Reviewing Partnerships to Enhance Management of the National Forest System

The committee will come to order.

Thank you. Thank you.

Welcome and thank you for t- joining today's hearing. We've got it entitled reviewing. Partnerships to Enhance Management of the National Forest System. After some brief opening remarks, members will receive testimony today from our witnesses and then the hearing will be open to questions. Um, in consultation with the ranking member and pursuant to Rule eleven E, I want to make members of the subcommittee aware that other members of the full committee may join us today. So let me begin with my opening statement. Good morning everyone. Welcome to this forestry and horticulture subcommittee hearing entitled " Reviewing Partnerships to Enhance Management of the National Forest System." This morning we will hear from a an expert panel of stakeholders on various issues before the national forest system, and we'll be reviewing how partners work with and support the forest service. These partnerships help to support active forest management, expand recreational opportunities, and create and maintain forest products and jobs, including those of essential community personnel like law enforcement, and how regulations from the top down impact their work day to day. Our national forests have been under-managed for decades, and because of that we are seeing a corresponding decline in forest health and resiliency. Millions of acres need better management to improve forest health, address invasive species, and ramp up much needed fuels reduction activities to decrease the threat of catastrophic wildfires. Over the past decade, we have seen some of the worst wildfires on record, resulting in millions of acres of burned forests, destroyed homes, and property, and unfortunately, in some cases, lost lives. Since wildfires are happening beyond the hottest and driest months of the year, I'm not sure that we are any longer able to uh label this as a fire season, but rather a fire year. I'm seeing the impact of these nearly every day in my district. Most of these disasters are preventable, and we need to be doing more to support important management work in our forests. The Forest Service is trying to do just that by identifying more than one hundred million acres of national forest land for treatment in the coming years. As you know, this will be no easy task, given the acreage and the scale. The agency has long relied on partners to help carry out this important work through partnership agreements such as good neighbor authority, stewardship contracts, memoranda of understanding, other existing authorities and programs. This committee has long supported these partnerships. The twenty twenty-six farm bill, which passed on the House floor just last month, continues this effort and provides additional improvements. It also reauthorizes the landscape scale, collaborative forest landscape, and the Joint Chiefs' landscape restoration partnership programs. Additionally, it includes authorizations for hazardous fuel reduction, cross-boundary wildfire mitigation, insect infestations and diseases, and expands several existing categorical exclusions to help encourage active management. Now, support for new markets of f- for forest products is also included in the Wood Innovation Grants program and a new biochar application demonstration project. We also prioritize forest products infrastructure by authorizing the timber production expansion program. All these are just a few of the provisions in the forestry title, and I'm glad to see the Senate has started their work. Our nation's farmers, ranchers, and foresters need a new and modernized farm bill, and we, we must deliver. With that, I'm looking forward to hearing from our witnesses today about how they work with the agency and suppor support the critical management of the national forest system, and, this is probably most important, recommendations for improvement. So thank you to all of you for appearing with us today. Before um, before we get into all of this, I just wanna take a moment now to acknowledge something that's kind of personal for all of us. This is our first subcommittee hearing since we lost tragically the our our good friend, Mister Doug LaMalfa. Uh, I think I can speak for everybody that Doug is sorely missed. He ch- he was a true champion of our national forests and uh and of our rural communities. He was a fellow farmer, so we had a lot in common. Uh, and I'd al- also like to recognize, even though he's not here, oh he is here. Our newest member of the committee, uh, Mister David Valladale from California. Uh, so welcome, David. Yeah. So, with that, uh, again, thank you all for being here. I'd like to welcome the distinguished ranking member, the my friend, the gentle lady from the great state of Oregon, Miss Salinas, for any opening opening remarks that she might like to share.

Oh, thank you, Chairman Newhouse. And um welcome Congressman Valadao. And I did notice at the beginning of the hearing my former chairman had a very large gavel that he would strike down and I thought about him as you opened up this committee, and I too. I'm yes.

Well, I've got it at the ready here, just in

We will we will all sorely miss him. Well, thank you for convening us today and uh thank you to our witnesses for making the trip to discuss this um timely topic. This hearing is happening against the backdrop of what experts warn will be one of the worst wildfire s seasons in recent memory. From increased temperatures to a historically low snowpack and extreme drought conditions we're facing a perfect storm this year for an especially devastating wildfire season. My home state of Oregon, as many of you know, is nearly fifty percent forested and has thirty million acres of some of the world's most productive forests. Our forests are at risk, but I am hopeful today's hearing will prepare this subcommittee to protect our forests, communities and infrastructure. Despite the threat wildfires posed to Oregon and much of the West, this administration is taking steps that make us all less safe. Specifically, the reorganization of the Forest Service and the administration's consolidation of wildfire response under the Department of Interior are causing chaos in our communities and are creating more questions than answers about the future of forest management. These changes come at what I consider a very dangerous time. Right as wildfire season is taking hold, with two point seven million acres already burned nationwide this year, exceeding the ten year average for both fires and acres burned to date. On top of the administration's changes to the forest service, their work, or lack thereof, to reduce hazardous fuels in our forest is particularly alarming. From twenty twenty four to twenty twenty five, the forest service treated roughly twenty five percent fewer acres of hazardous fuels. And in Oregon, treatments were down forty-seven percent in that period. Treating hazardous fuels must be the absolute top priority of the agency. A forest that is vulnerable to wildfire cannot deliver the same ecosystem benefits as a treated forest. I'm talking about benefits like recreation opportunities, timber production, clean water, wildlife habitat, and carbon sequestration. The steep decline in hazardous fuels work since twenty twenty-five coupled with our changing climate will only lead us to one outcome, catastrophic wildfires and decimating communities. To make things worse, the Trump administration's fiscal year twenty-seven budget included an approximate forty-three percent cut to the Forest Service budget, and that's if we do not include the loss of funding as part of the proposal to move wildfire operations from Forest Service to the Department of Interior. This budget proposal eliminates state, private and tribal forestry. eliminates forest and rangeland research, and cuts important programs like the collaborative forest landscape restoration program that meaningfully improve the health and resilience of our forests at the same time the Trump administration is calling for states and partners to take on more of the burden in managing our forests. They are cutting all support for this work. The collapse in hazardous fuels acres is just one obvious symptom of this misguided approach. This is not the time for removing opportunities for collaboration, active forest management, and real progress. What we need is a path to move forward, to work together, and to invest in active forest management. We know what effective forest management looks like. We need prescribed fires, hazardous fuel reduction, targeted thinning, and timber harvest, and other practices that reduce wildfire risk to m- to communities and restore balance to our forests after decades of overly aggressive fire suppression. We can prevent and combat wildfires without irreparably damaging the habitat and ecosystems we rely on to survive or harming the private and industrial forest intended for harvest. Partnerships are imperative to the success of active forest management. Tribes, states, local governments, universities, and private landowners all bring unique tools and expertise. Programs like Good Neighbor Authority, first agreements and shared stewardship show what's possible when we do work together. Partnerships are the backbone of the national forest system, and they are necessary to complete the work on the ground that keeps our forest productive, healthy, and safe for the public. They are even more important right now, considering these catastrophic changes the Trump administration is making. This subcommittee has a responsibility to ensure the forest service can be effective, and me we must work alongside one another to expand collaborative forest management, reinforce those partnerships between all who care for our forests, and keep our focus squarely on protecting people, communities, drinking water sources, and ecosystems. I am eager to hear from our witnesses and to work together to chart a path forward that will help us ensure our nation's forests are managed in a way that keeps them productive, resilient, and healthy. Thank you all.

