Hearings to examine the President's Budget Request for the United States Forest Service for Fiscal

Morning, the committee will come to order. Today we're gonna hear from Tom Schulz, the Chief of the United States Forest Service. We will be discussing the fiscal year twenty twenty seven budget for the forest service. So, uh, welcome Chief Schulz. Schulz, uh, to inform my colleagues on how we're gonna proceed this morning, I'll begin with my opening statement. be followed by an opening statement from Ranking Member, Make yourself easy to understand. Senator Heinrich. We will then turn to Chief Schultz for his opening prepared remarks.

Good.

No, but this is my, my, my, my, my, my, my, my, uh, my, my, my, my, my, my, my. Followed by questions from Senators who will be, looks like we've got some members from the Intel Committee with us who will be

Ob- obviously dealing with some Intel.

V- very, very important stuff. Um, we'll then turn to Chief Schultz after that, um, for his prepared remarks and that will be followed by questions uh from senators um it will be recognized in order of seniority for those present at the gavel and then in order of seniority um uh i- or in order of arrival rather um uh following the gavel. Uh so Chief Schultz welcome back to the committee and let me also say uh welcome um to Utah as far as the forest service goes. You could not have chosen a better place for the US Forest Service headquarters than Salt Lake City, and I suspect you'll quickly come to accre- appreciate why Utah's settlers looked across the valley uh, uh, when, when they entered in eighteen forty-seven and said this is the place. Utah is home to a vast amount of forest service land, nearly a quarter of the roughly thirty-five million acres of federally owned land in our state. is in the hands of the Forest Service. Generations of Utahns have li- lived alongside those beautiful landscapes and cared for them and helped preserve the beauty and character that make them so remarkable today. Western states uniquely understand the challenges facing these lands, and are keenly aware of the constant stewardship that our forests require. For decades, however, the agency's authority became concentrated, far from the actual forests themselves and even further from the communities that tend to be most affected by the Forest Service's decisions. As the bureaucracy expanded, decisions took longer to reach, active management became more difficult, and local expertise was often treated as secondary to directives coming from Washington, D. C. The consequences of that concentration have taken a heavy toll. Overgrown forests, crumbling infrastructure, growing fuel loads, mounting maintenance backlogs, and increased wildfire risk. These challenges are, uh, the entirely predictable consequences of a philosophy that prioritizes preservation for its own sake, while neglecting the active management that healthy forests require. Relocating the headquarters to Utah acknowledges that these lands are best managed, closest to the people who live, work and depend on them every day. Despite these challenges, uh, uh, you've made very significant progress. Reciting the two thousand one roadless rule is a perfect example. For more than two decades, the roadless rule imposed a rigid nationwide framework across many millions of acres of forest service land. that failed to account for local conditions, wildfire threats, watershed needs, and the realities facing, uh, so many of our Western communities. The inability to build or maintain roads has made restoration projects more difficult, delayed fuel reduction work, limited timber access, and complicated wildfire response efforts. All the while, our forest grew denser, fuel loads accumulated, insect infestation spread, and catastrophic fires became far more severe. Healthy forests require active management. They require thinning, timber harvest, fuel reduction, grazing, watershed restoration, and strategies tailored to on-the-ground conditions. The idea that forests can be left untouched has proven unsustainable and for many, dangerous. Under your tenure, it's been refreshing to see the Forest Service show a greater willingness to work alongside states and localities, uh, rather than treating them as obstacles to be just dealt with, uh, or managed around. The cooperative agreement signed with Utah is an excellent example of what's possible when local expertise and federal resources are aligned. And it's my hope that this approach will continue to guide the agency moving forward. Those types of partnerships matter because the scale of the challenge facing the agency cannot be overstated. The Forest Service deferred maintenance backlog has increased by more than eighty percent over the last five years. Roads, bridges, trails, campgrounds, water systems and other infrastructure continue to age while repair costs rise faster, then projects can be completed and the federal estate continues to grow. Congress established a legacy restoration fund to help address that problem, and this budget proposes reauthorizing it. I support efforts to reduce the backlog, but we also need reforms that prevent the problem from continually compounding year after year. No amount of spending will solve the problem if the underlying management never changes. We cannot continue expanding federal liabilities while roads, trails, campgrounds, and critical infrastructure continue to fall deeper into disrepair. There are, of course, encouraging signs that the agency is moving in a better direction. Timber targets are increasing, partnerships with Western states are expanding. The Forest Service is taking a more practical approach toward fuel reduction, grazing, and restoration work. But substantial challenges remain, and this budget hearing is an opportunity to examine whether the agency is aligning its priorities and resources with the realities as they exist on the ground. Our national forests are indeed national assets. woven into the story of the country itself. Keeping them strong for future generations requires care, vigilance, and a recognition that these lands will not remain healthy if they're simply left unattended. The American people expect these forests to be protected before disaster strikes and not after. I've got the o- utmost confidence in your ability to navigate these unique challenges, and I look forward to today's discussion. So again, um, uh, welcome Chief, and, uh, I now recognize, uh, uh, the ranking member, Senator Heinrich, for his opening statement.

