There are frequently calls to increase local government control over forests in the US. Minnesota’s county forests contain approximately 30% of all local-government-managed forests in the United States. These forests are managed in ways that protect public access while providing a stable timber supply to mills. This happens because of the intersection of law, markets, and local politics. County forests are legally obligated to provide revenue to local tax districts while paying for management from money earned from timber sales. This pushes counties towards managing with the goal of providing a stable revenue stream from their lands, a goal that is supported by local politics in timber-dependent counties. The result is that counties are more production-oriented than other public forestland managers; however, they provide more consistent public access than private forest owners. Study Implications There are frequent discussions in the US on whether to either turn over public lands to local governments or purchase private land to be managed by local governments for public benefits. We show that local governments can manage forests professionally, providing a consistent timber supply to local mills while maintaining recreational benefits to the public. Other benefits and costs of local management are difficult to evaluate. This outcome is dependent on the availability of robust timber markets, which may not exist in other parts of the country, and makes county land management dependent on fluctuating commodity prices.