale fund

Recover economic 

value

REGION 3

Kaibab Pumpkin 16,000 35 Timber sale 

(1)

 3,112 130 Salvage 

sale fund

Public health and 

safety

Stooge 

Complex

570 228 Timber sale 

(1)

 204,300 2,043 Salvage 

sale fund

Recover economic 

value

Hidden 464 232 Timber sale 

(1)

80,000 1,011 Salvage 

sale fund

Recover economic 

value

Lincoln Cree 8,000 500 Timber sale 

(1)

 1,900d 1,900 Salvage 

sale fund

Recover economic 

value

(Continued From Previous Page)

National 

forest Fire name

Total 

acres 

burned 

by the 

fire

Acreage 

included 

in the 

contract(s)

Contract 

type (and 

number of 

contracts) 

Contract 

value

Timber 

included in the 

contract(s) 

(hundred 

cubic feet)

Funding 

source

Primary objective for 

removing timber 
Enclosure

Forest Service Regions 1, 3, and 4 Timber 

Removal Contracts for Land Burned in 

Calendar Years 2000-2002

Page 12 GAO-03-808R Forest Service Burnt Timber Removal Efforts

Source: USDA’s Forest Service.

a

The timber sale contract includes a service component. Under the terms of the contract, the 

contractor removes and sells timber, a portion of which is in exchange for agreed-upon services 

provided to the Forest Service, such as reducing hazardous fuels. Congress authorized these 

contracts, which are termed “stewardship” contracts.

b

This volume is over and above that volume agreed to in a previously-approved sale of healthy, green 

trees that were being sold to finance a land exchange with a private company. A portion of the healthy, 

green trees that were to have been sold to finance the land exchange were burned in the Friday Fire.

c

Included in these contracts is timber that was burned in the Roderick South fire.

d

This reflects a value of $1 per hundred cubic feet.

e

In addition, the contractor is paying an equal amount for, among other things, road maintenance.

Penasco 1,600 300 Timber sale 

(1)

 4,750 1,900 Salvage 

sale fund 

Recover economic 

value

Scott Able 16,000 740 Timber sale 

(4)

8,537d 8,537 Salvage 

sale fund

Recover economic 

value

Santa Fe Viveash 30,000 1,800 Timber sale 

(2)

 20,198d,e 20,198 Salvage 

sale fund

Recover economic 

value

REGION 4

Boise Trail Creek 32,000 95 Timber sale 

(3)

3,700 90 Salvage 

sale fund

Public health and 

safety

SalmonChallisClear 

Creek 

208,000 260 Timber sale 

(3) 

404,935 8,800 Salvage 

sale fund

Public health and 

safety

Clear 

Creek 

534 Timber sale 

(1) 

38,524 3,458 Salvage 

sale fund

Recover economic 

value

(Continued From Previous Page)

National 

forest Fire name

Total 

acres 

burned 

by the 

fire

Acreage 

included 

in the 

contract(s)

Contract 

type (and 

number of 

contracts) 

Contract 

value

Timber 

included in the 

contract(s) 

(hundred 

cubic feet)

Funding 

source

Primary objective for 

removing timber 

(360329)
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
GAO’s Mission The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of 

Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional 

responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of the 

federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public 

funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, 

recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed 

oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government 

is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is 

through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older 

products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents 

using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety, 

including charts and other graphics.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site 

daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail 

this list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to 

e-mail alerts” under the “Order GAO Products” heading.

Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. A 

check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of Documents. 

GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to 

a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to:

U.S. General Accounting Office

441 G Street NW, Room LM

Washington, D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Public Affairs Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548