Thank you, Chairman Lee, and, uh, good morning Chief Schultz, thank you for being here today to discuss the Forest Services fiscal year twenty twenty seven budget request. Um, last year I found the proposed budget deeply troubling and, uh, this year, when taken in the context of what have been a relentless series of attacks on our public lands, the public the uh the budget seems um disappointing and irresponsible. Um, over the last year, we saw a chaotic hollowing out of the Forest Service s- staff, with the firing and rehiring in some cases of vital positions. In addition, deferred resignations, early retirements. Ultimately, we saw a loss of well over five thousand, roughly five thousand, eight hundred Forest Service employees. Now, I've heard from my constituents who are worried about the Forest Service's ability to carry out basic, uh, responsibilities, everything from trail maintenance to projects to protect infrastructure investments. We saw the Forest Service pull back watershed protections in areas where local communities are actually pleading for politicians in DC to safeguard their water. both in my state and around the country. We saw the Forest Service begin to strip away decades-long habitat protections in backcountry areas the very places that I and my constituents go to hunt elk. On top of that, the Forest Service continues to push forward with a reorganization without a public-facing plan or insurances on - on specifically how this will actually help the Forest Service better manage our forests. So let's be clear. Many of the claims that we will likely hear today, about how the Forest Service supports healthy forests and partnerships with sportsmen, local communities and states, don't match up to what's actually in the proposed budget. For example, when talking about the reorganization, we will hear about a desire to bring Forest Service managers closer to the forest that they manage, something that I support. However, workforce reductions proposed in the budget mostly affect on-the-ground staff. These are the people who actually carry out forest restoration and hazardous fuels work. We will hear claims that the reorganization will not impact the Forest Service's ability to continue to conduct top-notch research, despite this budget actually proposing to eliminate most of the research s- uh centers, something that I hope the uh the Senate and the Congress will revisit. So let's look at the budget. The budget request eliminates the forest and ranged land research program. To zero this program at a at a time when our forests face increasing threats from wildfire from insects from disease and from aridification is short-sighted, and in my view, reckless. We will hear claims about how eliminating regional offices will make the forest service more responsive to state and local governments. I want the forest service to be more responsive to state and local governments, but in the budget we see a total elimination of the state, private, and tribal forestry programs. These programs are important. They're vital for supporting forested landscapes landscapes in the West, where land ownership is split among federal, state, private, and tribal stewards. Eliminating these programs would undermine non-federal forest management. And claiming that states will somehow pick up the bill is unrealistic. It's an abdication of our responsibility to manage these lands today, and for future generations. And then there is the wildfire, the wildland fire program. We're hearing that the reorganization will not move the wildfire program out of the Forest Service, so let's look at the budget. Again, with few details and a passing recognition of the need for future legislation, the budget proposes to move the wildland fire program to the Department of the Interior. Let me be clear, when we are spending our time on make-believe budgets and reorganizations and moving deck chairs around on, on the deck of the ship, it means we're not preparing to fight fires, which is my primary concern in this coming season, which looks like it's gonna be a doozy. When we're willing to lose people who support the agency's ability to conduct research or interact with our state and local partners, we're losing the red card holders who make up incident command teams and the fire militia. I said this last year and I will say it again. I I'm open to new ideas in wildfire policy or, um, better, more efficient organization. But what we've been offered so far is not thoughtful reform. It's a decoupling of the fire management and land management missions. Those things should be done together. They should be one and the same. That that's how we have holistic management of our force. I'm also concerned that the Forest Service is claiming to have achieved ninety percent of the hazardous fuel treatment goals, but by their own account, the acres treated were down nearly thirty percent in twenty twenty-five, compared with twenty twenty-four. Uh, given a budget proposal that doesn't adequately support our communities, doesn't effectively protect watersheds and wildlife habitat, and doesn't seem to, uh, at its core value the people that carry out that work, I have serious concerns about this administration's ability to meet even the baseline land management responsibilities. What this budget shows me is a road map on how to dismantle the forest service. I want to empower the forest service. I want them to be able to manage our forest. So thank you, Chairman, I yield back, and I look forward to, uh, our discussion today.

