Forest Funds revert to 1908 law, slashing payments to Boundary County

Federal payments to Boundary County have dropped sharply this year following the expiration of the Secure Rural Schools Act, a program that for over two decades provided steady funding for the county’s Road and Bridge Department and local school maintenance projects.

Since 2000, the SRS Act compensated counties with large swaths of federal forest land using a formula based on historical timber revenues. For Boundary County, where about 60% of the land is national forest, SRS payments provided a reliable, inflation-adjusted average of $1.73 million per year, according to county records. The funding could go toward improving infrastructure and lowering the tax burden on maintenance and operations levies. 

With the law’s expiration, federal payments this year dropped to $413,837. 

“We budgeted for SRS, but we didn’t get SRS,” said Boundary County Treasurer Glenda Poston. "Now, we’re going to look at our budget and figure out how to save.” 

The Forest Funds system has now reverted to the original 1908 Forest Revenue Act, which sends counties 25% of the current year’s gross timber revenues generated from national forest lands within their borders.  

Unlike the SRS formula, these payments are directly tied to timber harvest levels, which fluctuate widely from year to year, depending on factors outside of local control, such as market changes and environmental protection litigation holdups. 

According to the Congressional Research Service, counties relying on the 1908 system saw average annual payment swings of 30% between 1985 and 2000, making it difficult for local governments to plan and budget effectively. 

Future of regional forest management, timber industry 

For the next two years, Boundary County will have zero new timber sales, according to the U.S. Forest Service, so Forest Funds will only be paid out for existing sales, which Boundary County commissioners say will not generate federal payments for very long. 

“We’re probably fine for the next couple years with the backlog that’s there,” said Commissioner Ben Robertson. “But if the Forest Service isn’t setting up anything new in the next two years, really the problem is three or four years in the future.” 

“We need to get Montana back online,” said Commissioner Tim Bertling. “The Three Rivers Ranger District is not producing anything. One of the reasons we’ve been getting some of our timber sales through in Boundary County is the Kootenai Valley Resource Initiative. If KVRI could have more of a presence over in Montana, we could combat these environmental groups that are currently litigating the sale over 100 million board feet.” 

 Satellite imaging shows the stark contrast of timber harvesting between Canada and northwest Montana.

The forestland in Montana is part of the wood basket supplied to the IFG mill in Moyie Springs. Commissioners said increased timber harvests benefit not just local industry, but also the environment. Large-scale industrial infrastructure encourages more harvests, which in turn supports forest management efforts like fuels reduction and habitat enhancement through sustainable logging — while also bolstering the local timber industry. 

“There is so much wealth out there with the timber in those mountains,” Roberston said. “Once we can harvest more, the federal reimbursement issue fixes itself. If the revenue is flowing, there is going to be plenty of money to go around. 

“But mother nature’s clear cut is much more severe. Wildfires do not discriminate.” 

Congressional effort to reinstate SRS 

On Feb. 3, U.S. Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, introduced the Secure Rural Schools Reauthorization Act of 2025 to extend the SRS Act of 2000. That day, it was read twice, then referred to the Committee of Energy and Natural Resources. 

“In Idaho alone, approximately $25 million in funding is distributed across 34 counties,” Crapo said in a public statement. “I am continuing to work with my congressional colleagues and affected stakeholders to ensure this legislation is passed into law.” 

But since Feb. 3, Congress has taken no action, even though the act received bipartisan support from 14 Democrats, 11 Republicans and one independent.  

“Representatives in Washington don’t understand Forest Funds,” said Bertling, who has traveled to the nation’s capital twice in the last two years to discuss SRS with U.S. Congressmen. “Many states don't have any federal ground. It's all private, so they get property tax from it. They get tax from that, where we get pennies on the acre for national land." 

Despite the gap in understanding the commissioners describe, there is optimism for rural counties across the nation with strong ties to the timber industry. Tom Schultz, a former Idaho Forest Group executive, was named the Chief of the U.S. Forest Service in February. 

“Hopefully Tom Shultz can put people in place, where they can actually manage and do what they need to do for our forests,” Bertling said.