Flathead National Forest released the draft environmental statement for its revised forest plan Friday, unveiling four possible approaches to guide management of the 2.4 million-acre landscape under the federal agency’s authority.

The plan designates acceptable land uses throughout the forest, including recommended wilderness, suitable timberlands, eligible wild and scenic rivers, priorities for reducing potential wildfire fuels and allowable recreational activities.

It also includes a proposed grizzly bear management strategy for the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem, which is also being proposed as amendments to the Kootenai, Lewis and Clark, Helena and Lolo national forest plans.

The Flathead Forest currently operates under a heavily amended plan finalized in 1986, despite the agency’s goal to revise forest plans every 10 to 15 years.

Forest Supervisor Chip Weber said during a Thursday press briefing that staffers aimed to maintain the environmental integrity and connectivity of what he called “one of the most intact ecosystems in the world.”

But each alternative offers a different approach to balancing the multitude of stakeholders and their competing preferences for how the forest is managed. The proposed alternatives would allow timber harvest ranging from 22 million to 29 million board-feet of saw logs per year.

Alternative A proposes “no action,” meaning the existing forest plan would remain in place and the grizzly management strategy would not be adopted.

In addition to the 45 percent of the forest congressionally designated as wilderness areas, the forest is managed through a range of land designations, including 22 percent classified as suitable for timber harvest and 4 percent as recommended wilderness.

Alternative B is a modified version of the forest’s proposed action in its first draft revision released in March 2015. It would reduce suitable land for timber production to 21 percent and increase recommended wilderness to 8 percent, with an overall emphasis on balancing “ecological, social and economic sustainability.”

Alternative C emphasizes wilderness and protection of fish and wildlife habitat. It would reduce suitable timberland to 13 percent and increase recommended wilderness to 21 percent while opening up more lands to backcountry recreation.

Alternative D emphasizes active forest management, including timber harvest and fuels reduction. It would reduce overall timber land to 21 percent and remove all recommended wilderness areas.

Forest planner Joe Krueger is leading the process, which to date has taken over three years. He said the final plan ideally will be a flexible, forward-thinking document requiring minimal amendments in the future.

“This is a beginning,” he said. “Even after we get to the [record of decision], this is about keeping the plans current and responsive to the local forest communities and the users at large.”

He also emphasized that the forest had not selected a preferred alternative at this point in the process. Alternative B, while a compromise between the other alternative revisions, was modified substantially, he said, after the forest received more than 20,000 comments on its proposed action last year.

Upon the document’s publication in the Federal Register, anticipated for June 3, a 120-day public comment period will begin.

Only individuals and organizations that submit substantive comments during that time will be eligible to file an objection once the forest selects a preferred alternative.

To view the draft forest plan and submit comments electronically, visit fs.usda.gov/project/?project=46286.

Comments can also be sent by mail to: Flathead National Forest, Attn: Plan Revision, 650 Wolfpack Way, Kalispell, MT 59901.

Forest planning staff will also host a pair of public, open-house meetings to answer questions about the draft plan next month:

• June 20, 2-6 p.m. at the forest supervisor’s office, 650 Wolfpack Way in Kalispell.

• June 22, 2-6 p.m. at the Hilton Garden Inn, 3720 N. Reserve St. in Missoula.