Thank you. Uh, now recognize Chief Schultz, uh, uh, for his opening statement and your written statement will also be admitted into the record.

Chairman Lee, Ranking Member Heinrich, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me here to testify today. Established in nineteen O five, the USDA's Forest Service is the nation's foremost federal forestry organization. We have the privilege of managing a hundred and fifty-four national forest twenty national grasslands, covering a hundred and ninety-three million acres in forty-three states and Puerto Rico. The Forest Service works with communities, states and local governments, tribes, forest industry, private forest owners, NGOs and others to manage for multiple uses. And collectively, yes, we have shared challenges. Addressing wildfire risk, threats to watersheds, infrastructure strain, the need to support rural economies that depend on healthy forest and grasslands are a top priority for the secretary and me. None of these challenges stop at jurisdictional boundaries. None of them can be solved by the federal government acting alone. They require partnerships in community and tribal members who bring local knowledge, experience, and accountability. The best outcomes happen when we plan and act collectively, especially as the wildfire risk grows and pressure on public lands increases. My focus over the past year as chief has been a return to fundamentals, keeping people and communities safe, reducing risk to communities, and actively managing forest and grasslands so that they remain productive. Additionally, we want to increase and improve public access for recreation and other national forest system uses. We talked about fire. Wildfire readiness remains central to our mission and year-to-date we're already seeing more fires. As of early May we've already hired about ten thousand five hundred firefighters, which is eleven percent more than we had done last year at this time, and eight percent more than we had done in twenty twenty-four. This is about a thousand more firefighters on board this year compared to the same time last year. Our target is eleven thousand three hundred firefighters, which is the same number. From twenty twenty four to twenty five, non-red-carded employees have increased from more than ninety eight hundred to over ten thousand three hundred employees. Bottom line overall is that we will have more than four hundred and fifty additional responders available this year. Our firefighters are world renowned for their rapid response. This year we will continue to demonstrate the strength that keep fires small, community safe, while also increasing the use of risk reduction tools such as prescribed fire, and mechanical thinning. We've already thinned and used prescribed fire in more than two million acres for this year to date. Just so you know, last year we als- was also predicted to be a bad fire season. We had twelve percent more starts during the season, yet we burned half as many acres. The Forest Service initial attack success rate was the highest in twelve years. Last year we were also very safe. We reduced our OSHA recordable incidents by almost fifteen percent from twenty-four to twenty-five. Much of the Western United States, the forest, have mortality on productive timberlands. It now exceeds our growth rates. particularly in the national forest system. This is driven by fires, insects and disease. In other words, our forests are dying faster than they're growing. The Forest Service currently harvests timber on less than point five percent of the total forested acres every year. And despite our reserves of forest land, we still rely heavily on Canada to meet our domestic timber supply and our demand, which is about twenty-five percent of the lumber currently comes from Canada. Active forest management is not optional. It's how we restore health to our forests, it's how we reduce fire risk, keep them open for public access and productive. Expanding timber production, modernizing grazing processes and accelerating reforestation are all part of restoring forest and grassland health and productivity. Last year we planted two hundred and eighty-five thousand acres of forest, and we this was more than we've done in the last twenty-five years. Our front-line work force is critical to expanding the management of the national forest. This year I committed to hiring two thousand seasonal employees for the summer of twenty-six to ensure they were able to do just that. We've made significant progress. We've hired more than eight hundred and eighty seasonal employees so far this year to date. Um, and we also looked to hire another seven hundred and forty-five that are gonna start within the next four to eight weeks which is critical to our mission's support. Our national forests provide far more than clean water and places to recreate. They're also working lands that support America's energy, security, and innovation. Energy security is national security. Responsible resource use strengthens our nation's economy and resilience while upholding our multiple use mission. The fiscal year twenty-seven budget that the President proposes focuses on forest service efforts to actively manage the national forest for timber production, recreation, range, critical minerals and permitting for energy development. Additionally, the budget emphasizes efficient and effective fire management by building upon our current practices to unify the federal suppression response apparatus into the US wildland fire service under Department of Interior. The unification of wildland fire under DOI, one bureau will allow the forest service to focus on its remaining core mission, of delivering critical outputs and services to the National Forest System lands. Twenty-seven budget firmly supports the President's timber production goals by significantly increasing funding for active management. The budget also proposed to increase the amount retained by the agency for ranchers and permittees grazing fees for reinvestment in the National Forest System lands. Our public lands offer some of the best recreational opportunities in the world. National Forests alone receive more than a hundred sixty million visitors annually and we maintain safe reliable infrastructure for these visits and other management it's critical. That's why the budget, President's budget requests reauthorization of the Great American Outdoors Act. Similar to the twenty-six request, the President's twenty-seven budget reduces or eliminates some aspects of federal funding in the Forest Service budget, to better balance appropriate roles of federal and state governments. In closing, the twenty-seven budget request underscores our commitment to focus on investments in products from the national forest that are critical, supporting rural communities. We are prioritizing fundamentals in managing our forest for their intended purposes and ensuring maximum value for the taxpayer. Thank you for inviting me here today. I look forward to answering your questions.

