Logging on the National Forests provides less than 5% of the nation's timber supply, but costs the taxpayers more than 1 billion dollars in subsidies every year.  Nor is logging a good job provider compared to recreation, which by Forest Service estimates provides over 30 times the economic benefits of logging.   These forests are the last remnants of the virgin forests that covered the country, and now have far more value as forest ecosystems, watershed/water supply protection, and  recreational assets than for logging.  In fact, the justification for the Weeks Act in 1911 which established national forests in the east, was watershed protection.
    (A major barrier to the Forest Service changing its ways is that these increased recreational economic benefits flow into the local economy, not to the Forest Service itself, whereas extractive uses of the national forests contribute directly to Forest Service budgets.) 

    Our nation is engaged in a great debate over the real purpose of our national forests, with the weight of public opinion swinging more and more strongly toward preservation.  Certainly this nation should not be subsidizing logging when it is clear that we understand so little about the functioning of these enormously complex and ancient forest ecosystems that provide millions of people with clean air and water, as well as homes for  a myriad of plants and wildlife that can live nowhere else.
    Your congressperson needs to hear from you on this issue.