This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Appalachia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Appalachia, a collaborative effort to increase coverage of Appalachia and the Appalachian Mountains. If you would like to participate, go to the project page to see a list of related articles needing attention.AppalachiaWikipedia:WikiProject AppalachiaTemplate:WikiProject AppalachiaAppalachia articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Forestry Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Forestry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the profession and science of forestry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ForestryWikipedia:WikiProject ForestryTemplate:WikiProject ForestryForestry articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Geography Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Geography To-do list: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{ WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles. Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes Map : See Wikipedia requested maps Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places Stubs : See Geography stubs Hampshire County, West Virginia High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hampshire County, West Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hampshire County, West Virginia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Hampshire County, West VirginiaWikipedia:WikiProject Hampshire County, West VirginiaTemplate:WikiProject Hampshire County, West VirginiaHampshire County, West Virginia articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Protected areas Mid‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Kentucky / Eastern Mountain Coal Fields / West Virginia Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Kentucky (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Kentucky - Eastern Mountain Coal Fields task force. This article is supported by WikiProject West Virginia (assessed as High-importance). Virginia High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Virginia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirginiaWikipedia:WikiProject VirginiaTemplate:WikiProject VirginiaVirginia articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

I was unable to locate the creation date of this forest.-- MONGO 09:55, 19 November 2005 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on George Washington and Jefferson National Forests. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{ cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{ nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120127093301/http://www.ccclegacy.org:80/camp_roosevelt_history.htm to http://www.ccclegacy.org/camp_roosevelt_history.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— ^{cyberbot II} _{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:38, 10 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Why are two national forests, each with its own details, covered by one article? I'm not seeing why this makes more sense than Brooklyn and Queens or Navajo Nation and Hopi Reservation or Laos and Cambodia. Largoplazo ( talk) 11:54, 14 December 2020 (UTC) reply

probably because they are now administered as a single entity.-- WilderAddict ( talk) 13:28, 14 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Oh, I see: https://www.fs.usda.gov/main/gwj/about-forest. The subject of the article is not so much the forests as the single entity now comprising the two of them—the name of which continues to characterize them as forestS, hence my confusion. Thanks. Largoplazo ( talk) 15:00, 14 December 2020 (UTC) reply

I've made an edit in the lead that I believe will add clarity and precision. Even if they're being administered together, though, it seems to me that the two forests ought to have their own articles, as does any large forest, and most of the content in this article is already segregated into material covering one or the other. It would make sense to push all that content into freestanding articles and then let this article link to them while retaining all the content that applies to the administrative unit as a whole. I'm considering drafting the new articles and a reduced version of this one. Largoplazo ( talk) 15:13, 14 December 2020 (UTC) reply

The forest service conducts separate reviews for the two forests, so separating the two forests would make some sense. Combining the two forests under one supervisor was probably a result of reducing administrative expenses.-- WilderAddict ( talk) 20:48, 14 December 2020 (UTC) reply