[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                 THE 2021 WILDLAND FIRE YEAR: RESPONDING 
                      TO AND MITIGATING THREATS TO
                              COMMUNITIES

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

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

               SUBCOMMITTEE ON CONSERVATION AND FORESTRY

                                 OF THE

                        COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                           SEPTEMBER 29, 2021

                               __________

                           Serial No. 117-17


          Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture
                         agriculture.house.gov
                         
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
47-306 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2022                     
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------  


                        COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

                     DAVID SCOTT, Georgia, Chairman

JIM COSTA, California                GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania, 
JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts     Ranking Minority Member
FILEMON VELA, Texas                  AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina, Vice  ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, 
Chair                                Arkansas
ABIGAIL DAVIS SPANBERGER, Virginia   SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee
JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut            VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
ANTONIO DELGADO, New York            DOUG LaMALFA, California
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois              RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine               RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia
GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN,      DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina
Northern Mariana Islands             TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire         DON BACON, Nebraska
CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois               DUSTY JOHNSON, South Dakota
SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York       JAMES R. BAIRD, Indiana
STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands   JIM HAGEDORN, Minnesota
TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona              CHRIS JACOBS, New York
SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California        TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
RO KHANNA, California                MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
AL LAWSON, Jr., Florida              TRACEY MANN, Kansas
J. LUIS CORREA, California           RANDY FEENSTRA, Iowa
ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota               MARY E. MILLER, Illinois
JOSH HARDER, California              BARRY MOORE, Alabama
CYNTHIA AXNE, Iowa                   KAT CAMMACK, Florida
KIM SCHRIER, Washington              MICHELLE FISCHBACH, Minnesota
JIMMY PANETTA, California            JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia

                                 ______

                      Anne Simmons, Staff Director

                 Parish Braden, Minority Staff Director

                                 ______

               Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry

               ABIGAIL DAVIS SPANBERGER, Virginia, Chair

FILEMON VELA, Texas                  DOUG LaMALFA, California, Ranking 
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine               Minority Member
ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire         SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee
TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona              RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia
JIMMY PANETTA, California            TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
J. LUIS CORREA, California           DUSTY JOHNSON, South Dakota
KIM SCHRIER, Washington              MARY E. MILLER, Illinois
                                     BARRY MOORE, Alabama

               Paul Babbitt, Subcommittee Staff Director

                                  (ii)
                                  
                                  
                             C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
LaMalfa, Hon. Doug, a Representative in Congress from California, 
  opening statement..............................................     5
    Submitted map................................................    42
Spanberger, Hon. Abigail Davis, a Representative in Congress from 
  Virginia, opening statement....................................     1
    Prepared statement...........................................     3
    Submitted letter on behalf of Jessica Turner, Executive 
      Director, Outdoor Recreation Roundtable....................    41
Thompson, Hon. Glenn, a Representative in Congress from 
  Pennsylvania, opening statement................................     6

                                Witness

Moore, Randy, Chief, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department of 
  Agriculture, Washington, D.C...................................     8
    Prepared statement...........................................     9
    Submitted questions..........................................    43

 
                     THE 2021 WILDLAND FIRE YEAR: 
                      RESPONDING TO AND MITIGATING.
                         THREATS TO COMMUNITIES

                              ----------                              


                     WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2021

                  House of Representatives,
                 Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry,
                                  Committee on Agriculture,
                                                   Washington, D.C.
    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:02 a.m., via 
Zoom, Hon. Abigail Davis Spanberger [Chair of the Subcommittee] 
presiding.
    Members present: Representatives Spanberger, Pingree, 
Kuster, O'Halleran, Panetta, Schrier, Costa, LaMalfa, Allen, 
Johnson, Miller, Moore, and Thompson.
    Staff present: Lyron Blum-Evitts, Jacqueline Emanuel, Ross 
Hettervig, Josh Lobert, Ashley Smith, Paul Babbitt, Parish 
Braden, John Busovsky, Caleb Crosswhite, Josh Maxwell, Patricia 
Straughn, and Dana Sandman.

     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ABIGAIL DAVIS SPANBERGER, A 
            REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM VIRGINIA

    The Chair. This hearing of the Subcommittee on Conservation 
and Forestry entitled, The 2021 Wildland Fire Year: Responding 
to and Mitigating Threats to Communities, will come to order. 
Welcome, and thank you for joining today's hearing. After brief 
opening remarks, Members will receive testimony from our 
witness today, and then the hearing will be open to questions. 
Members will be recognized in order of seniority, alternating 
between Majority and Minority Members, and in order of arrival, 
for those Members who have joined us after the hearing was 
called to order. When you are recognized, you will be asked to 
unmute your microphone, and will have 5 minutes to ask your 
questions or make a comment. If you are not speaking, I ask 
that you remain muted in order to minimize background noise. In 
order to get as many questions as possible the timer will stay 
consistently visible on your screen.
    I want to thank everyone for joining us today for this very 
important and timely hearing on the 2021 wildfire season. We 
have all seen the heartbreaking footage of the wildfires that 
continue to rage in the West, and have been raging in the West 
so far this year. The fires are terrifying, and I stand ready 
to do whatever I can as Chair of this Subcommittee to ensure 
that the Forest Service has the resources, the personnel, and 
the tools they need to prepare for future fires, and respond to 
the wildland fires already raging. It is also imperative that 
we make sure firefighters on the ground are compensated fairly, 
and given adequate time away from this intense and dangerous 
work, and I think I speak for everyone here today when I say 
that America's firefighters embody our nation's highest ideals 
of courage, commitment, and selflessness towards their fellow 
Americans.
    Unfortunately, as we head into the heart of wildfire 
seasons, or, as it has become, wildfire years after years, we 
are expected to have yet another unprecedented year of 
dangerous and deadly wildfires ahead of us. And as we speak, 
there are currently more than 60 wildfires raging in the United 
States across 3 million acres of land, and in much of the land 
represented by some of the Members of this Subcommittee, and 
certainly Members of the larger Committee. While the volume of 
wildfires may be unprecedented, the story before us is a 
familiar one. In the short time that I have chaired this 
Subcommittee, I have presided over a wildfire hearing each year 
that begins with news exactly about what has happened in that 
year's wildfire season, and each year it is worse than the 
last.
    In fact, it was almost exactly a year ago that we sat here 
and had a hearing nearly identical as the Rattlesnake, the 
Creek, the SCU Lightning Complex, and the El Dorado Fires, 
among others, devastated the western United States. And at that 
hearing, I compared the situation in the West to another 
environmental crisis that faced much of the United States in 
the 1930s, the Dust Bowl. And during that period there was a 
sense that Congress did not understand the severity of the 
problems facing America's farmers and families living in the 
midst of an environmental crisis. And despite demands for 
action by both the Administration and those impacted by the 
dust storm, for years Congress failed to act in a comprehensive 
manner, and it was not until March of 1935 when the dust from 
the Midwest reached the Capitol steps, and lawmakers were 
forced to see it and experience it with their own eyes, that a 
compromise could be reached on what became the first Federal 
conservation bill, the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment 
Act of 1936 (Pub. L. 74-461).
    It should not take the ash of these wildfires, or the 
debris and floodwaters of hurricanes ravaging our coasts, or 
the severe heat felt by millions across the nation and across 
the globe on a daily basis--it should not take that reaching 
the Capitol steps for us, for Congress, to take action on the 
environmental crisis we are currently facing. Through the House 
Agriculture Committee section of the proposed Build Back Better 
Act (H.R. 5376), the Committee is taking action. This bill, 
marked up by this Committee just a few weeks ago, contains $14 
billion for hazardous fuel treatments on National Forest System 
lands, $1 billion for critical vegetation management, $9 
billion in grants for state and private forestry for hazardous 
fuel treatments, millions of dollars in grants for recovery and 
rehabilitation of areas affected by wildfires, $50 million for 
post-fire recovery plans, and would remove the cap on the 
Reforestation Trust Fund, building on the REPLANT Act (H.R. 
2049), which was introduced by our colleague, Congressman 
Panetta, who serves on this Subcommittee. And this is a piece 
of legislation that I am proud to co-lead, and I know the 
Ranking Member is also a co-lead of this important legislation.
    What is more, this bill squarely takes aim at combating the 
crisis by investing in clean energy jobs, climate-smart 
conservation practices at USDA, and the creation of a Civilian 
Climate Corps, as called for in my bill, the Climate 
Stewardship Act (H.R. 2534). Of course, climate is not the only 
factor contributing to the intensity of wildfires in the 
wildfire seasons. We know that many factors are involved in the 
current wildfires and are wildfire risks. Encroachment of 
housing developments on forested wildlands, forest management 
decisions and resources, fire management, weather events, the 
actions of people, like the use of pyrotechnic devices, and the 
list, unfortunately, continues. In addition, there is still 
more that must be done to protect Americans from wildfires, 
make impacted communities whole, and ensure the U.S. Forest 
Service has the tools they need to respond to and combat 
wildfires, all while combating the climate crisis.
    Managing our forests to mitigate future wildfire risk is a 
steep, but not insurmountable task, and former Forest Service 
Chief Vicki Christiansen testified recently that we need to 
treat an additional 20 million acres of forestlands over the 
next 10 years to make progress in reducing our wildfire risk. I 
am looking forward to the conversation about how we can make 
that happen. And, before we begin the discussion, I do want to 
congratulate Randy Moore on his new role as Chief of the U.S. 
Forest Service. As a Regional Forester, Chief Moore has been a 
leader among his peers on issues relating to conservation, 
combating the climate crisis, responding to wildfires.
    Chief Moore's appointment to this role is historic. He is 
also the first African American to hold this role in the 
history of the United States Forest Service. I was excited to 
have a chance to speak with Chief Moore in advance of this 
hearing, learn about some of his experiences, the places he has 
worked throughout the United States, and I look forward to 
hearing more from him today. I have the utmost confidence in 
his leadership, and the vision that he brings to the U.S. 
Forest Service, and I appreciate him joining us today to answer 
our questions.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Spanberger follows:]

 Prepared Statement of Hon. Abigail Davis Spanberger, a Representative 
                       in Congress from Virginia
    Thank you all for joining us here today for this important and 
timely hearing on the 2021 wildfire season.
    We've all seen the footage of the wildfires raging in the West 
already this year. These fires are terrifying, and I stand ready to do 
whatever I can as Chair of this Subcommittee to ensure that the Forest 
Service has the resources, the personnel, and the tools they need to 
prepare for future fires and respond to the wildland fires already 
raging. It is also imperative that we make sure firefighters on the 
ground are compensated fairly and given adequate time away from this 
intense and dangerous work. I think I speak for everyone here today 
when I say that America's firefighters embody our nation's highest 
ideals of courage, commitment, and selflessness toward their fellow 
Americans.
    Unfortunately, as we head into the heart of the wildfire season, we 
are expected to have yet another unprecedented year of dangerous and 
deadly wildfires ahead of us. As we speak, there are currently more 
than 60 wildfires raging in the United States across 3 million acres of 
land.
    While the volume of wildfires may be unprecedented, the story 
before us is a familiar one. In the short time that I've chaired this 
Subcommittee, I have presided over a wildfire hearing each year that 
begins with news about how that year's wildfire season is worse than 
the last. In fact, almost exactly a year ago, I sat here and presided 
over a nearly identical hearing as the SCU Lightening Complex, 
Rattlesnake, Creek, and El Dorado Fires--among others--devastated the 
western United States.
    At that hearing, I compared the situation in the West to another 
environmental crisis that faced much of the United States in the 
1930s--the Dust Bowl.
    During that period, there was a sense that Congress did not 
understand the severity of the problems facing America's farmers and 
families living in the midst of an environmental crisis. Despite 
demands for action by both the Administration and those impacted by the 
dust storms, for years, Congress failed to act in a comprehensive 
manner. It was not until March of 1935, when the dust from the Midwest 
reached the Capitol's steps and lawmakers were forced to see it and 
experience it with their own eyes, that compromise could be reached on 
what became the first Federal conservation bill--the Soil Conservation 
and Domestic Allotment Act of 1936.
    It should not take the ash of these wildfires, or the debris and 
flood waters of the hurricanes ravaging our coasts, or the severe heat 
felt by millions across the nation and across the globe on a daily 
basis, reaching the Capitol's steps today, for this Congress to take 
action on the environmental crisis currently facing us.
    Through the House Agriculture Committee's section of the proposed 
Build Back Better Act, this Committee is acting. This bill, marked up 
by this Committee just a few weeks ago, contains $14 billion for 
hazardous fuel treatments on National Forest System Lands, $1 billion 
for critical vegetation management activities, $9 billion in grants to 
state and private forestry for hazardous fuels treatments, millions of 
dollars in grants for the recovery and rehabilitation of areas affected 
by wildfires, $50 million for post-fire recovery plans, and would 
remove the cap on the Reforestation Trust Fund--building on the REPLANT 
Act introduced by my colleague Congressman Panetta, who serves on this 
Subcommittee.
    What's more, this bill squarely takes aim at combating the climate 
crisis by investing in clean energy jobs, climate-smart conservation 
practices at USDA, and the creation of a Civilian Climate Corps as 
called for in my bill, the Climate Stewardship Act, that I introduced 
alongside Senator Booker.
    Of course, climate is not the only factor contributing to the 
intensity of wildfire seasons. We know that many factors are involved 
in the current wildfires and our wildfire risk. That certainly includes 
encroachment of housing and development on forested wildlands; forest 
management decisions and resources; fire management; weather events; 
actions of people, like use of pyrotechnic devices; and the list 
unfortunately continues.
    In addition, there is still more that must be done to protect 
Americans from wildfires, make impacted communities whole, ensure the 
U.S. Forest Service has the tools they need to respond to and combat 
wildfires, all while combating the climate crisis.
    Managing our forests to mitigate future wildfire risk is a steep 
but not insurmountable task. Former Forest Service Chief Vicki 
Christiansen testified recently that we need to treat an additional 20 
million acres of Forest Service lands over the next 10 years to make 
progress in reducing our wildfire risk. I am looking forward to a 
discussion on how we can make that happen.
    Before we begin, I want to congratulate Randy Moore on his new role 
as the Chief of the U.S. Forest Service. As a Regional Forester, Chief 
Moore has been a leader among his peers on issues relating to 
conservation, combating the climate crisis, and responding to 
wildfires. Chief Moore's appointment to the role is also historic, as 
he will be the first African American to hold this role in the history 
of the U.S. Forest Service. I was excited to have the chance to speak 
with Chief Moore in advance of this hearing and have the utmost 
confidence in the leadership and vision he brings to the U.S. Forest 
Service.
    With that, I thank our speakers for joining us today. We look 
forward to the discussion and I'll recognize the Ranking Member for any 
remarks he'd like to make.

    The Chair. With that, I thank our speaker for joining us, I 
look forward to the discussion, and I will now recognize the 
Ranking Member for any remarks that he would like to make at 
the outset of this hearing.


  OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DOUG LaMALFA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
                    CONGRESS FROM CALIFORNIA

    Mr. LaMalfa. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. I greatly 
appreciate us having this opportunity to have this very 
important hearing today, and cover the subject, as it greatly 
needs to be, and ongoing. I also appreciate your comments and 
your statement too about that it took the dust from the Dust 
Bowl to reach the steps of the Capitol to get action, and we 
hope that we don't have to deal with the smoke and the ash from 
this, and yet indeed some of that smoke and ash has already, 
just from this year, reached back here. Indeed, you would see 
that there would be health advisory warnings to not go outside 
and exercise from fires coming from my district, and some of my 
neighboring district colleagues as well. So, I appreciate that 
comment, and that sentiment.
    So, with that, welcome, Chief Moore, and thanks for being 
with us on the big screen, although you are on the small screen 
right now there. Is that Mount Shasta behind you there, 
perhaps, or--hard to tell from here----
    Mr. Moore. It could very well be Mount Shasta.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Okay. So, as we have talked about here a 
little bit, like so many others who live in the West or near 
forests, of course, it is an extremely important and personal 
issue to me, and so many that I represent. So, I want to first 
recognize our firefighters who have done the hard work on the 
ground, who risk their lives each day to confront these 
disasters head on. And there is nothing like when I was up on--
visiting the fires myself on--the Dixie Fire, as we know, right 
near the Town of Greenville, just after Greenville was consumed 
by one just a few miles up the road.
    There is another town called Canyon Dam that--they were 
gracious enough to take me by, and, as we arrived there, we 
only had minutes to even view Canyon Dam, as the orange wall of 
heat and flame was only about a mile down the road, and--as we 
and the group said, I guess we need to turn around and head 
back, because--it was incredible. The roar of that fire, the 
wind that it created, a 50 mile an hour swirl of wind, and just 
minutes later the Town of Canyon Dam was gone. So, our 
firefighters are out there having to deal with that, and trying 
to figure out how to stay out of the way of it at the same 
time, trying to cut those fire lines, and do what they do. We 
greatly appreciate the risk, and them putting it all on the 
line.
    These past years have, again, been incredibly difficult for 
my district, and my neighboring districts too, and for rural 
forested regions of the West. Last year we saw over 10 million 
acres burn, over 40 percent of it in California alone. It has 
been just as difficult, and it may even set greater records by 
the time 2021 is over with. Even more communities were leveled 
this year, as I mentioned, than by the last 2 or 3 years. Six 
of the worst fire seasons on record have occurred over just a 1 
year period in 2020 and 2021. This includes the August Complex, 
the SCU Lightning Fire, Creek, the North Complex Fires in 2020, 
and including the devastating ones this year, Dixie, Bootleg up 
in Oregon, Caldor, south of me, near the Tahoe area, the 
Monument Fire to the west of my area, and my other tragedies 
ongoing.
    We know there are some 63 million acres at medium- to high-
risk of wildfire, and at least 80 million acres of Forest 
Service land that need treatment. I was pleased to hear the 
Chair's mention of previous Chief Christiansen saying 20 
million acres need to be done on a fast-forward basis. Although 
the challenges before the Forest Service are many, the 
solutions that we must put into practice to prevent 
catastrophic wildfire are clear and well-established.
    While many continue to blame a changing climate for the 
increase in acres burned each year, and the greater intensity 
of recent wildfires, the fact is most of our forests are indeed 
overgrown and have been overstocked for decades. We aren't 
doing enough management to reduce these fuel loads that have 
dramatically intensified the wildfire crisis. They are a 
national emergency, yet we will not solve this crisis without a 
fundamental shift on how we manage these lands. We need to 
increase the pace and scale of landscape projects that reduce 
hazardous fuel loads. We need to strategically thin the forests 
where necessary, around communities, of course defensible space 
around homes, and set up lines of defense, maybe on our 
ridgetops, or other areas that make sense, so when a fire does 
occur, and they will occur, that it gives our firefighters a 
place to make a stand, instead of unknown devastation for 
unknown distance.
    I find it very frustrating that some Members of Congress 
and outside groups who don't represent National Forests, or 
areas constantly devastated by wildfire, continue to try to put 
a stop to what Forest Service and other land managers are 
trying to do for proactive management that will reduce the 
threat of wildfire, and encourage healthy forestlands, healthy 
for the forests themselves, the wildlife, the water quality 
that is going to be affected by so much ash, and so much 
erosion of soil. Our forests, they are undergrown--excuse me, 
they are overgrown and under-managed. We need to be doing more 
active management immediately to reduce the threat of these 
fires and save lives. I appreciate today. We need to do more of 
these hearings on wildfire, and we won't solve the crisis by 
throwing money at the problem while needlessly, at the same 
time, hamstringing the Forest Service.
    So Chief Moore, again, thank you for being with us today. 
We are eager to hear your testimony, your ideas. I look forward 
to working with you, and identifying the ways for Congress to 
do its part to support the Forest Service and the firefighters 
on the front line. We need to incentivize them to want to stay 
there. And so--finally, to make great strides to address the 
wildfire crisis. Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you very much, Mr. LaMalfa. I would now 
like to recognize Ranking Member Thompson for any opening 
comments that he would like to make at this time.

 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GLENN THOMPSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
                   CONGRESS FROM PENNSYLVANIA

    Mr. Thompson. Madam Chair, thank you so much for this 
hearing, Mr. Ranking Member. I appreciate you both and your 
leadership in this area, and certainly once again, welcome to 
Chief Moore. I much appreciate you being here today and having 
this very timely conversation.
    While last year was one of the worst fire seasons on 
record, 2021 has been another incredibly challenging year for 
the Forest Service and the communities across the West. This 
year we have seen roughly 5.8 million acres burned so far in 
some of the largest single fires, and we are still not even 
through the season. The fact of the matter is that our forests 
are overgrown, and in need of more management and proactive 
treatment. This includes dramatically more hazardous fuels 
reduction, thinning, post-fire restoration, and landscape scale 
restoration projects to help reduce the intensity of wildfires.
    It also includes increasing timber harvests, where it makes 
sense, to support both the forest health and rural economies. 
So, we are still below the target level of harvests, and not 
getting anywhere close to allowable sales quantity system-wide. 
Chief Moore, I welcome your input in this hearing on how we can 
address these pressing issues. In my view, we need a 
fundamental shift in how we equip the Forest Service and forest 
managers to restore the land, and do the work necessary to 
mitigate the wildfire crisis.
    Regarding reconciliation, and the $40 billion for forestry, 
I would like to echo the comments by Ranking Member LaMalfa. 
Not only did this Committee mark up the ag portion without the 
$28 billion for conservation, there are significant issues with 
the forestry section that makes that funding unworkable. The 
forestry provisions don't just miss an opportunity to provide 
new authorities needed for more management, it is worse, 
because it restricts the Forest Service's ability to do the 
restoration necessary on the millions of acres at medium- to 
high-risk of wildfire.
    We can't just throw money at wildfire while limiting the 
Service, and hope for a different outcome. Continuing to put 
limited resources into small-scale projects will not restore 
our forests, or reduce the threat of fire. We need to provide 
the appropriate level of funding, coupled with workable 
authorities, to help the agency increase management at the 
landscape scale. We tried doing this in the farm bill in 2018 
with this Committee's version of the farm bill, which contained 
a variety of authorities to help the Forest Service better 
manage, and do so on a larger scale. And while the final bill 
does contain some limited new authorities, Senate Democrats 
once again refused to even meet with us to discuss the broader 
reforms necessary during the conference process. Wildfire is an 
emergency that we can wait no longer to address.
    Chief Moore, thank you for your service, and for your 
leadership, and, again, for being here today, and for this 
important discussion. We look forward to your testimony and 
thoughts on how we can support the rural economy, forest 
health, and efforts to reduce the threats of wildfire. In 
closing, I also join the Chair and Ranking Member in 
recognizing our firefighters and wildland responders. We have 
lost too many of them over the past number of years because of 
the size and the intensity of these--what I believe are 
avoidable wildfires, if we are proactive with management.
    So, to all of you who serve in those capacities, we say 
thank you for your support and constant sacrifices. We say 
thank you to your families, who know that they don't know if 
you are coming home at the end of the day, or the end of the 
week, or the end of the month, when they are dispatched and 
respond to these fires. But we do appreciate your support and 
constant sacrifices to protect our forests, our homes, our 
property, and lives. And with that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you very much, Ranking Member Thompson. 
The Chair would request that other Members submit their opening 
statements for the record so our witness may begin his 
testimony, and to ensure that there is ample time for our 
questions.
    I am pleased to welcome to the Committee the Chief of the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture's Forest Service, Mr. Randy 
Moore. Chief Moore, you will have 5 minutes to deliver your 
testimony. The timer should be visible to you on your screen, 
and will count down to zero, at which time your time has 
expired. Chief Moore, please begin whenever you are ready.

