    [Senate Hearing 116-342]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 116-342

                              PENDING LEGISLATION

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                          ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                         ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                       on

                                    S. 1665

                                    S. 1723

                                    S. 1967

                                   __________

                                OCTOBER 31, 2019

                                   __________

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                           Printed for the use of the
                   Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

            Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov

                             ______

                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
     39-868               WASHINGTON : 2021

                   COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES

                        LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman
    JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming               JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia
    JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho                RON WYDEN, Oregon
    MIKE LEE, Utah                       MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
    STEVE DAINES, Montana                BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
    BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana              DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan
    CORY GARDNER, Colorado               MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
    CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi        MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
    MARTHA McSALLY, Arizona              ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine
    LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee           CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
    JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota

                          Brian Hughes, Staff Director
                         Kellie Donnelly, Chief Counsel
                    Annie Hoefler, Professional Staff Member
                    Sarah Venuto, Democratic Staff Director
                    Sam E. Fowler, Democratic Chief Counsel
            Bryan Petit, Democratic Senior Professional Staff Member

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                       Page
    Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from Alaska....     1
    Wyden, Hon. Ron, a U.S. Senator from Oregon......................     2
    Manchin III, Hon. Joe, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from
      West Virginia..................................................     3
    Gardner, Hon. Cory, a U.S. Senator from Colorado.................     5
    Barrasso, Hon. John, a U.S. Senator from Wyoming.................     5

                                   WITNESSES

    French, Chris, Deputy Chief, National Forest System, USDA Forest
      Service........................................................     7
    Haskett, Nikki, Acting Assistant Director for National
      Conservation Lands and Community Partnerships, Bureau of Land
      Management, U.S. Department of the Interior....................    14
    McGuire, Brendan, Vice President of Public Affairs, Vail Resorts.    22
    Davis, Lee, Executive Director, Outdoor Recreation Economy
      Initiative, Oregon State University - Portland Center..........    26
    Bannon, Aaron, Environmental Stewardship and Sustainability
      Director, National Outdoor Leadership School...................    38

              ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

    America Outdoors Association:
        Letter for the Record........................................   186
    America Mountain Guides Association:
        Statement for the Record.....................................   187
    Bannon, Aaron:
        Opening Statement............................................    38
        Written Testimony............................................    40
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................    82
    Barrasso, Hon. John:
        Opening Statement............................................     5
    Coalition for Outdoor Access:
        Statement for the Record.....................................   194
    Colorado Ski Country USA, et al.:
        Letter for the Record........................................   199
    Davis, Lee:
        Opening Statement............................................    26
        Written Testimony............................................    29
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................    78
    French, Chris:
        Opening Statement............................................     7
        Written Testimony............................................     9
        Response to Question from Senator Heinrich...................    62
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................    66
    Gardner, Hon. Cory:
        Opening Statement............................................     5
    Haskett, Nikki:
        Opening Statement............................................    14
        Written Testimony............................................    16
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................    71
    Manchin III, Hon. Joe:
        Opening Statement............................................     3
    McGuire, Brendan:
        Opening Statement............................................    22
        Written Testimony............................................    24
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................    75
    Murkowski, Hon. Lisa:
        Opening Statement............................................     1
    Outdoor Alliance and The Conservation Alliance:
        Letter for the Record........................................   201
    Outdoor Recreation Roundtable:
        Letter for the Record regarding S. 1665 and S. 1967..........   206
        Letter for the Record regarding S. 1723......................   208
    Recreational Equipment, Inc. (REI) Co-op:
        Letter for the Record........................................   210
    S. 1665, the Simplifying Outdoor Access for Recreation Act.......    85
    S. 1723, the Ski Area Fee Retention Act..........................   118
    S. 1967, the Recreation Not Red Tape Act.........................   127
    Wyden, Hon. Ron:
        Opening Statement............................................     2

                              PENDING LEGISLATION

                                  ----------

                           THURSDAY, OCTOBER 31, 2019

                                           U.S. Senate,
                     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:06 a.m. in
    Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Lisa
    Murkowski, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.

               OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA

        The Chairman. Good morning, everyone. The Committee will
    come to order.
        Happy Halloween. Happy World Series. Everybody stayed up
    late watching the game. Yeah.
        Senator Daines. Go Nats!
        The Chairman. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It is kind of exciting,
    kind of exciting.
        We are here today talking about good things, recreation,
    and I am going to keep my comments brief because I know
    colleagues have been very engaged in this and a couple of you
    want to make some opening comments as well.
        We have three pieces of legislation before us this morning
    that we are considering. S. 1665, the Simplifying Outdoor
    Access for Recreation Act. Senator Heinrich calls it the SOAR
    Act. I like the acronym there, pretty good.
        S. 1723, the Ski Area Fee Retention Act from Senator
    Gardner. We all love skiing.
        Senator Gardner. And they are open.
        The Chairman. Already?
        Senator Gardner. Already.
        The Chairman. Extraordinary. Can't wait.
        S. 1967, the Recreation Not Red Tape Act from Senator
    Wyden.
        This hearing is building off of one that we held in March
    where we focused on improving access, infrastructure and
    permitting to meet the increasing demand and provide high
    quality recreation opportunities on our federal lands. So the
    proposals that we are looking at today, I think, are a good
    start in addressing those issues.
        Senator Heinrich and Senator Wyden have put forward
    legislation to streamline and simplify the systems in place to
    process permits for our outfitters, guides and non-profits for
    those who operate across the spectrum of federal lands.
        Senator Gardner's bill would help facilitate the private
    investment needed for infrastructure to meet the demands for
    four season recreation at ski areas that operate in our
    nation's forests.
        All of these measures recognize the important role that
    recreation is playing in our economy. According to the Bureau
    of Economic Analysis in 2017, outdoor recreation accounted for
    2.2 percent of current dollar GDP, or about $427 billion. This
    includes not only the impact to sectors like outfitting and
    guiding but all of the associated impact as well, such as
    lodging, transportation, and restaurants.
        In my state we certainly see a big impact from recreation.
    In 2018, Alaska welcomed about 1.17 million cruise ship
    visitors. I think this next year we are up to about 1.3
    million. This is in a state of about 720,000 people. So we
    certainly feel that impact. It is exciting, but sometimes it is
    a little bit overwhelming.
        At the Mendenhall Glacier Visitor Center in Juneau, you
    have hundreds of people who want to get into the facility every
    day, but the facility is designed to hold a fraction of that.
    The Forest Service is developing a master plan to respond to
    the increased visitation, but it is a challenge.
        I was with Senator Lee this past Friday. We had a
    Roundtable out in Moab, and we had an opportunity to go to
    Arches National Park. And to see the pressures--everybody wants
    to get into the park, but how do we accommodate, how do we
    facilitate?
        Our outfitters and our guides are also trying to respond to
    growing demand. Heli-ski and backcountry ski guides want to go
    into new areas in the Chugach National Forest and on the BLM
    lands near Haines, but they are being delayed by a very lengthy
    and expensive environmental review process and a lack of
    capacity at the agencies to process the permits. These are all
    things that we hear about.
        So what we are trying to do is to ensure that our federal
    land managers have the resources and the flexibility needed to
    respond to increasing and changing demand. Again, I appreciate
    our colleagues' work on these very important bills.
        I am going to turn to Senator Manchin before I introduce
    our panel. I know that members, a couple of you, would like to
    make introductions for some of the witnesses who are here this
    morning.
        Senator Manchin. Madam Chairman, if I can, I would like to
    defer to my good friend, Senator Wyden, he has a finance
    meeting coming up, before I give my opening statement.

                     STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM OREGON

        Senator Wyden. Thank you, Senator Manchin and Chair
    Murkowski. I don't want to make this a bouquet tossing contest,
    but not only do I want to thank you for your courtesy so I can
    do this and see if I can get back, but I also very much
    appreciate your leadership on the recreation issues, the work
    we try to do up here in a bipartisan way.
        I think we all understand every member here, particularly
    Westerners, we understand that this recreation effort, Senator
    Heinrich's bill and mine are very compatible, is clearly a
    boost both for our quality of life in the West and for our
    economy and a chance to bring Americans together for better
    health. So I really appreciate this.
        My bill with Congressman Bishop, RNR, Recreation Not Red
    Tape, is basically one that, kind of, updates the policies from
    yesteryear because in yesteryear recreation was not the big
    economic engine that it is today. So that is what our bill is
    all about. That is point one.
        Point number two. We have an Oregonian, Lee Davis, here. He
    knows a lot about recreation. When he headed Mazamas, he was
    responsible for the outfitter and guide permit with the most
    user days in the State of Oregon and he also helped create an
    Oregon State Office of Outdoor Recreation. So Lee, I am going
    to be running back and forth and I have had the courtesy of the
    Chair and the Ranking Member, but colleagues, we are really
    talking to the gold standard when you hear from my fellow
    Oregonian.
        Last point, and I am not interested in starting a big
    controversy, but I want to make sure we talk through the Chair
    and the Vice Chair about this in the days ahead. And that is,
    colleagues, we all know because we read the paper about these
    wildfires that are just ravaging the West and there are a host
    of issues that we are going to have to tackle.
        I just want to put two up on the boards. One of them is
    climate change and I think there are some ways that we can work
    collaboratively on that. And second is collaboration which is
    what we have tried to stress on the ground. That is what the
    end of fire borrowing is all about. That is what stewardship
    has been all about.
        If we want to have colleagues' wonderful places to
    recreate, we are going to have to do something to get an update
    of the policies for fighting fire or we are going to lose some
    of those places.
        Madam Chair and the Vice Chair, I look forward to working
    with you on both fronts and to Lee, I will be back and forth.
        Thank you, Madam Chair.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Wyden.
        Senator Manchin.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. JOE MANCHIN III,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA

        Senator Manchin. Thank you, Chair Murkowski, for holding
    the hearing, and I want to thank all of you all for being here
    today.
        I commend the sponsors of the bills on today's agenda for
    exploring innovative ways to improve outdoor recreation and the
    business that supports it. Outdoor recreation has been a
    powerful economic driver in states across the country, and my
    home state of West Virginia is no exception. It has been
    wonderful.
        I have seen firsthand the jobs that outdoor recreation
    economy has brought to rural areas in West Virginia. Outdoor
    recreation in my state now generates two percent of our Gross
    Domestic Product and supports 22,000 jobs. Three percent of our
    workforce is now employed in the outdoor recreational sector
    earning over $688 million in salaries. So this is a topic that
    is near and dear to my heart, as I know it is to everybody
    here.
        As our Committee reviews legislation related to outdoor
    recreation, I believe we must ensure the ideas being discussed
    will grow the economies of rural communities. All three bills
    before the Committee today attempt to do that and will have
    impacts, I believe, in the states not only where they are being
    introduced but for all of us and especially in West Virginia,
    if enacted.
        Senator Gardner's bill would provide assistance to ski
    areas on federal land. While we will be hearing from Mr.
    McGuire about how this will impact the ski industry, I want to
    mention that we have two ski areas in West Virginia that use
    Forest Service land. Unfortunately, a third area located on the
    Monongahela National Forest closed earlier this year and is now
    for sale, but it will be back up and running. I look forward to
    the discussion about ways we can be better partners with the
    ski industry, the appropriate use of revenue from fees and a
    fair return to the taxpayers.
        We will also be discussing a bill sponsored by Senators
    Heinrich and Capito that would provide assistance to those
    leading backpacking trips on federal land.
        Senator Wyden's bill which he just spoke about proposes to
    establish a system of national recreation areas. West Virginia
    was actually home to the first national recreation area
    designated in the United States in 1965 which is the Spruce
    Knob-Seneca Rocks National Recreation Area.
        These bills all have things in common: facilitating
    people's ability to enjoy our public lands while supporting
    jobs and the local economies. Following this hearing, Chairman
    Murkowski and I will get to work with our colleagues on a
    recreation package to report out of this Committee. The heart
    and soul of that package will be the same as the bills we are
    discussing today to not only make it easier for people to enjoy
    their public lands but also grow businesses in all rural
    communities.
        Coming from Alaska and West Virginia, we have firsthand
    experience of the importance of recreation in our states and,
    with that as a basis, we have been developing additional ideas
    for inclusion in the forthcoming package. For example, one of
    the areas that I have been exploring is how we might be able to
    better support gateway communities. Those are the communities
    that are next to the recreation destinations where visitors eat
    and sleep before or after enjoying the sites that they come to
    visit.
        Mr. Jeffrey Lusk, from our Hatfield-McCoy Trail System
    testified before our Committee earlier this year about how
    difficult it was to establish businesses in gateway
    communities. Mr. Lusk's trail system hosts 50,000 riders
    annually but 87 percent of those riders are non-West Virginian,
    meaning that they need hotels at which to stay and restaurants
    at which to eat. Unfortunately, in West Virginia and I am sure
    in my colleagues' home states, it continues to be very
    difficult to establish the infrastructure that is needed to
    accommodate increased visitation to some of these rural areas.
        So I look forward to working with Chairman Murkowski and my
    colleagues on this and many other ideas as we assemble a
    bipartisan recreation package in the coming weeks.
        With that, I want to thank the witnesses and Madam
    Chairman, thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Gardner, I know you had wanted to make
    introductions and perhaps briefly speak about your bill.
    Senator Barrasso, I know you wanted to make an introduction,
    and Senator Heinrich, you have a bill up here. I have given
    everybody an opportunity; we are never going to get to these
    guys.
        Senator Heinrich. Yes, I was going to say, I just want to
    hear from our witnesses.
        The Chairman. I wanted to share the same courtesies, but
    let me turn to Senator Gardner and then Senator Barrasso then.
        Thank you.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. CORY GARDNER,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO

        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I will be very
    quick.
        I am very pleased to have before the Committee a fellow
    Coloradan, Brendan McGuire, who is Vice President for Public
    Affairs at Vail Resorts testifying on behalf of the National
    Ski Area Association this morning.
        Vail Resorts, of course, is headquartered in Colorado where
    its namesake, Vail Mountain, was started in 1962 by veterans of
    the famed 10th Mountain Division of World War II. Since then,
    Vail Resorts has grown into a huge Colorado success story
    spanning 37 ski areas across three countries and the United
    States all linked together by its industry leading Epic season
    pass, available online and around the country.
        Correct, Brendan? Is that right?
        Mr. McGuire. For sale right now.
        Senator Gardner. Sorry about that commercial.
        And all linked together that allows skiers and riders to
    access local, regional and destination ski resorts at a great
    value.
        Brendan, a native Coloradan, former ski instructor, former
    Senate staffer for Senator Ken Salazar and, as Chair Murkowski
    can attest to, a pretty great guy to be in the mountains with.
    Thank you very much for being here today. And I think you have
    86 acres open at Keystone right now.
        Mr. McGuire. That's right.
        The Chairman. Wow. Amazing.
        Great, thank you, Senator Gardner.
        Senator Barrasso.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING

        Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you very much, Madam
    Chairman. I am pleased to help you welcome Aaron Bannon to our
    Committee today as a witness. He and I share the hometown of
    Casper, Wyoming, and we share a love of the precious natural
    resources that Wyoming has to offer.
        He has spent more than a decade with the National Outdoor
    Leadership School (NOLS) where he has been extraordinary in
    terms of being an advocate for issues relating to outdoor
    education, efficient, responsible use of public lands and
    efficient permitting, of course.
        When we think about public lands in the history of this
    country, whether it was John Muir, whether it was Ansel Adams,
    whether it was Teddy Roosevelt--you know, John Muir carried a
    stick, Ansel Adams carried a camera, Teddy Roosevelt carried a
    gun. But all of them saw the land. They all arrived at the same
    conclusion. We need to preserve and protect and then pass on
    these resources and allow others to enjoy them.
        Aaron and I have had many conversations about ways to avoid
    the cumbersome permitting process that dissuades public use of
    public lands. So I am glad he is here today. Look, our State of
    Wyoming relies on recreation and tourism as a key component of
    our state economy. Much of the recreation occurs on public
    lands managed by federal agencies, so it is important that we
    combine thoughtful evaluation of the impacts with an effective
    and efficient permitting process that encourages public access
    and exploration of these magnificent landscapes.
        Aaron, I look forward to the expertise that you are going
    to share with the Committee today. I also want to congratulate
    you. I know that Monday you will be starting work with American
    Outdoors as the Executive Director. So it is big news, and I
    look forward to continuing to work with you in your new role.
        Thank you, Madam Chairman.
        The Chairman. Great. Thank you, Senator Barrasso. Thank
    you, all.
        Most of you have been introduced, but I will provide my
    welcome to each of you.
        We will start off the discussion here this morning with an
    individual who has been before the Committee. We have certainly
    had many dealings with Chris French. He is the Deputy Chief for
    the National Forest System in the USDA Forest Service. Chris,
    we thank you for the many, many efforts that you have made, and
    I know you are spending a lot of attention and time on Alaska-
    related issues as you deal with Forest Service. Thank you for
    your leadership.
        Nikki Haskett is with the Committee this morning. She is
    the Acting Assistant Director for National Conservation Lands
    and Community Partnerships over at the Bureau of Land
    Management (BLM). We thank you for being here this morning and
    look forward to your comments.
        Brendan McGuire has been introduced and welcomed. It is
    always good to have somebody that can be, again, speaking with
    a firsthand relationship to the industry that he represents,
    and he certainly does. We welcome you to the Committee.
        Mr. Lee Davis has been introduced by Senator Wyden. We are
    pleased that you are with us from Oregon. Welcome to the
    Committee.
        And to Mr. Aaron Bannon, we appreciate what you will
    provide.
        We ask you to try to keep your comments to about five
    minutes. Your full statements will be included as part of the
    record, and then we will have an opportunity for questions
    afterwards.
        I am going to excuse myself for just for a couple minutes
    to go introduce an amendment in another committee, and I will
    be back in about five minutes.
        We will lead off the Committee here with Mr. French.
        Thank you.

       STATEMENT OF CHRIS FRENCH, DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL FOREST
                      SYSTEM, USDA FOREST SERVICE

        Mr. French. Well, thank you very much, Madam Chair, Vice
    Chair and members of the Committee. I really appreciate the
    opportunity today to talk about our views on these three bills,
    the Recreation Not Red Tape Act, the Simplifying Outdoor Access
    Recreation Act and the Ski Area Fee Retention Act.
        You know, when I glance back at my 30 years that I've been
    with the Forest Service, I started as a Recreation Technician.
    And now, as I sit here and think about my role as Deputy Chief,
    I realize I've always had a passion for connecting people to
    the recreational opportunities on our public lands and it's
    where I take my family.
        Senator, I ski in those resorts in West Virginia. I know
    the one that closed and it was hard to see that happen.
        Senator Manchin. It will be back----
        Mr. French. That's good.
        And I used many of the services provided by our outfitter
    guides.
        You know, when I look at this, I think that anything that
    we can do to improve our ability to better serve our recreation
    community and our recreation partners and enhance those
    experience connecting folks to our public lands, that's a good
    day.
        Outdoor recreation is a significant use of our National
    Forest System. The number of recreation visits to the National
    Forest System rose from 143 million in 2009, nine years later
    that was at 150 million. Recreation on National Forest System
    lands sustains more private sector jobs than any other Forest
    Service program and provides the single, largest stimulus for
    many local gateway communities.
        Recreation on National Forest System lands contributes more
    than $11 billion to America's Gross Domestic Product and
    supports more than 148,000 full- and part-time jobs, most of
    which are in those gateway and rural communities. Outdoor
    recreation opportunities and amenities are consistently ranked
    as one of the primary reasons people move to rural towns and
    can be a leading contributor to local communities.
        At the Forest Service, we administer more than 30,000
    recreation specialty use authorizations for activities that
    generate nearly $2 billion to their holders. In particular, the
    Forest Service manages 122 ski area permits and approximately
    8,000 outfitter and guide permits. These permits enable private
    sector professionals, educational institutions to lead a wide
    range of activities on National Forest System lands whether
    it's white river rafting, downhill skiing, horseback riding,
    big game hunting or youth education trips in wilderness or
    scenic jeep tours.
        For many of these activities, they represent, this
    represents the first introduction that many folks have to the
    outdoors and the outfitter and guides that they employ are
    often small businesses that generate jobs and income for local
    communities.
        We also manage nearly 159,000 miles of trails, the largest
    trail network in the nation. We host over 60 percent of the
    country's ski area visits, and we're proud to provide a vital
    respite from the fast-paced life in the form of thousands of
    campsites and day use picnic areas as well as opportunities for
    boating, fishing, hunting and hiking.
        USDA supports the overall goals of these bills to improve
    recreational access on National Forest System lands. The
    Recreation Not Red Tape Act and the SOAR Act will complement
    agency efforts to streamline our processes, reduce
    inefficiencies and provide a higher level of customer service
    to our public and our valued partners. The Ski Area Fee
    Retention Act will increase available resources available to
    improve the administration of and the experience on our ski
    areas.
        Finally, outdoor recreation provides millions of Americans
    rich opportunities to connect with their lands and their
    heritage. The USDA Forest Service is honored to serve in this
    vital link and enormously values this opportunity to work with
    Congress to improve the lives and livelihoods of Americans
    through outdoor recreation.
        I, again, thank you to the Committee for the opportunity to
    provide testimony, and I look forward to working together on
    these important bills.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. French follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Heinrich [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. French.
        Ms. Haskett.