Thank you so much. A and again your uh your written statement will also be admitted to the record. We'll now start our uh five minute rounds of questions and uh I will begin with that. Um we we are absolutely thrilled that you're moving this service to Salt Lake City. It really is a good place and I I think you will agree and and once you're settled into the Wallace Bennet building in in downtown Salt Lake City I I'm sure you'll agree. Um, can you explain to us briefly just how this, this reorganization is gonna help reduce bureaucratic red tape, improve on the ground forest management, and strengthen collaboration?

Yes, Senator Lee, thank you for the question. Um, just so folks realize, we have statutes, we have regulations, we have a manual and we have directives. We have over thirty-six hundred directives that the forest service has promulgated. More than twenty-two hundred have come from regional offices. And so regional offices have historically had a function of not just administering programs and delivering service to the public but also delivering policy, and that policy has created um in many cases roadblocks to get work done. So in a big part of this reorganization is to move, as was mentioned previously, decision-making closer to the ground, and it's also removing the policy-making capacity of that regional office structure that currently exists. So r- policy will only be developed through the Washington office, not across the country. We are moving to a state-based model, uh, where we'll have state directors, um, in many co-located in the capital cities in many of the states. Um, in essence, we're trying to take a step back and look at how we empower folks on the ground, and make those decisions. The other piece that we're looking at is we reduce levels of management. We're gonna push those resources closer to the ground. So over time we would actually expect to see more employees on districts and forest, where much of that day-to-day work gets done, and where we serve the public.

Great. And Can you confirm that the reorganization won't have any adverse impact on on wildfire uh operations this season?

Yeah, Mister Chairman, we've made a conscious effort that any changes that are being proposed for regional offices will not occur after the wildfire season in the west. Um, so we are looking to delay that until such time so we do mitigate any potential impacts to our fighter fighting capacity.

Thank you. Now the uh the federal government owns sixty-seven percent of the land in Utah, about two thirds, and the Forest Service is responsible for about a quarter of that land. Past administrations have at times been unwilling to work with the state, imposing uh their agenda, preservation agenda or otherwise, over common sense active management strategies. You're changing course, and you're choosing to work with states instead of against them. The cooperative agreement that you signed with Utah for example, prioritizes expanding timber production, accelerating forest restoration, and increasing uh the fuel reduction treatments. Um how does this model of expanding the state partnerships improve the Forest Service's ability to manage these lands and to do so responsibly?

