This paper emerges from doctoral research on the geography of carceral power at the 2021 anti-logging protests surrounding the Ada’itsx/Fairy Creek watershed on Vancouver Island. While dominant narratives of the protest emphasize individual police behaviours, the project situates police violence at Fairy Creek as not only unexceptional, but as one feature amid a sprawling and diffuse geography of carceral violence. This paper highlights one feature in this carceral geography: tree farm licenses (TFLs) and the Canadian forestry industry’s Crown-corporate property regime. It argues that the transformation of Fairy Creek into a carceral geography begins not when police arrive, but with historical forms of enclosure and colonial claims-making on the Island. As enactments of colonial (dis)possession, propertization, and commodification, logging tenures on Vancouver Island have involved spatial regulation, securitization, and carceral power since the early colonial period, and contemporary enclosures, like TFL46, relate to and rearticulate these processes. This paper draws attention to how the seemingly neutral administrative practice of logging tenure is deeply implicated in colonial domination, value extraction, and ongoing confinement, surveillance, and marginalization of Indigenous communities and their allies. This paper demonstrates that carcerality operates at extractive sites, not only in major resistance events, but in the “quasi-events and in-between spaces” of logging development itself (Povinelli, 2014). In this way, this paper provides a critical and historical visualization of carceral circuits in an extractive zone, connecting economic management to broader disciplinary practices. However, highlighting these circuits through the forest landscape at Fairy Creek not only illuminates the historical cycles of enclosure and extractivism as carceral processes, but also illuminates these circuits as “vectors of resistance” that can and always have been slowed, interrupted, and distorted (Gill et al., 2018). While the insights generated from this paper are site-specific, they contribute to broader debates in understanding the distinct geographies of carcerality and resistance that emerge in extractive zones.