Thank you, Ms. Salinas.

I yield back.

Thank you very much. Uh, we're delighted today to have the Chairman of the full committee, Mister G. T. Thompson from the great state of Pennsylvania. So now I recognize Chairman Thompson for any opening comments he'd like to to make.

Thanks, Chairman. Well, good morning everyone, and I'd I wanna thank Chairman Newhouse and Ranking Member Salinas for holding this subcommittee hearing today on the importance of partnerships for the health of our nation's force. Um, I'd like to uh add my thoughts to the Chairman's uh taking a moment to recognize our great friend Doug LaMalfa. Doug certainly would have many thoughts and insights into today's discussion. He's a great friend, chairman, and and he is missed. With that also I'd like to acknowledge Chairman Newhouse as the new subcommittee chair and Representative Valadao is a new member of, both the full committee and this subcommittee. As for today's hearing, partnerships with forest with the Forest Service greatly benefit Pennsylvania's fifteenth district. by directly supporting forest health, bolstering the forest products industry, expanding recreation opportunities on public lands, and similar impacts are felt in areas near forest service in forty different states. Uh to me it's common sense that the current forest health crisis and the is- issues facing our forest products industry share a common solution that's increasing active management and sustainable timber harvest levels to benefit both ecological health and rural communities. Uh, while this committee has continued to support the forest service through partnerships, much more can be done, starting with swift passage of a new farm bill. I'm proud to say that we have worked diligently over the last few years to ensure the Farm Food and National Security Act has a robust forestry title. That will broaden and strengthen the forest service toolbox. for active force management, including enhancements to authorities that allow them to engage in critical partnerships with organizations like those that we have sitting before us today. These improvements have become increasingly important in recent years as wildfires and forest health crisis in this country has continued. And this is why the time to act is now. I'm proud of the work that the House Committee on Agriculture has done over the last several years. And I'm proud of the bipartisan vote that our farm bill recently received on the floor of the House. With the release of text this week, I strongly encourage the Senate to act on a new farm bill as soon as possible. It is long overdue and millions of people around this country depend on its passage for certainty, in a wide variety of lines of work. And so, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.

Thank you, Mr. Thompson. If Miss Craig, uh, from Minnesota does come, we would be happy to recognize her for any opening comments, and I would uh request that other members uh submit their opening statements for the record so the witnesses may begin their testimony and ensure that we have ample time for questions. So, our first witness today is Mister Ned Ko. He's the supervisor of Modoc County, California. So welcome Mister Ko. Our next witness is Mister Travis Joseph. He's the President and CEO of the American Forest Research Resource Council, and no stranger to Washington DC. So welcome. Our third witness today is Mr. Tracy Glover, who is the Sheriff of King County, Utah. So welcome, Mr. Glover. And next I would yield to my ranking member to introduce our next witness, Miss Salinas.

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. Witness intro, thank you. I am pleased to welcome Molly Whitney, She brings a diverse background in conservation stemming from her deep appreciation for the Co- Pacific Northwest landscape and her desire to protect, sustain, and restore its important ecosystems. Prior to her current role with Cascade Forest Conservancy Forest conservancy? Oh thank you. Miss, Ms. Whitney served as development director at Water Watch of Oregon. Previously, excuse me, Previously she was Program Manager of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation's Columbia Basin Water Transaction Program. She also served on the board of the Tualatin Riverkeepers, and currently serves on the board of Mount St. Helens Institute. As a native Oregonian, Miss Whitney has a lifelong relationship with the Cascades and brings a real enthusiasm for its protection and restoration. I am eager to hear from her today to understand the perspective she will bring to this subcommittee. Miss Whitney, thank you for joining us today. I yield back.

Thank you, and I just wanna again express uh my thanks to all of you, all of the witnesses for joining us today. So we'll now proceed proceed to the most important part of the hearing, your testimony. You'll each get five minutes. The timer is right there in front of you. Uh, it will count down to zero, at which point your time has expired. So, uh, Mr. Ko, please begin.

Thank you, Chair Newhouse, and and thank you for the kind comments and regards to the passing of of my previous Congressman, Congressman Lomofa, and close friend of of over three decades. Good morning, Chair, Newhouse and Ranking Member Salinas and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on behalf of the National Association of Counties or NACO. My name is Ned Ko. I serve on the Modoc County Board of Supervisors and I am second Vice President of the NAC NACO's Western Interstate Region. Modoc County is the third least populated county in California, with seventy plus percent being federally owned. National forest management is not an abstract issue for us. It directly affects our roads, schools, emergency services, and our local economy. I'm here today to share what genuine federal-county partnership looks like in practice. That partnership operates on three levels, counties w- as fiscal partners, as operational partners, and as intergovernmental partners. In counties like mine, where so much of the land is federally owned and therefore not taxable, programs like secure rural schools are not optional. They are essential. S- secure rural schools help support county roads, schools, and local capacity that makes partnership with the federal forced service possible in the first place. Title two of SRS is especially important because it supports resource advisory committees, or RACs. In Modoc County, our RAC brings together county government, forced service, ranchers, environmental interests, and other local stakeholders to identify and recommend projects that improve forest health and meet local needs. That pro through that process, we have supported projects like stock water wells, fuels reduction, habitat restoration. These prog projects benefit livestock operations, imbl- improve emergency fire suppression capacity, and strengthen the long-term resilience of the forest. But none of this happens without stable funding. Counties cannot plan, hire, or build durable partnerships one year at a time. NACO urges Congress to enact a long-term or permanent reauthorization of secure rural schools before the program lapses again. Stable funding ensures counties as operational partners. An example of of what this looks like in Modoc County um is the devil's horse cult challenge, and I ask you to refer to my written comments on more details on on this. But most importantly, Modoc's shared stewardship program. Federal staffing vacancies are one of the biggest barriers of effective forest management in the West, and we built a solution to this. Through this program, University of California Cooperative Extension recruits short-term employees. The Modoc County Farm Bureau serves as the employer of record. The forced service then gains qualified workers who are immediately able to help get work done on the ground. This program has been operational in the county for over five years now. In the most recent field season, forty-three workers logged more than eighteen hundred hours. They performed more than seven hundred miles of trail road maintenance, completing grazing allotment surveys, supported fuels and vegetation work, helped with timber sale production preparation, conducted hydrologic, archaeological, and botany wildlife surveys. Supported NEPA work, maintained campgrounds, and assisted in public education programs. The third level is partnership with formal standing in federal planning and decision making. Modoc County, we have a standing coordination committee with the Modoc National Forest. Each year, two or each month, two members of the board of supervisors, our Natural Resources Advisor and our Farm Advisor meet directly with forest leadership. These meetings help ensure local input shapes federal decisions on forest health wildfire reduction, grazing, roads, and water infrastructure. NACO urges Congress three things, reauthorize secure rural schools, support shared stewardship programs, and encourage forced service to establish regular coordination structures with county governments. Please refer to my written testimony for additional comments, and I would um entertain questions at the appropriate time. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ko. Appreciate that very much. Um, next I would recognize Mr. Glover. You may begin when you're ready. Thank you.