  STATEMENT OF RANDY MOORE, CHIEF, U.S. FOREST SERVICE, U.S. 
          DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, WASHINGTON, D.C.

    Mr. Moore. Great. So, Chair Spanberger, Ranking Member 
LaMalfa, Ranking Member Thompson, and Members of this 
Committee, it is my honor to testify today for the first time 
as Chief of the USDA Forest Service. I look forward to working 
closely with each of you. Today I will focus on the ongoing 
wildfire crisis. I will talk about what it will take to fight 
these fires, improve forest health, and also protect 
communities.
    By any other standard, we would be gratified by our 98 
percent success rate of putting fires out during initial 
attack, but when you see the tragic results left by just two 
percent of the fires, it is not good enough, not nearly. In my 
40+ year career, 14 of those being in California, I have 
witnessed firsthand the devastation of these fires. It is like 
nothing I have seen before. The record fire year played out as 
forecasters predicted. Climate change, drought, overgrowth, and 
fuels created a dire condition that was just right for a severe 
outbreak. We spent a record number of days at Preparedness 
Level 5, which is the highest fire risk level. More than 40,000 
fires have ravaged 5.5 million acres of forest, consuming 4,000 
homes, businesses, and outbuildings. Resources stretched thin, 
COVID-19 infections spiked, four Federal firefighters 
sacrificed their lives, and it is not over.
    The sobering takeaway, America's forests are in a state of 
emergency, and it is time to treat them like one. This should 
be a call to action, and it takes work on two fronts. We, among 
others, must maintain a stable firefighting force and a modern 
wildfire management system to ensure that we respond to these 
fires. But it is equally essential that we employ an active 
forest treatment program and strategy to put to work right 
away, and do the right work in the right places at the right 
scale to improve these forest conditions.
    First, we must ensure a stable, resilient firefighting 
force. That starts with taking care of our brave men and women 
who fight fires. They deserve better work-life balances and 
benefits. They deserve a supportive workplace in return for the 
grueling, hard work they do. At a time of increased stress, 
suicide, depression, they also need counseling and support 
services to prevent the tragedies. They deserve better pay 
above all. Federal wages of firefighters have not kept pace 
with states'. I have listened to stories of firefighters 
sleeping in their cars, or neglecting their medical bills. We 
must work to improve pay, and give them a livable wage. We 
already made a down payment on this commitment. As the 
President promised, we raised firefighters' base salary so no 
one makes less than $15 an hour. Permanent firefighters receive 
up to a ten percent incentive. Temporary firefighters got a 
$1,000 reward, but this is just the start. We are meeting and 
working with firefighters, listening to co-create permanent 
solutions.
    We must also modernize our wildland fire management system. 
This includes improving the use of technology. It also includes 
upgrading our models and systems for decision-making, and 
strengthening our cooperative relationships. But we will never 
have hired enough firefighters, we will never buy enough 
engines or aircraft to fight these fires. We must actively 
treat forests. That is what it takes to turn this situation 
around. We must shift from small-scale treatments, spread out, 
and landscapes to strategic, science-based treatments across 
boundaries at the size of the problem. It must start with those 
places most critically at risk. We must treat 20 million acres 
over 10 years. Done right, in the right places, treatments make 
a difference. I saw firsthand the lifesaving results of the 
Caldor Fire in Lake Tahoe. Forest treatments became a first 
line of defense. We are seeing more and more examples of 
success.
    Finally, we know we can't do this work alone. It will take 
partners, industry, states, and Federal agencies working 
together. I extend my thanks to Congress for what you are doing 
to pass the infrastructure bill. These investments are 
essential to getting this groundwork done. We are optimistic, 
we are working to get ready.
    In closing, we have faced this record year with both 
courage and humility. I am grateful to every firefighter, 
cooperator, and support personnel. The best way we can honor 
them, protect citizens, and reduce fire risk is to do this 
essential work on the ground. It is how we combat climate 
change. It is how we deliver services. It is how we create 
jobs, and sustain the healthy, productive forests that 
Americans deserve. Thank you for this opportunity, and I will 
be pleased to take any questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Moore follows:]

  Prepared Statement of Randy Moore, Chief, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. 
              Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
    Madam Chair, Ranking Member, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank 
you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss wildfire 
management and the 2021 Fire Year. Wildfires threaten urban and rural 
communities, Tribal Nations and their interests, farm and ranchland, 
municipal water supplies, timber, recreation sites, and important 
wildlife habitat.
    The Forest Service has a continuing need and responsibility to 
partner with all communities to prepare for wildfires. The Forest 
Service does not work alone in managing wildfires across the nation--
wildfire requires an all-of-government response, including major 
contributions from states, Tribes, and local government, contractors, 
partners, and volunteer organizations. These partnerships have evolved 
over many years, creating a robust interagency capability to support 
wildfire suppression across the country.
    Early in the year, the National Interagency Fire Center forecast 
predicted above normal fire potential for much of the West. As a 
result, the Administration took a number of steps to prepare for this 
fire year by bolstering firefighter pay, extending temporary 
firefighters to ensure effective response throughout the fire year, 
making additional aircraft available, continuing transition to a more 
permanent firefighting workforce, invoking the Defense Production Act 
to mitigate a potential shortage of firehose, and leveraging satellite 
and emerging technologies to rapidly detect new wildfires.
2021 Fire Year
    Our nation is enduring another devastating wildfire year, one that 
has cut destructive swaths through many states, including California, 
Oregon, Washington, Montana, Idaho, and Arizona. Complicating our 
efforts has been managing the effects of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, 
including the negative impacts on the health and availability of 
firefighting resources and supply chains. As of September 27, 2021, 
there have been 45,971 fires that have burned over 5.9 million acres 
across all jurisdictions. Sadly, we are also mourning the loss of a 
number of lives throughout the country due to wildfire activity, 
including four Federal firefighters who made the ultimate sacrifice in 
protecting our communities. The impact to communities cannot be 
overstated. While assessments are ongoing, to date, over 4,500 homes, 
commercial properties, and outbuildings have been destroyed, along with 
an untold amount of property damage and loss of livelihood for many.
    Fire year 2021, like 2017, 2018 and 2020, has been devastating in 
not only the size and frequency of large wildfires but also in terms of 
sustained activity. Since early spring, much of the western United 
States has seen intense fire activity that has not fully abated. 
Significant drought across the western United States produced 
conditions ripe for fire from the start of the summer. Substantial 
lightning events occurred early, and fires began simultaneously across 
multiple geographic areas. Our ability to mobilize resources was 
immediately constrained as we had personnel engaged in fighting fires 
in their home geographic area and could not leave to support other 
geographic areas as they have traditionally done. Prioritization of 
critical resources began early, and the demand for resources continues 
to be high across the system.
    Numerous large fires, including the nearly 1 million acre Dixie 
Fire, have burned in and around communities across Arizona, California, 
Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Montana. Smoke impacts from these fires 
have been widespread across the western states and have occasionally 
spread all the way to the East Coast. Resources have been constrained 
and the interagency wildfire system, of which the Forest Service is a 
part, has had to make many tough decisions to ensure firefighting 
resources were prioritized to fires with the greatest threat to public 
safety.
    We entered into National Wildfire Preparedness Level 5 on July 14, 
2021, indicating the highest level of fire activity and significant 
strains on firefighting resources. This is the earliest date in a 
decade and the second earliest date on record moving to this highest 
Preparedness Level. We remained at Preparedness Level 5 for 69 days, 
the longest stretch on record. During this stretch an average of 22,900 
firefighters and support personnel were assigned to wildfires each day.
    Due to local fire conditions, temporary closure orders have been 
put in place in some areas to provide for public safety and reduce the 
potential for new fires, including a temporary closure of national 
forests in California. Implementing fire restrictions, burn bans, or 
associated closures is a particularly difficult decision that we do not 
take lightly. The closures in California helped decrease the potential 
for new fire starts at a time of extremely limited firefighting 
resources. They also enhanced firefighter and community safety by 
limiting exposure that occurs in public evacuation situations, 
especially as COVID-19 continues to impact human health and strain 
hospital resources. Closure decisions are not made by the Forest 
Service in a vacuum. We work with our partners, state agencies, and 
communities to establish criteria for closing and re-opening our 
forests as conditions warrant. This risk-informed decision making with 
our partners led to us reopening California's national forests 2 days 
earlier than planned.
    Response requires a whole of government approach, and I want to 
personally thank our partners who answered our call for assistance to 
bolster our capabilities: the Department of Defense who provided active 
military from Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Washington, eight C-130 and 
two RC-26 aircraft, and continued access to critical satellite and 
other imagery; the Defense Logistics Agency; our international partners 
in Australia, Canada, and Mexico; and the Fire Department of New York 
City's All Hazard Incident Management Team. States also received 
significant assistance from their National Guard units. We are grateful 
for all of our partners around the country and around the world who 
continue to pitch in to help our nation through yet another difficult 
fire year.
Taking Care of Firefighters and Communities
    Wildland firefighters are the backbone of our ability to protect 
communities and vital infrastructure from wildfires. Wildland fire 
forecasts are consistently predicting fire seasons that start sooner, 
end later, and are more severe throughout the nation. Fire seasons have 
become fire years. With this change in condition, it is imperative to 
ensure a robust year-round workforce available to respond at any time, 
that is supported and equitably compensated, has a better work-life 
balance, and is available to undertake preventive actions like 
hazardous fuels management treatments during periods of low fire 
activity. As the complexity of the firefighting environment grows 
exponentially, our recruitment and retention of firefighters has been 
further complicated by our inability to offer a set of uniform 
competitive wages and benefits for permanent and seasonal employees. 
Federal wages for firefighters have not kept pace with wages offered by 
state, local and private entities in some areas of the United States. 
Firefighters must be fairly paid for the grueling work they are willing 
to take on. Additionally, in difficult fire years such as this one, 
annual Federal pay cap limitations can make it challenging for agencies 
to appropriately target compensation to our critical front-line 
employees and management officials who the U.S. government relies upon 
to lead our most difficult issues and at times dangerous incidents. We 
have seen highly trained personnel leave the Forest Service; we have 
experienced some inability to recruit new employees; and we are in a 
constant mode of training new employees. In addition, our Federal 
wildland firefighting workforce is stressed like no time in history. 
Suicidal ideation, depression, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder 
affect firefighters at levels far above what is found in general 
society. The Administration will work with Congress on longer-term much 
needed compensation, benefit, and work-life balance reforms for Federal 
wildland firefighters.
    It is time for a significant change in our Federal wildland fire 
system. The Forest Service is partnering with the Department of the 
Interior, the Office of Personnel Management, and Executive Office of 
the President to identify policy and legislative solutions to these 
challenges. As the President committed, permanent firefighting 
personnel up to the General Schedule (GS)-9 level, were provided a 
performance award payment equivalent to a ten percent award; temporary 
firefighters received a $1,300 award; and permanent and temporary 
firefighters in a GS-1, GS-2 or GS-3 position were additionally 
compensated to ensure they make $15 per hour. Over the last 2 years, 
the Forest Service has converted 500 firefighting positions from 
temporary to permanent. The Administration also supports the premium 
pay cap waiver in the FY 2022 Continuing Resolution that passed the 
House of Representatives. This provision will ensure that Federal 
firefighters will be compensated for the work they have and will 
complete this year. Most critically, going forward the Forest Service 
is working directly with firefighters and union officials to listen to 
their concerns and co-create solutions that serve their needs into the 
future. We look forward to working with Congress to support and 
modernize the Federal wildland fire fighter workforce
    Maintaining the health and safety of all our employees as they move 
around the country is fundamental to our continued success. Preventing 
the spread of COVID-19 among our first responders and communities is 
critical. COVID-19 protocols established in 2020, remain in place again 
this year. As a result, the Forest Service and our interagency partners 
have seen success with our COVID-19 prevention and mitigation measures. 
The learning culture of the wildland fire agencies allows for lessons-
learned to be shared in real time across fire incidents.
    The Forest Service continues to work with community leaders and 
local law enforcement to ensure their needs are met, and wildfire 
threats and capacity are clearly understood when planning firefighting 
strategies and evacuations.
    Smoke from large wildfire events poses significant risks to public 
health and safety. The Interagency Wildland Fire Air Quality Response 
Program has developed approaches for early warning of wildfire smoke 
impacts through efforts at the Forest Service Pacific Northwest 
Research Station and partner agencies. Successful outcomes include 
working with the Environmental Protection Agency to provide fire and 
smoke information on the popular https://www.airnow.gov/fires/ website 
and phone application. Air Resource Advisors provide Smoke Outlooks 
that inform approximately 21 million people, many in rural and 
underserved communities. Community preparation for wildfire smoke 
allows public health officials to be aware and prepare for effects on 
individuals vulnerable to smoke impacts.
Reducing Fire Risk Across All Lands
    Devastating wildfires are the most significant threat to the 
ability of our forests to sequester carbon, support local economies, 
and provide clean water and other important resources to communities. 
About 63 million acres, or 32 percent, of National Forest System lands 
are at high or very high hazard for wildfires that would be difficult 
to contain. This is, in part, a result of 110 years of fire overly 
aggressive suppression policies as well as climate change. Forest 
Service research has identified hundreds of communities at high risk 
from wildland fire. To reduce this risk there is a need to 
significantly scale up hazardous fuels reduction treatments across 
landscapes and in partnership with communities in the most at-risk 
places.
    An example of how fuels treatments help protect communities was 
seen in the Caldor Fire. On August 14, 2021, the Caldor Fire started on 
the Eldorado National Forest in California. Due to a historically dry 
season, the fire made unprecedented runs, with growth rates ranging 
from 10,000 to 40,000 acres per day in the direction of the Lake Tahoe 
Basin. The fire remained very active day and night. The fire was both 
fuels and wind driven and exceeded fire growth expectations in areas 
with significant natural barriers that would normally redirect or stall 
a fire. Despite the difficulty in managing this fire and the demanding 
fire environment, there are success stories to be found in the fuels 
reduction treatments completed around Lake Tahoe and the surrounding 
communities. As the Caldor Fire moved east, pushed by high winds and 
dry fuels, it encountered both thinning and prescribed fire treatments 
(see as green and purple polygons in the map below) that moderated fire 
behavior, allowed more time for evacuation efforts, and created safer 
and more conducive conditions for firefighters. There is no doubt homes 
were saved because of the efforts of firefighters, but those efforts 
were made safer and more effective due to the thinning and prescribed 
fire treatments in the wildland-urban interface.
South Tahoe Lake Hazardous Fuels Treatments
Sec.[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Forest Service carries out approximately 3 million acres of 
fuels reduction treatments annually. The Department of the Interior, 
states, Tribes and others also treat about 1 million acres annually. 
Unfortunately, this is not at the scale necessary to address the 
problem. Without reconsidering the way we treat hazardous fuels on 
Federal and non-Federal land, and address the impacts of climate 
change, we will remain in this current wildfire crisis. Destruction 
from wildfires will continue to threaten communities across the West. 
We will work with partners to focus fuels and forest health treatments 
more strategically and at the scale of the problem, using the best 
available science as our guide.
    To address the highest risk acres at the scale needed, we work 
collaboratively with states, Tribes, local communities, private 
landowners, and other stakeholders to:

   Strategically treat 20 million acres on priority National 
        Forest System lands, in the west, over and above our current 
        level of treatments; and

   Strategically treat 30 million acres of other priority 
        Federal, state, Tribal, and private lands, in the West.

    Forest Service research and risk based modeling has identified 
hundreds of communities at high risk, and can inform where and how to 
place treatments that will truly make a difference. We know that 
treatments need to be done across jurisdictions to be effective, and 
there are collaborative frameworks in place to enable cross-boundary 
treatments, including Cohesive Strategy projects, Joint Chiefs 
Restoration Partnership projects, Good Neighbor Authority agreements, 
and Shared Stewardship agreements.
    The Biden Administration's American Jobs Plan calls for protecting 
and restoring ``nature-based infrastructure--our lands, forests, 
wetlands, watersheds, and coastal and ocean resources.'' As part of the 
plan, the President has called on Congress ``to invest in protection 
from extreme wildfires.'' In addition, the USDA Climate-Smart 
Agriculture and Forestry Strategy has called for expanding the area of 
fuels treatments by two to four times nationwide to reduce wildfire 
risk.
    The President has made it clear that reducing the risk of wildfire 
and creating climate resilient forest landscapes is a top priority 
including a significant increase of over $280 million in wildfire risk 
reduction programs within the FY 2022 President's Budget. Additionally, 
the Administration supports the new investments within the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Deal that would enable the Forest Service to treat 
landscapes in the right places and at the right scale that is 
commensurate with the wildfire problem our nation faces.
Recovery Post-Wildfire
    The Forest Service has a lot of work to do to restore functioning 
ecosystems following the 2020 and 2021 wildfires. For example, 
wildfires create over 80% of reforestation needs, including 
approximately 1 million acres that burned with high severity in 2020 
alone. The Forest Service currently addresses only 6% of post-wildfire 
replanting needs per year, resulting in a rapidly expanding list of 
reforestation needs. The Agency has plans for the reforestation of over 
1.3 million acres of National Forest System land; however these plans 
only address \1/3\ of National Forest System reforestation needs, 
estimated to be 4 million acres and growing. As we work to recover from 
wildfire, the Agency emphasizes planting the right species, in the 
right place, under the right conditions, so forests will remain healthy 
and resilient over time.
    Employee care and recovery is a critical part of our work. Many 
national forests sustained destruction of infrastructure as well as 
significant environmental damage in the 2020 and 2021 wildfires. As a 
result of the 2020 wildfires alone, 110 Forest Service structures were 
damaged or destroyed, including: employee housing on the Arapaho and 
Roosevelt National Forests in Colorado; ten structures at the Brush 
Creek Work Center on the Plumas National Forest in California; and 
government quarters that housed 64 employees in Oregon. In September 
2020, the Forest Service stood up a team to aid in the care and 
recovery of employees, administrative units, communities, and short-
term and long-term natural resource needs. Several systems, 
organizations, and procedures have been developed that have supported 
employee well-being and employee's needs at work resulting from the 
2020 and 2021 wildfires. Some of these include an increase in mental 
health assistance for employees through peer-to-peer employee resources 
and contract services provided on incidents, and reimbursement to 
eligible employees when they were under evacuation orders.
Conclusion
    The USDA Forest Service is committed to keeping our communities and 
firefighters safe as fire seasons grow longer and more severe. The 
dedication, bravery, and professional integrity of our firefighters and 
support personnel is second to none. Many have lost their own homes as 
they helped save their communities. As we work with our many partners 
to assist communities impacted by wildfires, we are committed, through 
shared stewardship, to change this trend in the coming years.
    The Forest Service looks forward to working with this Subcommittee 
to take the steps forward needed to pay and support our wildland 
firefighters, reduce wildfire risk to communities across the western 
United States, and restore ecosystems and infrastructure affected by 
wildfires.