       STATEMENT OF NIKKI HASKETT, ACTING ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR
    NATIONAL CONSERVATION LANDS AND COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS, BUREAU
          OF LAND MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

        Ms. Haskett. Good morning, Chairman Murkowski and Ranking
    Member Manchin. I am Nikki Haskett, Acting Assistant Director
    for National Conservation Lands and Community Partnerships at
    the Bureau of Land Management. Thank you for inviting me here
    today to testify on S. 1967, the Recreation Not Red Tape Act,
    and S. 1665, the Simplifying Outdoor Access for Recreation Act,
    or SOAR Act.
        These bills which amend the Federal Lands Recreation
    Enhancement Act aim to improve the efficiency and reduce the
    cost for applying for and administering special recreation
    permits. They also authorize single, joint, special recreation
    permits for multi-agency trips. The Department supports the
    goals of both of these bills.
        Federal land management agencies oversee about 640 million
    surface acres, including public lands managed by the BLM, the
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Reclamation and
    the National Park Service as well as the Forest Service. These
    lands host a remarkable variety of recreational opportunities.
        Secretary Bernhardt is improving recreational access to
    public lands and has issued a number of orders in support of
    this priority. For example, Secretarial Order 3373 promotes
    improved access to public lands, and under this policy the BLM
    has acquired new lands such as 13,000 acres to improve access
    to the Blackfoot River in Montana and the 3,500 acres to
    improve access to the Sabinoso Wilderness Area in New Mexico.
        Much of the changes proposed in the bills being considered
    today deal with special recreation permits and their associated
    fees. Fees collected for each permit allow the Federal
    Government to implement projects that benefit visitors such as
    maintaining recreational sites. The BLM issues over 1,000 of
    these recreation permits a year and oversees about 4,600
    special recreation permits at any one time.
        S. 1967 and S. 1665 align with the Secretary's priorities
    to increase access and promote recreational opportunities on
    public lands. We believe that these bills have the potential to
    address some longstanding challenges, and we look forward to
    working with the sponsors and the Committee to address a number
    of technical issues in the measures.
        Both bills authorize agencies to issue single, joint
    recreation permits for trips that cross agency boundaries of
    more than one land management agency. When a single, joint
    recreation permit is proposed the bills authorize the
    designation of a lead agency for the permit. The bills also
    authorize agencies to delegate the respective enforcement
    authorities to the lead agency.
        The Department has been pursuing efforts to make recreation
    permitting easier, and we support efforts to improve the
    permitting process. Americans should be able to access and
    enjoy their public lands with as much ease as possible. The
    Department supports the goals of these provisions and would
    like to continue to work with the sponsors on certain
    modifications.
        The bills also provide various other authorities for
    agencies to improve the permitting process such as expanded use
    of categorical exclusions and allowing permittees to return
    unused service days. The Department strongly supports these
    provisions.
        Other provisions of the bills such as online and email
    notifications of permit opportunities and exemptions of the
    first 50 hours of work from cost recovery reflect the goals of
    the Department, and we support and appreciate the opportunity
    to continue working with the sponsors and the Committee on
    these provisions.
        Lastly, the Recreation Not Red Tape Act includes a
    provision regarding retailing of recreational passes,
    encouraging veterans and service members to recreate on public
    lands and expanding the use of volunteers. The Department
    supports these provisions.
        In conclusion, we are grateful that the Committee is
    considering legislation to make it easier for Americans to
    enjoy their public lands. Thank you again for the opportunity
    to testify today. I would be happy to answer any questions you
    may have.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Haskett follows:]

     [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Heinrich. Thank you very much.
        Mr. McGuire, you may begin.

    STATEMENT OF BRENDAN MCGUIRE, VICE PRESIDENT OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS,
                              VAIL RESORTS

        Mr. McGuire. Good morning. Thank you, Senator Gardner, for
    that nice introduction. Ranking Member Manchin, members of the
    Committee, thank you for the opportunity to be here in support
    of S. 1723, the Ski Area Fee Retention Act (SAFRA) of 2019.
        On behalf of Vail Resorts, my employer, and the National
    Ski Areas Association (NSAA), we'd also like to thank Senators
    Bennett and Wyden, for their leadership in introducing the bill
    and Committee members Barrasso, Cortez Masto, McSally and Risch
    for co-sponsoring this bipartisan measure to retain ski area
    permit fees locally.
        NSAA has 325 members, 122 of which operate on the National
    Forest System. Vail Resorts, my company that I work for, owns
    and operates 37 ski areas including iconic public lands
    resorts: Vail Mountain in Colorado; Stevens Pass in Washington;
    Heavenly in Tahoe; and Mt. Snow in Vermont. So it goes all the
    way East as well.
        SAFRA would retain a percentage of ski area permit fees in
    the forest in which they were generated. Those funds would be
    retained so that the Forest Service has the capacity to
    administer ski area permits and review ski area infrastructure
    projects.
        Ski areas work in partnership with the U.S. Forest Service
    to deliver an outdoor recreation experience that is really
    unmatched in the world. This public-private partnership dates
    back to the 1940s and has a long history of providing benefits
    to all Americans through health and fitness, an appreciation of
    our natural environment and providing strong returns to the
    U.S. Government through those fees paid for the use of the
    land.
        Over the past ten years, ski areas nationwide have averaged
    over 55 million visits annually. Sixty percent of those visits
    occur on Forest Service public lands. In total, the industry
    creates $62 billion in tourist-related revenue, supports nearly
    a million jobs and generates nearly $5 billion in annual retail
    sales.
        Public land ski areas are typically the largest employer
    for the communities in which they operate. They pay for all
    onsite improvements, including roads, parking lots, chairlifts,
    as well as all the processes required to review and approve
    such projects. The ability for our ski areas to move forward as
    a business is linked to our most important partner, the U.S.
    Forest Service, and their capacity to review proposals and
    render decisions.
        Fee retention as outlined in the bill is an important tool
    to boost the agency's capacity to review ski area proposals.
    This legislation would allow ski areas to invest more and
    sooner in much needed infrastructure.
        Retaining these ski fees is necessary because funding and
    staffing for the Forest Service Rec program sits at nearly 20
    percent below 2010 levels. Meanwhile, visitation has only
    grown, increasing by 30 percent in that same time period. The
    Forest Service's own data shows that 85 percent of visitors to
    the National Forests are seeking recreation opportunities. Of
    the ten most visited forests nationwide, nine of them host ski
    areas and that visitation drives local economies.
        Ski areas are less likely to receive timely reviews of
    project proposals when forests are operating at low permit
    administration capacity. Ski areas have experienced pauses
    during which proposals cannot be accepted by the agency. Some
    forests have seen a lack of bandwidth that allows them to only
    review one project at a time.
        When projects are delayed and timelines uncertain, ski
    areas, like all businesses, find it harder to invest
    significant resources. That means ski areas are less likely or
    slower to upgrade chairlifts, to upgrade to energy efficient
    snowmaking systems and to transition to four season models
    capable of supporting jobs and the economy all year. This
    uncertainty has, unfortunately, shelved ski area investments
    that would have benefited workers, guests and communities.
    Dedicating a percentage of the nearly $40 million in fees paid
    by ski areas will unlock new investment opportunities.
        Since 2010, ski areas operating on Forest Service lands
    have experienced good revenue growth in the winter, and they
    were up over 100 percent from our summer activities thanks to
    the bill that this Committee and Congress passed in 2011, the
    Summer Activities bill. There's tremendous interest in our
    industry to harness this momentum and build the infrastructure
    necessary to support future growth.
        We urge your support of S. 1723, and thank you again for
    the opportunity to be here.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. McGuire follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. McGuire.
        Mr. Davis, welcome.

    STATEMENT OF LEE DAVIS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, OUTDOOR RECREATION
     ECONOMY INITIATIVE, OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY (OSU) - PORTLAND
                                 CENTER