Uh, Mister Chairman, yeah, we have a hundred and ninety-three million acres that we manage, and that is beyond the capacity of any one agency to do that effectively. So we need partnerships, and the Forest Service historically has had lots of partnerships. But what we realize is that states, tribes, counties bring expertise and manpower to the table that we wouldn't otherwise have. So these new agreements that we're looking at, which Utah was one of the agreements that we signed, we're actually looking for the states to take a more active role in helping us administer the management of the national forest system lands. That could be on forest management activities. It could be on recreation. We have the Explore Act now which allows uh recreation to be um co-managed with the states as well as well as tribes and counties. So we're really looking to

Wonderful, and I applaud you for using those. We've seen the consequences when it doesn't happen, they're not pretty, and when it does happen, uh, things work much better. There are no better stewards of the land, of any land, than those who depend on it and live closest to it. And our our nation's ranchers exemplify that. The recent memorandum of understanding between the Forest Service uh and the BLM underscores the positive impact grazing has on landscape, health and on communities throughout the West. Can you speak about the importance of targeted grazing for fuel reduction, and what the Forest Service is doing to promote the availability of vacant allotments, especially as our ranchers face extreme droughts and wildfire conditions, uh that are really bad this season as as you've demonstrated by these terrifying charts.

Uh, Mister Chairman, so when we talk about active management, active management includes grazing management, includes forest management, includes reforestation, all of those things. Um, grazing has currently occurred, that's the most heavily permitted use that we have across the national forest. About forty percent of the national forest and grasslands are permanent for grazing. So it is a key part of our management strategy for reducing wildfire risk. Um, we have twenty national grasslands. It's a key component. And targeted grazing in particular allows us to target certain seasons with certain numbers to move in there. During certain, you know, spring, uh, green up of certain species, you can go in there and you can remove that fuel. Um, even cheatgrass, you can remove that fuel as well with grazing. So, we see that as a tremendous opportunity. You specifically asked about vacant allotments. We have about ten million acres that historically would have been available for grazing um and those - in some of those instances there's not fencing on it, there's not water development. we're prioritizing about a million and a half acres right now this year to make available for grazing in the short term the other thing that we've done particularly in utah we had some uh a large fire the monroe mountain fire last year um we had some grazing allotments that were vacant and that when permittees were impacted by those wildfires we were able to move their cattle over to some of those vacant allotments so there's a there's a rationale to afford opportunities for permittees if they are impacted by disaster to move their cattle elsewhere but we are prioritizing identifying those vacant allotments

Thank you. Ranking Member Heinrich. Chairman Lee said partnerships matter. You talked about the importance of partnerships, particularly with states.

Mm-hmm.

Um, but this budget eliminates the funding for the state private and tribal account that really supports those, partnerships. Talk to me, uh, I don't understand how those two things line up.

So, Mr. Chairman, uh, Senator Heinrich, um, historically, the state and private programs, um, were set up by the federal government to encourage the states to develop forestry programs. And I have worked in state government for almost thirty years, so I've got extensive experience in those programs. Um, what we've seen over time is that states have developed more expertise, they've developed greater capacity to do much of the work that state and private does. Now, states do come to rely on that funding over time, but what we're proposing here is to reduce that It doesn't mean we're not gonna still cooperate. We still cooperate extensively in wildfire management, um, and even land management discussions and opportunities. It just means that there would be a greater reliance for the funding to come from the States and those other partners, but that we would still consult, we would still work directly with States. We would have cooperative agreements. Um, there just would not necessarily be the same funding available that we've had in the past historically.

I- if Congress rejects that suggestion, will you commit to dispersing the funds as appropriated by Congress?

Excuse me, sir, if you could just

I- if Congress rejects the funding level suggested in the President's budget, will you commit to dispersing the funds as appropriated?

Um, Mister Chairman,

For that purpose?

Senator Heinrich, yes, we would disburse the funds as required by law. Yes, sir.

Um, one of the things that you said in your opening was that national forests are more than clean water and places to recreate. Um, clean water and recreation are what drive my state's economy. And a great example of that is the, the Pecos watershed, um, which economically supports agriculture, recreation, tourism, uh, hunting and fishing. Last month the administration officially canceled the withdrawal application of the upper Pecos watershed, and, and did that over the objection of, to my knowledge, all of the local elected leadership, as well as the agricultural community, um, this has been an overwhelmingly popular initiative that was driven by the local community. Why didn't the views of the local community carry more weight in the decision-making process, particularly when it's my understanding that there are no current plans for mining operations in this area?