    The Chair. Thank you so very much for your opening 
statement, Chief Moore. At this time Members will be recognized 
for questions in order of seniority, alternating between 
Majority and Minority Members. You will be recognized for 5 
minutes each in order to allow us to get to as many questions 
as possible. Please keep your microphones muted until you are 
recognized in order to minimize background noise. I will begin 
by recognizing myself for 5 minutes.
    And, Chief Moore, I want to thank you so very much for 
being here again. I congratulate you on your new position, and 
I thank you for your opening testimony. You--and so I will get 
right at my questions. You spoke about the recent pay raises, 
the announcement of the Biden Administration regarding 
increased pay for firefighters, and spoke a little bit about 
that. Could you give us your assessment so far about whether or 
not you think that the increased pay for firefighters, and what 
has been done so far, will improve the agency's ability to hire 
and retain firefighters? Are there other long-term strategies 
that Congress can work on to address firefighter pay issues or 
retention issues?
    Mr. Moore. Yes. So, thank you Chair Spanberger. So as 
Chief, one of the first things I want to do is provide 
stability in the organization, and that means we have a lot of 
vacant positions. We also have a lot of detailers in key 
leadership positions, and what that does is it erodes the 
quality and the continuity of decisions that need to be made on 
the ground. And so, in order to provide some stability to 
address that critical issue within the agency, we need to get 
those positions filled, and remove the detailers, and put 
permanent people in there. The other thing, in terms of the 
focus that I think we need to do, is what I mentioned in my 
opening statement, is really thinning the forests to reduce 
fire risk.
    The Chair. Yes.
    Mr. Moore. We talk a lot about fire suppression, but really 
we need to spend an equal amount of time talking about the 
treatments out on the ground, because I think that that is 
going to have an equal, if more, of a positive effect on how 
these fires are behaving as they walk across the landscapes. 
And in terms of the question being directly answered, I think 
it is a step in the right direction. This is good news. Looking 
at $15, no one within the firefighting workforce work--makes 
less than that, I think recognizing the firefighters up to the 
GS-9 level, with a ten percent award based on their salary, 
those are good steps to make. But, like I said earlier, it is a 
good beginning, and I want to work with Congress, as well as 
the firefighters and the union themselves, to look at how can 
we co-create an opportunity to go to that next step for our 
firefighters.
    The Chair. Yes. And Chief Moore, in your answer you spoke 
about forest maintenance, and thinning the forests, and earlier 
this year I introduced a piece of legislation called the 
Climate Stewardship Act (H.R. 2534), alongside Senator Booker 
in the Senate. It laid out a framework for some climate-smart 
Federal investments in forestry and conservation. It also 
includes funding for a Civilian Climate Corps. Separately, I 
worked with Congressman Neguse of Colorado to introduce the 
Civilian Climate Corps Act (H.R. 2241), which counterparts 
Senators Coons, Heinrich, and Lujan have introduced in the 
Senate. Do you see, and do you have any feedback for us, as we 
look forward, and continue to try and move these bills 
forward--do you think that the creation of, or do you have any 
advice for us related to the creation of a Civilian Climate 
Corps how that might be helpful in building up the forestry 
workforce in that forest maintenance, and in the preventative 
work that you just mentioned?
    Mr. Moore. Yes. Thank you, Chair. So, the Civilian 
Conservation Corps is a part of our proud history. In fact, a 
lot of the work that they have done back in the 1930s, 1940s, 
and 1950s still stands today. There are a lot of skills that 
are being developed within that workforce. In terms of a 
Civilian Climate Corps, this will put a new, diverse generation 
of Americans to work that can help conserve and restore public 
lands and waters, and I think that the investment in 
restoration, reforestation, reclamation, and other activities 
that improve the function and form of natural systems will not 
only bolster our nation's resilience to extreme wildfires, sea 
level rise, droughts, storms, and all the other climate impact, 
but they will also create a new pathway to the forestry 
workforce of the future.
    The Chair. Thank you very, very much, Chief Moore, for that 
answer. I have 38 seconds left, so, in the interest of 
respecting everyone's time, I am actually going to yield back, 
because I could otherwise spend another 10 minutes asking you 
many questions. And I am now going to yield to Ranking Member 
LaMalfa to ask his questions.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you again, Madam Chair. Randy, let us 
talk about--I mean Chief Moore. I mean, I know you as Randy. 
Anyway, sorry about that Chief Moore, let us talk about the 
initial attack on new fire starts, which we have seen some 
controversy about that even this year in California. It is 
extremely important that, in everybody's view, that an initial 
attack on a fire while it is small, and containable, or at 
least theoretically containable, is preferable. So, when we 
talked about this some months ago, you made a public pledge as 
well to try and change what the Forest Service pattern is on 
that, or beef that up, so what changes are you putting into 
place, and would like to implement for Forest Service to 
aggressively put out new fires right from the very beginning at 
the initial source?
    Mr. Moore. So, thank you, Ranking Member LaMalfa, and, as 
you well know, being in California, particularly in the 
northern part of the state--and as I mentioned in my opening 
statement, when you really look at the 45,000 fires that the 
Forest Service had to respond to this fire year so far to date, 
and having a 98 percent success rate, initial attack has been 
very successful. The issue is really--when those fires escape 
initial attack, then they take on a behavior that we have not 
seen in our past in our lifetimes. And so what we have to do, 
we have to talk also about forest treatments on the landscape, 
because we will never have enough firefighters to put every 
fire out. As much as we would love to do that, we just simply 
won't have enough firefighters to do that, so we have to try 
and level the playing field, and that is with a very strong, 
and an aggressive approach to forest management. Because I 
believe that that has just as much of an impact, if not more, 
than the actual tactics and strategies we are deploying on 
these fire suppression efforts.
    Mr. LaMalfa. I agree with that. That is indeed the only way 
we are going to be able to play defense on this, is to have the 
thinning, and have particular zones where you can trap fire as 
it approaches it in a situation like that. But, there is always 
much concern out in the field. My office gets many of the 
calls. It seems like they are monitoring the fire. It seems 
like they are not attacking it initially. We saw that on the 
Tamarack there, that--it was an area that was observed for--I 
think Mr. McClintock could tell us, but probably about over a 
week, and then--it just felt like it was an area that wouldn't 
do much, but then a wind came along, and conditions happened, 
and it turned into a very large fire. So, will you continue to 
pursue a strong initial attack? Would you say that the Service 
will throw all the resources they can at initially keeping the 
fire small?
    Mr. Moore. Congressman, we are doing that right now, and I 
appreciate you bringing up the Tamarack Fire, because it is so 
easy for someone to look in hindsight at what we are doing and 
second guess the decision, but let me tell you what actually 
happened on the Tamarack Fire, since you brought that up. It 
was a single tree fire is how it started. At the time we had 
100 large wildfires. We had 27,000 firefighters deployed on 
fighting the fires, so we didn't have a lot of additional 
firefighters to put on every fire while trying to put it out. 
We took the appropriate response. We spiked out a small crew to 
monitor that fire.
    The problem with that fire is the same problem that we are 
having all across the West, that once that fire broke away from 
that initial area, it just exploded into a larger fire. But, 
looking at the priorities of where we spend our firefighting, 
it is really about protecting life and property first. Our 
firefighters deploy to protect communities, life, and property, 
and that fire was in a remote area, and so the best--the only 
choice we really had was to monitor that fire. And as soon as 
that fire broke, it was a matter of just reassigning crews to 
try and attack those larger fires, because all of a sudden it 
was threatening communities. And so we would have loved to have 
been able to have enough crews to put on that fire.
    And here again, just that example, it lends itself to 
having the wrong discussion about what we really should be 
talking about, and that is a very active forest management 
program, because there will always be situations where you can 
second guess the decisions that were made. And I can't defend 
any decision because, in your community, if your community is 
threatened, then that is what matters. The problem though, is 
that there are a lot of communities that are threatened, and we 
are having to make some tough choices.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Yes, I get that. It is staffing, it is spread 
out resources. The Dixie Fire, for example, started because of 
one tree falling into a power line, and on the Tamarack 
situation, it is not uncommon, like a fire that happened in 
Grass Valley just a month ago, they pulled resources off 
another one in order to pounce on that, and they kept it to 
within a couple hundred acres right in the middle of a town, 
and then they put the resources back on a much larger ongoing 
fire. So, I am not here to second guess you, sir, it is just 
most of an issue of when we have an opportunity to--and you 
said the 98 percent. I--that is pretty incredible, but it only 
takes one to turn into a million acres, like we had with the 
Dixie Fire. Anyway, I need to yield back. Thank you, Madam 
Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you, Ranking Member LaMalfa. And certainly 
I am always happy to let you go a little over time when we are 
talking wildfires, because I know how impacted your district 
is. The Chair will now recognize Congresswoman Pingree of 
Maine.
    Ms. Pingree. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and thank 
you so much for holding this important hearing today, and 
welcome, Chief Moore. I am really looking forward to working 
with you, and I am very pleased to see you in that position. I 
really appreciate the fact that you bring so many years of 
experience and understanding into this job, and I am sure we 
will be well served by working with you. I also appreciate your 
opening statement, and the emphasis you have placed on making 
sure that the employees of the Forest Service are well treated, 
well paid, and understanding how critical that is to achieving 
your mission. So, I could ask you probably a million questions 
today, but I am going to try to just get a couple of them out. 
And I just want to say my condolences for those communities 
that have been so dramatically affected by the fires, by the 
firefighters that fight them, and the huge challenges that are 
faced out West by districts like Mr. LaMalfa's.
    As you know, I come from Maine. We are the most forested 
state in the nation, but a very different set of circumstances, 
and I know you know what our forests are like, and some of our 
challenges. One of the things that I wanted to bring up, which 
is somewhat of a side issue, I guess, but I think it is 
critical, is that one of the obstacles, as I see it, to 
wildfire risk reduction is the lack of markets for small 
diameter wood, which means it is generally not cost effective 
to remove it, and we have to understand that forests have to be 
healthy in the marketplace as well. But innovative wood 
products, like cross-laminated timber, have the potential to 
drive demand for this material, reduce the wildfire hazards, 
and even reduce the carbon footprint of new construction, which 
I think is an important thing to remember.
    In the Build Back Better Act (H.R. 5376) we put $1 billion 
in there to Wood Innovation Grants, but it is also been 
something that I have been anxious to increase the funding for. 
Could you just talk a little bit about the important role that 
the Forest Service plays in wood innovation in helping us to 
develop these new markets? Because I just see that as critical.
    Mr. Moore. Thank you, Congresswoman Pingree, and you are 
absolutely right. We need to be looking at new markets. So the 
Forest Service, along with our partners, have been working to 
expand markets toward innovative wood products and renewable 
energy for a while now, and some of the specific examples of 
available programs in the Forest Service include Wood 
Innovations Program, Community Wood Grant Program, and this 
includes potential to use wood for advanced biofuel, biochar, 
heat, and power. And, through our research and development 
deputy area, the Forest Service is also partnering with other 
government agencies, small businesses, Tribal communities, and 
industry collaboratives, and universities that are actually 
across the world to produce high quality, science-based forest 
products innovation.
    And so our forest products research, in many cases, it is 
stimulating economic resilience in many areas, including 
housing, bioenergy, tourism, packaging, and paper. And by 
promoting the efficient use of forest products, our research 
also helps protect against natural disturbance. We talk about 
wildfires, but it is also about invasive species, and a climate 
change, a change in climate, or climate change, that is 
creating a lot of these situations out there. We have other 
wood markets that we are very proud of as well, the CLT 
industry. In fact, I was scheduled to go and look at the first 
Forest Service building on the Nez Perce, that was built using 
CLT products.
    So we do think that this is an opportunity to use more of 
the small logs that we have in clearing the National Forests, 
and just the whole forested landscape, and I really appreciate 
you bringing this up, because new markets need to emerge, and 
the Forest Service, through our research and development 
branch, is very active in trying to help create and stimulate 
the economy around some of these new markets.
    Ms. Pingree. Well, thank you, and I look forward to being 
able to chat with you more about some of the things that you 
are seeing, and that they are doing at the Wood Products Lab. I 
am going to run out of time for you to answer this question, 
but I just want to put it out there, and perhaps we can follow 
up with a conversation about this another time. But, you have 
emphasized the importance of this very active Forest Management 
Program, and I am really interested to see how the Forest 
Service is looking at this into the future, because I think 
there are so many complexities involved with increasing the 
harvests, understanding old growth forests, and what is 
important to keep for our climate change impacts of carbon 
sequestration, the impact of these new markets, understanding 
the role of rebuilding our forests, the challenges with clear 
cutting, and some of the things we know now about how forests 
naturally rebuild.
    It is way too many things in one sort of pocket, but I know 
that this is really an important part of the Forest Service 
vision, about how we manage into the future. I have 9 seconds, 
so many you can only just say, yes, we could talk about that, 
anything you want to say.
    Mr. Moore. Yes, Congresswoman, I would love to talk to you 
to a large extent about this. I have some ideas I would love to 
share, so I look forward to the opportunity.
    Ms. Pingree. Great, thank you. I look forward to that too. 
And, again, thank you for taking on this role, and we are here 
to support you.
    The Chair. The Chair will now recognize Mr. Allen from 
Georgia for 5 minutes. Mr. Allen, you are muted, sir.
    Mr. Allen. All right. I have two hearings going, so sorry. 
Madam Chair, thank you for having this hearing today. I think 
it is very important that we talk about this issue, and really 
get to the truth of the matter. Wildfires, particularly those 
on Federal lands, are a major safety, public health, and 
environmental issue for our western states. I was at a meeting 
out in Jackson Hole, Wyoming over the August work period, and I 
couldn't believe it. I mean, the smoke--you couldn't even see 
the Grand Teton Mountains for the amount of smoke in Wyoming 
that was coming from the wildfires in Oregon and California. 
Over 70 percent of the nationwide acreage burned by wildfires 
in 2020 was on Federal land. I mean, shouldn't that tell us 
something?
    So, Chief Moore, I am glad to have you here today on behalf 
of the USDA Forest Service to try to help us understand what 
the real problem is. There are several schools of thought on 
why we are dealing more with wildfires today than ever before, 
but I believe the elephant in the room is just simply 
management, and just good care of this which has been given to 
us, and we have dominion over. Federal regulations which 
prevent the active management of our nation's forests, and 
protects specific species of animals to the detriment of the 
rest of the world due to increased carbon emissions via 
wildfire, those are the two biggest enemies which proponents of 
carbon sequestration will find. These environmental groups, who 
clog our courts with frivolous lawsuits to stop the active 
management of our forests, are another enemy of carbon 
sequestration, and we must work to modernize our environmental 
regulations to have a more fulsome understanding of 
environmental health as a concept.
    Most concerning for all of the climate control proponents 
out there in recent years is the carbon emissions from the 
California wildfires. I mean, why aren't we talking about that? 
In fact, the carbon emissions of the California wildfires is 
greater than the amount of carbon emissions that are produced 
in a year to provide power to the entire State of California. 
The Forest Service itself estimates that publicly and privately 
owned forests are offsetting roughly 14 percent of all U.S. 
carbon emissions, and, in fact, we need those forests to be 
healthy to provide the ability to deal with a--and to provide 
oxygen, and use the carbon that they need to survive. I hope we 
can work together to modernize our Federal regulatory system in 
a way that will allow us to manage our Federal lands and do 
this more effectively. Chief, what do you see the main reason 
for the increase in our wildfires that we have seen in recent 
years?
    Mr. Moore. So, Congressman, thank you for that question. It 
has a lot of different tentacles, and so I am just going to 
choose to go down a couple of them, just for the sake of time. 
We made decisions back in the early 1900s to put all fires out 
immediately, and, while that was the right decision at the 
time, over time we have found out that that may not be the 
right decision because the consequence is that now we have an 
overstock, dense forests. And then when you lay climate change 
on top of that, once a fire gets started in those conditions, 
they are creating catastrophic events like we have never seen 
before.
    And so now it has caused us to focus on fire suppression 
alone, but we really have to talk about treating the forests to 
remove some of that overstock of dense material, because it is 
lending itself to the fire behavior that we are seeing on the 
landscape.
    Mr. Allen. Well, it is obvious, when you look at--compared 
to our private lands that are actively managed. You are not 
going to have time to cover this, but we talk about climate 
change, and how that is causing forest fires. If you have data 
available, and like I said, I am about out of time, but if you 
would get that to my office so that I could review that, the 
science of how climate change causes forest fires, and has 
created this increase in forest fires, I would certainly 
appreciate it. And with that, Madam Chair, I yield back. I am 
out of time.
    The Chair. Thank you very much, Mr. Allen, and Mr. 
O'Halleran from Arizona is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you, Madam Chair, and Ranking Member. 
I would like to thank all the firefighters on the line who have 
done so much to keep communities across the West safe this 
summer. The tireless work of those on the line at the Telegraph 
and Rafael Fires in my district saved communities in Arizona, 
and I want to express my gratitude to them. However, I would be 
remiss if I did not mention the other important lesson from 
these fires. Areas that were previously treated or burned are 
less susceptible to severe fire, but more significant is that 
they become susceptible to flooding, and to nearby communities 
and streams.
    That brings me to the Forest Service's decision to cancel 
Phase 2 Contract for the Four Forest Restoration Initiative, 
4FRI. I am deeply disappointed that after 11 amendments, and 
nearly 2 years, there is no clear indication when we are going 
to get Phase 2 off the ground. Chief Moore, I thank you for 
your willingness to quickly engage on 4FRI, and the 
conversation we had last week with some of your deputy chiefs. 
I am hopeful that the Administration is now engaged in the 
issue, and I expect our offices will stay in close contact over 
the coming weeks to ensure that this gets done quickly.
    We also need to remember that, while the Forest Service has 
seen decades of diminishing amount of personnel dedicated to 
management of the forest--I have seen this ongoing now for 21 
years of my life in public service, both in the legislature in 
Arizona and in Congress. Thankfully, in the last 2 years, 
because of Members on this Committee, we were able to get some 
changes done, and hopefully we will continue to move in the 
right direction. But I think it is really--we have to make sure 
the public fully understands, this is not a 10 year commitment. 
This can't be a 20 year commitment. This has to be a commitment 
that we keep both our communities protected during times of 
fire, but make sure we don't allow fires to get into the 
catastrophic conditions that they have been in at one time in 
Arizona.
    Wally Covington, a forest expert, world-renowned, actually, 
Wally said that a fire in Arizona, at 25,000 acres, would be a 
big fire. Now we almost pray for a 25,000 acre fire. So, with 
that, Chief, I would like to ask you, and thank you again, what 
is the timeline for issuing a new RFP for 4FRI?
    Mr. Moore. Thank you, Congressman O'Halleran. I understand 
that many Arizonans, and the Arizona businesses, were really 
counting on the award of this large-scale 4FRI Project, and I 
understand how disappointed they are over it as well. I need 
you to know that I am disappointed too. I have talked with the 
Regional Foresters, and I have also talked with the evaluation 
panel, and understand the decision that they have made, and I 
think it was the right decision, considering what the potential 
outcomes could have been. I do want you to know, though, that I 
am committed to getting this proposal back out very soon, and 
certainly in a much, much quicker fashion than we did the first 
time around. So, I will pay personal attention to getting that 
out ASAP, and I would say that we will be following up with you 
so that you, as well as all Arizonans, know the status of the 
proposal.
    Mr. O'Halleran. I want to thank you for that, Chief Moore. 
How are you going to be working with the stakeholders in the 
4FRI stakeholder group to show that the Forest Service is 
committed to the success of 4FRI, and to rebuild trust? As a 
group, we started in the--well, the middle of the last 2 
decades ago now to start 4FRI, with the help of the Forest 
Service, and environmentalists, and ranchers, and farmers, and 
every one of the stakeholders out there that moved along over 
the course of a couple years, and then it hit a brick wall. How 
are we going to make sure that we are not going to hit that 
brick wall again, and that stakeholders are going to have input 
into the process?
    Mr. Moore. Congressman, through disappointment, trust is 
what erodes, and our word may not be as important or as 
valuable as our actions. And so I am willing to demonstrate 
through action that the Forest Service is trustworthy, and we 
are going to do that by demonstrating that we can get this 
project done, but we are also going to engage the community in 
this project so that it becomes ours, not mine, if that makes 
sense. So, we wanted to do this collaboratively, to the extent 
that we can, and we are committed to that.
    Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you, Chief, I have to yield now, as 
my time is up. Thank you.
    The Chair. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Moore for 5 
minutes, from Alabama.
    Mr. Moore of Alabama. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank 
you, Chief Moore. I appreciate you being here today. We, in 
Alabama we have a pretty good reputation of managing our 
forests, and actually my district director has a forestry 
background, so we are quite familiar with the process. I did 
have a question, and I guess it is as good as any. Now so, more 
than ever, I believe this Committee agrees that expedited 
forest management is needed. In your opinion, what policy 
changes would free up the good folks on the ground to be able 
to act quickly and effectively to manage and reduce our fuel 
loads?
    Mr. Moore. Well, Congressman Moore, thank you for that 
question. It is one that, I would have to say that I think the 
legislation that is being considered now would be one of the 
things that could help us greatly. It gives us an opportunity 
to do just what we are talking about, and that is to increase 
our ability to go out on this landscape and do the necessary 
work that needs to be done.
    One thing that we spend a lot of time talking about what 
happens in the West, but I have to tell you, if the West could 
mimic what is happening in the South, that would be our 
endgame. Whereas in the South, it comes to fire, we have done a 
lot of maintenance burns, prescribed burning. That is the ideal 
situation. And when you look at the number of acres treated 
across the whole U.S., and you look at us treating 3 million 
acres as an agency, over a million and a half of that comes 
from the southern region, Region 8, and it is because they have 
the conditions there, they also have the culture, that accepts 
prescribed burning in a much bigger way than what we do out 
west. And so I would say that I am hopeful, based on some of 
the legislation that you all are considering in Congress, and I 
think that that is going to give us our best opportunity that 
we have had in quite some time.
    Mr. Moore of Alabama. Thank you, Chief. Actually, that is 
my experience. I met with Forestry in Alabama a few weeks ago, 
and that was one of the things that they talked about, was just 
the control management process, the burns, whatever we have to 
do to keep those fuel loads down. And I hope that others will 
follow our lead in that respect, and maybe we can get some of 
these things under control. But with that, Madam Chair, thank 
you so much. I appreciate your time. Thank you, Chief, I 
appreciate you attending, and being here as a witness today.
    The Chair. Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Mr. 
Panetta from California 5 minutes.
    Mr. Panetta. Outstanding. Thank you, Madam Chair, and of 
course, Chief Moore, outstanding to have you here. Absolutely 
thrilled when I found out that you were selected to be the next 
Chief of the U.S. Forest Service, so congratulations, but also 
thank you. Let me express my appreciation for all your help, 
and for all of your work as Regional Forester for the Pacific 
Southwest Region. I tell you, based on our conversations, based 
on our work together, I really couldn't think of a better 
person to lead the Forest Service in what I believe, and I 
think what we all know, really is an unfortunately more 
dangerous era of wildfire years, rather than wildfire seasons, 
is what we are facing.
    Now, obviously you have been instrumental in the creation 
and the formulation of my legislation--I want to thank you as 
well--in my legislation, the REPLANT Act, the Wildfire 
Emergency Act (H.R. 3534), and the Save Our Forests Act (H.R. 
5341), and I look forward to continuing to talk with you as we 
continue to push this legislation forward through our process 
here, but also to ensure that we can implement our shared 
vision of a safer, healthier, and more sustainable forest 
across our country.
    Now, we have had a couple conversations, and I spoke with 
your predecessor, Chief Christiansen, on a number of occasions 
about chronic staffing shortages in the Forest Service. And as 
you know, look, 80 percent of wildfires in the U.S., at least 
based on my numbers, you may have different numbers, but my 
numbers are 80 percent are caused by humans, and being--and in 
the urban--or the wildland/urban interface, basically the 
fastest growing land-use type in this country, that I am sure 
you are familiar with. At the same time, as you know, the 
Forest Service suffers from chronic staffing shortages, with 
several National Forests, including the Los Padres National 
Forest, in my district, on the Central Coast of California, 
suffering from insufficient law enforcement and recreation 
management staff. And that is why I introduced the Save Our 
Forests Act.
    And so I wanted to get your take on what it would be like 
if we just had one additional recreation management position in 
each ranger district in the wildland/urban interface? How would 
that translate, if at all, into reducing the incidents of 
wildfire and improving the long-term health of our forests?
    Mr. Moore. Thank you, Congressman Panetta, and, to respond 
to the first part of the question, I am actually humbled to 
have this opportunity to serve as Chief. I think you are 
bringing up something that is really important to us as an 
agency. If I go back 20 years ago, we have lost 38 percent of 
our non-fire workforce. That 38 percent represents some of 
those resource areas that you are talking about: recreation, 
land, special uses, forestry, soil and water. All of those 
fields, archaeologists, wildlife biologists. So, we have had a 
lot of vacant positions because of, as the fire has continued 
to increase, and we have had to be more responsive, from a 
budget standpoint, to those fires, we have not had the ability 
to maintain the staff that we have lost.
    Now, we have done really well, because we have looked at 
technology, we have improved efficiencies, and we have done a 
really good job looking at the outputs, that they are similar 
to what they have been. But what happened is that we have an 
overworked workforce. We have a workforce that is tired. They 
can't continue to work at this pace and scale. We need to fill 
many of those positions that we have lost over time due to this 
situation that we are talking about today. So, it would be very 
helpful.
    Mr. Panetta. Understood, understood. I appreciate that. I 
appreciate you hitting on the prescribed burns, thank you very 
much. It is exactly what my legislation, the Wildfire Emergency 
Act, hits on and expands, at least in regards to permitting for 
those prescribed burns. And I understand your sentiment about 
the West mimicking the South. Obviously, we have a little bit 
more hurdles out in the West, as you know well, for a number of 
reasons, but hopefully this legislation allows us to get over 
those hurdles so that we can have more prescribed burns in our 
forests in order to reduce the chances of wildfire.
    Moving on, in regards to reforestation, quickly, I have 
less than a minute, would lifting the cap on the Reforestation 
Trust Fund, as outlined in my REPLANT Act, would that help the 
Forest Service address the backlog of reforestation projects 
that we have?
    Mr. Moore. The short answer is yes, it would. Right now we 
are limited by $30 million. We have 1.3 million acres that need 
reforestation. We are only able to do about 60,000 acres, at 
best, with what is funded now, that doesn't even include the 
fires from the Dixie, and this year's fires. So being able to 
do that, and develop public-private partnerships, and helping 
us do some reforestation, that would be a great way to go. So, 
if that cap was removed, it gives us more flexibility to do 
these types of things.
    Mr. Panetta. Outstanding. I look forward to working with 
you, continuing to work with you, and thank you again for your 
service in not just fire suppression, but fire prevention. 
Thank you, Chief. I yield back, Madam Chair.
    Mr. Moore. Thank you.
    The Chair. Thank you very much. The Chair now recognizes 
the Ranking Member of the full Committee, Ranking Member 
Thompson.
    Mr. Thompson. Madam Chair, thank you so much. Chief Moore, 
thank you again. My first question, Chief, the Forest Service 
needs to get closer to, or above, preferably, its national 
timber targets for the coming year. How much timber do you 
foresee the agency harvesting in 2021 and 2022?
    Mr. Moore. Go back 2 years, and we had a goal of about 4 
billion board-feet that we were planning to accomplish this 
past year, but we are probably going to come in at about 60 
percent of that. Part of it is the situation that we have been 
talking about all morning, that we have had a number of fires 
that have burned through planned timber sales, planned 
restoration work, and so we have lost the ability to do that. 
The other thing is that since we have had so many fires this 
year, we have had to take a lot of members that support the 
fire in a support role to support the whole fire suppression 
efforts that we have had this year. So those are the resources 
that were not going to be doing this other work that you are 
talking about. So different reasons we are not able to 
accomplish that.
    Might I also say at this point, though, that I think if we 
can get to a point where we talk about what the land needs, I 
think we will find that we are doing a lot more than what we 
had planned to do, and I think the outcomes would be greater 
than what we are planning to do, because it puts the focus on 
the wrong part of the conversation, and we need to have a 
broader conversation about landscape work, landscape 
improvement, and all of the product that comes off of landscape 
treatment.
    Mr. Thompson. Very good, thank you for that. Now, the 2018 
Farm Bill provided the Forest Service with various authorities 
intended to help the agency to conduct better management. This 
includes reauthorization of the insect and disease categorical 
exclusion, as well as categorical exclusion for the Greater 
Sage Grouse and mule deer habitat. Has the agency issued 
guidance, or gone through the rulemaking process to implement 
these authorities, and if so, has the agency utilized these 
authorities, and if not, why?
    Mr. Moore. Yes. Thank you, Ranking Member. The answer is 
yes. We utilized these greatly. Take a look at the Good 
Neighbor Authority. We continue to grow relationships with 
state and other partners in the GNA, and this has really 
allowed us to restore a lot of watersheds and manage forests on 
National Forests via agreements or contracts. What you might 
also want to know is that we have a total of about 286 GNA 
agreements across the U.S., and they cover a variety of 
restoration activities that are in place in 38 different 
states, and so we have been using the tools that Congress has 
allowed us to have.
    I think, when I look at timber harvesting for a moment, 
timber harvesting under the GNA, it continues to grow. We had 
well over 230 million board-feet that were sold in 2020 under 
this authority, and this is an increase of about 182 million 
board-feet from the year before, so we are seeing a continued 
growth in these areas using some of these types of tools. The 
other thing that I am really proud of is the CFLRP 
(Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program), the 
collaborative. We are actually implementing now to reauthorize 
CFLR Program, per Congressional direction in the 2018 Farm 
Bill. That has been a success because we have had the 
opportunity to bring the community of people into deciding what 
needs to happen on that landscape, and then everyone is 
throwing in their money, so to speak, to make these things 
happen. These tools are allowing us to operate in a much more 
collaborative fashion.
    And the last thing that I will respond to is that the 
implementation of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act, all of 
the regions across the U.S. are really developing projects 
using the insect and disease portion of that, and the wildfire 
resilience CEs that were contained in the HFRA. And so we are 
really pleased for the tools that Congress has provided us, and 
I do want you to know that we are utilizing those to the full 
extent, and we think that the opportunity continues to grow 
with these tools.
    Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Chief. Obviously, I am a huge 
supporter of the Forest Service research that is done for many 
perspectives, the things that we are looking at, and the 
research on where specifically the agency needs to perform 
restoration activities, reduce the threat of wildfire, and we 
can talk about this offline, I will just tee up the question. I 
am looking forward to talking with you about how the Forest 
Service intends to use this research, to be able to prioritize 
those types of projects. And with that, Madam Chair, I am just 
about out of time, so I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you very much, Ranking Member Thompson. 
The Chair now recognizes Congresswoman Schrier from Washington 
State.
    Ms. Schrier. Thank you, Madam Chair, and welcome, Chief 
Moore. I am delighted to meet you, and look forward to working 
closely with you to keep our forests healthy, and our 
communities safe from wildfire. There have been some very 
recurrent themes today, so I hope you will have some really 
good opportunities for a path forward after this discussion.
    As I am sure you know, the wildfire outlook in my home 
State of Washington, and across the whole Pacific Northwest, is 
getting more dire. Every year we are seeing more fires, earlier 
fires, a longer fire season, and more money and resources used 
to suppress those fires. And I wanted to focus on ways to make 
our forests healthier, which most of us are talking about 
today, to make them more resilient to wildfire, and sort of the 
nitty gritty of what we will need to get there. A recent report 
from the Washington Department of Natural Resources identified 
3 million acres of forestlands just in our state alone in need 
of reforestation. A significant percentage of those acres are 
in my district, in rural central Washington, including about 
700,000 acres in the Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forests, 
and the towns here are some of the most at-risk locations for 
wildfire in the nation.
    Our state is doing some incredible work. The Washington 
State Department of Natural Resources local fire districts, 
counties, nonprofits, private forests are doing this kind of 
work, and they are conducting the controlled burns and the 
mechanical thinning that we have all talked about today as much 
as possible, but they face some really big barriers, and one of 
those barriers is the need to partner with the Forest Service. 
And in places like Chelan County, 70 percent of the land is 
owned by the Forest Service, and so, no matter how good a job 
our state does, and private forest-holders do, 70 percent is on 
you.
    And to that end, my colleagues and I are working to bolster 
the Forest Service resources. We got the National Prescribed 
Fire Act (H.R. 3442) that increases Federal investment with 
Ranking Member LaMalfa, and we have the National Forest 
Restoration and Remediation Act (H.R. 4489) to allow the Forest 
Service to get interest money, and then we have the bipartisan 
infrastructure bill that puts more money in for forest health. 
I understand that you and George Geissler, Washington State 
Forester, go way back, and I would just love to encourage you 
to continue to work with George, and with our Commissioner of 
Public Lands, Hilary Franz, and the local fire departments to 
increase the pace and scale of fuel reduction. They are ready. 
They are willing, they are excited to work with you, and they 
just want that relationship to work toward better, and if you 
could deal kind of with the details.
    I know one of those details we have talked about is how do 
we get more personnel? How can you hire more people, because 
you do need people that do this work. And we have talked 
about--I think many of us were surprised that firefighters were 
not making $15 an hour. That still seems incredibly low. Local 
fire departments pay more, and so of course you were losing 
people. How can you address this issue of staffing and funding? 
Do you have specific plans to ramp up the number of people you 
have?
    Mr. Moore. So, thank you, Congresswoman Schrier, I really 
appreciate that question. I talked about the 38 percent 
reduction in our resource-related programs from 20 years ago, 
and so, if we have to replace those positions, our funding 
needs to reflect that. So, I am hopeful, based on some of the 
legislation that is currently in Congress, and I think that if 
that does happen, it gives us our best chance that we have had 
in a long time to fill some of those necessary vacant 
positions. George and I talk often, George Geissler, the State 
Forester there, and we do go back a long ways. And we do have 
some opportunities to do a lot more than what we are currently 
doing.
    What I am pleased about is the state shared stewardship 
agreements that we have been signing with the governors. I 
think we have about 46 of those now. That, coupled with GNA 
authorities, gives us the opportunity to work across 
jurisdictional boundaries and landscapes. And so now I think we 
have some authorities that will allow us to do that, but we 
need our budgets increased somewhat to hire some of those 
