Randy Moore Retires

[J_Woulfe]

After weeks of complete radio silence from the Chief and Regional Foresters, Rando Moore, Chief of the US Forest Service, sent out an email today to all employees wishing them well and announcing his retirement. His has not been a very strong leader throughout his tenure, and his retirement adds more uncertainty to an agency already troubled by a seasonal hiring pause and layoffs of probationary employees.

 

[WesternCO68]

The new chief is an outsider and former timber industry exec. I’m gonna withhold judgment. I’m not against the timber industry by any means.

 

[BuzzH]

Like his ties to my alma mater and Wyoming.

 

[BigHornRam]

https://idahocapitalsun.com/2025/02/27/usda-secretary-appoints-idahoan-tom-schultz-to-serve-as-u-s-forest-service-chief/

 

[TheTone]

Based on background I’d guess cutting timber will be a high priority

 

[JEL]

I worked with/for Tom Schultz. He is a solid dude. I was happy to see him get the position. Gonna be a challenge.

 

[WesternCO68]

Based on background I’d guess cutting timber will be a high priority

That's fine with me. I don't always agree with how much cutting happens (the recent history of the Black Hills, for example), but even some over-harvesting here and there isn't the end of the world. The thing I like is that he doesn't seem like the kind of guy you'd appoint if you simply wanted to dismantle the agency.

 

[Wild Bill]

That's fine with me. I don't always agree with how much cutting happens (the recent history of the Black Hills, for example), but even some over-harvesting here and there isn't the end of the world. The thing I like is that he doesn't seem like the kind of guy you'd appoint if you simply wanted to dismantle the agency.

To be clear, are you advocating for more or less cutting in the Black Hills? I’m an SD guy and not a timber expert, but as far as I can see the hills timber industry is on life support and the forest itself needs a tremendous amount of thinning.
More cutting wouldn’t be the end of the world, if you axe me.

 

[WesternCO68]

To be clear, are you advocating for more or less cutting in the Black Hills? I’m an SD guy and not a timber expert, but as far as I can see the hills timber industry is on life support and the forest itself needs a tremendous amount of thinning.
More cutting wouldn’t be the end of the world, if you axe me.

Parts of the forest need thinning, for sure. But I can say from experience that a lot of stands that look pretty dense from a distance are a lot thinner when you get into them. You can definitely get more timber out, but there won't be much left for the next generation. We want to be able to go back into stands at regular intervals instead of blowing it all out in one go.

Ecologically, I don't worry too much about over-cutting. The bigger concern is taking too much and making it so that logging has to be virtually shut down for a generation or two in order to replenish the supply of sawtimber.

Some people dispute the numbers, but I've seen the data and agree with the official line that the amount of sawtimber being removed until just a year or two ago was not sustainable. The timber target was reduced a couple of years ago, and I know industry is feeling the squeeze. I expect the target to go back up under the new administration.

There's a balance between keeping the local timber industry alive and meeting the legal requirement to be able to supply timber in perpetuity. It's a really hard call, because losing industry is really bad for Forest Service timber operations in addition to all the harm done to the local community.

Just trying to explain it from a forester's perspective. There are other valid viewpoints as well that are worth listening to.