Uh, Mister Chairman, Senator Heinrich, um, I think you're right, there are no current plans that are identified to us yet. i think what we're trying to make sure is that lands are available and open for multiple use whether that be grazing whether that be timber whether that be mining so i think that's the overall perspective is that we wanna make sure lands are available and open for those uses

the the frustration i think of the local community is one they don't feel like they were adequately um consulted and two they lost other multiple uses as a result of uh mining impacts and spills on that river where fisheries were deeply impacted, irrigation was not able to be conducted because the the Pecos River was um, you know, awash in um, uh, uh, uh, mine tailings. So, we have to, we have to not do, multiple use doesn't mean every single use on every single acre. And I would just, we've heard a lot of, of lip service about listening to local communities. But I think we actually need to do that, especially in these cases where the community is, um, w- where the community is of one mind. Literally there is, to my knowledge, no support for, uh, new mining in this area. Um, I wanna go back to wildfire, uh, hazardous fuels treatments in twenty twenty four. We treated four point two nine million acres. Last year we treated three point one. Um, why the drop and and why I wanna understand why funds from the infrastructure bill were used to reduce the workforce, because none of us discussed that as a authorized use when we wrote that legislation. It was a great example of bipartisan legislation, but we thought we were authorizing those infrastructure funds in order to get into those watersheds and reduce fuels. and instead those infrastructure funds were were used to fund the resignation program, is how is that an authorized use?

Mister Chairman, Senator Heinrich, just to clarify on the field's numbers, um, in twenty twenty five we traded about three point three million acres collectively. When you look at the

Three three point three?

yes, sir.

Okay.

When you look at the land

So down from four point three.

So it was four point two eight six in twenty four,

Okay.

but I'm gonna give you some more data. So if you go back to twenty twenty, we typically look at trends, data. We don't try to pick out any one given year. So between twenty twenty and twenty twenty five with that six year period, um, we treated on average about three point five seven million acres per year over that five year period or that six year period. This year our target is three point six million acres. So we're right in there with the average that we've done over the last six years. And we'll continue to prioritize those acres. The w- the big thing I want to point out this year as we look forward, um, last year at this time we had prescribed fire acres, um, we treated the entire year about one point one million acres. This year, year-to-date, we're at about one point five three. So we've averaged one point six million acres a year just with prescribed fire, and this year we're just about right there this early in the season. So we feel we've made a lot of progress, um, in terms that we are prioritizing field treatments, um, just so we're clear on that.

OK.

I mean, any given year, things can be up, they can be down. And like we talked about conditions, we'll talk about that more this year. I've tried to give most of you maps of your states to kind of show you the tough conditions. when conditions are that difficult in in oregon for instance right now we know that snowpack the snow tail data is about what about less than twenty percent of average so our ability to go out and conduct prescribed fire right now is challenged because we put fire on the landscape when conditions are as difficult as they are it will it will challenge us

sure and using uh infrastructure funds for the

so what we did was as as part of the drp process we had obligations to pay folks out there was about

production of the workforce

folks that that took the drp process to leave the agency early and we had all the funds that we had to look at that we had available to us and those are funds that we had to accommodate that we had about a seven hundred

i i just wanna be real clear i don't think any of us voted for funding in the infrastructure bill to be used to reduce the workforce we that was that was funding that was really focused on on watershed treatment

so sir um we were we had a shortfall of about seven hundred fifty million dollars in our budget

you mean But you don't get to just pull money from anywhere. I mean, it has to be authorized for that use.

We think what we did was legal, sir.

It may be legal. It wasn't what any of us had in mind for those funds.

Yes, sir. Senator Bricell.

Uh, thanks, Mr. Chairman. Thanks so much for being here. I'm grateful for what you've been doing in terms of, uh, all the, uh, the issues in in Wyoming. You've been to the state, you've visited with people. Uh, you, you know, been to Riverton, had meetings, all of these things have been tremendous and - and I hear great, great feedback from the people of Wyoming on - on the work that you've been doing. So thank you very much for that. I wanted to just, uh, talk about vacant allotments. And you know, I have a bill currently before the Senate, S two eleven. It's called the Ranch Act, resiliency for ranching and natural conservation health act. It - it's - allows the temporary use of vacant grazing allotments during extreme events and disasters. especially on vacant allotments on our national forest lands. Uh, the past wildfire season, you know, one of the worst we've seen in the past decade. Thank you for coming today with the maps for all of us to see from what's going on, uh, in our own states with, uh, with the ongoing problems we're having with moisture and the need for that, and that you clearly have a good assessment of the situation, uh, which is great, con- greatly concerning to all of us. So we're anticipating this year is gonna be a bad wildfire season. The, more important now than ever,

Uh, Mister Chairman Cenebrasso, um,

Mm.