really needed positions, to spend the time developing those 
agreements, and to spend the time going out on the ground, 
working with that local community, and engaging them in how we 
should go about in making those improvements that protect----
    Ms. Schrier. They are ready to dive in and get to work, and 
so whatever barriers are there, if you could work to eliminate 
those, I think we could make even more progress just relying on 
state, local, even private, and Ranger work forces. So, thank 
you. I understand we will have a second round, and I will get 
to more questions then.
    Mr. Moore. Thank you.
    Ms. Schrier. I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you very much. The Chair now recognizes 
Mr. Johnson from South Dakota. And, because we are making 
excellent time, and there is interest in doing a second round, 
just to let all of the Members know who may be interested, we 
will do a second round of questions, and thank you for your 
willingness to stick with us, Chief Moore. Mr. Johnson?
    Mr. Johnson. Yes, thanks, Chief Moore. It is great to have 
you. The Black Hills National Forest is one of the only forests 
that had had a regular monthly meeting as part of an advisory 
board. And, as you would expect, the advisory board had 
representatives from all kinds of user groups. Timber folks, 
state and local governments, the Norbeck Society, trails, 
permittees, et cetera. And so, way back in June of 2020, the 
coordinator for this local forest advisory board submitted 
their charter renewal, a list of new members, everything that 
was needed, and this was 6 months prior to the deadline for 
doing so.
    Now, since that time, again, June of 2020, there has been 
no action taken in D.C., and so the forest advisory board 
hasn't been authorized to meet, either virtually or in person, 
for the entire year. And, of course, this is at a time when 
there are a lot of very big issues going on with the Black 
Hills National Forest, a time when you would think input from 
this broad group of stakeholders would be valuable to the 
Forest Service and to the forest. And during that time, our 
office has reached out a number of times to Forest Service 
liaisons, and it just seems like we can't get any real 
communication, we can't get any movement by the regional or 
national office to renew this forest advisory board. And so I 
guess my question, Chief Moore, is just, I mean, can we get 
some sort of a commitment from you to work with us on getting 
this advisory board reauthorized?
    Mr. Moore. Congressman Johnson, thank you for that 
question, and this is one that I have actually been personally 
briefed on. And, after the brief, I agree that the board 
improved collaborative opportunities, and relationship with 
individuals, and it hasn't happened yet, but I am pleased to 
report to you that the package is in the final stages of the 
clearing process as we speak, so I would look for that to 
happen fairly soon. But I agree with you wholeheartedly on what 
has occurred over time.
    Mr. Johnson. Chief, fairly soon, just kind of give me a 
ballpark to set expectations. Are we talking days, weeks, 
months?
    Mr. Moore. Well, I don't think it is, certainly not months, 
but, we have done everything that we need to do as an agency, 
so I think the clearing process now has to take place over in 
the Department, and I know that they are working on that really 
hard. And while I can't give you a specific time, I can tell 
you that it is in the final stages of being cleared.
    Mr. Johnson. Thanks, Chief. Madam Chair, I would just note 
this as an important part of our oversight responsibility. That 
is why I want to thank you for this hearing. Deadlines drive 
achievement, and I think Chief Moore clearly came prepared 
today, and was ready to address a lot of our questions, and so 
these hearings do make a difference in how the agencies respond 
to our needs.
    Chief, another one. As you certainly know, in the Black 
Hills our local volunteer fire departments, they volunteered 
for the initial attack of these forest fires, and grassland 
fires, and I think one of the frustrations they have shared 
with me is this 24 hour rule. So they can be on site with the 
initial attack, they are getting close to the end of the 24 
hour period, they feel like they are on the cusp of having the 
fire contained. They are pulled off the fire, even though 
sufficient Forest Service resources are not yet in place for a 
seamless handoff to close this fire out. And so I just wanted 
some insight from you, what is the statutory or regulatory--why 
is this 24 hour rule in place, where does it come from, and is 
there any flexibility so we can do a better job of closing 
these fires out?
    Mr. Moore. Yes, thank you, Congressman. Yes, so that 
usually comes through a mutual aid response--these fires, and I 
think, as we look at updating the agreements, these are the 
types of things that I think we need to be documenting so that 
when we have the opportunity to update the mutual aid in 
response, that we allow flexibility geographically. One of our 
biggest challenges is that, and for good reason, we go out with 
direction that is national in scope, and what that does 
sometimes is it doesn't allow flexibility for that local 
geographic area.
    And so we want to find the--really, the sweet spot in these 
agreements to allow flexibility at that local level, as long as 
it meets the national intent. And so we are going to be working 
toward that ideal, and hopefully we will be able to respond to 
these same issues that you are talking about through the mutual 
aid agreement. But it doesn't just happen there in South 
Dakota. This is a common problem in many other locations. And I 
think that we are taking notes from this hearing that these are 
some of the things that we think we need to take on to improve 
the fire service, and how we respond as a collective group. 
Because I will tell you, the volunteer fire department, the 
local fire departments, we couldn't do this without them. And 
so if there are challenges, we need to deal with those 
directly.
    Mr. Johnson. Well, Chief, I have a third question, which I 
don't have time to ask, and so I will submit it for the record, 
and look forward to getting a response from your team. It deals 
with the Four Forest Restoration Initiative, and to what extent 
that effort can be expanded into the Black Hills National 
Forest and elsewhere. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. Moore. Thank you.
    The Chair. Thank you, Chief Moore, for your very detailed 
answers, and I now recognize Congressman Costa from California.
    Mr. Costa. Thank you, Madam Chair, for allowing me to sit 
in on the Subcommittee here. You and I have had a number of 
conversations about the importance of the role your 
Subcommittee plays, and invitation to have you come out to 
California still stands, as we deal with these challenging 
issues affecting America's forests.
    Chief, we are excited about your participation and your 
career. It has been long established. By the way, I like that 
backdrop. Is that Mount Shasta, or where might you be there?
    Mr. Moore. Yes, Mount Shasta is in the background.
    Mr. Costa. Okay. That is part of God's country in 
California. We want to keep it that way, but we have had 
horrific fires. Let us stipulate for the record that I think 
everyone is aware of, that we are in a crisis mode, as it 
relates to the conditions of American forests caused by not 
only climate change, but a multitude of factors. Would you 
agree?
    Mr. Moore. Yes, I would.
    Mr. Costa. And we no longer have a fire season, certainly 
in California and the West, but we have a fire year, it seems, 
right?
    Mr. Moore. Right.
    Mr. Costa. Are you satisfied with the status quo, Chief?
    Mr. Moore. Congressman, I think you know me well enough to 
know that I am not. I don't think anyone is.
    Mr. Costa. Good. When is the last time we have updated the 
U.S. Forest Service Land Management Plan?
    Mr. Moore. So, they generally run anywhere around 10 to 15 
years.
    Mr. Costa. That is not adequate, do you believe?
    Mr. Moore. Well, it would be if they were living documents 
were we make changes----
    Mr. Costa. But they are not?
    Mr. Moore. No. Well, not completely. Some are, but 
generally----
    Mr. Costa. Would you agree that it is time that we really 
take the effort to update the forest management plans for all 
of these forests that are being impacted, not only in the West, 
but wherever else it is appropriate?
    Mr. Moore. Yes, and we are in the process, Congressman, of 
about 100 updates, 100 forest plans----
    Mr. Costa. And how much will that cost, to update the 
forest management plans?
    Mr. Moore. Well, I don't have a number yet on how much that 
would cost----
    Mr. Costa. Well, we need to know that so we provide you 
with the resources. And then, once the plans are updated for 
the forests throughout the country, you need to have the money 
to implement the plan. I was in a hearing a year ago, and they 
estimated that, to truly do the work over a period of time that 
is necessary to provide proper forest management, we are 
talking about somewhere in the neighborhood of $2 billion a 
year for a period of at least 6 to 8 years. Could you check 
those numbers, and verify, and get back to the Members of the 
Committee? Because, as we look at the reconciliation effort, as 
we look at the budget year coming up, the crisis mode that we 
are in, we need to address this issue. Would you not agree?
    Mr. Moore. Yes. I will certainly look into those numbers, 
Congressman.
    Mr. Costa. And if we have those numbers, I think we are in 
a better position to provide you all the forest management 
tools you need so that we can address the challenges that we 
face of properly managing our forests. When you look at the 
monies that we are paying each year for fire suppression, 
frankly, we spend all the money that we set aside for forest 
management, and we end up in the billions of dollars spending 
money for fire suppression. And, frankly, if we continue in 
this vein, I don't think we are ever going to deal with the 
crisis, or provide the forests the proper management they 
deserve. Would you agree?
    Mr. Moore. Yes, I would agree with the majority of that, 
sir.
    Mr. Costa. We need an updated plan, so then we need the 
financial resources to give you all the tools in the management 
toolbox to do the work that provides the certainty that forests 
in the future, with all the factors we are dealing with, that 
include climate change, will be there for the next generations 
of Americans to come, for all the multiple uses that they 
serve. I mean, is that not the goal?
    Mr. Moore. Absolutely one of the goals.
    Mr. Costa. Let me ask you a little bit about, with all the 
horrific fires we have had in California and the West, the 
partnerships between state and Federal. You have been in 
California for a good time. CAL FIRE, and I know about our 
California response, and our efforts over the last several 
years. How would you describe the partnership between the 
Forest Service and states like California, and the necessity of 
continuing to improve and work on them?
    Mr. Moore. Well, keep in mind too, the fire service is much 
bigger than just CAL FIRE and the Forest Service. And I would 
say in general, if I was to focus specifically there in 
California, I think relationships are great. In fact, I think 
that is why we are having so much success in that state, is 
because of the fire service in general, and how it is working 
together. I mean, there are always problems when people work 
together, but I can assure you that the leadership of those 
agencies and those local fire departments, they are committed 
to working through whatever issue that may come up, but the 
relationship is solid.
    Mr. Costa. Well, my time has expired, and Madam Chair, 
thank you for allowing me to participate, but I would think it 
would be helpful, Chief, if you were to provide, if you have 
not already, a list of areas that you think we need to work on 
together to allow you to better do your job. And thank you, for 
myself, thank the firemen and -women, and the people at the 
U.S. Forest Service for the heroic jobs that you are engaged in 
here always, and certainly in terms of recent years during 
these really terrible fire seasons we are dealing with.
    Mr. Moore. Thank you, Congressman Costa.
    The Chair. Thank you very much, Chief Moore, for your time. 
We are going to do a second round of questions, for anyone 
interested. I will continue in the same order, and I will begin 
by recognizing myself for 5 additional minutes.
    Chief Moore, in answers to prior questions you talked about 
the 38 percent loss in staffing that you have experienced 
across non-firefighting roles. Could you just give us a little 
bit more of a background of what those roles are, and what the 
impact has been on your agency?
    Mr. Moore. Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, the type of 
positions are those resource positions that actually do a lot 
of the resource work on the ground. And--whether it is doing 
NEPA, which the Congressman just mentioned, our forest 
prioritization but also it is going and putting structures out 
on the ground for wildlife purposes. It is going out and doing 
surveys, looking at some of the sensitive species that are 
taking place. It is also our foresters that go out and look at 
the landscape and design our silvicultural practices by getting 
at some of the disturbances that have taken place on the 
landscape. So, it is those resource-related issues, watershed 
improvements, whether it is a soil scientist, hydrologists, 
some of those types of specialty programs where we improve the 
landscape so that the types of fires that happen, it is not 
happening in a catastrophic way.
    Most of the fires--most of the land out West is developed 
through fires, and so you have a lot of fire-adapted ecosystems 
out there. And so fire is a natural part of the landscape, and 
we need to make sure that fire continues to be a natural part 
of the landscape, but through controlled conditions. And we 
just have not been able to spend the necessary amount of time 
making improvements on the ground that would also make that 
fire behave differently as it moves across the landscape.
    The Chair. And, Chief Moore, what I hear you describing is 
an investment, really, in preventative efforts so that we are 
preventing those catastrophic fires, so that we are making 
investments in the personnel who will prepare us, and ensure 
that the land is not as susceptible to the sorts of 
catastrophic fire, is that a correct assessment, that it is the 
preventative?
    Mr. Moore. That is correct, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. And the types of skillsets that those employees 
would bring, is there a challenge that you all are facing that, 
as you have experienced loss of these personnel predominantly 
related to funding, are you also then challenged by a loss of 
skillset and knowledge in terms of resiliency in wild forest 
management?
    Mr. Moore. Yes. We have certainly lost a lot of skills, and 
we have tried to mitigate that somewhat by partnering with 
groups and other entities that have those skills.
    The Chair. Okay.
    Mr. Moore. And so now what you see is a gradual shift in 
how the Forest Service is being managed. We are working more 
through others and with others than what we have in the past, 
and that has been a really positive thing. It is just that we 
need to have more capacity internally so that we can continue 
to work in that way, because I think that this is the new 
generation of natural resource management in this country. But 
we need to have those critical positions filled that will allow 
us to do more of this.
    The Chair. Great. And, Chief Moore, well, we passed the 
wildfire funding fix last year, and I understand about $2.7 
billion of this funding has already been used thus far this 
year. Can you talk about how this funding authority impacts 
your ability to combat the growing number and increasing 
intensity of wildfires, and how it might overall--how it is 
useful, or how you all are using it? Any comments on that 
funding and its value to you?
    Mr. Moore. Yes. First of all, I want to thank Congress for 
the fire funding fix. It has really stopped the bleeding of 
these other program areas, and so I think that that is been 
really good. I think now what we need to do is to be able to 
build those programs up so that we can do more of the work that 
I talked about earlier. But certainly the fire funding fix was 
one of the single most important things I think Congress could 
have done for the Forest Service in recent years.
    The Chair. And I hope we will continue to talk about that 
program into the future, in our oversight function, talk in 
greater detail about the benefits, challenges, and certainly 
the way that money has been deployed. In my last 40 seconds, I 
would just open it up to any other comments that you would like 
to make before the Committee, focused on your goals or 
priorities.
    Mr. Moore. I want to thank Congress for their interest in 
what happens on America's forests and grasslands. And I 
appreciate the opportunity to work with Congress as we move 
into this tenure that I am in. I am just so appreciative.
    The Chair. Thank you very much, Chief Moore. I now 
recognize Ranking Member LaMalfa for 5 minutes.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you again, Madam Chair. Let us talk 
quickly about what we can do on the ground more immediately. We 
talked before about the BAER, the BAER Response, called the 
Burned Area Emergency Response Teams. They are out doing the 
assessments post-fire of what we have, what we can be doing. 
Now, I think the Committee has the ability to put on the screen 
a map we have of what is known as the Feather River Watershed, 
and illustrate what we are looking at with the immediate 
response that we really should be trying for.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    * Editor's note: the map referred to is located on p. 42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    If you see on the screen there, the area in red is pretty 
much all this year, and that represents well over a million 
acres combined, the Beckwourth Fire, the Dixie Fire, and those 
surrounding colors are just in the last 4 years of fire, all 
except for one tiny one that was back in--well, tiny, 
relatively--I think the Moonlight Fire in 2007, the scar you 
can still see. What I am looking for Chief Moore, we talk about 
looking at things in long-term, but that Feather River 
Watershed is an area that services in the water that is 
delivered and stored, and ultimately makes its way to 
Californians. 25 million Californians rely on the water that 
comes from the state water project that is primarily filled by 
this area.
    So, we talk about restoration, whether it is going to be in 
one bill form, I had a legislation in a previous bill. We have 
to pounce on this right now, because we are talking about the 
erosion, we are talking about the ash and the material that can 
be washing down the hill in the next couple of large rains we 
hope to have in the winter, right? It is going to greatly 
affect the watershed and the water supply situation for our 
whole state. So, what does the forest need in order to start 
immediate restoration in a volume, or a pace and scale, so to 
speak, that can really, really make a difference in a short 
amount of time? We have a window of time right now, since we 
are still in September that we could be doing a lot before a 
rainy season ensues. What could we pounce on right now to be 
effective on limiting damage from erosion, et cetera?
    Mr. Moore. Okay. Thank you, Ranking Member LaMalfa. So the 
first step that needs to be done are assessments. We need to 
send teams out to look at what are those emergency types of 
things that need to take place immediately? And so that is the 
Burned Area Emergency Response that you had talked about, BAER. 
So that is taking place now. We have a need--based on this 
year's fires, we have a need of about 216 assessments that need 
to be done. We have currently completed about 136. We are 
currently in the process of looking at the Dixie now. We have 
already looked at the Beckwourth, and we have--I think we have 
committed somewhere around--I think about $430,000-$440,000, 
and we are expecting to kick that up to much higher than that, 
based on the continuous needs that we find.
    In terms of the Dixie Fire, I agree with you, that is in a 
critical watershed. The Feather River Watershed is really 
critical to the water supply, as you have indicated, and so my 
immediate goal is to bring just a small team of key leaders in 
the agency out so that they can get a perspective of the amount 
of work that needs to be done. We also want to line up working 
with private partners and others, because this is going to take 
a lot of us working together to try to get that area done.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Chief Moore, I am sorry, time is limited, but 
we have an immediacy we need to have here. We need to be 
hauling straw, and we need to be, shaping waterways in some 
fashion, and not be devastated this year. And I appreciate that 
you have the teams out there doing that, but we need to take 
that information and turn it into immediate action, so that 
is--and I proposed a very large amount of money in a recent 
amendment to legislation here. It didn't make it, because the 
size and the cost is going to be huge of what we are looking 
at.
    Mr. Moore. I agree with that, and just for your 
information, some of those activities are currently taking 
place out there, but that was such a large area, it is going to 
take a little bit of time to do a full assessment of what the 
needs are out there. But I agree, that is something that is 
very important to the watershed of the state----
    Mr. LaMalfa. Can partnering with private industry help 
speed this up? The people in the industry, timber industry, can 
they be a partner to help on this with some of the dead tree 
removal, and putting something down on the ground that will 
stop erosion and the habitat damage that is going to happen?
    Mr. Moore. Yes, absolutely they can, Congressman, and I 
would have an expectation that they would be engaged with us, 
as well as other members of the community, to get some cover 
back onto the ground, and get some of these structures in 
place.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Okay. Thank you. I yield back.
    The Chair. The Chair now recognizes Ranking Member 
Thompson, if he would like to ask another round of questions.
    Mr. Thompson. Thanks, Madam Chair. Chief, I am going to 
circle around and give you an opportunity to respond. I know 
the Forest Service has, again, done new research on where 
specifically the agency needs to perform restoration activities 
to reduce the threat of wildfire. So, the question that we ran 
out of time on, how does the Forest Service intend to use this 
research and prioritize such projects?
    Mr. Moore. So thank you, Ranking Member. So, as we 
indicated before, we have about 66 million acres that need to 
be treated. Our researchers have been engaging with us, and we 
feel that if we treat about 20 million acres of those, that we 
would have a positive impact on the 66 million acres there. I 
think the key is to have strategically placed landscape 
treatments across the area. We know we must protect 
communities, and also the infrastructure that those communities 
depend on. We also know that we need to protect the wildland as 
well, but life and property would be our first priorities, and 
that is where we are focused on now.
    Mr. Thompson. Very good. And, Chief, I know this is your 
first public appearance before this Committee, and we really 
thank you for that, much appreciate you, and your leadership. 
As you may know, our Committee recently marked up a 
reconciliation measure that included many policy changes 
impacting the Forest Service, and some $40 billion in forest-
related investments, and, quite frankly, did that without any 
public hearings, any Committee discussions. So as Chief of the 
Forest Service, were you asked to provide input or testimony on 
those provisions within the budget reconciliation legislation?
    Mr. Moore. I believe that has taken place before I assumed 
this position, so I have not personally been engaged at that 
level, to answer your question.
    Mr. Thompson. Okay. So, to the best of your knowledge, 
since you came into your position as Forest Service Chief, and 
we are happy to have you there, there was no request that came 
from this Committee, or the Senate Committee, or somewhere else 
for any kind of consultation, or to provide testimony or 
technical assistance on that bill?
    Mr. Moore. Yes. Well, I am sure there is, at least I hope 
so, but I am not aware of what that might be at this point, 
Congressman.
    Mr. Thompson. I would certainly hope so too, but if you are 
not aware in your position, and, again, I reinforce we really 
appreciate you having you there. It is kind of sad, this is 
what we get when they don't allow this Committee, the 
Agriculture Committee, to do its job. It is like throwing money 
at a wall. In my opening statement I identified the fact, the 
lacking of authorities, just how flawed that is. Congress 
should not just throw money at--we know wildfires are an issue. 
We know having healthy forests are so important, but that is 
why we have an Agriculture Committee, so that we can have 
hearings, we can have debate, we can have delivered a process. 
And this bill that is going to be voted on, and it was shoved 
through this Committee, is just alarming, absolutely alarming. 
I don't think we want the leadership of either party writing 
our farm bills, including the forestry title.
    Now, can you shed, just changing gears with the time 
remaining, can you shed any light on the working relationship 
between the Forest Service and CAL FIRE? I have been hearing 
reports of issues, and now, with the 60 Minutes report that 
response to the Caldor Fire was delayed due to conflict, it 
seems like this needs to be addressed.
    Mr. Moore. I think I have different information than you 
do, Congressman. I am not aware of any problems between the 
Forest Service and CAL FIRE. As I indicated earlier, that 
relationship is really solid, so I am not aware of anything 
that might be going on.
    Mr. Thompson. All right. And I certainly don't take 
credible references from the media, so I am glad to--certainly 
work with Mr. LaMalfa. I yield to Mr. LaMalfa.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Would gentleman yield? I ran out of time on 
previous thoughts, but indeed there is a lot on the ground that 
needs to be looked at, Chief Moore, on the relationship there, 
people that will come up to me off the record and tell me that 
the philosophy between the two entities on how to attack fire, 
deal with fire, who is going to be in charge, there are big 
problems. And yes, whether it is 60 Minutes, or what have you, 
there are people on the ground that--been feeling like regular 
firefighters that approached 60 Minutes about this, or were 
approached, that feel very strongly about this. So, we have a 
lot of patching to do on that relationship with the strain that 
is been on, and the different philosophies on fighting fire.
    The bottom line is--the American people, the public, they 
don't care what color the fire truck is that shows up to their 
fire, whether it is light green, or red, or yellow, or what 
have you. They just want action. They want their community 
safe, and that. So I thank Mr. Thompson for yielding to me.
    The Chair. Thank you very much to the Ranking Members. The 
Chair now recognizes Mr. O'Halleran for 5 minutes.
    Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you, Madam Chair. I am just going to 
have a couple of comments based on what I heard, and a couple 
of questions. My district has all of six National Forests. Some 
of them are in direct--bordering on the Grand Canyon, which is 
in my district. And, first of all, let me thank the 
Administration for putting it up to $15 an hour, but that is a 
ridiculous number. These firefighters are away from their 
families for an extended period of time. I have been to a large 
amount of Type 1 and Type 2 incidents, where I have seen these 
young people coming off the line exhausted, going into small 
tents and sleeping for a short period of time, and then getting 
back up, and going out and risking their lives to save 
communities and our natural resources. And that is $15 an hour. 
I don't know where that number came from, but let us hope that 
we in Congress can do a lot better than that. And I know a lot 
of the firefighters that come from local jurisdictions that are 
side by side with them, and working very hard also, but making 
a lot more money than they are, and risking the same amount of 
life.
    The other thing is the 38 percent loss of workforce. As you 
indicated, Chief, that was over a number of years. That was 
something that was said time, and time, and time again. I have 
said it the entire time I was in the legislature. I asked 
Congress to do something. Since I have been in Congress, we 
have tried to find ways to address that issue. Some of it has 
been addressed, but the timeline is too short to be able to get 
it to where we need it to be. But the idea that we just said, 
well, we will just fight these fires, and cut the workforce 
down. And, of course, NEPA, and all those people are taken off 
the lines. Our Type 1 people come right from the Forest 
Service. Our firefighters, they come right from the Forest 
Service. I see the offices when they can't be as productive 
because they are out fighting fires.
    And Mr. Panetta talked about law enforcement. Red Rock 
Ranger District, in my district, has millions of visitors every 
year. They have two law enforcement officers. I am a former law 
enforcement officer, and I know that those officers are hardly 
out there because of days off, because of sickness, because of 
court time, because of paperwork. There is no law enforcement 
in the Red Rock Ranger District, or, for that matter, in the 
million plus acres of the Coconino National Forest, or many 
other National Forests around this country. Again, Congress has 
been not willing to put the money forward, and I am glad to 
hear people start to talk about landscapes' work.
    Now, we just had a couple of fires up in the district--
well, actually, a lot of them, 14 in one weekend, but the 
uncharacteristic fire severity is causing more post-fire 
flooding. Northern Arizonans know all too well. This summer, 
those living in Flagstaff neighborhoods below the Museum Fire 
from 2019 that the burn area is continuing to face severe 
flooding in areas that never flooded before. And then when, as 
you know Chief, when this stuff comes out of those mountains, 
it not only brings a ton of stuff down, but at the speeds it 
comes down those mountains, it just moves right into 
neighborhoods, and just rips people apart. And the intense fire 
behavior jeopardizes the long-term watershed health and water 
quality. What is your opinion on what we can do? I heard you 
say 60,000 acres of funding. Well, that is near ridiculous, as 
far as why haven't we moved, as fires have increased, up to the 
higher levels?
    Mr. Moore. Thank you, Congressman O'Halleran. I think you 
stated the problem very well. I just want you to know that we 
are doing everything we can with what we have, and if we have 
more, we will do more. But, that is for you all to decide, in 
terms of what more looks like. I can assure you, though, we are 
committed to the job that you all have given us as Federal 
employees, and we are also committed to working with people in 
the communities, and our neighbors to look at landscape-type 
treatments, rather than just jurisdictional boundaries only.
    Mr. O'Halleran. Thanks, Chief. I just have to say that the 
BAER issue is huge, the idea that we also have the law 
enforcement issue, and you and I will talk about that later at 
some time. And Madam Chair, I will be sending in more questions 
for follow-up, and also documentation for the record.
    The Chair. Thank you very much. And the Chair now 
recognizes Congresswoman Schrier from Washington for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Schrier. Thank you, Madam Chair. And, I wanted to 
continue. We were talking about the importance of thinning 
forests, and one of the solutions is having mills, and in 
Washington State we have very little mill infrastructure left. 
And before harvesting and milling was done in a very 
irresponsible way. Now we know how to do it really responsibly, 
and support an industry, and make our forests healthier at the 
same time. And right now, without a mill nearby, it just 
doesn't pencil out. Public and private landowners have to truck 
logs 150 miles away to the nearest mills, high cost, they end 
up losing money. And so, locating a mill in Chelan County, 
where there is, again, 70 percent of the forest land is Forest 
Service land would be such a huge win-win situation. It would 
bring a ton of money to the Forest Service, so you would raise 
wages and benefits, and pay people more, and get more employees 
in. It would support more affordable housing, it would make us 
less reliant on foreign steel, because we could build with 
cross-laminated timber, and it would create a ton of family-
wage jobs.
    And so I have been in touch with our Regional Forester, 
Glenn Casamassa, about this, and just would welcome the 
opportunity to talk with you both more about whether we could 
have reliable dependence on Forest Service logs. Can you talk a 
little bit about that, who could go in and do the logging if 
you don't have the personnel to do it? Like, how can we make 
this work?
    Mr. Moore. So, Congresswoman, I would first suggest that 
maybe we need to sit down and talk about what the opportunities 
are, and then we could land on what the appropriate tool would 
be to do that. It is so very hard to answer that question in 
just a minute or so, but I would love to be able to sit down 
with you and Glenn, and others that may need to be involved, to 
talk about this very issue, because the same applies in so many 
other locations.
    Ms. Schrier. I have even better. You are invited, and I 
will send you a formal invitation, to come out to Washington 
State and lay eyes on areas of forest that have been 
appropriately managed, and what happened there when a fire came 
through, areas that haven't and what happened there, and truly 
just the tremendous potential for a big win-win. So please come 
to Washington State.
    I also wanted to highlight one particular landscape 
restoration project that is really important in my district. 
And I don't think you are going to have answers to these 
questions now, but I will throw them out there, and you can 
just reply later. Maybe you can even reply when you come out to 
Washington State. This one is the Upper Wenatchee Pilot 
Project, and I will be following up, as I mentioned, with your 
team, but I wanted to know when an environmental assessment 
will be available for the public to review. Also, when we can 
expect the final NEPA decision, and when we might be able to 
see work actually starting on the ground? Because while this 
project is stalled, land within the treatment area is currently 
burning as we speak.
    Mr. Moore. So, Congresswoman, I did get a briefing on this, 
very brief, but what I can tell you, though, is that the 
expectation is that NEPA should be out in spring or early 
summer. I think, looking at the purpose and needs for that 
project, I think it was really solid, it was really laid out 
well, and so now it is just a matter of working through the 
process. But I will look more into this, and we can have a 
follow-up conversation on some specifics.
    Ms. Schrier. That would be fantastic. Obviously the earlier 
the better. Fire season starts early, so if we get that going 
in spring, that would help us with the next season. I think I 
will leave it there, and yield back the rest of my time. Thank 
you again for coming today, and facing some of these really big 
challenges. We understand how big they are, and how much work 
you have cut out for you, and also how important it is. Thanks. 
I yield back.
    The Chair. Before we adjourn today, I invite the Ranking 
Member to share any closing comments that he may have.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Well, thank you, Madam Chair, I will be brief 
on the close here. And I appreciate the comments by Ms. 
Schrier, what she was saying there, we are going to need a 
place for this material to go, and we have a massive amount of 
material, so we do need to inspire those that want to invest in 
the infrastructure to process wood. Whether we are going to 
make chips, whether we are going to be able to salvage some saw 
logs, whatever we can turn this material into. Biochar, 
something that needs to be explored more. So I appreciate that. 
We have to have people that invest, they need to have 
confidence that they can be, over a 30 year period that they 
will have a steady supply that we can guarantee from Federal 
land, so that is extremely important.
    Also, a lot of good, positive comments and thoughts in 
Committee here today. I was working with Jimmy P. there, or Mr. 
Panetta, on the legislation we are working on together, along 
with our Chair, with part of it being prescribed fire. Now, 
prescribed fire is not going to be popular, maybe, at all 
times, but when you do a comparison of a controlled situation 
there, and how we are going to reduce the fuel load we have, 
when we do it wisely, the right time of year, the right 
atmospheric conditions, it can be extremely effective, and very 
minimal on annoyance, so that it all goes together.
    I appreciate Mr. Costa bringing up that the forest plan 
needing an update for many years. I also would caution that we 
also move very quickly on the ground, as we can, with executive 
actions or what have you, in order to do what we can to offset 
the problems we have had with current fire, and the salvage 
needs to be done. An update of a plan, Chief Moore, I don't 
know if that might take 3 or 4 years or what, but we obviously, 
in my view, really need to move quickly and adeptly on where we 
need to go for the immediate cleanup, and what we can do to get 
ahead of the curve on setting fire breaks, and other things 
that help defend communities and more forestland.
    And also Ms. Pingree, she has been very kind in this 
Committee, and other previous ones, on looking at the 
situation, and I know she wants to be a partner as well, with 
that, I think we had a really good start today on this 
discussion during this 2021 fire season of where we can go. So, 
Madam Chair, I really appreciate your diligence, and for making 
this time for us today. Thank you again, Chief Moore, for your 
time, and let us continue to work together, and get all this 
together, and get CAL FIRE and U.S. Forest Service thing ironed 
out too. We will have more to follow up with you on that as 
well. Anyway, thanks a lot, and I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you very much, Mr. LaMalfa. Again, I want 
to thank you, Chief Moore, for joining us today, for taking the 
time to answer our questions, to engage with this Committee. I 
hope that it is the beginning of a very productive conversation 
and relationship as you continue to grow in your role. Again, 
congratulations on the role that you have assumed.
    I think the conversations of today have been pretty broad, 
everything from the pay of firefighters to the stability of the 
workforce, the challenges that the Forest Service is facing, 
that you are facing in hiring and retention. Those are things 
that need to be at the forefront of our mind. The conversations 
related to science-based treatments, prevention, and forest 
maintenance certainly is something that we talk about in this 
Committee, and so it was great to have you bring your 
perspective of what is currently happening, and what more needs 
to happen. Conversations related to lack of mill infrastructure 
throughout the United States, and what that actually means when 
we are looking at some of our prevention intentions. My 
colleague from Maine, who spoke about cross-laminated timber, 
and some of the forest product research that is happening 
within the Forest Service I think is really bringing a fulsome 
discussion to the work that your agency does, and, frankly, the 
focus that we, as a Subcommittee, do have on the beginning to 
the end discussion related to how not only are we fighting the 
forest fires, but, frankly, how are we preventing them, and 
what are some of the hindrances and challenges that you and 
your colleagues face?
    And certainly the threat of wildfire continues to increase 
every year, and we have heard some of the real challenges faced 
back home in the districts of so many of the Members on this 
Committee. So, I appreciate you listening to the very specific 
stories and impact that it has had on the communities 
represented by this Committee. I do look forward to our 
continued work together. Certainly the task moving forward 
continues to be daunting, but I hope that we will be a partner 
in ensuring that the United States Congress is doing all that 
we can do to prevent forest fires, to prevent the economic and 
land devastation, and certainly to be supportive of the men and 
women on the front lines of that.
    And so, as we close out this hearing, I just want to convey 
my appreciation to your entire workforce, and particularly the 
firefighters who are risking their lives to keep our 
communities safe, and certainly we are so grateful for their 
service, and we will continue to work with you on issues of 
oversight and issues of engagement to ensure that the work that 
they are performing is optimized, and that we are as supportive 
as we can, because certainly we are grateful.
    Under the Rules of the Committee, the record of today's 
hearing will remain open for 10 calendar days to receive 
additional material and supplementary written responses from 
the witness to any question posed by a Member. This hearing of 
the Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry is now adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:58 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
    [Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
Submitted Letter by Hon. Abigail Davis Spanberger, a Representative in 
    Congress from Virginia; on Behalf of Jessica Turner, Executive 
                Director, Outdoor Recreation Roundtable