        Mr. Davis. Thank you, Chair Murkowski and Ranking Member
    Manchin and members of the Committee. The Committee members
    here today are very, very aware of the details in these bills
    and the issues facing us and all the giant numbers and impacts
    that recreation bring to our economy and people.
        I've been waiting for this day for about seven years, so I
    decided that you can read my written testimony and today I'm
    just going to tell you some stories.
        Seven years ago, I was called to a meeting in Portland,
    Oregon, with some people that are here behind me. It was about
    trying to figure out how to get more permits for groups that
    were trying to get kids outside. I was called because, as
    Senator Wyden mentioned, at that time I was running the largest
    outfitter guide permit in the State of Oregon. And so, people
    were pretty regularly calling me, small business owners and
    other people were calling me and saying how do I get a permit?
    How do I get a permit? Do you guys have it? And you know,
    asking if we could broker permits, asking if they could, you
    know, is there any way they could work with us or could the
    Mazamas just buy them out so that they could do the things they
    wanted to do within our permit? And I bring up that meeting
    because what we ended up doing in that meeting was deciding
    that we had to create a private sector training program to
    teach small businesses and outfitters and guides simply how to
    navigate the permit process, you know?
        And so, we built those with, again, some of the people in
    the room, Paul Sanford behind me helped with that. We built
    those training programs. We launched those training programs.
    We had to stop them within about a year because people were so
    angry by the end of the training. We'd teach them all the
    processes and procedures and all, and we'd have Forest Service
    staff come and tell them, you know, exactly what you need to
    do, step by step by step.
        And then they would hear that there's been a 23-year
    moratorium on permits on Mount Baker National Forest or a 20-
    year moratorium on Mount Hood National Forest. And the permit
    staff, you know, was not available that day to help them with
    their request, you know? So we had to stop that training, and
    that's kind of ridiculous.
        The other thing that I think is worth mentioning about
    those days is that the permit application that I would submit
    every year was 76 pages long. We had to tell them exactly where
    all 14,000 participants were going to be, every single year. If
    we were going to vary the date of participation because of
    weather or, you know, different seasonal issues or anything
    like that, we had to call them and notify them. It was just
    incredibly laborious.
        The other thing I want to mention about that meeting was
    that day I met a man, a philanthropist from Seattle, named Doug
    Walker. Doug Walker was the person that explained to me that
    the biggest threat facing public lands and waters in the future
    is that our kids aren't building a bond of care with the
    outdoors, that more than anything else if our future voters,
    our future workers and constituents don't understand the value
    of the place, they're not going to vote to protect it. So I
    think those are some real reasons why we need to work on permit
    reform.
        Next, I want to talk a little bit about national recreation
    areas. Most of us are aware we have great tools like the
    Wilderness Act and the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and monuments
    to protect natural and cultural assets in our country. But to
    my knowledge, we don't have great tools that help us protect
    places where the primary value is recreation. And that's, I
    think, some folks are afraid of creating a new designation
    because it might be misused. But I think even on Halloween we
    don't need to be afraid of that because of you guys. In other
    words, each new national recreation area would have to go
    through Congress, and the devil's in the details on these
    things. And there's nothing in this provision that prohibits,
    you know, the interchange between recreational uses and
    resource extraction.
        The Dean of the College of Forestry at Oregon State
    University, where I work, often likes to talk about trails in
    Northern Europe where you can mountain bike by wineries and
    farms and sawmills. And they have recreational trails that
    effectively integrate resource extraction and recreation and
    celebrate all the great uses that our public lands bring to our
    people and our economies. And that's possible.
        I think, you know, and you've heard in some, I think, in
    some previous hearings on this that people have had to go
    outside of the country just to operate sometimes because it was
    so hard to operate in this country. There's a rafting guide in
    Oregon that I know that does that. There's a mountain climbing
    guide in Oregon I know that leads trips in Africa and Nepal,
    because it's easier than running them in Oregon and Washington.
        I, myself, spent eight years taking people to Chamonix,
    France, because it was easier for me to fly 15, 20 people to
    France than it was to get them to recreate in Alaska or
    Washington or Oregon. I mean, my most formative experience in
    the outdoors was traversing the Arrigetch Peaks in the Gates of
    the Arctic National Park in the Brooks Range. I would have
    loved to have taken those people there, but I just couldn't do
    it.
        The last thing I want to talk about is making recreation a
    priority. I think in my written testimony I laid out a series
    of strategies that I think that we might want to look at and
    evolve into a national strategy to move the recreation economy
    forward. I think that the outdoor recreation economy is the
    future of natural, resource-based jobs in America. And
    certainly, resource extraction jobs will be with us forever,
    but I think that we need to invest in this economy the way we
    invested in 20th century in natural resource-based jobs and
    infrastructure.
        Currently in my role at OSU I'm working on creating
    pathways to new and better jobs in the outdoor recreation
    economy, working on creating certificates and badges and degree
    programs eventually that will address the technical labor
    challenges and the, you know, leadership level challenges that
    all industries face and that also face our industry.
        Through my work I also know that our industry really does
    back these bills. I work very closely with Jessica Wall at the
    Outdoor Recreation Roundtable representing 50,000 companies in
    America, and they support these bills. So this isn't just me
    and education and advocates saying this stuff's important--this
    is industry.
        I think you all are also very aware that my work and Jess'
    work is about bringing it together, the entire recreation
    economy from hunt and fish to non-consumptive to, you know,
    across divides and we have a real opportunity here to bring
    people together in a different kind of way.
        The last thing I'll say is that I think future visions of
    high-quality life in America include outdoor recreation out
    your doorstep. I often, sort of, joke that my kid can still
    draw you a better picture of what high-quality life in the '50s
    was supposed to look like than he can tell you what it's
    supposed to look like 20 years from now.
        But we do know places like Bend, Oregon, and Ashland and
    Head River in Oregon, at least, are, sort of, icons of that. I
    think that if we can reform our permit process, if we can have
    dedicated accountable agency staff that are measured by outdoor
    recreation as a performance metric, and if we can have tools
    like National Recreation Areas to tell managers that they need
    to plan and manage around recreation, that we can move the
    needle on these, on this economy.
        So, thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Davis follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

            The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Davis.
        Mr. Bannon, welcome.

       STATEMENT OF AARON BANNON, ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP AND
      SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL OUTDOOR LEADERSHIP SCHOOL

