Public Lands Collaboration: Building on Success and Addressing the Gaps

Event Summary

2026 Forest Collaborative Workshop Summary

Coeur d’Alene, ID April 8, 2026

The 2026 Forest Collaborative Workshop, co-hosted by the Idaho Forest Restoration Partnership (IFRP) and the Montana Forest Collaboration Network (MFCN), was held over two days, April 7 and 8, at The Coeur d'Alene Resort in Coeur d'Alene, ID. The event welcomed over 90 individual attendees, representing more than 50 organizations from both Idaho and Montana. Speakers included a wide range of professionals, from government agency representatives, collaborative groups, and industry partners, to students studying natural resources. The workshop focused on advancing collaborative forest management in Idaho and Montana, addressing critical challenges related to federal capacity, funding uncertainty, and adapting to new policy directives, while emphasizing innovative contracting and integrating recreation with restoration efforts.

Panels and speakers included:

• Keynote Address (Forest Service Priorities & Policies): Tom Schultz, United States Forest Service

• State of the Forest & Wildfire Forecast (Shared Stewardship Agreements): Wyatt Frampton (Montana), Archie Gray (IDL), Moderated by Steve Kimball (MFCN)

• Moving Policy to Action on National Forests: Ben Johnson (Lolo NF), Tim Gilloon (Idaho Panhandle NF), Jon Word (Nez Perce-Clearwater NF), Moderated by Tera King (IFRP)

• Collaborative Adaptation to Changing Policies: Steve Daniels & Gregg Walker

• Collaborative Groups Speed Sharing: Moderated by John Robison (IFRP)

• Industry Retention and Forest Service Innovations: Kevin Hake (Nez Perce-Clearwater NF), Josh White (Colville NF),

• Good Neighbor Authority Agreements: Jon Songster (IDL), Ben Johnson (USFS)

• The Role for Recreation in Restoration: Liz Bridges (ITA/Boise Forest Coalition), Zach Angstead (Wild Montana/KFSC), Jim Burchfield (Lolo Restoration Committee)

• Future Outlook on Natural Resources (Student Panel): Bryce Smith (UM), Katie Russ (UI), Christine Whitehorse (UI)

A primary concern across all levels was the significant and accelerating reduction in federal resources.

• Budget and Workforce Constraints: The Forest Service is experiencing significant staff and capacity constraints. Federal funding is uncertain, with projected cuts of 4% in FY26 and 5% in FY27. High fixed costs are forcing difficult decisions on operational capacity.

• Funding Uncertainty: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) funding, which has supported the Montana Forest Collaboration Network (MFCN) and other agreements, is expected to be exhausted within about one year, with federal agencies not anticipating additional contributions. Funding and support for individual collaboratives through NFF is also being reduced.

• Organizational Restructuring: The USFS re-organization has begun, including moving the Headquarters and USFS Chief’s office to Salt Lake City, Utah, and moving decision-making authority closer to the ground (rangers and district staff), eliminating the 9Regional offices, and closing several research stations and consolidating research staff into existing federal buildings. Supervisors are also changing their reporting structure to the Chief of Staff. Additionally, the USFS is transitioning to a state director model that will oversee the Forest Supervisors, similar to how the BLM currently is organized. No changes will be made until after the 2026 fire season.

2. Policy Adaptation and Pace

New guidance is forcing a rapid cultural transformation within the Forest Service and requiring partners to change how they engage.

• NEPA Implementation: New regulated timelines impose a one-year clock for project completion and shorten or eliminate formal public comment opportunities. Collaboratives that want to be involved in project development will need to focus on early engagement and“front-load collaboration” with the Forest Service . Collaboratives may also wish to work with the Forest Service in the development of  five-year program of work.

• Public Involvement: Without the normal public involvement process, collaboratives may need to serve as more of a liaison for communications between members of the public and the Forest Service. .

• Culture Change and Gaps: There is a need to transform organizational culture to manage internal expectations and partner relations. Fiscal constraints are creating tension with ambitious new policy directives.

3. Innovative Contracting Models and Shared Stewardship

State and federal partners highlighted innovative contracting to increase the scale and pace of work.

• A-Z Contracting: This new approach to stewardship contracting was pioneered on the Colville National Forest as a way to meet the pace and scale of restoration needed on the Forest. The model involves bundling planning and pre-sale work into a single instrument with timber harvest and service activities such that the contractor carries the cost of all pre-implementation work, including NEPA, through final project completion. The Forest Service retains decision-making authority. This approach successfully increased treatment acres from 4,000–6,000 annually to 35,000–45,000 acres over a decade.

• G-Z Contracting: This model retains the Forest Service as the lead on project design, NEPA and decision-making, and then contracts out the implementation after the decision is made.

• Good Neighbor Authority (GNA) Success: Idaho's program has statewide coverage and key Forest Service are co-located at IDL offices. Montana's program is consolidating 15 separate agreements into one 20-year statewide master agreement.

• GNA Challenges: New, restrictive terms and conditions are being imposed by USDA (44 pages effective January 2025) which are raising "big concerns" among state forestry groups.

• Timber Industry Viability: Supervisors emphasized maintaining a consistent workload to support industry planning and stability. However, Montana reported losing approximately 100 million bf in timber processing capacity due to five large mill closures, impacting implementation capacity.

4. Integrating Recreation and Restoration

The role of recreationists as a political constituency and on-the-ground resource was a key theme.

• Dominant Use Pattern: Recreation is a dominant use of national forests, with a high percentage of residents using public lands. However, active participation in planning processes is low (around 2% of recreationists).

• Project Effects on Recreationists: Depending on project design, project implementation activities can have positive or negative effects on recreationists. Upon completion, a healthier and more fire-resistant forest should generally enhance recreation opportunities.

• Value of Recreationists: Recreation constituencies can provide valuable information during project design to improve project effectiveness and minimize impacts. Recreationists can also help provide social license for forest management programs. Collaboratives successfully mitigated fire risk and avoided litigation on the Wildfire Decker Missoula Project by gaining support from recreation users like mountain bikers and disc golfers.

5. Workforce Development and Skills Gaps

Graduate students identified necessary skills for future engagement.

• Critical Skills: Students identified science communication and grant writing as their most valuable skills. A major gap was in understanding contracting mechanisms, agreements, and federal agency processes.

• Engagement Strategies: Successful strategies include hiring students for specific fellowship and internship projects, utilizing university courses for project-based learning, and initiating connections between students and organizations.

• Mentorship: Experienced professionals were challenged to establish actual mentorship relationships to provide professional and personal development for early-career professionals.

Action Items

A variety of action items were identified across the participating groups to address the major challenges:

• Forest Supervisors: Continue developing five-year programs of work and shelf-ready projects to provide consistent workload and stability.

• State Forestry Agencies: Monitor and formally respond to the new USDA terms and conditions regarding Good Neighbor Authority (GNA) through the National Association of State Foresters. Finalize consolidated 2026 statewide GNA agreements in Montana and Idaho.

• Collaborative Groups:

• Identify and recruit underrepresented recreation groups (e.g., rock climbers, ATV users) to broaden stakeholder participation.

• Reach out early and often to get engaged with Forest Service projects. Reduced comment periods means front loading information & engagement is critical.

• Educational Institutions/Professionals:

• University programs should develop coursework in grant writing and federal contracting/agreement mechanisms to address student-identified skill gaps.

• Experienced professionals should establish formal mentorship programs for students and early-career professionals.