 
 
 
Hon. Abigail Davis Spanberger,       Hon. Doug LaMalfa
Chair,                               Ranking Minority Member,
Subcommittee on Conservation and     Subcommittee on Conservation and
 Forestry,                            Forestry,
House Agriculture Committee,         House Agriculture Committee,
Washington, D.C.;                    Washington, D.C.
 

    Dear Chair Spanberger, Ranking Member LaMalfa, and Members of the 
Committee,

    On behalf of the Outdoor Recreation Roundtable (ORR), thank you for 
bringing attention to the impact of this year's extreme wildfire 
activity on communities around the United States through last week's 
hearing on strategies to respond to and mitigate wildfire threats. As 
representatives for the $788 billion outdoor recreation industry, we 
have watched closely as fires forced closures of cherished recreation 
areas and forced cutbacks in many of the businesses that sustain our 
industry. Because of outdoor recreation's notable economic, 
environmental, and public health benefits, we have vested interest in 
policies that help improve both management of and resilience towards 
wildfire risk on our public lands and waters.
    ORR is the nation's leading coalition of outdoor recreation trade 
associations--made up of 34 national members, as well as other 
nonprofit organizations and business entities--serving more than 
110,000 businesses. According to the most recent data from the Bureau 
of Economic Analysis released last year, the recreation industry 
generated $788 billion in economic output, accounted for 2.1 percent of 
GDP and 5.2 million American jobs, and was growing faster than the 
economy as a whole in every indicator.
    COVID-19 and the desire for safe, family-friendly activities during 
the pandemic made 2020 the biggest year for outdoor recreation 
participation and sales in American history. A survey published in May 
2020 found that 81 percent of Americans had already spent time outside 
at that point in the pandemic, with 32.5 percent turning to outdoor 
recreation for the first time. 8.1 million more Americans hiked in 2020 
vs. 2019 (a 16.3 percent increase), and the total percentage of 
Americans who participate in outdoor recreation rose from the previous 
10 years. Many sectors within the industry saw record participation 
numbers in the past year: freshwater fishing added 3.4 million 
participants in 2020, shipments of RVs reached an all-time high in the 
first quarter of 2021, new model powersports sales increased 40 percent 
in 2020 over 2019 levels, and retail unit sales of new powerboats in 
the U.S. increased by 12 percent in 2020 over 2019. These figures 
capture our nation's recognition over the past year that outdoor 
recreation provides significant physical health, mental health, and 
community benefits. Importantly, new participants in outdoor recreation 
are younger, predominantly female, and more diverse.
    Despite this inspiring tailwind for outdoor recreation 
participation, this year's wildfires have severely impacted the outdoor 
recreation economy's ability to function at its fullest potential, 
particularly across western states. To ensure safety for the public, 
land management agencies took unprecedented steps to close wide regions 
within national forests and parks, including the Boundary Waters Canoe 
Area Wilderness in the Superior National Forest, Kings Canyon, Lassen 
Volcanic, and Sequoia National Parks, or all 18 of California's 
National Forests. Each of these closures has a ripple effect, impacting 
the gateway communities and small businesses that benefit from these 
treasured public lands and waters. For example, Sierra Mountain Center, 
a 40 year old guiding company based in Bishop, CA, was hit hard by USFS 
closures in both 2020 and 2021, putting guides out of works and 
disappointing guests who traveled from thousands of miles after being 
forced to close for 3 weeks in 2021 with just 36 hours' notice. And it 
is not only the communities and businesses that are impacted by 
wildfire, but the consumers they serve: Air Quality Index (AQI) 
readings across the West surpassed healthy levels for much of the 
summer as smoke impacted iconic outdoor recreation destinations, 
forcing cutbacks in recreational habits and visitation.
    We share the concerns of the Committee about the unavoidable role 
of wildfire in communities around the United States and are prepared to 
work closely on strategies to reduce future wildfire risk and increase 
resilience to wildfires that occur. We are particularly focused on a 
few climate initiatives across the industry, including:

   Efficient implementation of the Great American Outdoors Act, 
        which offers unprecedented levels of Federal funding to create 
        new and protect existing outdoor recreation infrastructure with 
        benefits of both conservation and carbon sequestration

   Invest in climate resilient recreation infrastructure and 
        natural ways to mitigate the impacts of climate change on 
        outdoor recreation businesses and the communities that rely on 
        them

   Expansion of EV charging networks across public lands and 
        waters to reduce emissions from the transportation sector

   Creation of a Civilian Climate Corps, which would put 
        America's youth and veterans to work on green infrastructure 
        projects that can increase climate resilience and expand 
        outdoor recreation access.

    We hope the House Agriculture Committee in the 117th Congress will 
see us as a key partner in identifying more opportunities to address 
risks and opportunities posed by wildfire in the future.
            Sincerely,
            Sec.[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
            
Jessica Turner,
Executive Director,
Outdoor Recreation Roundtable.
                                 ______
                                 
 Submitted Map by Hon. Doug LaMalfa, a Representative in Congress from 
                               California
Sec.[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 ______
                                 
                          Submitted Questions
Response from Randy Moore, Chief, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department 
        of Agriculture
Questions Submitted by Hon. Tom O'Halleran, a Representative in 
        Congress from Arizona
    Question 1. The Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) program is 
designed to address damage to the land following intense wildfire. The 
objective of the BAER program's goal is to determine the need for and 
to prescribe and implement emergency treatments on Federal Lands to 
minimize threats to life or property resulting from the effects of a 
fire and to prevent unacceptable degradation to natural and cultural 
resources. What is the backlog on BAER projects?? What other 
Congressional actions are needed to improve the program?
    Answer. The Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) program addresses 
post-fire emergency conditions on National Forest System (NFS) lands. 
There is not a backlog of BAER projects. All projects that meet the 
intent and guidelines in BAER program direction are funded through 
wildfire suppression appropriations. Due to the post-fire emergency 
requirements of the program, BAER projects are accomplished within 1 
year of fire containment. Longer-term rehabilitation and restoration 
needs are separate post-fire recovery efforts that need to occur over a 
longer time frame after the wildfire and are referred to as Burned Area 
Rehabilitation (BAR) needs. BAR activity examples include reforestation 
and revegetation, invasive species treatments, rangeland infrastructure 
repairs, and watershed improvements.
    Rehabilitation, as defined by the National Wildfire Coordinating 
Group (NWCG), is the action undertaken within 3 years of a wildland 
fire to repair or improve fire-damaged lands unlikely to recover to 
management-approved conditions, or to repair or replace minor 
facilities damaged by fire. The Forest Service had consistent Burned 
Area Rehabilitation (BAR) funding from 2002-2011. While the BAR program 
did not fully fund all post-fire rehabilitation needs during that time 
frame, it did support the completion of a subset of the needed work. 
With its end, the backlog of projects has expanded and has subsequently 
been exacerbated by the increasing scale of fire impacts to NFS lands 
and infrastructure. The current backlog of post-fire (post-BAER) 
rehabilitation and restoration projects exceeds $2 billion, including 4 
million acres in potential need of reforestation.
    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provides $100 million to 
the Forest Service for burned area rehabilitation activities that must 
be implemented within 3 years of containment of a wildland fire. 
Division J includes $45 million each of Fiscal Years 2022-2026 for 
post-fire recovery as well. These funds are being focused on the repair 
or improvement of lands unlikely to recover naturally to a management-
approved condition and to repair and replace minor infrastructure and 
facilities damaged by the fire.
    We are happy to work with the Congressman's office regarding ways 
to improve the program.