Thank you, Chairman Newhouse, Ranking Member Salinas, and members of the committee. My name is Tracy Glover. I'm the sheriff in Kane County, Utah, the president of the Utah Sheriffs' Association, as well as the president of the Western States Sheriffs' Association who I represent here today. Uh, our association of Western States covers nineteen Western States and over eleven hundred sheriffs. As you know, the US Forest Service manages about two hundred million acres of land and national forests that are truly a national treasure. These lands deserve resource protection and sound management. America's sheriffs invest time and treasure every day to support that Nash uh national forest management. There is ample evidence that sheriffs are all in as viable partners in this important work. We have great respect for the US Forest Service law enforcement officers that we work alongside uh every single day in the field and we commend them for their work. At the management level however, our relationship is fracturing. I'm here today to ask Congress through this committee to help sheriffs move forward and and recover these relationships, returning to a level of mutual respect. I wanna touch on three quick things to that point. First, uh criminal jurisdiction and police power. In our country, states and therefore local subdivisions hold the authority to police the people. While sometimes confusing, criminal legislative jurisdiction is reserved to state and local governments. As the only elected law enforcement branch within any form of government, sheriffs are often in the position of holding the line on these matters. While we appreciate the interest of limited federal law enforcement uh jurisdiction by Congress agencies within the executive branch have generally pushed back and with some success passed rules and regulations that are sort of a work around to the principles of limited jurisdiction. We are here today to ask this committee to work with sheriffs to a arrive at a solution to one such issue the criminal prohibitions rule little bit of background. In two thousand eleven the forest service law enforcement folks reached out to our association with their intent to uh institute this criminal prohibitions rule. uh it would dramatically increase the uh the the stance of federal law enforcement and their their uh authority on federal law or on federal national forests. After some difficult discussions, negotiations, and uh meetings, we we pushed back and the idea was shelved. Fast forward in twenty twenty four, a slightly watered-down version of the rule was put forward and uh on the federal register. This time sheriffs were not given any significant notice. Uh our association and others participated by providing public comment on the federal register, and while the rule disproportionately affects sheriffs, we were not afforded any appropriate level of coordination. After providing public comment, asking for specific changes to be made, the final rule was adopted and published on December twenty sixth of twenty twenty four, with no significant modifications. At that time we met with the US Forest Service Administrators who appear at least so far, to not have any interest in modifying the rule. A CRA was filed by Congresswoman Celeste Malloy, but with the difficult timing of a government shutdown, it ended up timing out without action. Uh, Representative Malloy then filed HR sixty-eight O two in this Congress, which is active and I believe assigned to this committee, and would simply require that the criminal prohibitions rule would not have any force or effect. The primary reason I'm here today on behalf of sheriffs is to ask this committee to advance HR sixty eight O two as a priority bill, help sheriffs hold an important baseline of local jurisdiction and find a better path forward. We are committed to working together with the agency to come to a more appropriate solution if we get the chance. Uh shifting gears, I want to touch just briefly on a different program called the Cooperative Law Enforcement Agreement program. As many of you know, sheriffs across the country uh provide law enforcement services on our national forests under cooperative law enforcement agreements. A little uh context, in nineteen eighty-five the program was funded at about seven point five million nationwide, and in nineteen ninety-three that amount dropped to five million. Today, roughly forty-one years later, the funding remains at five million dollars. During that time frame you can imagine sheriffs have dealt with marked cost increases in our operations. Uh for example, I looked at the social security cost of living index and uh cost of living adjustments have increased by a hundred and thirty-eight percent in that same time frame. Uh the cost of a of a Ford F one fifty truck in nineteen eighty five was about fifteen thousand dollars today it's about seventy thousand to get it fully equipped. Uh with US Forest Service staffing shortages and special assignments, fire details, et cetera, Sheriffs are being asked to do more and more on national forests, which we embrace to a degree. We respectfully ask that this committee review the program and bring it up to a twenty twenty-six funding standard. And with that, I appreciate your time and I look forward to answering any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Sheriff. Uh, Mr. Joseph, you may begin when you are ready.

Chairman Newhouse, Ranking Member Salinas, members of the committee, good morning. I thank you for this opportunity. My name is Travis Joseph. President, CEO of the American Forest Resource Council. We have the privilege of representing the forest product sector, many of the mills, the loggers, the truck drivers, the contractors, and the supply chains that actively manage and steward our national forest that belong to all Americans. We are critical partners of the forest service, and we have been since the agency's founding a hundred and twenty years ago. We wanna be partners to help manage national forest for another hundred and twenty years. Our members buy federal timber, on the most regulated lands on planet Earth, our national forest. We harvest using the best science and the most advanced forest practices in the world. We bring federal timber to local mills and we make all kinds of wood products that are essential to society from housing and construction, to paper and packaging, to medicine, and food, and renewable energy and fuel. That's just the start. We do so much more. Our members grow and plant millions of seedlings on private and federal lands. We do wildfire We do wildfire prevention work. We do fish and wildlife habitat restoration work, trail and construction, road repair and maintenance. Across this country, the forest product sector employs tens of thousands of certified foresters, engineers, scientists, welders, mechanics, heavy equipment operators, IT professionals, accountants, lawyers, and drone pilots, just to name a few. We care deeply about our health and the resiliency of our national forests. The plight of our communities and our businesses are intertwined with the plight of our federal forests. It's where we hike, it's where we camp, it's where we hunt, it's where we fish, it's where we work. And as those who work in and near our national forest every day, we can tell you that the scale of our federal forest and health crisis is staggering. It's now estimated that between eighty and a hundred million acres of national forests are at high risk of catastrophic wildfire disease. and insect infestations. We stand at a critical moment. The status quo is not working, and it's putting these public forests and all their invaluable benefits to society at risk. It's a threat to countless rural communities, to public health, to public safety, to our neighbors and to our businesses. We can and we must solve this, and we can together. The forest products industry, states, counties, tribes, and other partners, and we have the expertise We have the capacity, we have the infrastructure, we have the people, we have the will, we're problem solvers, we share common interests, managing our national forests and taking care of our communities. We have two pictures in front of you. The one right now is up on the screen, you have two pictures in your your packets. This first one here is from the Archie Creek fire in Oregon. This forest stand is dead. And the forest stands as far as you can see from the ridge top are dead. I took this picture myself two weeks ago. That fire occurred six years ago. It's a shocking sight to see in person. That area will likely never regenerate naturally because the fire burns so hot. And that's what that forest stand will look like in the future, for your kids and your grandkids and your great-grand grandkids. This is not environmentalism. This is not good stewardship. It's neglect. And it's wrong. That's one picture of one fire during one year on one national forest. And I'm sharing it with you because I want you to see where the status quo of federal forest management is taking us. Similar environmental catastrophes like this exist on national forests in all western states. The second picture is a picture of a shaded fuel brick in northern California along a major highway corridor. And this is what a successful partnership looks like. In this case, a neighboring private forest landowner, CR Pacific Industries SPI worked with the forest service Cal Fire firefighters, and experts and partners on the ground to create defensible space and strategic locations to help prevent the kinds of wildfires that have wiped out entire forests, and communities in California. I took this picture last week. This is important work. It's proactive, it's intentional, it can save property and infrastructure, taxpayer dollars, and most importantly, it can help save communities and lives. That's one picture of one partnership on one at-risk landscape on one national forest, and I'm sharing it because it represents what's possible. One forest products company or other forest products company and members of AFRC, who are doing amazing work like this all over the West. We need to do more and we need to do it faster. If the Forest Service was able to fully leverage the assets and expertise of all of its partners, the potential is limitless. That's the exciting part, and that's also where Congress comes in, right? We're not oblivious. to all the challenges that are in front of the Forest Service right now. We're asking Congress to zoom out, to look at the current system of how we manage national forests. We need to rethink our approach. We need to ask important questions. What outcomes do we want from our national forests? Are we achieving those outcomes? If not, why? And how do we align and modernize our approach, our laws and regulations to deal with twenty-first century challenges to create new opportunities? and new partnerships on national forests. Creative powerful relationships and solutions exist. Good forestry and good forest stewardship is not a partisan issue. Partnerships are essential. In fact, I would argue it's the only way that Congress and the Forest Service are gonna be able to deliver better environmental social and economic outcomes for the American public count the forest products industry in we're here we're at the table we want durable bipartisan solutions we want healthy forests and healthy communities. We're here to ask how do we help you, Congress, to build and grow partnerships into the future. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Joseph. Ms. Whitney, uh please begin when you're ready.

