Impacts to forests, woodlands, and forest products would result from surface-disturbing activity or actions that increase the chance of catastrophic wildfire or degrade forest health through increased erosion and disease. Surface disturbance would adversely affect forests and woodlands under all alternatives, but would have the greatest impact under Alternative C, followed by alternatives D, A, and B. Alternative C would also place the least restrictions on motorized vehicle use and new road construction, which, in addition to increasing erosion, would increase the risk of unplanned ignitions and unauthorized woodcutting that would degrade forest health. Beneficial impacts to forests and woodlands would result from more intense forest management practices and silvicultural treatments that would improve forest health and reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires, which pose the greatest threat to forests and woodlands. Forests products would also benefit from similar treatments that increase the availability of commercially viable stands. Alternative C, followed by alternatives D, A, and B, implements the largest number of silvicultural practices and other treatments to actively manage forests and woodlands. Beneficial impacts would also result from management actions that restrict surface-disturbing activities within certain specially managed areas, such as ACECs, where forests and woodlands are present. However, such actions may also limit silvicultural treatments in certain areas. Alternative B manages the most acres of forests and woodlands within ACECs followed by alternatives D, A, and C. Therefore, while Alternative B would result in the least surface-disturbing activity that may affect forests and woodlands, it would also place the most restrictions on proactive management that would improve forest health and reduce the risk of catastrophic fire.