You’re talking National Forest. My comments have been mostly regarding BLM land. The two are related but distinct issues.
Most Forest land in the west is in mountains and is well wooded. (Obviously.) It was withdrawn from sale as “Forest Reserves” starting in 1891. Given the way loggers were misusing timber resources on private land at the time, it’s difficult to argue this wasn’t a wise decision. (Which is not to say that it’s still relevant.)
Most BLM land is semi-arid or desert. Much of this land was still available for purchase as late as the 70s, but with few if any buyers.
Most BLM land in Oregon is prime cattle grazing land. The feds need to give back state lands. The reason why they don’t want to is because lobbyists are giving politicians huge amounts of money to prevent competition. You think Georgia-Pacific wants lumber mills to start back up in Oregon? Why do you think the big players in wood products give money to watermelon organizations? Because they have large privately owned forests that don’t have smelly hippies chaining themselves to trees in.
Follow the money.