Chairman Newhouse, Ranking Member Salinas, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to join me today. I'm Molly Whitney, the Executive Director of the Cascade Forest Conservancy. For forty years my organization has worked to protect, sustain forest streams, wildlife wildlife and the communities in Southwest Washington Cascades. We do this through conservation, education, restoration, and advocacy. Conservation NGOs like the Cascade Forest Conservancy provide oversight, accountability for actions impacting our public lands. In the past, that role has often put us at odds with the Forest Service and led to litigation, but today we increasingly engage with the agency as a collaborative partner. We work closely with the Forest Service on forest management, watershed restoration, and economic resilience. My organization is an active and founding member of two forest collaboratives that have improved forest management and community outcomes throughout our region, the South Gifford-Pencho Collaborative and the Pencho Partners. These forest collaboratives are stakeholder groups that provide feedback throughout the forest service uh project planning to develop well-balanced, publicly supported projects and iron out conflicts with slow without slow, costly litigation. The C the Cascade Forest Conservancy also partners Forest Service to implement restoration projects, including aquatic habitat restoration, beaver relocations, volunteer programs, and we've supported an initiative that connects local high school students to paid summer partnerships on national forest lands. Today this partnership is being strained through a multitude of cutbacks. Due to uncertainty, organizational restructuring, and staffing cuts that originate at the national level, our forest service's ability to plan, collaborate, and execute projects effectively is being critically compromised. On the Gifford Pinchot National Forest, there are vacancies in essential positions for project planning and timber sale administration and implementation. The interdisciplinary planning teams, which are vital to advancing projects with expert input, have decreased from three to one across the forest. As a result, the agency's capacity to move projects forward has declined, even as production expectations increase. At the same time, we are concerned about the agency's growing resilience on categorical exclusions, emergency determinations, and exemptions from environmental review requirements. These tools do have a role, but they are increasingly used f as substitutes for comprehensive, transparent planning processes with public buy-in. Environmental assessments and the NEPA process provide meaningful opportunities for coll- collaboration, public involvement, and tribal consultation. This helps project planners identify problems early, strengthens p- project design, and reduces the likelihood of conflict. In the absence of these processes, litigation becomes the only tool we have to ensure that projects meet legal standards. Streamlining in specific solutions can be helpful, but shortcuts that sacrifice transparency and public involvement may actually hinder progress and increase our reliance on litigation rather than on collaboration and public input. Sustaining our public lands requires ongoing public input, strong federal agencies, and a reliable public investment. Recent shifts, a lack of clarity, and a lack of transparent dialogue among stakeholders and agency staff have diminished public pathways for input. Forest collaboratives have always been useful, but they are now becoming even more essential as other public engagement avenues are limited. By creating a space open to the public for difficult conversations and nontraditional relationships, they promote a shared understanding among diverse stakeholders. They enhance project planning and they help prevent conflicts before deci decisions are made. While collaboration does take time, it builds trust and it proves pro improves project outcomes and often presen prevents costly disputes making the process actually more efficient. We encourage Congress to support stable, long-term investment in the forest service. This includes rebuilding agency capacity through sustainable consistent funding supporting collaborative processes, maintaining me meaningful environmental review, and addressing long-standing infrastructure challenges such as the Forest Service road maintenance backlog. Attempts have been made to address Forest Service capacities with issues and partnerships like the Good Neighbor Authority. Whi while GNA can serve as a useful tool, maintaining adequate Forest Service staffing remains a more efficient and accountable approach for carrying out forest management and restoration work on our federal public lands. Even for GNA to function a at its intended capacity, The authority still requires forest service personnel to lead planning, to provide oversight, and to ensure projects align with broader management goals and public interests. The dedicated staff on our national forests continue to do remarkable work under difficult conditions. By providing them with adequate resources, consistent direction, and the tools needed to engage the public, we can improve forest health, increase wild wildfire resilience, support local economies, and ensure that our public lands are managed managely effectively for future generations. Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I look forward to answering your questions.

Thank you, and thank you all for your testimony this morning. Um, at this time members will be recognized for questions in order of seniority, alternating between the majority and minority members, and in order of arrival for those who joined us after the hearing convened. Will be recognized for five minutes in order, each in order, to allow us to get to as many questions as possible. I'd first like to recognize myself for five minutes, and I'll start with Mister Joseph, if I could. Um certainly I appreciate your comments and your testimony about how forest products industry is needed for the stewardship and the conservation and protection of our forests. As we know, given that we've lost a significant number of sawmills and logging capacity over the past several decades uh throughout the Pacific Northwest, uh my state in particular, wh what does this reduction in infrastructure mean for forest health and management? Uh d and tell me in your view are there ways that that we can help support new infrastructure?