I made, gave an example before, this past year we had the Monroe Mountain fire, um, in Utah. and we had multiple allotments that were impacted by that. We did have some vacant allotments. We were able to transfer those cattle onto that, those vacant allotments. So it's something that's super important for ranchers and permittees across the landscape. Um, and so the more intent that we have from Congress on something like that, it'll just expedite the process in terms of getting through that to be able to transfer those from allotments that have been impacted to those that might be available.

Yeah, I wanna talk next about grasslands grazing. Another one of the bills in front of the Senate, S twenty eight seventy eight, it's called the Grasslands Grazing Act. Livestock grazing on federal lands has a strong tradition in Wyoming and certainly all across the West. Federal grazing is a necessary tool for wildfire prevention and for promoting range land health. Uh, widely used by both the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. The Forest Service manages the national forest and national grasslands. Livestock grazing is done on both of these. Uh, so I was pleased that Congressman Hageman from Wyoming was able to get the house companion to my bill, included in the farm bill just passed the house last month. Does this legislation still have your agency's support?

Yes, sir, the USDA does support the intent of this bill. And we'd like to continue with the committee to ensure that's passage.

And then in terms of collaborating with the states, already this year, uh, we have all seen fires, uh, and they've been in Wyoming as well. We've talked a little bit about that. Just last month, the Bighorn Recreation Canyon saw a large Fire took a joint federal response to help control the burn. Uh, rural communities in the west are bracing for what will likely be another devastating wildfire season. Um, as more incidents start and suppression resources are spread thin, federal and state agencies, I believe, need to work together. How is the Forest Service engaging state, local, and private partners to ensure that we can effectively respond to wildfires?

Mr. Chairman Senebroso, I think the first thing is we have very good um relationships with the state foresters. So, Miss Norris is your state forester and we talk with her on a regular basis. So we have various agreements in place with the different states, and those are typically cost share agreements. We have a master agreement. Um, and those agreements afford opportunities to clarify long before the fire season how we're gonna pay for fires and, and the response that's gonna be required, whether it's with local government or with the state. So, we have those agreements in place across the country, including Wyoming, and we have active ongoing communication with the state foresters and those entities on a regular basis.

Thanks. Kelly Norris is terrific. She's been here to testify on a couple of occasions. So thanks for pointing out how much closely you're wor- you're working with her.

Yes, sir.

Wanted to talk about timber production. The Forest Service has been following the new executive orders to increase timber production. So I'm supportive of the steps the Trump administration has been making to improve timber production since the last administration hindered so many, uh, timber plants, timber operations. Can you give us an update on how the agency has been managing an increase in timber production?

Yes, sir. Uh, Mister Chairman Senebroso, we had direction from the, uh, the President and the Executive Order to increase by about twenty-five percent over the next four years, timber production. Congress also in the reconciliation bill direct us to increase what we sell by two hundred and fifty million feet a year for the next ten years so we have increased over year over year we exceeded our targets last year to about two point nine four uh, billion board feet. This year we're on target to sell about three point two billion board feet. To put that in context, my direction to our team has been to implement forest plans. If we implement every forest plan around the country, that's about seven billion board feet. So we are moving in a direction that is moving toward full plan implementation as we do this. It's sustainable, it's consistent, plans have had public involvement, it's the right thing to do.

Thank you. Thanks for your leadership on all of this. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks, Senator Brasso. Senator Wyden.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and uh good. Thank you, Chief. Uh, as you know, I've made it clear that Oregon is facing a wildfire time bomb waiting to detonate. Drought and wildfire conditions are worse than ever. Snowpack is practically nonexistent. And I wanna start by saying between the redu- reduced goals for hazardous fuels treatment, the layoffs, and the budget cuts, I believe that Donald Trump has set Western states up to fail this season and in the years ahead. And here's the math as we see it in Oregon and the West. Your agency is in charge of a hundred and ninety-three million acres of public lands. Apparently the president thinks if you treat two percent of that acreage annually, communities are gonna be okay. Oregonians who are choking on smoke each summer don't have to do the math to say that isn't working. And these are, as I think you've heard me describe the situation, these are not your grandfather's fires. They're bigger, they're hotter, they're more powerful. And my first question is, what additional tools will you use now to start ramping up a more extensive fire protection effort that we can use now and move ahead with in the years ahead? Because that's what we need. This needs to be a two-step But our now and in the days ahead and I think we've talked about some of the ideas here and I think it's important to get them out on the table today so we can get going.

