ANNOTATION: This study evaluated restoration prescriptions for three widely occurring ponderosa pine stand conditions and determine to what level the value of product removals could finance the treatment costs. The article compares the cost in both terrain suitable for ground-based harvesting systems as well as cable systems and with or without a roundwood pulpwood market. ABSTRACT: The call for ecological restoration of declining forest conditions in the western United States has raised concerns about a fundamental change toward smaller, lower-value timber products flowing from national forest lands. The objective of this study was to evaluate restoration prescriptions for three widely occurring ponderosa pine stand conditions, and determine the degree to which the value of product removals might underwrite treatment costs. In mature pine conditions on terrain suitable for ground-based harvest equipment (i.e., ≤ 35% slope), a comprehensive restoration prescription produced a net revenue of $950/ac. with a roundwood-pulpwood market, and $875/ac. without one. On terrain > 35 percent slope requiring cable-yarding systems, net values were $600/ac. with a pulpwood market, and $500/ac. without. In contrast, thinning-from-below using ground-based equipment required a $50/ac. subsidy with a pulpwood market, and $300/ac. without one. Using cable systems, a subsidy of $300/ac. would be needed with a pulpwood market, and $600/ac. without one. In dense second-growth conditions using ground-based equipment, the restoration prescription produced $500/ac. with a pulpwood market, and $325/ac. without. With cable systems, this prescription produced $75/ac. with a pulpwood market, but required a subsidy of $100/ac. without one. Using ground-based equipment in moderately open conditions, the restoration prescription needed a $50/ac. subsidy with a pulpwood market, and $75/ac. without. Corresponding shortfalls with cable systems were $250/ac. and $275/ac., respectively. Results show the importance of selecting: 1) comprehensive prescriptions over thinning-from-below for restoring mature stands; and 2) dense second-growth stands over moderately open ones in terms of treatment priority.