    Question 2. It is my understanding that the Wildland Fire 
Management program provides sufficient funding to protect, treat, and 
prevent forest fires on 20 million acres of forest service land. I also 
believe that there are at least 66 million acres where treatment is 
needed. What is the timetable to address the other 46 million acres? 
What additional resources are necessary for this? Are staffing levels 
sufficient to complete this work or are additional staffing needed? If 
so, how much? Are additional authorities needed?
    Answer. There are 63 million acres of National Forest System lands 
at high or very high risk of wildfire that would be difficult to 
contain. While funding through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs 
Act will allow us to pick up the pace and scale of our work, it will 
not fully fund the work necessary to treat the 20 million acres that 
pose the highest risk to communities. That said, we now have the 
science and tools we need to size and place treatments in a way that 
will truly make a difference. We will focus on key ``firesheds''--
large, forested landscapes with a high likelihood that an ignition 
could expose homes, communities, infrastructure, and natural resources 
to wildfire. Firesheds, typically about 250,000 acres in size, are 
mapped to match the scale of building exposure to wildfire.
    Under the 10 year Strategy to confront the wildfire crisis, we are 
working with our partners to:

   Treat an additional 20 million acres on National Forest 
        System lands.

   Treat an additional 30 million acres of other Federal, 
        state, Tribal, and private lands.

   Develop a plan for long-term maintenance beyond the 10 
        years.

    Our new management paradigm builds on the National Cohesive 
Wildland Fire Management Strategy.\1\ The nation already has 
collaborative strategies in place for cross-boundary treatments, 
including Cohesive Strategy projects and Shared Stewardship agreements. 
We will work collaboratively through shared stewardship with states, 
Tribes, local communities, private landowners, and other stakeholders 
to adapt lessons learned into a coordinated and effective program of 
work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/strategy/. [Attachment 1].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Forest Service has set up a Wildfire Risk Reduction 
Infrastructure Team to build on new and existing capacity in carrying 
out projects under the 10 year Strategy. Together with our partners, we 
will plan project areas while building the needed workforce capacity 
and public support. We will treat the highest priority firesheds first. 
Then we will move on to other western firesheds, accelerating our 
treatments over 10 years. Next steps will include building our 
workforce capacity in the Forest Service and with our partners to 
accomplish the work at the scale needed while establishing the large 
multi-jurisdictional coalition needed to support the work.
    The Agency recognizes that it will need to increase overall 
staffing to successfully reduce the risk of wildfires. The 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provides funds to help increase 
capacity. The Agency is still developing comprehensive staffing plans 
and will be increasing workforce capacity, not only in field personnel 
to complete the work, but also key administrative positions like 
contracting officers, grants and agreements specialists, partnership 
coordinators, and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 
professionals who act as force multipliers. The Agency also recognizes 
that achieving the desired pace and scale of land treatments will 
require the support of states, Tribes, local communities, non-
government organizations, and private contractors.

    Question 3. While I appreciate the decision to increase the level 
of pay for temporary firefighters to $15 an hour, this is clearly 
inadequate. These Federal firefighters sleep in tents away from their 
families and risk their lives to protect communities, people, and 
property from wildfire. How was the decision reached to pay these 
individuals $15 an hour? Are discussions on going to increase that rate 
of pay so it is commensurate with the intensity and difficulty of the 
work? Do you anticipate that an increase in pay will result in better 
retention of firefighters throughout the extended fire seasons?
    Answer. The Forest Service is partnering with the Department of the 
Interior, the Office of Personnel Management, and Executive of the 
President to identify policy and administrative actions needed to 
implement appropriate workforce management and compensation reforms.
    In September 2021, the Forest Service provided retention incentives 
to approximately 11,300 firefighters. This is in addition to a monetary 
incentive for approximately 1,100 firefighters (permanent and 
temporary) earning less than $15 per hour. These incentives provided 
temporary relief through the end of the calendar year to cover the gap 
for those earning less than $15 per hour.
    On November 9, 2021, the Forest Service established a minimum pay 
standard for all firefighters to make $15 per hour or more. The new pay 
scale settings represent the absolute minimum pay these employees would 
receive at grades GS-02, GS-03, and GS-04.
    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act authorizes the 
development of a distinct ``wildland firefighter'' occupational series, 
appropriates $480 million to convert seasonal wildland firefighters to 
permanent full-time wildland firefighters, and increases the base 
salary of Federal wildland firefighters in hard to fill areas by 
$20,000 or 50%, whichever is less. These provisions are expected to 
help improve recruitment and retention of wildland firefighters in the 
Forest Service.

    Question 4. In the last 20 years, the forest service has lost 38 
percent of its workforce. This has resulted increased NEPA delays, 
reduced forest management, and backlogs for projects to be completed. 
What are the real numbers in non-fire staffing now versus 2000? How 
much of this reduction in workforce has been due to the hiring of 
additional temporary firefighters for more intense and longer fire 
season? What other factors contribute to staffing declines?
    Answer. The Forest Service has lost more than 40% of its non-fire 
positions over the past 15 years. This significantly limits our ability 
to meet the Administration's current priorities. Losses have been 
especially great in lands and realty management resources (land line, 
reality, cadastral services) in support of wildland fuels reduction, 
forest restoration, and road infrastructure, as well as in recreation 
resources (planning, engineering, patrol and service technicians, 
grants and agreements, and contracting specialists) needed to support 
the Great American Outdoors Act and portions of the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act that target trail and recreation 
infrastructure. Other areas with noted reductions in staffing include 
heritage, minerals and geology, special uses, land management planning, 
and vegetation and wildlife management. Declines in non-fire staffing 
reflect the increased proportion of the budget that has gone to 
wildland fire.
    Given updates to agency personnel systems and changes to the 
definition of wildland firefighter and associated position 
descriptions, the Forest Service is able to provide reliable personnel 
data for the past 5 years.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Total Permanent Positions Onboard at the end of September
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year                Sep. FY16      Sep. FY17      Sep. FY18      Sep. FY19      Sep. FY20      Sep. FY21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Count           28,193         27,955         27,562         27,446         28,971         28,772
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Fire Permanent Positions Onboard at the end of September
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year                Sep. FY16      Sep. FY17      Sep. FY18      Sep. FY19      Sep. FY20      Sep. FY21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Count            6,985          7,214          7,411          7,558          8,581          8,453
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Non-Fire Permanent Positions Onboard at the end of September
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year                Sep. FY16      Sep. FY17      Sep. FY18      Sep. FY19      Sep. FY20      Sep. FY21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Count           21,208         20,741         20,151         19,888         20,390         20,319
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Total Temporary Positions Onboard (Peak Timeframe--Pay Period 14)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year                Jul. FY16      Jul. FY17      Jul. FY18      Jul. FY19      Jul. FY20      Jul. FY21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Count           11,649         11,541         10,990         10,367          9,970          9,201
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Fire Temporary Positions Onboard (Peak Timeframe--Pay Period 14)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year                Jul. FY16      Jul. FY17      Jul. FY18      Jul. FY19      Jul. FY20      Jul. FY21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Count            5,235          5,163          4,968          4,756          4,584          4,163
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Non-Fire Temporary Positions Onboard (Peak Timeframe--Pay Period 14)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year                Jul. FY16      Jul. FY17      Jul. FY18      Jul. FY19      Jul. FY20      Jul. FY21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Count            6,414          6,378          6,022          5,611          5,386          5,038
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As illustrated, there is a slight decrease in overall permanent 
onboard strength from FY16-FY19; onboard strength begins to increase 
again in FY20. The overall non-fire permanent workforce decreased in 
FY17, FY18, and FY19, but began to increase in FY20. There has been a 
steady increase of the overall fire permanent workforce year after 
year, with a 21% increase in permanent fire numbers when comparing FY16 
to FY21.
    There are decreases in all temporary hiring numbers from FY16-FY21, 
regardless of whether the position is fire or non-fire.

    Question 5. There are significant issues related to lack of law 
enforcement personnel in our national forests. Please share the 
breakdown of law enforcement personnel assigned by the USFS for every 
ranger district and every national forest along with the number of 
square miles for every national forest and ranger district.
    Answer. See Appendix A with requested information.

    Question 6. The USFS often engages in agreements with local police 
departments in communities where there is not sufficient law 
enforcement to provide that service. In your mind, how successful have 
these agreements been? What improvements are needed?
    Answer. Forest Service Law Enforcement and Investigations (LEI) 
routinely engages in agreements with state, county, and local law 
enforcement partners under the authority of the Cooperative Law 
Enforcement Act. These agreements are generally for 5 years and often 
include a fixed yearly funding level of reimbursement for services 
rendered or equipment used/purchased related to services performed on 
National Forest Systems (NFS) lands. The level of funding varies per 
agreement and no existing agreements offer total reimbursement for all 
services performed. In FY 2021, Forest Service LEI had 478 Cooperative 
Law Enforcement (CLE) Agreements totaling $5.2 million.
    These agreements are vital to management of NFS lands and our 
state, county, and local cooperators are key partners in protecting the 
resources and providing public safety. The agreements are most commonly 
used for additional patrol services on NFS lands. Many agreements may 
specify certain patrol activities or areas for reimbursement like a 
busy campground, recreation area, or a specific area where FS law 
enforcement coverage is lacking. Some agreements may just be general 
patrol agreements or other services like dispatch services. Some 
agreements are also used to purchase equipment such as off-road 
vehicles for patrol or search and rescue on NFS lands.
    The agreements are also often used as a vehicle for state, county, 
and local partners to confer state authority on FS LEI staff. This 
additional authority allows FS LEI staff to enforce state, county, and 
local law in many areas the same as local law enforcement do. These 
enforcement actions utilize the same state/local laws and courts as our 
partners and help the FS LEI staff became a vital member of the local 
law enforcement community. This authority commonly assists our partners 
as well. In many cases, a FS LEI officer can take an enforcement action 
to resolve an issue rather than requiring a local officer or deputy to 
respond in an area (often remote) on NFS lands.
    CLE funding levels have been flat and can impact adequate 
reimbursement for services. This issue has been further stressed with a 
decrease in Forest Service Law Enforcement staffing and the significant 
increase in visitation on public lands, including during the COVID-19 
Pandemic.

    Question 7. Coconino National Forest currently is seeing 
significant environmental degradation because of Off-Highway-Vehicle 
usage. This is causing local trees and vegetation to suffer, increases 
dust in the air, increases air pollution, and makes the forest more 
dangerous for other users. What additional resources are needed by the 
forest service to prevent people from engaging in dangerous OHV usage 
and to limit the environmental degradation? What solutions exist to 
protect the forest's health and prevent the ongoing significant 
environmental degradation we have seen? I have attached photos and 
links to videos to show the level of destruction caused by OHVs in the 
area.
Photos: Red Rock Ranger District National Forest
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Links to Showing Environmental Degradation from OHVs: *
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \*\ Editor's note: the videos are retained in Committee file.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 OHV rollovers in 3 days
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0jdRNnvoWg
Oct. 2, 2021, OHV rollover, doughnuts, reckless driving, dust, abuse, 
        etc.
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
        
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzMvBwMKFYE
OHVs are so out of control, there were two major rollovers with four 
        people going to the hospital
        Sec.[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
        
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2_86zaF5b04&t=21s
Sept. 26 29, 2021, mud doughnuts and comments from jeep tour driver
Sec.[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8zBL40Gq-Y
Sept. 25, 2021, OHV rollover, reckless driving, speeds, environmental 
        damage
        Sec.[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
        
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVQXhZyaknk&t=35s
Sept 24, 2021, OHV abuse, speeds, reckless driving, environmental 
        damage
        Sec.[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
        
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lo8ctgep_q0&t=71s

    Answer. Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) recreation opportunities on the 
Red Rock Ranger District (District) are relatively concentrated and 
visitors often travel a limited road network to access the same 
destinations. While there is some road/trail widening and use of 
unauthorized routes, most OHV use in the area is legal and does not 
create resource damage. The Coconino Forest (Forest) does not currently 
have any limitation on the number of OHVs that can operate, except in 
the Soldiers Pass area, and does not have posted speed limits on 
National Forest System Roads. A 2018 Engineering Road Use Study 
conducted found that 85% of motor vehicles traveled under 30 MPH, 
including OHVs. Results of this study found that drivers are properly 
regulating their speeds for the conditions (partially due to the road 
condition and dust), and a speed limit is not currently warranted.
    The District operates a large, motorized recreation special use 
permit program comprised largely of guided jeep tours. Additionally, 
over the last 5 years the number of OHV rental businesses (OHV and 
jeeps) has increased in the cities of Sedona, Cottonwood, and 
Cornville; similar to car rentals, these businesses are not required to 
hold a recreation special use permit, thus allowing private individuals 
to operate their equipment on the Forest. Arizona State law prohibits 
the Forest from prohibiting street-legal OHVs on open roads.
    National Forest System Roads (NFSR) 525 and 152c connect a series 
of four designated OHV routes (29.5 miles). The OHV routes are utilized 
by Jeep and ATV guiding permittees and are very popular with the public 
renting OHVs in Sedona and Cottonwood. NFSR 525 and NFSR 152c are the 
primary access for visitors of this national and international tourist 
destination.
    Two Forest Service Law Enforcement Officers (LEOs) and 
approximately six field-going Forest Protection Officers (FPOs), 
provide education and enforcement duties on the Coconino National 
Forest. Existing cooperative partnerships with local, County (Coconino 
and Yavapai County Sheriff's Offices), and state agencies (Arizona 
Department of Game and Fish), provide additional enforcement during 
peak visitation periods, including saturation enforcement and citations 
for violations of state law. The State of Arizona regulates use of 
motor vehicles and OHVs on open roads, including NFSRs. While most 
visitor accidents and injuries that occur in the area are heat related 
illnesses, the Forest Service is working with cooperators to address 
visitor accidents and injuries.
    Collaborative Efforts:

   The District served on a working group convened by Yavapai 
        County Supervisor Michaels related to dispersed camping and OHV 
        use west of Sedona, attending eight meetings to date. The 
        Forest Service intends to replicate a similar facilitated OHV 
        working group in 2022 to continue addressing concerns in the 
        Sedona area.

   The District initiated monthly cooperator meetings with 
        local law enforcement and emergency responders to enhance 
        relationships, share information, and accurately track safety 
        incidents.

   The Forest participates on the Diablo Trust Recreation 
        Working Group, a collaborative group that addresses recreation 
        issues (including OHV use), to find balanced solutions for all 
        stakeholders.

   In June 2021, the Coconino Forest Supervisor issued a letter 
        to OHV rental businesses in Sedona and Cottonwood inviting the 
        companies to engage with forest officials to address user 
        conflicts and prevent resource damage. As a result, the Sedona 
        Chamber of Commerce announced the formation of the Red Rock OHV 
        Conservation Crew (RROCC), a coalition of more than a dozen 
        private OHV industry partners. In partnership with 
        TreadLightly!, the RROCC is addressing effects from increased 
        OHV visitation.

   In September 2021, RROCC companies began dedicating 1% of 
        sales to land preservation and rider education, a commitment 
        that could achieve $350,000 in annual contributions to be used 
        as matching funds in the 2022 Arizona State OHV grant program. 
        Funds will be used for education and patrol rangers, road/trail 
        maintenance, restoration projects and public engagement.

   The Forest responded to a November 1, 2021, letter from the 
        City of Sedona requesting limited OHV entry points on to the 
        forest.

    The district will seek funding for projects through the Arizona 
State OHV Grant program, a competitive process for funding 
opportunities specific to motorized recreation. Road engineers have 
conducted a Road Use Study for forest road 152c and a section of 525 
(with finalization expected in early 2022). Results of the study will 
enhance management and maintenance efforts. The Forest Service is also 
considering other non-engineering actions to improve conditions and 
visitor experience, such as improved portal entrance and various 
educational signs along 152C. The District is developing a 
comprehensive signing plan that will be educational and enforceable to 
keep visitors on designated routes.
    With RROCC assistance, a multi-year program of work will be 
developed and transparent to local stakeholders, identifying outcomes 
and funding streams. Financial assistance through the RROCC 1% program 
is anticipated.

    Question 8. What is the timeline for the update of each of the 
forest management plans in Arizona's first Congressional district?
    Answer. Each of the Forest Land Management Plan revisions in 
Arizona Congressional District One occurred recently:

   Kaibab National Forest Land Management Plan, revised in 
        2014.

   Prescott National Forest Land Management Plan, revised in 
        2015.

   Apache-Sitgreaves National Land Management Plan, revised in 
        2015.

   Coconino National Forest Land Management Plan, revised in 
        2018.

   Tonto National Forest Land Management Plan, final decision 
        on revised plan expected in Fiscal Year 2022.

    In general, we plan to update our forest plans every 15 years, but 
often the timeline is longer due to resource availability.
Questions Submitted by Hon. Kim Schrier, a Representative in Congress 
        from Washington
    Question 1. Can you address the issue of staffing and capacity at 
the Forest Service to accomplish large-scale forest treatments? I hear 
from folks in my district that hiring limitations and salary 
constraints within the agency are a major problem and are stalling 
desperately needed work.
    Answer. We recognize the need to increase overall staffing to 
successfully reduce the risk of wildfires. The Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act provides funds to help increase capacity. The 
Agency is still developing comprehensive staffing plans and will be 
increasing capacity in not only field personnel to complete the work, 
but also key administrative positions like contracting officers, grants 
and agreements specialists, partnership coordinators, and NEPA 
professionals who act as force multipliers. The Agency also recognizes 
that achieving the desired pace and scale of land treatments will 
require the support of states, Tribes, local, non-government 
organizations, and private contractors.

    Question 2. Since we know the scale of wildfire and forest health 
risks is too massive for the Forest Service to take on alone, and we 
need an all-hands-on-deck mentality, what are your plans to provide 
more local authority, funding and flexibility to allow ranger districts 
to more effectively utilize local partners to help with planning and 
implementation?
    Answer. We are taking a cross Deputy area approach to ensure we are 
developing maximum flexibilities while abiding by all regulations, 
policy and laws. We continue to look for and implement efficiencies in 
our execution of agreements. An example would be the development of 
master agreements with our national level partners. This allows local 
units to develop supplemental agreements much quicker. Also, we are 
aggressively working with our national level partners to gain 
efficiencies in our program execution.
    The Forest Service is committed to using all the authorities we 
have at our disposal, such as stewardship contracts and agreements, and 
Good Neighbor Authority (GNA) agreements. We have a long history of 
consistently working with partners at all levels of the Agency. Most 
Ranger Districts engage partners where available to help with planning 
and implementation of a variety of Forest Service activities. No 
significant additional local authority or flexibility is needed. The 
main barriers to more Ranger Districts effectively utilizing partners 
for planning and implementation are staffing shortages, rapid employee 
turnover, and shifts in program of work as forests must respond to 
wildfires and other competing priorities.
    Additionally, by using funding and authorities under the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to increase our staffing in 
contracting, grants and agreements, and other key areas, the Forest 
Service will be able to more effectively work with partners to reduce 
fuels under our 10 year Strategy to combat the wildfire crisis in this 
country.

    Question 3. There's one particular landscape restoration project of 
great importance in my district: The Upper Wenatchee Pilot Project. I 
don't expect you to have these answers today, but I will be following 
up with your team to learn more about the status of that project, to 
learn (1) when an Environmental Assessment will be available for the 
public to review, (2) when we can expect the final NEPA decision, and 
(3) when we will see work starting on the ground. While this project 
remains stalled, land within its treatment area is burning in a 
wildfire as we speak.
    Answer. The Okanogan Wenatchee National Forest has mostly completed 
the environmental assessment (EA) for the Upper Wenatchee Pilot 
Project, and we are working through the regulatory consultation 
processes that are required before we issue a decision. Fortunately, 
this planning effort was not impacted by fires this year. Our current 
schedule is to release the Final EA and Draft Decision Notice for 
public review in spring of 2022. A final decision is anticipated late 
fall of 2022, and after that we could initiate implementation.
Questions Submitted by Hon. Doug LaMalfa, a Representative in Congress 
        from California
    Question 1. As the wildfire season lengthens throughout the west 
and fires become larger and more frequent, how does the USFS plan to 
limit Unable to Fill (UTF) rates related to requests for aerial 
firefighting support?
    Answer. To meet wildfire support needs in 2021, the Forest Service 
contracted for 23 airtankers. The States of California, Colorado, and 
Oregon contracted for five airtankers total for their own use. Though 
committed to those states, these airtankers provided additional 
airtanker support, reducing the need in some cases to send Forest 
Service contracted airtankers to those states. The Forest Service also 
used all eight National Guard and Air Force Reserve Modular Airborne 
Firefighting System C-130s for a substantial part of the summer fire 
season. Through our international agreement with Australia, the Agency 
also ordered and received an Australian airtanker that remained 
operational in the United States for nearly 60 days, contributing 
significantly to the interagency airtanker response and capability.
    Unable to fill orders occur for many reasons. Airtanker and Type 1 
and Type 2 helicopters are national assets intended to be mobile to 
meet needs as they arise around the country. As the fire year 
intensifies, so does the demand for aviation assets. During high fire 
occurrence or predicted fire weather, these resources are frequently 
prepositioned to areas of highest concern to provide for rapid initial 
attack response. At National Preparedness Levels 4 and 5 (https://
www.nifc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-09/
National_Preparedness_Levels.pdf [Attachment 2]), the National Multi-
Agency Coordination group prioritizes fire needs and airtanker 
deployments accordingly to ensure maximized fleet use in the most 
critical areas in the country. As fire priorities change throughout the 
day, aircraft usage is reassessed, and aircraft continue to be 
reassigned as they accomplish their designated missions. All incidents 
must submit their incident management needs nightly and are subject to 
this prioritization process. During simultaneous wildfire events, the 
result may end in unable-to-fill orders until higher priorities are 
met.