Chairman, thank you for the question. Appreciate it. It's a really important question, cuz I think sometimes we don't quite make the connections that I think you're making, which are when you lose the infrastructure, when you lose the mills, When you lose the people, when you lose the know-how, when you lose the equipment, you lose your ability to manage forests. And that's what's happening in a huge part of the the west, not just the Pacific Northwest but the west. And we've seen examples of this. We've seen examples in States, unfortunately it's my colleagues, where where they reside in Utah and parts of Southern California and New Mexico and Arizona that have completely lost their forest products industry infrastructure and when you do that you see the environmental consequences. So in our part of the world, it's dominated by the federal government and the federal government managing national forests and oftentimes more than fifty percent of the land base in these states, it's critical that we have a consistent, reliable, higher supply of a raw input to support that infrastructure. The Forest Service manages what's mentioned a hundred this is context, I think this is critical context for Congress that sometimes we just lose sight of. The Forest Service manages a hundred and ninety-three million acres. Only one third of that land base is ever ever eligible for timber harvest of any kind. And in any single year, the Forest Service is managing one half of one percent of one third of our national forest. So if you wanna help the forest products industry, if you wanna help rural communities, manage our forests, we'll deliver better economic, environmental, and public safety and health benefits for everybody.

Thank you. Thank you. Wow. Um Sheriff Glover, could you take a few minutes to or no, a few seconds I should say, to expand on issues that you're currently seeing on the impacts of top-down regulations, and how they're impeding on inter-agency cooperations between the local law enforcement departments and the Forest Service.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I first wanna say our our relationships with the US Forest Service law enforcement folks on the ground are solid. Uh we have great respect for each other. We work together every day. Uh we ha we are friends with the the folks uh here in DC at the management level as well. We spend a lot of time together. The problem is is that uh we weren't heard on this criminal prohibitions rule, and and the issue isn't necessarily uh all of the details of the rule. We had some parts of the rule that we could support. The the problem we had was there are some parts of the rule that are clearly um, you know, outside of the typical guardrails of of federal jurisdiction on propri lands of held in proprietary interest. And our concern there is is it's a a bit of a camel's nose in the tent kind of a concept where uh other agencies, other federal agencies like the National Park Service or the Bureau of Land Management are kind of keeping an eye on that and trying to see how far can we crowd the guardrails as it relates to rule making authority in this space. And that's our concern, that's our biggest concern is that it could get out of hand and uh and it will get out of hand.

Good, thank you. Um, Mister Koh, um, as a district that receives a good deal of funding from the SRS or Secure Real Schools program, could you talk a little bit about how constant delays in reauthorization efforts affect the counties that rely on this funding?

Thank you, Chairman. Yes, uh, two two examples out of the recent um time that the SRS expired. One was a local school district in the county that had been years in the process of getting funding, engineering, and design for a new facility at their junior high campus. They were in the early stages of construction when SRS expired. While it was a small portion of the total budget for that project, it was vital and required them to take from other areas of the the budget that was education related to complete this um construction project. As a county, it's vital for our roads. Um we had a number of um road projects in process when SRS expired. In order to complete those projects, we had to suspend routine maintenance. That's delays in chip seal and repaving, which just further um degrades the condition of our of our roads, which every access point to the National Forest in Modoc County is via a county road.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you for that real life examples. Um, Ranking Member Salinas.

Uh, thank you, Mister Chairman, and again, uh, welcome, Miss Whitney and Mister Joseph, both Oregonians. Um to start, could you please uh this is to Miss Whitney, to start, could you please share some of what you are seeing on the ground regarding partnerships for management of the national forest system and this is in light of the remarkable loss of staff at the forest service over the past year, alongside that twenty-five percent decrease in hazardous fuels reduction on the ground.

Yeah, we are definitely seeing uh some changes on the ground, definitely delays and things slowing. Um For example, our team has been working to move forward a project where CFC actually secured outside funding outside the forest service or f uh the federal government. And this project focused on aquatic habitat restoration, that would uh be beneficial to the national forest, and create employment for local contractors. But due to severe and unexpected staffing shortages and a lack of clarity on current internal processes with the f within the forest service this work has just been delayed and that is good work that could have happened with extra partnership funding. Additionally, uh staffing cuts and uh frequent policy changes have forced timber, harvest, and wildfire preparation projects to adapt during development resulting in delays. And a recent example of this is uh the North Packwood project, which I wrote up a case study in my written testimony, if you'd like to know more. But it shows how shifting direction from the USDA and the current administration uh c complicates and delays forest management efforts on the ground. And there were repeated changes in policy guidance such as environmental review requirements and legal r interpretations of CE_s, like CE_six that was illegally overturned, that led the Forest Service to redesign the project multiple times. This reduced its scale, delayed implementation, and caused redundant planning efforts, ultimately resulting in a much smaller treatment area than initially planned. And this uncertainty really hampers the Forest Service's ability to efficiently carry out large landscape scale restoration and wildfire resilience.

Uh thank you. And then uh to Just pivot a bit to reorganization. What do you see uh um do you see any downside for moving firefighters from the Forest Service to the Department of Interior's wide-land fire service when it comes to delivering more acres of hazardous fuels reduction?

I definitely think that there are reasons to be concerned that a re- reorganization like that could make fuel reduction efforts more difficult. Hazardous fuels reduction is tied to landscape management through coordination among fire personnel land managers. scientists, tribes, and local communities, and collaborative partners. And this work includes project planning, prescribed fire, if it's allowed and able to occur, uh ecosystem res- restoration, and community engagement. And the proposed US wildfire service appears to focus on suppression and thereby discounting fire management within land management agencies responsible for long-term stewardship and fuels planning and this re uh risks creating a disconnect between wildfire response and the need for a more efficient and the proactive work needed to reduce wildfire risk before it occurs. And because the vast majority of Forest Service personnel are funded in part by dollars associated with wildland fire transferring that funding approximately sixty percent to the wildland fire service would effectively uh decimate the forest service and compromise multiple use land management uh mandates. Granted, the current system isn't ideal as forest service specialists have to leave their primary role sometimes for several months to serve on fire duty in another district, It would greatly benefit productivity if the continuation of the workflow of specialists would continue their important work without such yearly inter uh interruptions and a preferred alternative would be to invest in the agency capacity work forcibility and prescribed fire on the landscape. This uh this would be a better alternative and would lead to increased hazardous fuels treatments rather than the declines we've been seeing in a large scale organization transfer that and benefits that still remain unclear.

So if I could just recap for the folks back home and maybe some less technical um wording, what I'm hearing from you is perhaps some some continuity, some additional collaboration to really emphasize the fuels reduction pieces of this and to balance out so we're not always thinking about suppression. Is that correct?

Correct.

Okay. Um one last question her uh hopefully quickly. Um when it comes to forest management we often hear that

Think the bottom line is public lands deserve public input,

Mm.

and NEPA hasn't always been a hindrance. In fact, I think that the NEPA process actually provides public input, public process, a clear line of process.

Thank you, Miss Salinas. Mister Moore from the great state of Alabama.

Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh it's a pleasure to see all the witnesses here today. Uh certainly Doug Lemoffel was a good friend and Heather and I agree for his family, we miss Doug. He had a big body and a big heart and so he's a great man. Alabama forest supports rural communities, forest product jobs, hunting, recreation, wildlife habitat, public access. The national forest in Alabama is about six hundred and sixty seven thousand acres. We have Bankhead, Kineka, Talladega, Tuskegee, all those national forests. And so um it requires a forest service obviously to work with the state. counties, local law enforcement, private businesses, and people who know these forests best. And I'm thankful for President Trump's focus on expanding domestic timber production, improving forest health, reducing wildfire risk, and cutting unnecessary delays. The goal should be healthier forest, more work completed on the ground, stronger rural economies, and measurable results for taxpayers. Mister Joseph, um your testimony explains that active forest management can include commercial timber harvest, thinning, prescribed burning, selective harvesting, and mechanical vegetation treatment. You also endorsed President Trump administration's the National Active Forest Management Strategy, which focuses on building capacity, streamlining implementation, environmental compliance partnerships and markets, as well as salvage and reforestation. Alabama already has a good neighbor agreement between the Forest Service and the Alabama Forestry Commission. Under that agreement, the state can help carry out timber harvesting, hazardous fuel reduction, road work, wildlife surveys, and forest res restoration projects on federal land, what are the biggest barriers keeping partnerships like Alabama's from producing more completed projects healthier forest, and timber that is actually delivered to American mills? What do you what do you think is the biggest barrier, Mister Joseph?

To delivering timber to mills in America?

Yes sir.

The laws and regulations and the system, the current approach that we have to managing federal lands, I again I think context is really important. In the Pacific Northwest, a vast majority of the national forests that are at risk of fire, disease, insects, they're not available for management. So even if a collaborative decided, hey, we need to go in there and we need to do active management, the the regulatory regime that overlays those national forests oftentimes restricts the ability to actually go in and do the right treatment at the right time, at the right place. That needs to be fixed, and that's up to Congress.

So I remember Ronald Reagan said, it was one of my favorite quotes, he said, the government's idea on the economy is when it's moving you tax it, keep m moving your regulator and it will fail as you subsidize it, but very often it seems like the regulatory environment is the biggest inhibition to getting the work done and getting the the timber to the mills. Is that kinda what you're telling me?

I and it impacts partners. It's not just the timber industry, it's states, counties, tribes, other organizations. The regulatory environment is not an incentive right now in national force to do business with the federal government. It's incredibly complex and it's risky.

It makes it almost impossible at times, doesn't it, to do it in certain areas, I would assume.

It also makes it really challenging, or if you can imagine a a private interest that's thinking about building a mill in the west why would you come in and make you know build a quarter billion dollar mill, if your partner is the forest service and based on the policies or politics of varying administrations, that timber flow is gonna change. That's that's not certainty, that's not predictability, you can't make a business decision off of that un you know uncertainty.

The uncertainty. And so the photos you showed a while ago, and and it was pretty impactful I thought, the uh the one forest had a fire six years ago.

Mm-hmm.

And what's the hold up? Why why is there such a drastic difference between the one where we saw the green trees coming outta the ground they're getting up on I don't know how big they were from the photo but then you see these others that are dead for years and been standing. What what's the what's the hold up? What

Yeah, that's it. Uh again, the regulatory environment. So where I took that picture was from a road that bisects a roadless area near Glide in R near you know Roseburg and Douglas County, Oregon. Hundred and thirty thousand acres were burned in that fire. And because of the overlying regulations of that land base, you cannot go in there and remove those dead and dying trees, even off the roadsides, bring them to a mill, and reinvest the revenue back into the land. That's not allowed.

So how long do you think that timberland is out of production? Is it forever or f four generations?

That land base likely will be if it ever comes back as a forest.

So the second photo I saw, like green trees growing, what what how long ago has that been, that fire occurring?

That fuel break on the second picture is an ongoing project. So that's anticipation of and a proactive strategy to try to address fire if and when it comes through that area. So that project is happening right now and ongoing as they work to complete hundreds of miles of fuel breaks across multiple jurisdictions. And that's exactly what we need to be thinking about doing. It's not just about forest or wasteland, although that's the fo the focus, but in the west when you have multiple ownerships, you've gotta work with all of the managers to create um a more holistic approach to forest management.

Gotcha. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I'll yield back.

Thank you, Mr. Moore. Gentleman from California, Mr. Costa is recognized.

Thank you very much, uh, Mr. Chairman and the ranking member, an important effort I think that many of us who, uh, come from western states especially, uh, uh, share the challenges of, uh, trying to maintain and, uh, our f- our forests. Um, I represent the San Joaquin Valley along with my colleague, Congressman Reilly Dale, but our beautiful Sierra Nevadas are in our backyard. Um and um included in those are the giant sequoia groves uh trees that are increasingly threatened by more extreme droughts and hotter and more intense wildfires and I think we all share the notion that we no longer have a fire season but a a fire year I think out in the west. Certainly that's become the sadly the the the rule. Um I uh co-sponsored the Fix Our Forests Act and the Headwater spent years working on these partnerships between uh the federal and and and state uh efforts and local. Um Supervisor Cole, uh it's good to have fellow Californian testify and a farmer rancher uh common sharing um a lot of these issues and of course both of us uh mourn the loss of our friend Representative LaMoffa. Um but I would like to ask you about your the impact you see I've seen in the central Sierra in the closing of regional and station offices, including the capacity for research um and uh uh the permitting and the other kinds of things that the Forest Service does as a partner locally. Um as a supervisor and um person who's involved in many areas, what does that mean to you and Modoc County for wildfire and mitigation work on on the ground in rural California?

Thank you Congressman Costa and and good to see you again. Um so I I will go back to the approach of we have in Modoc County where the county works proactively with the Modoc National Forest. Um through our coordination um we are able to on a monthly basis go over issues similar to what you just discussed and um find solutions to those problems.

Yeah, but have you felt a reduction of staff and has that impacted

Um

your ability to do the necessary work uh in that partnership?

Um the the reduction of staff definitely has has impacted the f- the force even on the Modoc force and and that is where our shared stewardship retired worker um program first got started. Um the f the forest didn't have an engineer and they had a timber sale that was sold and ready to be harvested but they needed an engineer to certify the road we we hired up an engineer um through the farm bureau

Yeah, no

um that was a retired forest engineer and we were able to complete that project. That's just one example of that program.

Yeah. Okay, I I need to move on. My time's limited. Um uh Miss Whitney, uh your work on the ground uh as you'd stated in your testimony uh uh makes a strong case for public engagement and collaboration uh that make projects more durable, and less likely to end up in court. As the agency loses staff and leans on faster, more streamlined reviews, does that mean for public trust uh for getting forest health and fuel projects done right the first time?

Um I think the question is about eroding public trust.

Yes.

Yes, and we're definit definitely seeing that on on the land. When you move into projects that don't have avenues for public input and bypass processes that allow for public to have um scoping periods commenting periods and objection periods you uh only the only avenue to hold to people accountable, um the agency accountable is litigation. And if you are litigating smaller projects that didn't have public input, that are CE_s, that are moved along quickly on a smaller scale, that isn't nearly as time-consuming and productive as it is to work on larger scale projects that have buy-in through collaboratives that are gonna have larger impacts on the land and um less conflict at the end.

Yeah, my time's almost expired, but I'm very concerned about this whole reorganizational plan and the cuts that have been made within the forest service. Um Mister Joseph, in your testimony you highlighted the need to get back to active management and for Congress to evaluate the roadblocks that are getting in the way. I think we're always uh find ourselves in this bind between forest management and the funding for that, and the funding we put for fire suppression, and we borrow from Peter to pay Paul. We don't do a good job on the forest management areas because we're trying to triage putting out the fires and in the meantime we get further behind. That's my assessment of this over the years that we've worked on that. Do you concur?