        Mr. Bannon. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman, members of
    the Committee, for holding this very important hearing. We are
    doing critical work here today to address the persistent
    challenges that are constraining guided outdoor recreation
    experiences. And we at NOLS are very grateful for your
    diligence.
        As Senator Barrasso mentioned, I find myself at a personal
    crossroads today. This week, today, I'm representing NOLS, the
    National Outdoor Leadership School, a non-profit, educational
    institution which has educated nearly 300,000 students in our
    55-year history which was also, Senator, incidentally, started
    by a 10th Mountain Division member.
        And next week, I will begin as the Executive Director of
    the America Outdoors Association. America Outdoors is a trade
    association representing hundreds of non-profit and for-profit
    commercial outfitters across the country.
        So, NOLS and America Outdoors have been working hand in
    hand on this legislation for years Simplifying Outdoor Act--I'm
    sorry, Simplifying Outdoor Access for Recreation Act, and it is
    fitting and a positive development for both of our
    organizations to have this hearing on our bill today.
        The SOAR Act is about finding legislative solutions to
    persistent barriers for commonsense permitting problems through
    rulemaking processes. Agencies have tried to reform their own
    permitting challenges to varying degrees of success. In the
    best cases, permit administrators are able to navigate the
    process successfully. In many cases, however, these
    administrators perceive too many obstacles in the successful
    processing of a permit application or modification is near
    impossible.
        If a capacity analysis has not been completed, for example,
    administrators do not think they can make additional days
    available. If a review team is not available, administrators do
    not feel they have the resources to complete an environmental
    analysis. If there are other competing interests on the forest,
    those interests typically take priority over recreation
    permitting.
        Fundamentally, agencies need to adapt simplified processes
    to streamline permit reviews and to empower line officers to be
    more responsive to the needs of their permittees. The SOAR Act
    would restore reasonable flexibility in permitting providing
    more options to permitted administrators who otherwise feel
    like their hands are tied.
        Strained resources and a push for consistency compel the
    permit administrator on the river of no return, for example, to
    strengthen their permit there by two days. Traditionally, for
    15 years, we ran a 12-day course through a 72-mile stretch of
    river training our students--having our instructors train our
    students first to canoe and kayak and then to run the river. As
    permit administrators retired and new people came into their
    place or, honestly, we're quickly replaced, the forest was
    constrained in managing a variety of permits and asked to
    confine our permit to what everybody else was doing on the
    river.
        That changed our ability to educate our students. We used
    to have two days of clinics and then they had a half day of
    clinic. So it's stressful. It's hard on the instructors and
    it's hard on the students. It's certainly a rewarding
    experience still, but we would welcome the flexibility that
    existed there before.
        Federal land and water agencies are in the business of
    connecting more people with their landscapes. In practice,
    however, they are raising the cost of entry. Programs for
    profit and non-profit alike have no choice through the rising
    costs of running their business by either paying cost recovery
    fees or the layering of the three percent of gross fees and we
    are constraining our business or raising our prices.
        And for NOLS, the increasing cost and decreasing efficiency
    is making it harder for our scholarship dollars to go as far as
    they could. These scholarship dollars are targeting hundreds of
    at-risk youth every year and trying to provide them that NOLS
    experience. We welcome an opportunity to free those dollars up
    and to make the courses more efficient so that they could, we
    could run more courses for more students.
        Finally, a cost recovery, I would say, where an agency
    recoups its expenditures on permit analysis by billing a
    requesting party is not delivering as agencies hoped that it
    would. If a permit request is under consideration that would
    require an environmental analysis to review, even with the
    current cost recovery paradigm, the review may take years and
    the cost to the outfitter will run in the tens of thousands of
    dollars, even for a relatively modest request and there is no
    guarantee that after paying for that analysis, the permittee
    will be awarded the days. When cost recovery is applied, which
    it's applied inconsistently, it is often applied haphazardly
    and places an undue burden on local businesses.
        So finally I would say that I understand that everybody in
    this room--witnesses, agencies, staffers, audience and our
    Committee alike--is here to connect more people with America's
    incredible outdoor treasures. I truly appreciate our collective
    effort to address those challenges and the spirit of this
    hearing today. We're all in this together. Thank you for your
    time.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Bannon follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you. Thank you to each of you.
        I want to start my questions with you, Mr. French, and you,
    Ms. Haskett. At Forest Service, at BLM, you have not only heard
    the issues that have been presented by the others, but you have
    heard the stories that we have shared directly with you,
    whether it is the nearly ten-year effort to help facilitate
    more heli-skiing activity down near Haines--we have a Special
    Recreation Management Area (SRMA) there.
        We have come to you, Mr. French, with frustrations over the
    length of time to get permits. For some years, much of what we
    heard back from Forest Service was we just don't have available
    folks to process these permits because what has happened with
    the somewhat tortured history of fire borrowing that we allowed
    to continue over the course of way too many years, that it
    robbed accounts and you were not adequately and ably managed to
    staff.
        The good news for us is we have addressed that in this
    budget cycle. In fact, with this appropriations bill that we
    will move out here this morning, we are setting to rectify
    that. But that doesn't answer all of the issues and the
    frustrations with what can we do better when it comes to these
    permits on these public lands and how can we facilitate it. And
    thus, the need for the legislation that we are talking about
    here today when we are trying to cut through some of the
    regulatory red tape or the permitting issues.
        Both BLM and Forest Service are mandated to manage for
    multiple-use. You have to figure out how you balance recreation
    with the other uses of these public lands. So to both of you.
    How do you do that? How do you, basically, provide for that
    prioritization or balance one against the other? And then, I
    might have to add it to another question, but I want to hear
    from you, specifically, as to what you think you can do within
    your agency to respond to the frustrations, the very real and
    legitimate frustrations, and not just say, we just need more
    money. There is more to it than just the dollars. So a wide-
    ranging question to the two of you.
        Mr. French. Well, thank you, Senator. I really appreciate
    the question.
        I think the testimony that you heard today is very
    accurate. That has been the space we've been in. And as you
    mentioned, you know, we've heard from a number of folks about
    the lack of customer service and our inability to deliver on
    some of these things.
        The fire funding fix is essential. It has basically stopped
    the bleeding of money away from those activities. And so,
    that's really helpful. And that's going to create a more stable
    environment going forward.
        On the first question about how do you balance? You know,
    right now for our focus it is about dealing with that core
    issue that is driving that fire funding issue. And that is, the
    condition of our forests. That's our focus. And then the other
    is around customer service. How do we improve our customer
    service?
        And so, actions that we're doing right now to address this,
    this year building off pilots we've done the last two years. We
    have created funding for additional strike teams just to focus
    on special use permit operations. We, at any given time, have a
    backlog of expired permits that are just unacceptable. Last
    year, we cut that backlog in half, down to about 5,000 and that
    was through these strike teams. We're continuing to do that
    using a risk-based approach where we're looking where the
    biggest problems are and bringing resources to bear there.
        We've also, just this year, in our budget direction issued
    new guidance developing customer service requirements about the
    timeframes for us to respond on many different types of permit
    issues.
        The Chairman. Chris, are you doing that with input from the
    user groups or are you just, are you working these, kind of,
    best practices on your own? Because I think it is important
    that you are acting, kind of, with consultation with those who
    are on the receiving end of this. How much input do you take
    from them or do you just solicit?
        Mr. French. We will.
        And so, in this year's budget direction what we said is
    this year we will establish those standards which we've never
    had before about those minimum response times. And that was
    issued about three weeks ago. And so, that'll be our work in
    the next months, working with groups to inform how we should do
    that.
        The final thing that I'd add, Senator, is we're looking at
    all the processes, the regulations that are around this that
    are driving some of the ways that were showing up that are not
    capacity-related. And so, we're looking at our, as you're
    aware, our NEPA regulations, but we're also looking at the
    policies on permitting in general.
        One of the things that we're working on right now is
    there's over 8,000 activities in our permitting processes that
    we believe through our nominal effects analysis may not even
    require a permit. We're working to put that into regulation.
        So it's a multi-tiered approach of adding capacity where
    it's needed, reforming our policies and putting in performance
    metrics.
        The Chairman. Well, if I can suggest one of the things that
    we have learned is that when, say, for instance--I am going to
    use an example--when the Dodd-Frank regulations came out and I
    would hear all of my small banks and small credit unions coming
    to me and saying, Ah, we are getting killed by these
    regulations. I said, spell it out to me. Tell me which ones are
    really onerous and where you think that there can be a level of
    fix.
        So my hope is, is the agency is listening to, again, the
    outfitters, the guides, the consumers in terms of these are
    areas that are really onerous and burdensome and that are
    keeping us from getting a little, a little permit so that I can
    take eight people out ice fishing. I hope that there is that
    kind of connect going back and forth.
        Ms. Haskett, I want to get to you but I am over my time, so
    I am going to ask you to respond to my question in the next
    round and I am going to turn to Senator Manchin.
        Senator Manchin. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
        First of all, basically I want to commend Senator
    Heinrich's bill. It opens up something bigger for me because I
    come from West Virginia where we have the New River Gorge Park
    System. We have some of the most fantastic rivers, as far as
    rafting, with the New and the Gauley. We don't have this
    problem, because the state controls it. The state controls
    access. We want you to come.
        If it is supposed to be for recreation, why in the heck is
    the Federal Government throttling everything back? Why are we
    fighting the Federal Government which sets access, thousand
    days, this, that and everything else? My goodness, and we are
    doing another park and preserve and we are writing into the law
    to make sure that the state manages the river permits. You
    know, why fix something that is not broken?
        But I'm learning more and more about the federal process
    and how much the Federal Government--well, I know, I have a
    problem with that.
        [Laughter.]
        The Chairman. I just told him that the West has public
    lands.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Manchin. The park has, the park could have control
    over our river access, same thing. But we never did give it to
    them and that is the difference.
        I don't know how we can--the only thing I would ask is if
    any of you all want to comment, maybe Mr. Bannon or any of you,
    on this. On Senator Heinrich's bill, it makes all the sense in
    the world, we have had, they are telling me that we have had
    these permits out there for a long time. They have been
    dormant, have not been used, no one is getting access or
    setting there, prohibiting people from having the tourism that
    we should have and the economic vitality from it.
        Is this only for businesses? Or if I was a private citizen,
    and if there were 1,000 days allowed and they haven't been
    used, and we are going to rebid that, could some of those go
    back to me? Where I could walk up and use that river too or
    does it have to go through an outfitter?
        Well, if you don't mind, can I ask Senator Heinrich?
        Senator Heinrich. As a former outfitter guide, there isn't
    really, in most places, there is not a limitation on the
    general public, but anyone conducting group exercises.
        Senator Manchin. Sure.
        Senator Heinrich. Whether it is a university or a business,
    that is where you get into this outfitter guide bucket.
        Senator Manchin. Let's have----
        Senator Heinrich. And that is where many of these
    moratoriums really are limiting economic development, despite
    the fact that there is not a resource problem. So if there is
    an overuse problem, that is one thing. But in many of these
    cases, in the vast majority, I would say, there was not a
    resource problem.
        Senator Manchin. Yes, to me it seems like if we had
    language in legislation that would allow best use practices to
    enhance recreation and the economy for the purpose and we wrote
    the findings of what we are trying to accomplish then they
    couldn't be throttling this back. They have to continue to make
    sure that those permits are used. And if they are not used,
    then they go back in. I mean, if I go out of business and I
    still have a permit, the way I understand it, where the law is
    right now, it stays dormant.
        Yes, Mr. Bannon.
        Mr. Bannon. Senator, if I may?
        Indeed, in Montana we have a situation where one outfitter,
    it was Outward Bound in Red Lodge, shuttered about 15 years