    Question 2. As the Forest Service looks for additional resources to 
fight wildfires, has the Forest Service considered Containerized Aerial 
Firefighting Systems (CAFFS) technology?
    Answer. Testing, evaluation, and approval of retardant delivery 
systems are conducted under the authority of the National Interagency 
Aviation Committee in accordance with methods and standards established 
by the Interagency Airtanker Board. The U.S. Department of 
Agriculture's Forest Service does not perform testing at the request of 
companies unless a member agency, Federal or state, identifies an 
operational need through the National Interagency Aviation Committee.
    In recent years the Forest Service has been approached by a number 
of companies with Containerized Aerial Firefighting Systems (CAFFS) 
technology proposals. The Agency has completed an assessment of our 
retardant delivery requirements in conjunction with current industry 
science, technology, and best practices. At this time, our current 
capabilities align very well with our requirements and modernization 
strategy, and we are not seeking any additional capabilities, including 
containerized delivery systems.
    While this system received a favorable evaluation by the Air 
National Guard, the Air National Guard Air Force Reserve Command Test 
Center only evaluated the suitability of the Container Aerial Fire 
Fighting System according to standard containerized delivery systems 
rigging, loading, and release guidance and procedures. There was no 
evaluation of the system's firefighting effectiveness. Their evaluation 
stated that ``using containerized delivery systems as a method of 
firefighting presents a number of safety concerns that would need to be 
addressed prior to operations.'' One notable concern is ``there is no 
method to emergency jettison the bulk of the weight when it is in 
containerized delivery systems format. Unlike the emergency jettison of 
the modular airborne firefighting system, containerized delivery 
systems are reliant on the load to gravity extract from the aircraft, 
which can take significant time.''

    Question 3. How does the Forest Service decide between ``best 
value'' and ``Lowest Price Technically Acceptable'' contracting with 
regards to aerial firefighting assets?
    Answer. Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) is a competitive 
negotiation source selection process where the non-price factors of a 
proposal are evaluated to determine which proposals are `technically 
acceptable' and award is made to the offeror of the technically 
acceptable proposal with the lowest price. FAR 15.101-2(a) states that 
this process is appropriate when Best Value is expected to result from 
the use of this process. Thus, the `best value' decision is made in 
planning the procurement, not in evaluating the proposals (as in the 
Tradeoff Process). In the lowest price technically acceptable process, 
the non-price factors are all evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable 
basis with no gradations or scores for higher levels of achievement. 
Thus, no tradeoffs are made in the source selection decision.

    Question 3a. What safety concerns does the Forest Service evaluate 
before deciding to go with LPTA contracts for aerial assets?
    Answer. The safety factors evaluated in the solicitation include 
not only Aviation Safety Management System implementation and 
effectiveness in the contractor's company, but improved aircraft 
performance margins defined in the categories, additional radios for 
improved communication with other aerial resources and ground 
resources, flight data monitoring systems to provide aircraft 
preventative and post mishap aircraft data, air traffic advisory 
systems to help deconflict the airspace, and many other aircraft, 
company and personnel safety enhancements. Promotion of appropriate 
oversight and maintenance by the contractor and the Forest Service is 
required resulting in a higher level of safety. All vendors must meet 
the safety and technical standards to receive a contract award. They 
then can compete for task orders to fill fire helicopter orders.
Questions Submitted by Hon. Glenn Thompson, a Representative in 
        Congress from Pennsylvania
    Question 1. Does the Forest Service have specific recommendations 
for what Congress can do to help the agency perform more landscape-
scale management projects?
    Answer. The Agency recognizes that we will need to increase overall 
staffing to successfully reduce the risk of wildfires. The 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provides funds to help increase 
capacity. The Agency is still developing comprehensive staffing plans 
and will be increasing capacity in not only field personnel to complete 
the work, but also key administrative positions like contracting 
officers, grants and agreements specialists, partnership coordinators, 
and NEPA professionals who act as force multipliers. The Agency also 
recognizes that achieving the desired pace and scale of land treatments 
will require the support of states, Tribes, local, non-government 
organizations, and private contractors.
    The Agency is grateful for the authorities provided in the 2018 
Omnibus and subsequent legislation such as increasing the ability to 
use Good Neighbor Authority to increase the pace and scale of our work. 
The Agency greatly appreciates the support provided through the IIJA 
and the numerous pieces of legislation that have been introduced.

    Question 1a. What are the barriers that hinder the Forest Service 
from undertaking new partnerships and larger-scale restoration?
    Answer. The Forest Service has lost more than 40% of its non-fire 
positions over the past 15 years. This significantly limits our ability 
to meet the Administration's current priorities. Losses have been 
especially great in lands and realty management resources (land line, 
reality, cadastral services) in support of wildland fuels reduction, 
forest restoration, and road infrastructure, as well as in recreation 
resources (planning, engineering, patrol and service technicians, 
grants and agreements, and contracting specialists) needed to support 
the Great American Outdoors Act and portions of the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act that target trail and recreation 
infrastructure. Capacity to carry out administration and oversight of 
agreements is the largest barrier. Partner capacity and expertise in 
hazardous fuels reduction work is also a common barrier.
    The Forest Service greatly appreciates the funding provided through 
the IIJA to conduct much needed restoration and fuels reduction work. 
These investments will help the agency increase the pace and scale of 
our work with partners to carry out these projects.

    Question 2. In response to the fatally flawed 2015 Cottonwood 
decision, the Obama Administration filed a petition of certiorari that 
stated this new precedent had the potential to ``cripple forest 
management.'' And that has certainly been the case, as whole forests 
have been shut down and hundreds of projects implicated as a result. In 
some instances, project areas have burned in wildfire while being 
delayed in the courts over this very issue. Furthermore, limited Agency 
resources are diverted to this procedural requirement and responding to 
frivolous lawsuits instead of getting more work done on the ground.
    Chief Moore, how has the Cottonwood decision made western 
communities more vulnerable to wildfires?
    The past four Chiefs of the Forest Service testified in support of 
finding a solution to reversing this decision. Do you support fixing 
this issue once and for all?
    Answer. The Ninth Circuit's decision in Cottonwood Environmental 
Law Center v. United States Forest Service, 789 F.3d 1075 (9th Cir. 
2015), in which the court found the Forest Service retains 
discretionary involvement or control over a forest plan after its 
approval.
    The Cottonwood Decision remains a source of litigation and 
continues to be an issue of concern for the Agency We are committed to 
finding a collaborative, science-based approach to conserving wildlife 
and managing our public lands and forests, and we will continue to work 
with the Department of the Interior towards a solution.

    Question 3. It appears to me that much of the funding provided by 
the agriculture portion of the pending reconciliation package will 
never get on the ground to do the management activities necessary 
because the bill, as drafted, text contains many restrictions and 
limitations, and emphasizes noncommercial projects.
    Does the Forest Service have concerns with the restrictions on 
commercial projects, as well as the lack of emphasis on thinning and 
landscape scale restoration?
    Does the Forest Service have any comment on which provisions may 
trigger guidance orrulemaking?
    If so, how long would such rulemaking and processes take before 
projects could begin?
    Answer. The Forest Service stands ready to fully implement the 
forestry title of the reconciliation bill if enacted. We have not 
conducted an assessment of which provisions will involve rulemaking at 
this point.

    Question 4. The Forest Service has a long practice of assigning 
annual timber sale volume targets to individual forests based on the 
funding they are allocated by the Washington Office. These volume 
targets are critical to the agency's partners in the forest products 
industry, which must plan on how to secure needed raw materials and 
consider potential business investments or changes in operations. The 
targets also help encourage accountability and incentivize efficiency 
in unit costs with funds allocated by the Washington office.
    Some regions and forests are signaling a shift away from specific 
timber sale targets.
    Will the Forest Service continue to assign annual timber sale 
targets at the national, regional, and forest level?
    Answer. The Forest Service is adjusting their approach to the 
setting of timber targets this year. We are looking at what the Forests 
can produce instead of setting targets based on past performance. This 
is particularly necessary in the western U.S. where there have been 
significant changes in the amount of timber available for harvest and 
the condition of the timber that has been previously sold. We will 
still maintain a national target of 3.4 billion board feet and will 
work to set the goals for each Forest based on the proposed budget and 
other factors. In addition, the units recognize the importance of 
maintaining the viability of critical timber infrastructure and intend 
to offer volume at levels to sustain it.

    Question 5. Following a wildfire, hazard trees along Forest Service 
roads pose a significant threat to restoration and reforestation 
efforts, as well as access for emergency response, wildfiresuppression, 
commercial or administrative purposes, and the public.
    What guidance is the agency providing to its regions and forests on 
a consistent, uniform approach for addressing roadside hazard trees 
following a catastrophic event to get agency roads safely reopened as 
soon as possible?
    Answer. Forest Service policy speaks to hazard identification (all 
hazards) and correction including danger tree Hazards in FSH 7709.59 
chapter 40. The policy directs qualified staff to mitigate high risk 
areas as soon as practicable.

    Question 6. Does your current roadside salvage CE provide the 
Forest Service with the ability to adequately address roadside hazards? 
It's my understanding that a court case in the Northwest has limited 
the use of this CE to one tree length on either side of the road.
    Does that provide adequate clearance for safe access?
    Answer. The Forest Service does not have a categorical exclusion 
(CE) specifically for the purpose of salvage harvest along roadsides. 
The Agency does have a general salvage CE though it is limited to no 
more than 250 acres. Historically, we have used our road maintenance 
CE, 36 CFR 220.6(d)(4) to remove hazard trees along roads. A recent 
ruling in the 9th Circuit (EPIC v. Carlson) limited the application of 
this category for trees greater than one tree length from the road 
edge. Subsequent rulings have limited use of this category for hazard 
tree removal activities over a large spatial area. The Agency has 
reduced use of this CE and its activities in response to the court 
rulings, including scaling back the degree to which units propose 
treatment, considering other environmental analysis processes, and 
closing roads until any identified hazards are mitigated. The recently 
enacted Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act does provide a statutory 
CE for the creation of fuel breaks along constructed linear features 
such as roads. Within certain conditions, this CE could have some 
applicability in post-fire salvage where there is sufficient fuel 
remaining to warrant a fuel break.

    Question 7. President Biden issued an Executive Order on September 
9 requiring COVID-19 vaccinations for all Federal contractors, 
including subcontractors and small businesses. Based on guidance issued 
by a Federal task force and approved by OMB on September 24, the 
vaccine mandate will take effect on December 8.
    What potential impact could this mandate have on the Forest Service 
workforce and the Forest Service's ability to implement critical forest 
health treatments, fire suppression, and replanting activities on 
Federal lands through the many small, family-owned contractors that 
provide these services in very rural areas of the country?
    Answer. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of 
Georgia has temporarily halted the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for Federal 
contractors nationwide.

    Question 8. The Forest Service recently indicated that it must 
increase forest management and restoration 2-4 times over current 
treatment levels if it hopes to get ahead of the forest health and 
wildfire crisis.
    What additional staffing numbers will be required for the Forest 
Service to increase treatment levels by 2-4 times, assuming that 
current analysis requirements remain unchanged?
    What other authorities or contracting mechanisms are available for 
the Forest Service to perform these functions within current staffing 
levels?
    Answer. The Agency recognizes that we will need to increase overall 
staffing to successfully reduce the risk of wildfires. The 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provides funds to help increase 
capacity. The Agency is still developing comprehensive staffing plans 
and will be increasing capacity in not only field personnel to complete 
the work but also key administrative positions like contracting 
officers, grants and agreements specialists, partnership coordinators, 
and NEPA professionals who act as force multipliers.
    The goal to increase treatment levels by 2-4 times will require 20% 
to 30% additional staffing in key areas, in particular at the key GS-12 
and GS-13 grade levels (senior contracting officers with the knowledge 
and experience to form and administer competent contracts beyond the 
simplified acquisition threshold). It is highly likely that the 
increases in treatments will require larger, landscape scale contracts 
and agreements, in particular construction, architecture/engineering 
and stewardship timber contracts. These areas require specific 
expertise.
    The agency also recognizes that achieving the desired pace and 
scale of land treatments will require the support of states, Tribes, 
local, non-government organizations, and private contractors. The 
Forest Service utilizes a multitude of grant and agreement authorities 
to engage with Federal, state and local governments as well as Tribal, 
nonprofit and private entities to carry out forest management projects. 
The Agency also uses the authorities like the Good Neighbor Authority 
to increase the pace and scale of our work.

    Question 9. Hazardous fuels reduction has two main components: 
prescribed fire and silvicultural treatments, such as ``thinning.'' 
Both activities have a beneficial impact on mitigating wildfire 
emissions by reducing combustible material in our forests and 
wildlands. Following a harvest treatment, prescribed fire can be an 
important tool to maintaining the investment of a more healthy and 
resilient forest and minimizing the risk of catastrophic wildfire.
    What is your vision to increase the pace and scale of these 
critical hazardous fuel reduction practices to help reduce the wildfire 
threat on National Forest lands?
    Answer. The Agency recognizes that we will need to increase overall 
staffing to successfully reduce the risk of wildfires. The 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provides funds to help increase 
capacity. The Agency is still developing comprehensive staffing plans 
and will be increasing capacity in not only field personnel to complete 
the work but also key administrative positions like contracting 
officers, grants and agreements specialists, partnership coordinators, 
and NEPA professionals who act as force multipliers. The agency also 
recognizes that achieving the desired pace and scale of land treatments 
will require the support of states, Tribes, local, non-government 
organizations, and private contractors.
    We now have the science and tools we need to size and place 
treatments in a way that will truly make a difference. We will focus on 
key ``firesheds''--large, forested landscapes with a high likelihood 
that an ignition could expose homes, communities, infrastructure, and 
natural resources to wildfire. Firesheds, typically about 250,000 acres 
in size, are mapped to match the scale of building exposure to 
wildfire.
    Under the 10 year Strategy, we will work with partners to:

   Treat an additional 20 million acres on National Forest 
        System lands.

   Treat an additional 30 million acres of other Federal, 
        state, Tribal, and private lands.

   Develop a plan for long-term maintenance beyond the 10 
        years.

    Our new management paradigm builds on the National Cohesive 
Wildland Fire Management Strategy. The nation already has collaborative 
strategies in place for cross-boundary treatments, including Cohesive 
Strategy projects and Shared Stewardship agreements. We will work 
collaboratively through shared stewardship with states, Tribes, local 
communities, private landowners, and other stakeholders to adapt 
lessons learned into a coordinated and effective program of work.
    The Forest Service has set up a Wildfire Risk Reduction 
Infrastructure Team to build on new and existing capacity in carrying 
out projects under the 10 year strategy. Together with our partners, we 
will plan project areas while building the needed workforce capacity 
and public support. We will treat the highest priority firesheds first. 
Then we will move on to other western firesheds, accelerating our 
treatments over 10 years.
    Forest Service research and risk-based modeling has identified 
hundreds of communities at high risk that can inform where and how to 
place treatments that will truly make a difference. We will provide a 
focused investment to these high priority areas to reduce wildfire 
risk. This will require treating about 20-40% of these landscapes with 
a combination of mechanical treatments and prescribed fire. We know 
that treatments need to be done across jurisdictions to be effective, 
and there are collaborative frameworks in place to enable cross-
boundary treatments, including Cohesive Strategy projects, Joint Chiefs 
Restoration Partnership projects, Good Neighbor Authority agreements, 
and Shared Stewardship agreements.

    Question 10. The scale of wildfires and their community impacts far 
outpace current efforts to prevent them and mitigate the damage they 
cause. Substantial increases in active forest management and fuel 
treatments along with community planning and resiliency efforts across 
all landscapes, ownership boundaries and communities are needed in the 
areas at greatest risk for unwanted wildfire.
    What do you see as your number one goal within the USFS to reduce 
this growing threat of wildfire to our communities and our landscapes?
    Answer. To address the highest risk acres at the scale needed, we 
need to work collaboratively with states, Tribes, local communities, 
private landowners, and other stakeholders to strategically treat 20 
million acres on priority National Forest System lands and 30 million 
acres of other priority Federal, state, Tribal, and private lands, in 
the west, over and above our current level of treatments.

    Question 11. As you know, the 2015 Cottonwood decision has had 
negative impacts on the USFS management activities. Since January 2016, 
it has been reported that close to 30 lawsuits and 50 notices of intent 
(NOIs) to sue the Forest Service involving ESA new information claims 
have been initiated, challenging both plan-level and project-level 
decisions.
    Can you provide us with an updated and accurate accounting of these 
lawsuits and related management impacts? More specifically, since the 
2105 Cottonwood decision to current date, how many lawsuits have been 
filed against the Forest Service involving ESA new information claims?
    How many notices of intent (NOIs) to sue the Forest Service 
involving ESA new information claims have occurred since the decision?
    Answer. Since January 2016, there have been at least 27 lawsuits, 
in twelve states, and 49 NOIs to sue involving ESA new information 
claims, challenging both programmatic-level and project-level 
decisions. Of the 49 NOIs received with new information claims, 26 are 
project specific, 11 challenge programmatic decisions, and 12 have both 
project specific and programmatic-level claims.

   Three programmatic actions were enjoined or vacated due to 
        litigation associated with NOIs with new information claims.

   Two project specific actions were enjoined due to litigation 
        associated with NOIs with new information claims.

    Question 11a. Who are the Plaintiffs for each of these lawsuits?
    Who are the claimants for each of these NOIs?
    What is the status of each of the lawsuits?
    Categorized by USFS Region and type of activity, how many USFS 
projects are enjoined or under threat of being enjoined due to the 
lawsuits?
    Answer. Claimants and plaintiffs are primarily local or national 
environmental advocacy non-governmental organizations. These cases are 
in various stages within the judicial process. Claimants have issued 
Notices of Intent (NOI) and plaintiffs have filed lawsuits against the 
Forest Service in all regions accept the Southern Region and the Alaska 
Region. At this time five agency actions have been enjoined by court 
order.

    Question 11b. Categorized by USFS Region, what is the scope of USFS 
lands (in acreage) impacted by the lawsuits?
    What percentage of these acres impacted or enjoined are categorized 
as a part of the 63 million acres of USFS lands designated as high or 
very high hazard for wildfire?
    Answer. Our electronic data systems do not currently track acres 
affected by the various stages of litigation.

    Question 12. As you know, our Committee recently marked up a 
reconciliation measure that included many policy changes impacting the 
agency and some $40 billion in forest-related investments.
    As the Chief of the Forest Service, were you asked to provide input 
on this legislation? If so, did that request come from this Committee 
or the Senate Agriculture Committee?
    If you weren't consulted or weren't officially in your position as 
Chief at the time, was anyone at the Agency been asked to provide 
testimony or technical assistance on the bill? If so, can you provide 
to us that testimony?
    Answer. USDA provided testimony before the Senate Energy and 
Natural Resources Committee on June 24, 2021. A copy of the testimony 
can be found at: www.energy.senate.gov. [See Attachment 3]. Technical 
assistance requests from Congressional Members and committees are 
treated as confidential by the agency.
Question Submitted by Hon. Dusty Johnson, a Representative in Congress 
        from South Dakota
    Question. To what extent can the Four Forest Restoration Initiative 
be expanded into the Black Hills National Forest?
    Answer. The Four Forest Restoration Initiative (4FRI) is a 
landscape-level effort to restore 2.4 million acres of Ponderosa pine 
forests on the Apache-Sitgreaves, Coconino, Kaibab, and Tonto National 
Forests in Northern Arizona. The Initiative has been active for the 
last 10 years, and the agency plans to continue addressing restoration 
needs over the next twenty years. The current 4FRI restoration approach 
is working to address the most critical restoration needs, support 
existing forest industry, and attract new industry across the landscape 
through a variety of partnerships and investment strategies.
    Some applicable lessons learned from the 4FRI that could apply to 
other regions and National Forests such as the Black Hills include 
developing a diverse and collaborative group of stakeholders to 
identify and use best available science, mitigate potential litigation, 
and leverage local, national and private resources. The use of the 
authorities such as stewardship contracting, Good Neighbor Authority 
(GNA), and 638 contracts with Tribes allow for the development of 
projects beyond traditional timber sales. These authorities allow for 
flexibility to use appropriated funds, ability to cover the costs of 
harvesting through service work, and the ability to use our external 
partners to assist in developing and implementing projects.
                               appendix a