Uh, Mister Chairman, Senator Wyden, first I want to thank you for your leadership in pushing for those tools. Um, you've talked about some of those tools and the use of prescribed fire is something you better have a get for. It's the most effective means that we can use. It's the cheapest means by which we can treat acres. And we have increased. I mentioned previously that so far, year to date, year over year, we've increased the number of acres that we've used prescribed fire on year over year significantly. Um, other tools that we're looking at are firefighters, so in addition to the fields work that we do, it's also looking at our capacity that we have. So year over year we've hired an additional, where we at today, about initial fi- one thousand firefighters compared to last year at this time. We've also red-carded an additional about five hundred folks that are non-fire personnel that will support directly and respond to wildfires. So, today, where we sit today, we're about fifteen hundred personnel above where we were last year at this time, in terms of being prepared for this fire season.

Let's stay with the prescribed fire issue, because in the past I've heard you say that that's up at the top in terms of cost-effectiveness. I think we need a game plan to start earlier, set targets, and make sure that when the weather is right, we can move all year round. Because you said, you know, it's dry now, we're not able to do as much. I think we understand that this is a tougher time. But, you know, we missed some opportunities given the overall, uh, activities in the in the Congress, and we just need to be ready to go when there's an opportunity. We haven't done that before. Will you work with us on that?

Uh, but

High higher targets? Move when there is an opportunity.

Mister Chairman, Senator Wyden, s- yeah, we would definitely work with you on that. That's something we do. And just to put it in perspective, the George Washington Jefferson Forest, which is just south of here, We have a two-week burn window in the Mount Range- Rogers district down there. So we do. We have crews literally waiting on the edge so when those windows open up we can get after the Bozeman district. In Bozeman, Montana, same thing, two weeks. So a lot of times these burn windows are super short and challenging.

Let's just be bolder, chief, because you have bipartisan support around here. This is not the Appropriations Committee. This is the Authorization Committee. And there are other people. Senator, uh, Bud has worked very closely with me on it. It's bipartisan. We've got the tools. Let's work with you and be bolder. Let me talk to you about another tool where I, we may have some good news. As you know, Senator Crapo and I have prosecuted this case, the deal with fire borrowing, for years and years. And we finally got it done. So we don't waste uh opportunities to do prevention and still have the resources to get the bi- big fires uh take taken care of. We don't have to choose any uh longer. The law expires soon. Can you give us the current update? of how much money has been saved as a result of this bipartisan effort. And there's - we're senators all over this committee. Senator Rish has been very s- very supportive. How much money have we saved as a result of what we've done on fire borrowing?

So, Mister Chairman, Senator Wyden, you're right. So, in the past before fire borrowing we had to take money from within the agency and then we couldn't do other work in the agency. So it's been over twelve billion dollars during this period of time that we've been able to - to save from taking it from landowners.

Let's - let's make sure everybody heard that math.

Twelve billion.

Since we passed the fire borrowing law for the first time after all that debate, we've saved twelve billion dollars that you can use.

Yes, sir.

OK. Let me close by way of saying there are a couple of areas, like prescribed fire and the issue we're talking about in terms of rewarding prevention where I think we can be a lot bolder and we better be a lot bolder, because citizens are counting on our taking these steps for one reason, and that is they want more safety in their communities during the fire season. I'm

Mr. Chairman, sir, we're aligned, yes, sir.

Senator Cortez Masto.

Thank you, chief. Thanks for being here. Let can I just say from the uh uh as we begin this conversation, the men and women that work in the Forest Service that I know in Nevada, they're the most incredible people. They're hardcore. They're there all the time. They're trying to do right. They're working uh with our state and local folks, and I thank them. But here's the deal, and we have incredible agreements in Nevada that you've talked about.

Yeah.