    ago. They had something like 500 days on the Custer Gallatin
    National Forest. Those days were never recovered or returned to
    anybody. They're just gone.
        And as the Custer Gallatin is considering, in its forest
    planning process, permitting, they have got a clause in that
    draft plan that says there's basically a moratorium for the
    life of the plan on any additional permits. So we know that the
    capacity is reduced, but we also see no additional use being
    awarded to anyone.
        Senator Manchin. Well, the only thing I can do is I can say
    thank you, Senator Heinrich, and any way we can work with you
    on this to make some common sense for all of you in the Western
    lands. If anyone thinks that they have been throttled back, and
    they can't get on the river, come to West Virginia. We will not
    prohibit you at all.
        [Laughter.]
        Bring your own raft. Come get with a guide. Get an inner
    tube. Whatever you want. We are good with that, okay?
        Thank you. I yield back my time.
        The Chairman. Senator Gardner.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        The Chairman. We are all going to bring an inner tube----
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Gardner. An inner tube----
        The Chairman. ----to West Virginia.
        Senator Heinrich. An exciting development on the Energy and
    Natural Resources Committee here.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Gardner. Team building activities.
        The Chairman. Field hearing.
        Senator Heinrich. There are going to be photographs, I am
    sure.
        [Laughter.]
        Madam Chairman, I think these are all really good--oh,
    sorry.
        The Chairman. [off mic] I meant Gardner----
        Senator Heinrich. My apologies.
        Senator Gardner. That's okay.
        Senator Heinrich. Senator Gardner.
        Senator Gardner. I will be brief. Thanks, Madam Chair.
        Mr. McGuire, thank you very much for your testimony today.
        The ski industry obviously had a very good year last year
    in Colorado. We are home to just under two dozen ski resorts in
    the state. Vail's got resorts all over, as we talked about,
    coming off a record winter in the Colorado River Basin, a
    record amount of snowfall in the Colorado River Basin and other
    areas as well, record number of visitors to our ski areas,
    record number of length of the ski season. So it really was an
    incredible year.
        Can you, kind of, walk through what you see though, from
    the business side of this?
        Mr. McGuire. No, I think that's right in, I think that's
    part of the momentum that I talked about in the testimony, that
    I think the industry is feeling. So coming off a 2018-2019
    winter that was good everywhere, right? It was not, you know,
    good in one place and dry another place. Snow was up about 31
    percent, and it was really equally distributed.
        So it was the fourth best year in the industry in terms of
    visitation, back up to 59 million skier visits. So everyone was
    really excited about that, and I think that momentum is rolling
    over into this year. We just had our snowiest October in a long
    time in Colorado. Good, cold temperatures everywhere, so less
    snowmaking going on. Some accounting in Colorado, over four
    feet of snow in the month of October. So everyone's really
    excited.
        But I think the other thing that has the industry bullish
    and driving some momentum is the advanced commitment that
    guests are making via all these new season pass products. It's
    a win for the consumer, and it's a win for the industry when
    people advance early or advance commit.
        Senator Gardner. And so with that success comes the
    opportunity then to invest in aging infrastructure to make
    upgrades to equipment, facilities throughout the properties and
    installations to be able to develop more accommodations for the
    growing number of visitors. What does that mean in terms of
    constraints that the industry has faced in recent years for ski
    areas on federal lands in trying to advance these capital
    improvement projects that you are able to make because of the
    successes that you have had last year and hope for this year as
    well.
        Mr. McGuire. No, that's right, the momentum, and folks want
    to capture and harness that momentum. And I think, first and
    foremost, none of this is intended or should be taken as
    commentary on the great work of the Forest Service. They're a
    tremendous partner. What we're trying to do is narrowly address
    some of the constraints that our partners are facing. We can't
    be a healthy industry without a healthy partner with the men
    and women of the U.S. Forest Service.
        But just a couple of examples. There's a Western ski area,
    they currently don't have a permit administrator in their
    forest. That means that there are delays for new lifts, a new
    lodge. They want to bury some power lines up to the ski area.
    They literally can't get started on that.
        When you have this, these lower funding regimes, we're
    seeing lower staffing levels, we're seeing staff turnover and
    we're seeing details, but details run out and people leave. And
    that really impacts the ability. We've seen a delay in project
    implementation for a new lift, new snowmaking system and trails
    and summer uses at a Western ski area. The pause that I
    referenced in testimony, it was a nine-month pause where the
    forest was just not in a position where they could accept
    applications for projects.
        We have competing ski areas owned by different entities in
    a single forest, sort of, having to elbow each other out,
    trying to get the one project slot that that forest feels like
    it has capacity to do.
        And then, I think one thing I don't want to miss are the
    avalanche centers that the Forest Service runs. There's 13 of
    them around the country. In our opinion, they're underfunded by
    about half and that gets filled in by friends and private
    donations, but that's a critical service that gets provided.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you. I think it is important to
    point out too that with the White River National Forest being
    one of the--I think it is the number one visited forest in the
    country. Over the last 20 years now we have seen significant
    declines in Forest Service personnel that are able to work on
    this. So at the same time you have significant increase in
    people visiting the most heavily visited forest in the country,
    personnel within that forest have declined, making it more
    difficult. And as you talked about in your opening statement,
    2011 legislation that passed, signed into law, allowing for
    year-round recreation. That, too, has put greater pressure on
    the Forest Service.
        Could you talk about how this legislation will allow us to
    address the year round recreation needs and permitting in the
    Forest Service?
        Mr. McGuire. No, that's right. So in 2011 you could call it
    an unfunded mandate, right? We started applying to the Forest
    Service for more summer activities and reducing the stress.
        In the White River, we actually think we're down about 40
    percent on overall rec funding. It's been a little more acute
    in the White River. That forest and that region has done
    everything possible to keep up with the ski industry, and I
    think they've done a really decent job.
        And when Mr. French was talking about the strike teams, you
    know, they've tried to do that in Colorado and they did that
    absolutely in consultation with the industry and I think we're
    starting to see some of the fruits of that.
        Senator Gardner. Great. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
        Now, Senator Heinrich.
        Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
        I wanted to start just by saying I think these are all
    really important bills and very compatible, but addressing the
    basic resource issue, I think, is also really important and
    just getting that out there. Setting fire borrowing aside,
    which the Chair and a number of people on this Committee have
    done a remarkable amount of work on in recent years and we're
    starting to see that this year for the first time in the
    appropriations process. Recreation is still only five percent
    of the Forest Service budget. And that is despite the fact that
    it is the single largest economic driver across the Forest
    Service today. So it generates more income than the other
    programs that we typically really spend an enormous time
    focusing on in this Committee. And by limiting that and not
    making it more of a priority, what we are really doing is we
    are limiting economic development and especially in rural
    communities.
        So we have to, I think, revisit our priorities and put more
    emphasis on recreation and then also just recognize that we
    need to fund our public lands agencies better for
    infrastructure, for the folks who should be in the field to be
    able to actively manage. We have to do a better job because we
    have seen, in real dollars, reductions in that focus over time,
    and that is a huge fundamental problem.
        Mr. Bannon, we heard from Mr. Davis about challenges in
    terms of moratoriums. You know, I had an experience back in the
    '90s where I was trying to get a permit that the organization
    that I worked for at the time, Cottonwood Gulch Expeditions,
    had had for decades. I am not sure how many decades. It was one
    we used every single year. I called up to check on my permit,
    and the recreation person said, ``Sorry, we are not going to be
    able to do your permit this year. I am busy on a land exchange.
    Call me next year.'' You just can't run a business like that.
    And whether you are organized as a non-profit or as a for-
    profit business, either way, if you are spending more than you
    can bring in and your business gets shut down for a season, you
    are out of business. Have you had those kinds of experiences
    too?
        Mr. Bannon. Senator, those were the good old days.
        [Laughter.]
        The temporary permit, if you were on a year-to-year
    temporary permit back then, that temporary permit has gone
    away. And under the new permitting policy of the Forest
    Service, which was done with the best of intent, a temporary
    permit that you can get on year-to-year is limited to 200 days.
    That's not even enough to run a single NOLS course on.
        Senator Heinrich. Right, yes.
        Mr. Bannon. And the process for acquiring any kind of new
    permit and trying to transfer that to a priority use permit is
    murky at best, I would say.
        And to the point that the fees or that the recreation
    resource has been so reduced, I think you see that a lot. I
    think we've seen that in the Gila National Forest.
        Senator Heinrich. Absolutely.
        Mr. Bannon. And the Gila National Forest right now is going
    through a proposed management plan. There's changes in that
    plan to group size to length of stay limits, and we're trying
    to get some securities wrapped into our own permit as we've
    been renewing it. We've been operating without an existing
    permit for over two years in the Gila National Forest on an
    agreement, and they're certainly working with us to get it
    there.
        Senator Heinrich. Yes.
        Mr. Bannon. But it's a pretty tenuous situation to be in.
        Senator Heinrich. Speaking of murky, if I asked you to
    explain how cost recovery works for recreation permits, could
    you explain it to me, either you or Mr. Davis?
        Mr. Bannon. Not easily, go for it.
        Mr. Davis. I'd be happy to.
        I tried to process a new permit back at the Mazamas maybe
    eight years ago. The permit application went in. It was clear
    to the Forest Service at that time that the environmental
    review to process the permit would be somewhat significant.
    They asked for, I believe, about a $14,000 down payment to do
    before cost recovery work or any planning could start
    happening.
        This is six, seven years ago, to my knowledge----
        Senator Heinrich. $14,000 to get in the door, basically.
        Mr. Davis. Just to get in the door. To my knowledge, that
    money has not been spent and has not been returned to the
    Mazamas.
        So, not only----
        Senator Heinrich. Let me ask you this----
        Mr. Davis. ----not only the permit stalled, but like, yeah,
    so, yeah. I mean, cost recovery is about covering the costs of
    going through the process of the permit and the paying for the
    agency staff to do all the various review processes and all
    that.
        Senator Heinrich. Yes, which can be a giant barrier to
    entry, so----
        Mr. Davis. Yeah.
        Senator Heinrich. ----we need to make some changes.
        Thank you all.
        The Chairman. Senator Daines.
        Senator Daines. Thank you, Chair Murkowski, Ranking Member
    Manchin.
        I love talking about Montana's economy and particularly
    about our outdoor recreation economy. It is absolutely a pillar
    economy in Montana. In fact, it is our outdoor economy that is
    estimated to bring in $7.1 billion in consumer spending. It is
    about $286 million in revenues to our state and local
    government. Seventy-one thousand direct jobs, that's nearly ten
    percent of all the jobs in Montana. In fact, in one poll, 87
    percent of Montanans said they are outdoor enthusiasts. Of
    course, my question then, who are those other 13 percent there
    in Montana?
        Outdoor recreation though, it is not just about dollars. It
    is a fundamental driver of our economy, but it is very much our
    way of life. My wife and I spend a lot of time outside, despite
    my staff trying to make sure I am skilled in other things
    besides being in the wilderness. We got out in August in the
    Beartooth Wilderness and did our normal three or four 20- to
    30-mile loops, some of it off trail, and that is what we define
    as a really great time in Montana.
        This bipartisan SOAR Act, and I want to thank Senator
    Heinrich for his leadership there, streamlines the permitting
    process, making it easier for families. They want to fish one
    of our great rivers. They want to backpack in the Beartooth or
    The Bob. This will help to that end.
        The bill is heavily supported by our outfitters, our
    guides, the outdoor rec groups, including the Montana
    Outfitters and Guide Association, the Montana Alpine Guides and
    so many more. I will continue to fight to get this bill passed,
    signed into law to help protect the outdoor recreation heritage
    which we have in Montana.
        Ms. Haskett, as you know, the bipartisan SOAR Act helps
    streamline currently a burdensome permitting process. Can you
    explain how making key reforms to this process will help
    increase recreational opportunities?
        Ms. Haskett. Thank you for the question.
        The BLM currently issues about 1,000 permits, and we
    oversee about 4,600 permits at any one time. Typically, most
    recreation activities on the public lands do not currently
    require a permit, but we support this bill to help improve
    those permit activities. And Secretary Bernhardt has issued
    several secretarial orders to help in this regard. For example,
    we are working on an online system so that people, public
    users, can apply to get their permit, for their special