Congressman, you're right, and every dollar that Congress invests in proactive management saves the taxpayer four dollars in welfare damage.

Well, my time's expired, but not only that, but what we have found, Mister Chairman and the ranking, remember, in conjunction with our universities, that when we are better able to manage our floors, we retain more of the moisture and the snowpack and the water that otherwise gets soaked up, literally and figuratively, by the vegetation that's grown which creates more fuel for fire, and so it becomes a a very difficult vicious cycle. I think we need to re-examine the efforts between monies for fire suppression and fire uh and forest management to try to figure out how we can better um complement the two efforts.

Yeah. Appreciate it very much, Mr. Costa. Thank you. Uh, gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Baird is recognized.

Thank you, Mister Chairman and Ranking Member, and um you know I appreciate the interest uh in the forest products. I'm always been in interested in agriculture and I got a brother that that owns a mill on the home farm but uh so so forestry is an important part of agriculture in my opinion. So uh Mister Joseph uh I would like to back up a moment. I thought I heard you say that in in uh you cannot go in and and harvest or remove trees after a fire or those downed trees. And the reason I wanna do that, my question focuses on um on uh those headers as fuels and I'm I'm interested in biochar, I am interested in biomass utilization and other value added products so but but go back and and repeat if you will, unless I misunderstood that what you said about

Some places you can, some places you can't, for example wilderness areas, you can't go in to a wilderness area after the fact and use mechanical treatments and replant that forest in a wilderness area that's restricted under the nineteen sixty four wilderness act. The roadless rule has restrictions about what you can and can't do on the land base. The Northwest Forest Plan in the Pacific Northwest that governs twenty four million acres tells you where and what you can't do on national forest. So yes, a vast majority of the landscape, including after a fire, are unavailable for management. Even if they do, you have to go through a process that I would love to talk to you about. that needs to be changed if we do wanna do active management and replant our forests.

Well then that in regard I I agree with my colleague from California, you know that makes no sense to me when in agriculture you either you know and and in Indiana I know through forest management we've been able to the the net gain in productivity aboard feet has increased over over the use of forest management and so you know uh Being an agriculturalist, I don't understand why we can't harvest that, but but but aside from that, um I'm really interested in the in the biochar idea, that and I have realized there's some concern about that, but then other biomass utilization where we can make energy out of or fuel out of those by-products, if if we harvested them. So I'd just be interested in your thoughts in that regard.

We w there's extraordinary opportunity there, and currently the renewable fuel standard and how we treat biomass and woody biomass is really important and critical. And my understanding that there are ongoing conversations to try to come up with a bipartisan solution to make sure that we treat wood equitably in terms of policy and the law and the renewable fuel standard so there's an extraordinary opportunity for all these other uses of of wood and biomass that support society including as you said energy and fuel. Right now, by the way, woody biomass from federal lands does not qualify. for the renewable fuel standard. So we're leaving a hundred and ninety-three million acres and all the outputs from those lands don't qualify for the RFS. That needs to change.

Well thank you, and then uh you know I'm gonna preface my next uh question uh which will be to Mister Ko, but um but Mister Glover, you're the sheriff, and I I read something or saw something interesting. Back in nineteen forty eight they they moved in through low flying planes cuz too difficult a terrain to get them any other way they brought beavers into a valley there in utah they called it flying beavers and uh they and and then the the uh video of all that got misfiled for sixty some years so those beavers worked in that valley all that time and when when you had a and when you had a giant fire uh that area was not involved because they built so many dams and worked so effectively i just I just bring that up because we're talking about nature and and and uh national forests and sometimes if you let nature alone uh it'll take care of itself. But I don't ask you to comment on that because anyway my question my my question uh Mr. Cole goes to the the role of the universities and you've worked with the University of California Extension Service, you've also worked with the with the California Farm Bureau, as well as NACO um so I just would appreciate your thoughts and we got about forty some seconds uh appreciate your thoughts on the importance of uh these extension services, some of these other the cooperation with the counties and so on in that regard to fire prevention

The

forest management.

the knowledge that the extension service can um put on the ground at the local level is

Thank you very much, and uh my time's up, I yield back, Mister Chairman.

Be.

Mister Vasquez, you are recognized.

Thank you so much, Chairman Neuhaus. Uh, thank you to our uh panel of experts today. Um, I represent New Mexico's second district, home to four national forests. I hunt coos deer and myrtle quail in the Coronado. I fish for Gila trout and backpack in the Gila. Hunt turkey in Lincoln and I hike and camp in the Ceibola. I know these areas very well. It's where I prefer to st- uh spend my time uh when I'm back home. Uh, what I can tell you is that every forest is different, should be managed different, and should operate with a modernized management plan and adequate and stable staffing. Uh partnerships are necessary and should be expanded, but it also can't replace adequate forest service staffing as well as new management plans. Uh but today I wanna focus on an issue that's very important to my district, and that is the secure rural schools program. For decades SRS has helped counties provide the basic services that people count on every day. such as schools and roads. And when that funding is delayed or uncertain, local leaders are forced to make impossible decisions about budgets, staffing and public safety. That's why last August I convened a meeting in Catron County, a bedroom community to the Helay National Forest, in a very rural part of my district, and spoke with stakeholders, including Republican state representatives, local elected officials, teachers and others about the importance of reauthorizing SRS. That's why I also introduced the bipartisan Secure Real Schools Reauthorization Act with the late Congressman LaMalfa, just last year, which ultimately passed with bipartisan support, which is a win that was applauded by state lawmakers from both sides of the aisle back home in New Mexico. But that funding is set to lapse again in twenty twenty seven. I believe our communities deserve certainty, not year to year uncertainty over whether they're gonna have the resources that they need. So my first question is for Supervisor Ko. Um could you tell me as a supervisor what happens when SRS funding isn't reliable, when it's delayed, and Congress waits until the last minute to act? How does that impact your budget and your operations?

It creates massive budget and uncertainty. Um unlike some other entities, a county has to budget with the revenue that they have available. Um And when that d did not come through this past several years with the um expiring of SRS, it required us to make hard decisions. Um as I indicated previously, delay road work. But it goes way beyond just roads and schools in in the impact to our to our budget.

Thank you, Supervisor Cohen, I can tell you in one of the most rural schools in Kamado, uh New Mexico. Uh if we didn't get that done in time, uh they were gonna let go about a dozen teachers from the local elementary school. That's the impact in in that community. So thank you, I appreciate you sharing that insight.

Yes.

Uh Sheriff Glover, I'd like to ask you the same question from a public safety perspective. Uh what does stable SRS funding mean for law enforcement and emergency response in particular in counties with large amounts of federal land uh where tax revenue is limited and how does that lapse or delay in SRS funding negatively impact public safety?

