Stop regeneration logging near New Castle in Craig County
Eastern Highlands Vegetation Management Project
U.S. Forest Service· George Washington and Jefferson National Forests, Eastern Divide Ranger DistrictU.S. Forest Service project page ↗
Forest ServiceWe track this on the agency’s own system of record, where most on-the-ground decisions live.

The groups on this fight
4 groups work Virginia
By footprint, from the same match the STAND matchmaker runs; none is linked to this decision in our record yet. Give straight to them; nothing routes through us.
- Friends of Shenandoah Mountain
Works Virginia: they work only in Virginia.
- Friends of the Blue Ridge Parkway
Works Virginia: virginia is one of the 2 states they work in.
- Potomac Appalachian Trail Club
Works Virginia: virginia is one of the 4 states they work in.
- Shenandoah National Park Trust
Works Virginia: they work only in Virginia.
Every group above is on STAND for Public Lands, with its court record, its filings and who backs it.
The Forest Service proposes logging, herbicide use, and temporary road construction across 1,059 acres near New Castle, Virginia.
What’s at risk
Up to 1,059 acres of the George Washington and Jefferson National Forests face regeneration harvests, herbicide treatments, and new temporary roads. These activities can disturb wildlife habitat, compact soils, and introduce lasting changes to forest structure on the Eastern Divide Ranger District.
If this goes through
Regeneration harvests, herbicide applications, and temporary road construction would proceed across 1,059 acres, with road and soil disturbance effects that may persist long after project completion.
Our plain-English read of the official notice ↗. Check it against the agency’s own words below.
3 holes in the agency’s own analysis
What the public could have raised, from the agency’s own document
- I oppose this action as proposed, and I ask the agency to weigh the specific harms below.
- Public scoping specifically raised karst and sinkhole risk as a project issue requiring explicit analysis because the area has a high concentration of sink holes, yet the Soils and Watersheds chapter contains no discussion of karst features, sinkhole density, or groundwater/cave connectivity anywhere in the effects analysis. The agency should directly analyze karst and sinkhole risk in the Soils and Watersheds section as the scoping comment requested, or explain why it was dismissed.
- Table 10 shows that even after implementing the full proposed harvest in the Wildlife Road working area, early successional habitat would reach only 9.2 percent (315 acres), still short of the Forest Plan's stated minimum desired condition of 10 percent (341 acres) for objective 8B-OBJ1. The EA's own text concedes this shortfall by saying the action will merely 'bring us close to meeting objective 1' rather than meet it. The agency should explain why a proposed action justified by the need to reach Forest Plan desired conditions is designed to fall short of the plan's own minimum threshold, or increase treatment acreage to actually meet the objective.
- The entire project is framed as a response to an Emergency Determination issued under a Secretary's Memorandum implementing Executive Order 14225 for expanded timber production, yet the EA does not explain how this emergency designation affects the scope of alternatives considered, the level of analysis required, or why only two alternatives (action and no action) were carried forward. Given the scale of harvest (1,059 acres of commercial treatment, 4.38 miles of new temporary road, 80 log landings), the agency should clarify how the emergency determination altered the normal range-of-alternatives requirement and justify why no intermediate action alternative was developed.
- Say something only you can say. The law requires the agency to consider and respond to substantive comments, and specifics are what make a comment substantive.
In the agency’s own words
Forest health improvement project across 1,059 acres near New Castle in Craig County, Virginia. Proposed treatments include regeneration harvests, manual site preparation, herbicide treatments for invasive or undesirable vegetation, and construction and use of temporary roads.
The reporting behind this
From More Than Just ParksAfter more than a decade chasing peak color across America, we built the foliage map we always wanted.
Another foreign mining company wants a piece of America’s public lands. This one comes with millions of gallons of groundwater pumping and radioactive radon.
A few dozen names most Americans have never learned hold more power over America’s greatest landscapes than almost anyone in Washington. They’re counting on you not to learn them.
More actions that need you
Go deeper, free
See how your members of Congress vote on public lands
Every representative, graded on the votes that decide the fate of parks, forests, and refuges.
Open ↗The mapSee the places under active threat
A live map of the parks, monuments, and wild country in the crosshairs right now.
Open ↗A wrong fact, a dead link, a form that wouldn’t take your letter: one tap and it comes to the people who build PLAN, with this fight attached.
Know an open comment period we are missing, or spotted a wrong deadline? .