    recreation permits, online to help that process.
        Senator Daines. One of the reasons that streamlining this
    process is so very important is in places like Montana we have
    a checkerboard pattern of land ownership. In fact, there is a
    Missoula company called onX that about every outdoor
    enthusiast, especially hunters, has that app on their phone
    because it lets us know exactly where we are at in terms of
    what, who has land ownership in terms of regarding multiple
    public agencies. You could be on BLM land, you might be on
    Forest Service land, you might be on a state piece, you might
    be on a Fish and Wildlife Service Refuge--all in the matter of
    doing a relatively short walk.
        And I can tell you, the elk have no idea what federal
    agency manages the land their feeding on. By the way, our
    farmers and ranchers know sometimes where the elk are feeding
    in the alfalfa fields. But forcing outfitters to get permits
    from three agencies, two departments for a day hunt, it just
    doesn't make sense.
        Ms. Haskett, DOI itself has numerous agencies that all have
    different permitting processes. You talked about it a bit
    already. Doesn't it make sense that having a single permit
    would save the department time and money and result in more
    people getting more permits and spending more time outside?
        Ms. Haskett. Thank you for the question.
        Absolutely. We support the provisions of the bill to
    delegate the authority so that we can have that multi-
    jurisdictional ability to issue those permits. And I, on BLM
    lands, you know, hunting we probably wouldn't require a permit.
    And I completely understand the challenge of O&C lands. I used
    to work in Western Oregon where the checkerboard ownership was
    prevalent. And so, I completely understand the frustration that
    that management, that checkerboard ownership, can create some
    unique management awkwardness.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Daines. Yes, I can tell you outdoor enthusiasts,
    they came to spend time outside, not play checkers.
        Ms. Haskett. That's right.
        Senator Daines. Sometimes you wonder.
        Last, I recently heard frustrations from a number of groups
    in Montana about the complex and sometimes excessive amount of
    forms needed for a filming permit on public land. Our Montana
    small businesses can't keep up with the growing burden of
    paperwork needed for something that has little to no effect on
    the environment.
        Mr. French, my last question. You will have to answer
    quickly because I am running out of time. What can we do to
    simplify film permits and make them more uniform across your
    agencies?
        Mr. French. I think there's a number of things that we can
    do. Our staff is working on looking at our entire permitting
    process, this is included with it, because basically, we feel
    the process right now is too cumbersome. So, you know, we'll
    get back to you on the specifics of that, Senator, but that is
    a focus of ours in our overall reform.
        Senator Daines. Yes, it would be helpful. It is yet another
    part of helping drive economic activity in Montana, and we like
    to show off our beautiful landscapes that makes for great
    backdrops for films. We appreciate your help there.
        Mr. French. Very much agree.
        Senator Daines. Yes.
        Mr. French. Thanks.
        Senator Daines. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Daines, I appreciate you
    bringing that up. I know that we visited and were frustrated
    over this issue with the film crews and photographers, and part
    of the frustration was that there were basically different
    rules or regulations from one public land agency to another. So
    it was different on Forest Service than it was on Parks. Again,
    if all you are trying to do is take pictures of our
    extraordinary public spaces, to have to jump through the level
    of hoops that we did. I know that for smaller film crews we
    were able to work through some of that which, that was good.
    But still, it is something that we need to continue working on.
        Let's go to Senator King, I believe? Was it King or,
    actually, I think it is Cortez Masto, but you needed to go
    first. Are we all good?
        Senator King. [off mic] No, I am good.
        Senator Cortez Masto. [off mic] You sure?
        Senator King. [off mic] Yes.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. I appreciate that.
        Let's talk about beautiful Nevada outdoor recreation.
        First of all, by the way, Happy Nevada Day. This is a
    holiday for us in Nevada. We celebrate our statehood, very
    proud of our state, but also of our outdoor recreation. This is
    something that is really important to me, and I have been
    talking about it. In Nevada alone it creates 87,000 direct
    jobs, generates $12.6 billion in consumer spending.
        Mr. Davis, I so appreciate just the pragmatic, real life
    experience that you have because this is what I hear every day
    in Nevada. One of the things that I am curious about, can you
    talk a little bit about the people that you bring out to
    explore the great outdoors? Some of the experiences you have
    had from them experiencing it, maybe for the first time? Do you
    have any stories? Because, to me, this is not just about those
    of us who grew up with it or get to experience it, but those
    who are brought out for the very first time because that is
    what this is about. This is ensuring that we preserve our
    pristine areas. We give access to the great outdoors for so
    many different areas and opportunities for individuals who may
    never get the chance and all of a sudden, boom, a light goes on
    because somebody had the opportunity to bring them out there,
    they had that opportunity.
        I am curious, does anybody have a story with respect to
    something that they have experienced?
        Mr. Davis. I think all of us have those stories, especially
    all of us here today.
        The thing that I keep talking about is that, you know,
    going outdoors has all these other benefits besides just the
    economic benefits.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Right.
        Mr. Davis. We know that it improves mental and physical
    health. We know that it, sort of, especially among kids, sparks
    an interest in lifelong learning. It's these early moments that
    turn on the light bulb and tell us that we need to be stewards
    of the land. That they're, you know, that it's not just there,
    but we have to take care of it.
        Senator Cortez Masto. And it is healing.
        Mr. Davis. Yeah.
        Senator Cortez Masto. I think there is a part, that it is--
    --
        Mr. Davis. Yeah.
        Senator Cortez Masto. ----there is some sort of healing
    that goes with it as well, and that is one of the things I
    learned when I was home and talking with some of our veterans
    who are dealing with some PTSD and some issues.
        Mr. Davis. Right.
        Senator Cortez Masto. They are now experiencing the
    outdoors, and part of that is helping them with their healing
    process as well.
        Mr. Davis. Right. And thank you for your bill, Accelerating
    Veterans Recovery, by the way, and Senators King and Daines for
    co-sponsoring that.
        Yeah, I mean, there were some studies pretty recently that,
    I think, we took 72 veterans out on a research study in the
    outdoors and there was a 27 percent reduction in the PTSD
    symptoms because of, through that study, which exceeds the
    success rate for prescription drugs.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Yes. And so----
        Mr. Davis. So----
        Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
        I only have so much time, and the reason I want us to
    explore all this is because I think it is important that we
    make access available to everyone and we streamline the
    permitting process. I mean, that is the reason why we are here
    for these bills. I think there is, conceptually, a reason why I
    support that streamlining process and we all do.
        Here is my concern, I think, from hearing from our federal
    agencies. It is great that you are in the process of trying to
    do the streamlining now, but how long has this process been
    taking place? Seven years?
        My concern is every time there is a new administration,
    there may be changes and whether there is that cooperation and
    streamlining unless we codify it somehow in law. And that is
    why I support this. What we are trying to do with this
    legislation is to make sure that long-term there is this
    coordination. But I appreciate the agencies for moving forward
    on this.
        Let me ask, while I have an opportunity here, Mr. French,
    because I think Mr. McGuire brought this up, the concern with
    the avalanche services. I think, Mr. McGuire, you said there
    are 13 of them throughout the Forest Service but they are
    underfunded by half.
        Mr. French, I am curious, what are your thoughts on that
    and how Senate bill 1723, the Ski Area Fee Retention Act, will
    help address that issue?
        Mr. French. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
        We agree. I mean, if you look at the overall capacity of
    the agency to deliver non-fire work, it's dropped by almost 40
    percent in the last 15 years. You're seeing acute symptoms of
    that in cases like this. This bill will directly help provide
    capacity into managing those ski area permits and that provides
    additional capacity that we might use toward those areas to
    help in other areas such as the avalanche centers. So it's a
    direct help.
        Senator Cortez Masto. And when you talk about the work that
    you are doing in avalanche safety, do you also talk about and
    will this help you with education as well? Is that a key piece
    of what you do when you are addressing the avalanche services?
        Mr. French. Well, the key focus of our avalanche services
    is about prevention and then safety in preventing avalanches
    from occurring. So education is a key part of that, yes.
        Senator Cortez Masto. And this bill will help funding that?
        Mr. French. Yes.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Okay, thank you.
        I notice my time is up.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator King.
        Senator King. First, Madam Chair, I want to observe that we
    mispronounced the word recreation. It really is re-creation,
    and that is the essence of what we are talking about here is
    the re-creation of people's hearts and souls when they enter
    the outdoors. I just think it is important that word is, you
    know, it is rec-reation. That is not what it is. It is re-
    creation.
        Anyway, first, Mr. Bannon, you mentioned 300,000 people
    have done NOLS trips. My son was one of them, some 30 years
    ago. It was an extraordinary experience. Madam Chair, it was on
    Prince William Sound in Alaska, and it was a really signal
    experience in this young man's life. So I want to thank you for
    what NOLS does for 300,000+ people around the country.
        Mr. Bannon. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator King. More substantively, there is a theme here
    that bothers me. We had a hearing a couple weeks ago. Senator
    Cassidy has a bill to increase staffing at FERC to process
    certain permits. Here we are talking about bills to increase
    staffing and be able to respond more promptly and efficiently
    to permits. The bottom line is the Federal Government can't
    work if there is nobody to answer the phone. And we are going
    through a period where bureaucrat is a dirty word and where we
    have hiring freezes and freezes of salary, no raises, and yet
    here we are talking about delays in permitting because
    somebody, I think you said, was doing something else, had a
    land transfer, and couldn't do the permits.
        I just think we need to realize this is part--I suspect you
    could have this same hearing in practically any committee at
    the Department of Agriculture, Inland Fish or Fish and
    Wildlife, anywhere in the Federal Government, the IRS, that
    processes complaints and permitting applications from our
    citizens.
        I just think it is important to point out, Madam Chair,
    that you can't have it both ways. You can't bully reg
    bureaucrats and then complain that permits aren't being granted
    in a timely fashion. I just think that is an important point,
    and I am seeing a pattern develop here.
        Finally, a specific question. Mr. McGuire, I am curious
    about this bill and Senator Gardner isn't here. In Section, I
    think it is (5)(A)(iii), it talks about what the money can be
    used for and most of the discussion has been for administrative
    cost, reducing permitting time, staffing up the agencies. No
    problem there.
        But then it talks about other things it can be used for and
    it says interpretation activities, visitor information, visitor
    services and signage to enhance the ski area visitor
    experience. Could you buy a new chairlift with this money?
        Mr. McGuire. No.
        Senator King. Could you build a road through your ski area
    or to your ski area?
        Mr. McGuire. A ski company could submit an application to
    the Forest Service----
        Senator King. But Senator Gardner----
        Mr. McGuire. ----but no, the Forest Service would not----
        Senator King. ----was talking about and you were talking
    about increasing your infrastructure of your ski area. What
    does that mean? I am just, I am a little concerned that we are
    talking about federal money being given to a profit-making
    organization. There is no matching requirement or anything.
    What could it be used for? What does that mean, visitor
    services?
        Mr. McGuire. So I think first and foremost I do want to
    note, none of these dollars will be used to pay for or buy
    infrastructure for a private company. It's purely through the--
    --
        Senator King. But that is what you just--but earlier you've
    used the word infrastructure about five times today, so did
    Senator Gardner.
        Mr. McGuire. I mean, when I say infrastructure, I mean the
    permitting and processes, the NEPA process, that a company must
    go through, a permittee must go through in order to be able to
    make that investment.
        Senator King. So this money would go to pay the cost of the
    ski area in preparing their application, is that what you are
    saying?
        Mr. McGuire. No, currently ski areas pay for all the
    environmental work that goes through, through cost recovery. I
    don't anticipate this going.
        When the Forest Service contracts that work out to a third
    party, they must necessarily accept the work of that third
    party back into the Federal Government. That takes the Forest
    Services' own biologist, their own----
        Senator King. Well, I just want to go on record as being
    concerned about this term, the visitor services. I don't know
    what that means because I have gathered through this discussion
    today that we are talking about things that enhance the visitor
    experience. In fact, that is what it says. And then it also
    says, oddly enough, it forbids using this money for fire
    suppression or for land acquisition to fill out an area in the
    area. I just find this whole provision a little disturbing.
        Madam Chair, I just want to, when we get to markup, I would