Yeah, uh many law enforcement agencies and sheriff's offices across the west are dependent on SRS funding uh in the Pacific Northwest. I have with me uh Hood River County Sheriff Matt English, uh large forest uh in his county, lots of visitors, four million visitors uh in his county. I've I got a similar s less forest in my county, but I get about five between five and six million visitors that come through our our county. We're small counties of twenty, you know, ten thousand, twenty thousand uh population, so that SRS funding

Thank you so much Sheriff, and that's why these bedrock programs like PILT and SRS are so important to the rural west. And I think in this committee and in Congress as a whole, uh we have to look at solutions for permanent reauthorization and appropriation, so that your counties don't have to go through this every year. And that's the same message that I've been hearing from my County Commissioners, uh back home. They still have to pass budgets, they still have to hire deputies, keep roads maintained, support their schools, and they can't put those responsibilities on hold while they wait for Washington to get its act together. So SRS funding truly is about supporting and keeping rural communities safe. Uh this program is set to lapse again next spring and this coni this committee has to continue to work together in a bipartisan fashion to prevent any more delays or lapses in funding uh the health of both our forest and our rural communities and their economies depend on it thank you all thank you Chairman I yield back.

Thank you Mister Vasquez. And I recognize a gentleman from California Mister Valadao.

Thank you Mister Chairman, thank you to all of our uh witnesses for your time today. Um while many of my constituents don't live in or near

Yes, as other members of the panel have already indicated, there are barriers every day to active forest management. And and I'll refer back to an example that um occurred several decades ago. It was part of the Quincy Library group where they did a um a shaded fuel break, similar that was shown in the in the photograph today. And the moon fire which was raging out of control got to that and dropped down

Alright. Miss Whitney, farmers in my district depend on water uh that originates in forested watersheds. Are there current federal policies, permitting requirements, or funding limitations delaying watershed-focused forest management projects from being carried out at a scale needed?

I think funding delays and staffing across the

Alright, thank you. Mister Ko, Mr. Ko, as Congress appropriates money and reauthorizes as Congress appropriates money and reauthorizes forest management forest management programs each year, programs each year what metrics should we use to determine whether these what metrics should we use to determine whether these investments are making

Looking at the results, I would say the measurements of the outcomes are are not being looked at correctly. Um our forests are in in much poorer condition. Um as you your previous question about water off of the forest, when I left Monday I w I watched the last of my irrigation water for this summer coming down the ditch. When I get home tomorrow, it's gonna be dry. And that's because all my water comes off of National Forest land that has anywhere from um magnitudes of more trees per acre than it can support. That water's being consumed up there with small stunted trees.

I guess I should have asked you the same question that I asked Miss Whitney. Uh, are there any current funding uh federal policies, permitting requirements or funding limitations delaying watershed focused forest management projects from being carried out to the scale needed?

Absolutely.

Any one specifics you wanna highlight?

Um one that Congressman Lamoffa worked on for years, the SITES project. This is an off-stream reservoir project.

Yeah, from my understanding, SITES has been in the planning stages for sixty years now.

Yeah, that was the number I was gonna use.

Yeah, it's a l little longer than my life, but I'm not sure if it's longer than the chairman's life. Sheriff Clever, in your testimony you mentioned difficulties in working with US Forest Management uh force law enforcement uh especially uh after the national m- memorandum of uh agreement was modified in twenty th twenty three. How can Congress straighten the partnership between law enforcement, division and county sheriff offices across the country as they work towards their shared goal?

Yeah, w thank you for your question. We we need to get the criminal prohibitions rule off. table repealed, whether that's through uh this legislation, H R sixty eight O two or another means. Uh and just get back to the table. I think we can solve this problem in short order actually. We love these guys. We like working together with them. We uh we work very well together. But we can't we can't sustain uh you know them usurping our authority and jurisdiction on a state and county level at at you know, like they did with this rule making. So if we can get that rule off the table and get back to the table, I I have great confidence that we'll resolve this issue and move forward.

Alright, my time is up. Yield back to the chairman. Thank you.

Thank the gentleman who should understand that the next hearing he'll only get two and a half minutes uh to ask questions. So um I think that completes the round of questioning from our members on the committee at uh b before we adjourn what I'd like to do is give the ranking member uh Mr. Vasca as an opportunity for a closing comment and then I may have some comments at the end as well.

Thank you so much uh Chairman, thank you as well again to our guest for being here in Washington for this important subcommittee hearing. Um I'm have the I'm glad we had the opportunity to discuss the importance of durable and lasting partnerships in forest and rural communities, and discuss a regulatory environment that is conducive to improving forest health and conditions especially during times when we need it most in this heightened wildfire risk season that we face today. And it's also important for us to remember that our forests are the land of many uses, uh and stakeholders do deserve a voice. Uh however that uh shouldn't come at the expense of getting projects on the ground when we need them the most. I do just wanna briefly address wildfire risk because New Mexico faced two of our largest wildfires in our state's history in just uh the last three years, including right in my district, the Black Fire and the Gila National Forest. And there are many solutions, um some of them which have been discussed here today. Uh, but I wanna just continue to throw some of these out there as we continue this conversation uh that includes protecting the integrity of our watersheds, that includes maintaining trails to cut fire lines which requires volunteer and staff and conservation corps and other folks uh to do that work. Um, it requires funding and support uh for volunteer fire departments. That's one of the biggest issues that we face in my district, oftentimes as the first responders. Uh, improving the communication infrastructure for the network of first responders in rural communities is also incredibly important when that fire lookout first spots the fire uh we've gotta take action and those lines of communication are often broken in rural counties like those in my district I mentioned the full funding and reauthorization of SRS properly staffed regions and individual units adequate staffing for the development and implementation of new forest plans under the twenty twelve rule Modernized prescriptive burn practices, I can't emphasize that enough. Uh, that was the cause of the Hermits Peak-Calf Canyon fire in northern New Mexico, which was completely preventable and has devastated that community. Um, easing regulations on fuel thinning and timber harvesting where it's appropriate in different forest units. And of course, the Fix Our Forest Act, which I also supported, uh, that provides some of those common sense solutions. Uh, we've gotta tackle these issues sooner than later. And certainly those partnerships that we build with local governments, tribes and stakeholders uh have to be there, have to be solid and we gotta have adequate staffing to ensure that we can execute on those partnerships. Thank you, Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Vas- Vasquez. Uh, first of all, I'd just like to thank everyone uh for joining us today to take part in this important discussion on a very important topic and particularly I wanna thank the witnesses uh I b- I believe I can s- b- speak on behalf of the entire subcommittee when I say that we do deeply appreciate you traveling across the entire country uh to share your wisdom with us here in Congress. Uh, just as the Forest Service depends on their partners to to as steward our public lands, we in Congress greatly benefit from people like you coming all the way to Washington DC uh to provide us with such thoughtful and answers to our maybe not so thoughtful questions. So thank you very much for that. Um, your experiences shaped the policies that we championed and a hundred and ninety-three million acres of cherished public land are better off because the four of you are here today so thank you thank you very much for that. Um, under the rules of the committee, the record of today's hearing will remain open for ten calendar days to receive additional materials and supplementary written responses from the witnesses to any question posed by a member, so take note of that. Uh, with that, this hearing is on the subcommittee on forestry and agriculture is adjourned. Thank you very much.