    like some more information because there is--it says
    interpretation activity, visitor information, visitor services
    and signage. That is a pretty, visitor service is a pretty
    broad term. I want to know what that means because I don't
    think we should be funding a new chairlift or if we are going
    to fund that kind of thing, there at least should be some kind
    of matching requirement and other limitations.
        Mr. McGuire, do you want to respond?
        Mr. McGuire. Certainly not the intent of this legislation
    to subsidize any actual infrastructure. When we say visitor
    services, we mean things such as signage that lets visitors
    know they're on their national forest.
        Senator King. That is fine.
        Mr. McGuire. When we say visitor services, we mean having
    law enforcement available, Forest Service Law Enforcement
    available to visit. This means having the ability for rangers
    to be out on the forest, on the ski area.
        Senator King. If that is what we are talking, I don't think
    we have any problem.
        Mr. McGuire. Yeah.
        Senator King. I'm just worried about the vagueness of the
    language. And I am worried, I don't quite understand why the
    money couldn't be used for forest fire suppression on that
    unit. It seems to me that would be something we would want to
    do, wouldn't it?
        Mr. McGuire. I think the concern would be that the fire
    suppression needs are so great that it could quickly take
    everything.
        Senator King. I see. Okay.
        Thank you, Madam Chair.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator King. I appreciate you
    raising that. I know that was a question that Senator Manchin
    had, so what we might want to do is just look very----
        Senator King. Let the record show I had that question
    before Manchin planned it.
        The Chairman. There you go.
        [Laughter.]
        We are going to give you total credit here.
        But I do think that this is an important part of what we
    are doing as we are learning more about these issues, looking
    at the legislation that has been proposed. I think we all know
    that even contained within these three bills there are going to
    be some things, some ideas that are going to be prompted from
    this, more that we might want to add.
        And as Senator Manchin mentioned in his opening comments,
    what we are seeking to do is take all these good ideas, not
    unlike what we did with our energy storage initiative where we
    had five separate bills that we, kind of, worked together to
    really put together a package. I think, the goal here is to
    really build a robust recreation, re-creation, package coming
    out of the Committee. So I appreciate the directed focus on
    some of this language. I think we want to make sure that,
    again, it all works.
        I wanted to give you, Ms. Haskett, an opportunity to
    respond to the same question that I had asked Mr. French about
    how you balance the recreation uses on BLM lands, how you
    determine that and then I will have some other questions for
    the rest of you.
        Go ahead, Ms. Haskett.
        Ms. Haskett. Thank you for the question.
        The BLM balances those resources typically through a land
    use plan. And so, and also Secretary Bernhardt has issued many
    secretarial orders around making recreational access and
    streamlining permits and NEPA through several secretarial
    orders. And so, we are following those and implementing those
    and, like I said, balancing those through our land use planning
    process.
        The Chairman. I think we recognize that the processes are a
    little bit different between agencies and that there is a
    difference in terms of ease of operation, what is determined to
    be user friendly, consumer friendly. So again, these are things
    that we want to explore a little bit further.
        Mr. French, I want to bring up an issue that you and I have
    shared when we have been out actually in the Tongass last year
    with the Secretary. I raised it with the Secretary at the time
    because it is something that I continue to hear as I am home in
    the state and specifically, in the Tongass, although, the
    Chugach as well.
        This comes up when you have volunteers, people who really
    love their outdoors. This is our forest. This is where we play
    and where we recreate. They have seen degradation of, whether
    it is public trails or whether it is the Forest Service cabins,
    and all they want to do is help. They want to be the volunteers
    that are going to make sure that the little cabin is kept
    better after they leave for their nice weekend than when they
    go there. And the level of frustration that I have heard from
    individuals that have said, all we wanted to try to do was
    help. In order to be certified as a volunteer to be able to go
    out, we have to demonstrate that we have, you know, we are
    certified in how to run a chainsaw, that we have full-on Red
    Cross training. These are men and women that know more about
    the Tongass National Forest than most any of us would on any
    given day, and they just feel like they have been
    disenfranchised and discouraged from trying to be good
    partners. This is something that I know the Secretary cares a
    lot about because this not only is good partnering, but it
    gives us that ownership in our own forest.
        And so, if you can speak to what you are doing within
    Forest Service to look to these areas that are prohibiting or
    restricting volunteers from coming together to be helpful and
    what we can do here in Congress to help facilitate volunteer
    efforts.
        I participated in a Park Service, just, volunteer day out
    at Rock, it wasn't Rock Creek Park. It was Great Falls area in
    August or September with--August, with my interns. It was a
    great day for us. But it was one day, and we were very strictly
    supervised. But we were supervised by fabulous, fabulous folks
    from the parks. Our public lands need all of us chipping in,
    but it seems like our own government is the one that says,
    hmmmm, for liability reasons, it is just not safe that you go
    there.
        Help me out with this.
        Mr. French. Okay, thank you for the feedback. And I, we
    never want to show up in that way. We have a responsibility to
    protect folks, and I think that may be a space for some
    dialogue where we could talk about that liability side of
    things. On the other hand of this, we had 4.4 million hours of
    volunteer assistance last year. It's huge. It's critically
    important to us. And if there are ways that we're showing up
    that are disenfranchising folks, the way that we're managing
    that right now is primarily through education of our employees,
    of going in and talking about problem-solving and finding
    solutions to fix that because that's not the case in all
    places.
        When we see systemic issues, these are the places where we
    start to have conversations about are there regional policies,
    local policies or national policies that need to be either
    aligned because that's part of our problem. We're sometimes
    showing up differently in different places or we need to create
    some alignment across the agency. I'm always open to hearing
    more of that feedback, especially if we know of places where
    that's occurring and we'll address it.
        The Chairman. Well, and I know that some of the community
    members had, kind of, come together as an advisory, an ad hoc
    advisory. I think that there needs to be more of that and
    really working together with our Forest Service partners. I
    think we see some examples where it is working better than
    others.
        But I have some very, very specific stories about what we
    have seen with Forest Service cabins that are perfectly good,
    perfectly usable but they are pretty remote. Well, Alaska in
    the Tongass is pretty remote. There are no roads to anything
    anyway, so people have to fly in and the pushback that we are
    getting is well, there is not a lot of use in that particular
    cabin because it is remote. Okay, that is fair. We have to make
    decisions in terms of how we are prioritizing the cost. But if
    there are those who can then help Forest Service in some basic
    maintenance, instead of Forest Service saying, no, the answer
    here is we are going to take the cabin down because it is
    expensive to go check on every year and not that many people
    are using it. But if there are those who can help, why are we
    taking down these great assets? That is something that I would
    like to explore with you and your team a little bit more. I
    know it just can't be related to Alaska. We have some great
    facilities.
        Let's go back to you, Senator Heinrich.
        Senator Heinrich. Thank you and I think we are getting at a
    lot of really good issues that deserve our attention.
        Ms. Haskett, I don't want to pick a bone with you, but I
    want to return to the exchange you had with Senator Daines
    because I think there was a little bit of a misunderstanding.
    It is very true that you said that the BLM doesn't require
    permits for hunting. But I guarantee you, having spent some
    time in and around this business, that to guide a hunt, you do
    require permits. And that is where, for a day hunt, which he
    was describing, it still requires that special use permit.
        One of the things we talked about quite a bit here and that
    I have worked a little bit with the Chair on is the filming
    issue. Congress, somewhere around a decade ago, a little more
    than that at the tail end of the Bush administration, tasked
    Department of the Interior and the Forest Service, all three
    agencies at DOI, as well as the Forest Service with coming up
    with unified filming structure. And in 2013 there was a draft,
    or not a draft but a proposed rule. My understanding is that
    was accepted by the three DOI agencies, meaning BLM, Park
    Service, Fish and Wildlife but the Forest Service did not
    accept it and today, we still have a mismatch between DOI and
    the Forest Service on those.
        Mr. French, do you know what the thinking there was and why
    we still have two different standards for filming?
        Mr. French. I don't.
        Senator Heinrich. Okay.
        Mr. French. But I'll follow up with you, Senator.
        Senator Heinrich. That would be wonderful.
        Mr. French. You bet.
        Senator Heinrich. We want to look at that and see if one
    makes more sense than the other, if there is a way to unify
    them across agencies, just like cross agency permits make a lot
    of sense when you have BLM and Forest Service butting up
    against each other.
        I know in New Mexico, oftentimes, when some of these shows
    film, they are trying to operate in areas that have multiple
    public land agencies. And so, having one unified agency and
    maybe even a unified, once again, permit structure where you
    designate a lead agency and they can do it once rather than
    jumping through both agencies might make a great deal of sense.
        Mr. French. Sure, that makes sense.
        [Information on filming policies follow.]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Heinrich. I know you also mentioned, Mr. French,
    the categorical exclusions that the Forest Service is working
    on with respect to recreational activities. When do you expect
    final action on some of those?
        Mr. French. We would, we're expecting to release our final
    rule sometime late spring, early summer.
        Senator Heinrich. Great.
        Mr. French. In fact, we were working on that before we came
    here, and it will directly address many of the pieces that you
    heard in Mr. McGuire and others' testimony this morning.
        Senator Heinrich. Great. I will look forward to seeing
    that.
        Thank you all very much.
        The Chairman. Senator King.
        Well, the other part of our job is now commencing. We have
    a series of three votes that began about ten minutes ago, so we
    will have to wrap up here.
        But I want to thank each of you for your contribution to
    the discussion here today. I think this is one of those areas
    when we look to those things that the Energy Committee can help
    advance, that builds a level of support, builds a level of
    consensus. We have Republican bills and Democrat bills that we
    have considered here today. We have matters that people care
    about because they care about our public lands. They care about
    the ability to get outside and recreate or re-create.
        I like that, Senator King. I am going to remember it.
        But it really is such an important part, not only of our
    economy but what we are blessed to have as Americans. I think
    we recognize that we have visitors that come from around the
    world to see our national treasures, to walk through our parks
    and to float our rivers, or to take an inner tube in Senator
    Manchin's state.
        We have extraordinary lands, and how we make them available
    is important. But I am also very, very cognizant that the
    experience is something that we want to ensure is a good one,
    and sometimes that requires a level of regulation that some of
    us would rather not have to put up with, but it is part of what
    we do.
        We also have to recognize that our public lands are not
    just entirely recreation lands, that they are multiple-use
    lands. Again, how we balance that is an important part of the
    discussion as well. So as we prioritize, that is one aspect of
    it, but again, making sure that there is access and access in a
    way that treats the lands respectfully and allows for that good
    visitor experience.
        It was interesting when I was in Arches National Park with
    Senator Lee, you know, extraordinary, extraordinary spaces. It
    was my first visit there, and it just, kind of, takes your
    breath away. We were there in the shoulder season and there
    wasn't a lot of traffic on the road, but just listening to the
    local folks there and the Park Service Superintendent talk
    about the increased visitation and how they accommodate that,
    how they ensure that they have a good visitor experience and a
    safe visitor experience when you have, basically, one way in
    and one way out and everybody wanting to see many of these same
    treasures all at once.
        How we do this is a challenge and a good one. I think we
    have some good legislation in front of us. We have a lot of
    good ideas to work with.
        I am certainly going to be soliciting more as we work to
    build a broader package, but when I think about those component
    pieces of energy measures that we can move through this
    Committee, it is good to talk about our natural resources in
    the sense of our oil, our gas, our coal, our renewables, our
    minerals, but also to recognize that the recreation component
    on our lands is an extraordinarily important part of our
    economy and an extraordinarily important part of our national
    identity.
        We have some work to do, and we will look forward to doing
    it with you all.
        Thank you so much, and we stand adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:44 a.m. the hearing was adjourned.]

                          APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

                                  ----------

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]