  USDA Forest Service Law Enforcement and Investigations Field Staff by
          Region, Forest, District with Acres and Square Miles
                         As of November 1, 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Total LEI Sworn Field Staffing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region                 LEO's        Captain        Special         Total
                                                     Agent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           1              29              4              5            38
           2              26              4              3            33
           3              29              5              5            39
           4              29              5              4            38
           5              66             16             17            99
           6              51              7              6            64
           8              71             10             12            93
           9              41              5              7            53
          10              13              2              1            16
               ---------------------------------------------------------
  Total.......           355             58             60           473
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                          USDA Forest Service Region 1
                                   LEI Field Staffing and Forest/District Size
                                                November 1, 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     National Forest              District                Acres            Sq. Miles        LEO     CPT     SA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beaverhead-Deerlodge                    Supervisors Office--North East Zone
 National Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Beaverhead-Deerlodge      Butte Ranger District           675,794.092       1,055.928159       1
 National Forest
Beaverhead-Deerlodge      Pintler Ranger District         731,233.201       1,142.551757
 National Forest
Beaverhead-Deerlodge      Madison Ranger District         751,356.604       1,173.994572       1
 National Forest
Beaverhead-Deerlodge      Dillon Ranger District          579,820.221        905.9690015       1
 National Forest
Beaverhead-Deerlodge      Wisdom Ranger District          875,879.975       1,368.562318
 National Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                      3614,084              5,647
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bitterroot National                   Supervisors Office--South Central Zone
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Bitterroot National       Sula Ranger District            248,532.299        388.3316769
 Forest
Bitterroot National       Stevensville Ranger             251,432.345        392.8629975       1
 Forest                    District
Bitterroot National       West Fork Ranger                793,460.223       1,239.781469
 Forest                    District
Bitterroot National       Darby Ranger District           371,027.402        579.7302552       1
 Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,664,452              2,600
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Custer Gallatin National                Supervisors Office--South East Zone                            1       1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Custer Gallatin National  Sioux Ranger District           176,981.829        276.5340793
 Forest
Custer Gallatin National  Ashland Ranger District         501,821.078        784.0953521
 Forest
Custer Gallatin National  Bozeman Ranger District         560,154.972         875.242053       1
 Forest
Custer Gallatin National  Gardiner Ranger District        419,554.913        655.5544828       1
 Forest
Custer Gallatin National  Hebgen Lake Ranger              355,699.128        555.7798296       1
 Forest                    District
Custer Gallatin National  Yellowstone Ranger              794,292.372       1,241.081702       1
 Forest                    District
Custer Gallatin National  Beartooth Ranger                603,732.391        943.3317622       1
 Forest                    District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                   ........................          3,412,236              5,331
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dakota Prairie National                 Supervisors Office--South East Zone
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Dakota Prairie            Medora Ranger District        1,237,515.937       1,933.618449       1
 Grasslands
Dakota Prairie            Mckenzie Ranger District        846,089.526       1,322.014747
 Grasslands
Dakota Prairie            Sheyenne Ranger District        136,912.863        213.9263263
 Grasslands
Dakota Prairie            Grand River Ranger              448,306.602        700.4789925
 Grasslands                District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                   ........................          2,668,824               4170
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flathead National Forest              Supervisors Office--North Central Zone                           1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Flathead National Forest  Hungry Horse Ranger              453,086.81        707.9480663       1
                           District
Flathead National Forest  Spotted Bear Ranger           1,037,183.432       1,620.598943
                           District
Flathead National Forest  Tally Lake Ranger               299,450.614        467.8915362       1
                           District
Flathead National Forest  Glacier View Ranger             343,791.395        537.1739991
                           District
Flathead National Forest  Swan Lake Ranger                518,181.093        809.6578729       1
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,651,693              4,143
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Helena-Lewis and Clark                  Supervisors Office--North East Zone                            1       1
 National Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Helena-Lewis and Clark    Belt Creek-White Sulphur        654,431.118       1,022.548515
 National Forest           Springs Ranger District
Helena-Lewis and Clark    Judith-Musselshell              564,105.723        881.4151006       1
 National Forest           Ranger District
Helena-Lewis and Clark    Rocky Mountain Ranger           783,923.209       1,224.879886       1
 National Forest           District
Helena-Lewis and Clark    Helena Ranger District          454,532.926        710.2076221       1
 National Forest
Helena-Lewis and Clark    Townsend Ranger District        372,748.424        582.4193521       1
 National Forest
Helena-Lewis and Clark    Lincoln Ranger District         347,958.058        543.6844088
 National Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     3,177,699              4,965
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Idaho Panhandle National                   Supervisors Office--West Zone                               1       1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Idaho Panhandle National  St. Joe Ranger District         870,590.026       1,360.296774
 Forests
Idaho Panhandle National  Priest Lake Ranger              382,556.158        597.7439349
 Forests                   District
Idaho Panhandle National  Sandpoint Ranger                393,661.546        615.0961017       1
 Forests                   District
Idaho Panhandle           Bonners Ferry Ranger            488,801.073        763.7515963       1
                           District
Idaho Panhandle National  Coeur d'Alene River             807,892.136       1,262.331331       1
 Forests                   Ranger District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,943,500              4,599
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kootenai National Forest              Supervisors Office--North Central Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Kootenai National Forest  Three Rivers Ranger             663,494.042       1,036.709333
                           District
Kootenai National Forest  Fortine Ranger District         281,616.217        440.0252929       1
Kootenai National Forest  Libby Ranger District           877,077.248       1,370.433057       1
Kootenai National Forest  Rexford Ranger District         331,384.722        517.7885737
Kootenai National Forest  Cabinet Ranger District         468,542.274        732.0972266
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,622,114              4,097
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lolo National Forest                  Supervisors Office--South Central Zone                           1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Lolo National Forest      Missoula Ranger District        622,593.238        972.8018332       1
Lolo National Forest      Seeley Lake Ranger              438,907.581        685.7930238       1
                           District
Lolo National Forest      Superior Ranger District        517,194.741        808.1166988
Lolo National Forest      Plains/Thompson Falls           575,201.183         898.751755
                           Ranger District
Lolo National Forest      Ninemile Ranger District        471,618.152         736.903286
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                      262,5514              4,102
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nez Perce-Clearwater                       Supervisors Office--West Zone                       1
 National Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Nez Perce-Clearwater      Palouse Ranger District         206,306.137        322.3533062       1
 National Forest
Nez Perce-Clearwater      North Fork Ranger               777,996.793       1,215.619862
 National Forest           District
Nez Perce-Clearwater      Red River Ranger                781,579.117       1,221.217242
 National Forest           District
Nez Perce-Clearwater      Moose Creek Ranger              822,617.024       1,285.338966
 National Forest           District
Nez Perce-Clearwater      Salmon River Ranger             532,828.401        832.5442901       1
 National Forest           District
Nez Perce-Clearwater      Lochsa/Powell Ranger             951,467.68       1,486.668095       1
 National Forest           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     4,072,795              6,363
                                                   =============================================================
    Total for Region                                       29,452,916             46,020      29       5       5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                          USDA Forest Service Region 2
                                   LEI Field Staffing and Forest/District Size
                                                November 1, 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     National Forest              District                Acres            Sq. Miles        LEO     CPT     SA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arapaho and Roosevelt                    Supervisors Office--Central Zone
 National Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Arapaho and Roosevelt     Boulder Ranger District         246,023.064        384.4109967       1
 National Forests
Arapaho and Roosevelt     Clear Creek Ranger              203,540.046         318.031288       1
 National Forests          District
Arapaho and Roosevelt     Canyon Lakes Ranger             839,116.047       1,311.118687       1
 National Forests          District
Arapaho and Roosevelt     Sulphur Ranger District         434,938.617        679.5915182       1
 National Forests
Arapaho and Roosevelt     Pawnee Ranger District          768,181.308       1,200.283169
 National Forests
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,491,799              3,893       4       0       0
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bighorn National Forest                  Supervisors Office--Northern Zone                             1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Bighorn National Forest   Powder River Ranger             334,338.557        522.4039414       1
                           District
Bighorn National Forest   Medicine Wheel Ranger           364,531.511        569.5804262
                           District
Bighorn National Forest   Tongue Ranger District          413,999.193        646.8736714       1
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,112,869              1,738       2       1       0
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Black Hills National                     Supervisors Office--Northern Zone
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Black Hills National      Hell Canyon Ranger               601,669.09        940.1078552       1
 Forest                    District
Black Hills National      Bearlodge Ranger                202,625.501        316.6023117
 Forest                    District
Black Hills National      Mystic Ranger District          357,436.171        558.4939592       1               1
 Forest
Black Hills National      Northern Hills Ranger           375,747.212        587.1049583       1
 Forest                    District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,537,477              2,402       3       0       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre                 Supervisors Office--Southwest Zone                             1       1
 and Gunnison National
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre   Ouray Ranger District            364,348.11        569.2938623       1
 and Gunnison National
 Forests
Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre   Grand Valley Ranger             557,621.761        871.2839115       1
 and Gunnison National     District
 Forest
Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre   Paonia Ranger District          479,991.893        749.9872551
 and Gunnison National
 Forests
Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre   Gunnison Ranger District       1,357,830.94       2,121.610622       1
 and Gunnison National
 Forests
Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre   Norwood Ranger District         393,437.672        614.7462991
 and Gunnison National
 Forests
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     3,153,230              4,926       3       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medicine Bow-Routt                       Supervisors Office--Central Zone                              1       1
 National Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Medicine Bow-Routt        Brush Creek-Hayden               580,315.38        906.7426874       1
 National Forest           Ranger District
Medicine Bow-Routt        Yampa Ranger District           394,695.695        616.7119588
 National Forest
Medicine Bow-Routt        Hahns Peak-Bears Ears           500,034.678         781.304103       1
 National Forest           Ranger District
Medicine Bow-Routt        Parks Ranger District           489,062.726        764.1604304
 National Forest
Medicine Bow-Routt        Douglas Ranger District/      2,258,381.233       3,528.720309
 National Forest           Thunder Basin National
                           Grassland
Medicine Bow-Routt        Laramie Ranger District         370,367.717        578.6994973       1
 National Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     4,592,857              7,176       3       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nebraska National Forest                 Supervisors Office--Northern Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Nebraska National Forest  Ft. Pierre Ranger               209,044.225        326.6315672
                           District
Nebraska National Forest  Bessey Ranger District           206,784.05        323.1000438
Nebraska National Forest  Pine Ridge Ranger               355,082.906         554.816983
                           District
Nebraska National Forest  Fall River Ranger               806,962.411       1,260.878635
                           District
Nebraska National Forest  Wall Ranger District            486,993.076        760.9266025
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,064,866              3,226       0       0       0
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pike and San Isabel                     Supervisors Office--Southeast Zone
 National Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Pike and San Isabel       Comanche Ranger District      1,122,279.791        1,753.56199
 National Forests
Pike and San Isabel       San Carlos Ranger               422,072.698        659.4885215       1
 National Forests          District
Pike and San Isabel       Pikes Peak Ranger               282,996.078        442.1813256       1
 National Forests          District
Pike and San Isabel       Salida Ranger District          504,269.308        787.9207122       1
 National Forests
Pike and San Isabel       Leadville Ranger                304,779.674        476.2181917       1
 National Forests          District
Pike and San Isabel       South Platte Ranger             450,225.879        703.4778625
 National Forests          District
Pike and San Isabel       South Park Ranger               540,709.353        844.8582762
 National Forests          District
Pike and San Isabel       Cimarron Ranger District         341,728.55        533.9508031
 National Forests
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     3,969,061              6,201       4       0       0
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rio Grande National                     Supervisors Office--Southeast Zone                             1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Rio Grande National       Divide Ranger District        1,010,662.796       1,579.160455       1
 Forest
Rio Grande National       Saguache Ranger District        528,013.921        825.0216658
 Forest
Rio Grande National       Conejos Peak Ranger             398,614.196        622.8346167       1
 Forest                    District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,937,290              3,027       2       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Juan National Forest                Supervisors Office--Southwest Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
San Juan National Forest  Pagosa Ranger District          698,223.174       1,090.973595
San Juan National Forest  Columbine Ranger                763,669.445       1,193.233384       1
                           District
San Juan National Forest  Mancos/Dolores Ranger           632,767.363        988.6989017       1
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,094,659              3,272       2       0       0
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shoshone National Forest                 Supervisors Office--Northern Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Shoshone National Forest  Wapiti Ranger District          785,014.473       1,226.584986       1
Shoshone National Forest  Washakie Ranger District        320,076.121        500.1188874       1
Shoshone National Forest  Wind River Ranger               546,636.824        854.1199484
                           District
Shoshone National Forest  Greybull Ranger District         310,929.44        485.8271999
Shoshone National Forest  Clarks Fork Ranger              506,591.215        791.5486903
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,469,248              3,858       2       0       0
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White River National                    Supervisors Office--Southeast Zone
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
White River National      Dillon Ranger District           389,954.25        609.3034523       1
 Forest
White River National      Blanco Ranger District          366,166.116        572.1344958
 Forest
White River National      Aspen Ranger District           274,937.841        429.5903317
 Forest
White River National      Rifle Ranger District           313,945.948        490.5404926
 Forest
White River National      Eagle Ranger District           321,654.275        502.5847522
 Forest
White River National      Sopris Ranger District          433,146.383        676.7911526
 Forest
White River National      Holy Cross Ranger               382,909.647        598.2962613
 Forest                    District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,482,714              3,879       1       0       0
                                                   =============================================================
    Total for Region                                       27,906,075             43,603      26       4       3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                          USDA Forest Service Region 3
                                   LEI Field Staffing and Forest/District Size
                                                November 1, 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     National Forest              District                Acres            Sq. Miles        LEO     CPT     SA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache-Sitgreaves                    Supervisors Office--Northern Arizona Zone
 National Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Apache-Sitgreaves         Black Mesa Ranger               616,541.499        963.3459917       1
 National Forests          District
Apache-Sitgreaves         Springerville Ranger             273,662.17        427.5970961
 National Forests          District
Apache-Sitgreaves         Lakeside Ranger District        270,459.087        422.5922798       1
 National Forests
Apache-Sitgreaves         Clifton Ranger District         500,626.659        782.2290727
 National Forests
Apache-Sitgreaves         Alpine Ranger District          449,398.469        702.1850353       1
 National Forests          Southern New Mexico
                           Zone
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,110,687              3,297       3
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carson National Forest             Supervisors Office--Northern New Mexico Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Carson National Forest    Camino Real Ranger              339,460.069        530.4063018
                           District
Carson National Forest    El Rito Ranger District          280,471.37        438.2364705       1
Carson National Forest    Tres Piedras Ranger             387,716.828        605.8074809
                           District
Carson National Forest    Canjilon Ranger District        150,657.454        235.4022476
Carson National Forest    Jicarilla Ranger                157,892.421        246.7068822
                           District
Carson National Forest    Questa Ranger District          276,275.915        431.6810723       1
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,592,474              2,488       2
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cibola National Forest             Supervisors Office--Northern New Mexico Zone                        1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Cibola National Forest    Mount Taylor Ranger             653,687.095        1,021.38598
                           District
Cibola National Forest    Sandia Ranger District          121,609.824        190.0153301       2
Cibola National Forest    Mountainair Ranger              255,680.068        399.5000643
                           District
Cibola National Forest    Kiowa/Rita Blanca               863,345.686       1,348.977494
                           National Grasslands
Cibola National Forest    Black Kettle National           244,456.075        381.9625778
                           Grassland
Cibola National Forest    Magdalena Ranger              1,076,878.544       1,682.622549
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     3,215,657              5,024       2       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coconino National Forest             Supervisors Office--Northern Arizona Zone                         1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Coconino National Forest  Flagstaff Ranger                945,954.916       1,478.054402       2
                           District
Coconino National Forest  Mogollon Rim Ranger             517,763.706        809.0057067
                           District
Coconino National Forest  Red Rock Ranger District        537,216.785        839.4011383       2
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,000,935              3,126       4       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coronado National Forest             Supervisors Office--Southern Arizona Zone                         1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Coronado National Forest  Sierra Vista Ranger             321,532.476        502.3944418       2
                           District
Coronado National Forest  Douglas Ranger District         433,953.616         678.052455
Coronado National Forest  Nogales Ranger District         352,562.921        550.8795073       1
Coronado National Forest  Santa Catalina Ranger           265,840.793        415.3761963       2
                           District
Coronado National Forest  Safford Ranger District         411,205.774        642.5089555
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,785,095              2,789       5       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gila National Forest               Supervisors Office--Southern New Mexico Zone                        1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Gila National Forest      Wilderness Ranger               685,129.041       1,070.514015       1
                           District
Gila National Forest      Black Range Ranger              556,756.742        869.9323182
                           District
Gila National Forest      Reserve Ranger District          61,2876.15        957.6188845
Gila National Forest      Silver City Ranger              405,764.778         634.007399       1
                           District
Gila National Forest      Glenwood Ranger District        525,643.052        821.3171828
Gila National Forest      Quemado Ranger District         603,228.699        942.5447432
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     3,389,398              5,295       2       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kaibab National Forest               Supervisors Office--Northern Arizona Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Kaibab National Forest    Tusayan Ranger District          331,598.85         518.123149
Kaibab National Forest    North Kaibab Ranger              655,892.19        1,024.83144
                           District
Kaibab National Forest    Williams Ranger District        593,897.441        927.9646543       1
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,581,388              2,470       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lincoln National Forest            Supervisors Office--Southern New Mexico Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Lincoln National Forest   Sacramento Ranger               549,067.408        857.9177357
                           District
Lincoln National Forest   Smokey Bear Ranger              423,758.577         662.122707       1
                           District
Lincoln National Forest   Guadalupe Ranger                289,126.404        451.7599584
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,261,952              1,971       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prescott National Forest             Supervisors Office--Central Arizona Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Prescott National Forest  Verde Ranger District           327,243.298        511.3175998
Prescott National Forest  Chino Valley Ranger             646,077.645       1,009.496215       1
                           District
Prescott National Forest  Bradshaw Ranger District        438,229.096         684.732891
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,411,550              2,205       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Santa Fe National Forest           Supervisors Office--Northern New Mexico Zone                                1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Santa Fe National Forest  Coyote Ranger District          268,307.077        419.2297638
Santa Fe National Forest  Espanola Ranger District        366,235.263        572.2425381
Santa Fe National Forest  Jemez Ranger District           245,636.817        383.8074868       1
Santa Fe National Forest  Cuba Ranger District            254,630.763         397.860526
Santa Fe National Forest  Pecos-Las Vegas Ranger          546,995.192        854.6798977       1
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,681,805              2,627       2               1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tonto National Forest                Supervisors Office--Central Arizona Zone                          1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Tonto National Forest     Cave Creek Ranger               611,250.751        955.0791984
                           District
Tonto National Forest     Globe Ranger District           471,080.481        736.0631742       1
Tonto National Forest     Mesa Ranger District            444,806.104        695.0094646       3
Tonto National Forest     Payson Ranger District          463,372.801        724.0199259       1
Tonto National Forest     Pleasant Valley Ranger          437,190.565        683.1101862
                           District
Tonto National Forest     Tonto Basin Ranger              538,716.444        841.7443565       1
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,966,417              4,635       6       1       1
                         =======================================================================================
    Total for Region                                       22,997,361             35,933      29       5       5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                          USDA Forest Service Region 4
                                   LEI Field Staffing and Forest/District Size
                                                November 1, 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     National Forest              District                Acres            Sq. Miles        LEO     CPT     SA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ashley                                Supervisors Office: Southern Utah Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Ashley                    Vernal Ranger District          341,243.295        533.1925925       1
Ashley                    Duchesne Ranger District         365,908.74         571.732346
Ashley                    Flaming Gorge Ranger            354,282.467        553.5662966       1
                           District
Ashley                    Roosevelt Ranger                339,843.917        531.0060642
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,401,278              2,185       2       0       0
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dixie                                 Supervisors Office: Southern Utah Zone                           1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Dixie                     Pine Valley Ranger              480,979.935          751.53107       1
                           District
Dixie                     Powell Ranger District          388,877.841        607.6215629
Dixie                     Cedar City Ranger               404,452.468        631.9569154       1
                           District
Dixie                     Escalante Ranger                436,975.068        682.7734731
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,711,285              2,673       2       1       0
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fishlake                              Supervisors Office: Southern Utah Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Fishlake                  Beaver Ranger District          313,238.312         489.434812
Fishlake                  Fillmore Ranger District        493,436.615        770.9946312
Fishlake                  Richfield Ranger                 460,428.16        719.4189258       1
                           District
Fishlake                  Fremont River Ranger            521,160.942         814.313887
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,788,264              2,794       1       0       0
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manti-La Sal                          Supervisors Office: Southern Utah Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Manti-La Sal              Moab Ranger District            174,410.273        272.5160228       1
Manti-La Sal              Monticello Ranger               368,658.381        576.0286604
                           District
Manti-La Sal              Sanpete Ranger District         259,406.045        405.3219037       1
Manti-La Sal              Price Ranger District           278,497.125        435.1517128
Manti-La Sal              Ferron Ranger District          333,253.279        520.7081943
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,414,225              2,209       2       0       0
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uinta-Wasatch-Cache                    Supervisors Office: Nothern Utah Zone                           1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Uinta-Wasatch-Cache       Ogden Ranger District           584,697.682        913.5900334       1
Uinta-Wasatch-Cache       Salt Lake Ranger                288,041.538        450.0648556       1
                           District
Uinta-Wasatch-Cache       Evanston-Mt. View Ranger        494,504.776        772.6636325       1
                           District
Uinta-Wasatch-Cache       Heber-Kamas Ranger              536,932.688         838.957237       1
                           District
Uinta-Wasatch-Cache       Logan Ranger District           368,948.827        576.4824817       1
Uinta-Wasatch-Cache       Pleasant Grove Ranger           150,637.619        235.3712545
                           District
Uinta-Wasatch-Cache       Spanish Fork Ranger             489,193.069        764.3640913       1
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,912,956              4,551       6       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boise                                 Supervisors Office: Western Idaho Zone                                   1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Boise                     Mountain Home Ranger            734,791.741       1,148.111975       1
                           District
Boise                     Emmett Ranger District          353,824.782         552.851165
Boise                     Idaho City Ranger               568,017.047        887.5265434       1
                           District
Boise                     Lowman Ranger District          468,938.635        732.7165408
Boise                     Cascade Ranger District         401,299.862        627.0309684       1
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,526,872              3,948       3       0       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Payette                               Supervisors Office: Western Idaho Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Payette                   Council Ranger District         375,483.134        586.6923354       1
Payette                   McCall Ranger District          557,061.766        870.4089181
Payette                   Weiser Ranger District          121,902.543        190.4727043
Payette                   New Meadows Ranger               287,112.72        448.6135787
                           District
Payette                   Krassel Ranger District       1,065,746.279       1,665.228387
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,407,306              3,761       1       0       0
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sawtooth                              Supervisors Office: Western Idaho Zone                           1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Sawtooth                  Sawtooth National               812,157.725       1,268.996313
                           Recreation Area
Sawtooth                  Ketchum Ranger District         329,683.021        515.1296663
Sawtooth                  Minidoka Ranger District        632,639.528        988.4991599       1
Sawtooth                  Fairfield Ranger                415,658.203        649.4658743
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,190,138              3,422       1       1       0
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bridger-Teton                         Supervisors Office: Idaho/Wyoming Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Bridger-Teton             Big Piney Ranger                449,856.202        702.9002423
                           District
Bridger-Teton             Kemmerer Ranger District        286,027.094        446.9172881
Bridger-Teton             Greys River Ranger              485,101.506        757.9710237
                           District
Bridger-Teton             Blackrock Ranger                722,458.846       1,128.841829
                           District
Bridger-Teton             Jackson Ranger District         695,025.412       1,085.977094       1
Bridger-Teton             Pinedale Ranger District        827,879.068       1,293.560909       1
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     3,466,348              5,416       2       0       0
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caribou-Targhee                       Supervisors Office: Idaho/Wyoming Zone                           1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Caribou-Targhee           Westside Ranger District        416,464.192        650.7252315       1
Caribou-Targhee           Soda Springs Ranger             365,373.927        570.8967011
                           District
Caribou-Targhee           Montpelier Ranger               428,045.876        668.8216121
                           District
Caribou-Targhee           Dubois Ranger District          458,070.499        715.7350796
Caribou-Targhee           Ashton/Island Park              668,823.661       1,045.036861       1
                           Ranger District
Caribou-Targhee           Teton Basin Ranger              267,704.074        418.2875721
                           District
Caribou-Targhee           Palisades Ranger                472,994.294        739.0535076
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     3,077,476              4,808       2       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salmon-Challis                        Supervisors Office: Idaho/Wyoming Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Salmon-Challis            North Fork Ranger               775,711.035       1,212.048366
                           District
Salmon-Challis            Lost River Ranger               814,856.994       1,273.213921
                           District
Salmon-Challis            Salmon-Cobalt Ranger            642,333.138       1,003.645423       1
                           District
Salmon-Challis            Middle Fork Ranger            1,031,514.734       1,611.741604
                           District
Salmon-Challis            Challis-Yankee Fork             802,906.788       1,254.541726       1
                           Ranger District
Salmon-Challis            Leadore Ranger District         328,967.012        514.0109025
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     4,396,289              6,869       2       0       0
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humboldt-Toiyabe                          Supervisors Office: Nevada Zone                      1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Humboldt-Toiyabe          Santa Rosa Ranger               300,733.997        469.8968218
                           District
Humboldt-Toiyabe          Ely Ranger District           1,024,430.663       1,600.672744       1
Humboldt-Toiyabe          Carson Ranger District          601,511.531        939.8616685       1
Humboldt-Toiyabe          Spring Mountains                322,198.476         503.435066       2               1
                           National Recreation
                           Area
Humboldt-Toiyabe          Austin-Tonopah Ranger         2,136,574.262       3,338.396937
                           District
Humboldt-Toiyabe          Mountain City-Ruby            1,201,311.924       1,877.049685
                           Mountains-Jarbidge
                           Ranger District
Humboldt-Toiyabe          Bridgeport Ranger             1,117,357.653        1,745.87115
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     6,704,118             10,475       5       1       1
                                                   =============================================================
    Grand Total for                                        33,996,558             53,119      29       5       4
     Region
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                          USDA Forest Service Region 5
                                   LEI Field Staffing and Forest/District Size
                                                November 1, 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     National Forest              District                Acres            Sq. Miles        LEO     CPT     SA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Angeles National Forest                   Supervisors Office--South Zone                               1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Angeles National Forest   Los Angeles Gateway             337,521.811         527.377775       3
                           Ranger District
Angeles National Forest   San Gabriel Mountains           369,194.179        576.8658443       3
                           National Monument
                           Ranger District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                       706,715              1,104       6       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cleveland National                        Supervisors Office--South Zone                               1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Cleveland National        Trabuco Ranger District         160,639.476        250.9991552       3
 Forest
Cleveland National        Palomar Ranger District         186,336.932        291.1514253
 Forest
Cleveland National        Descanso Ranger District        214,840.005        335.6874726       1
 Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                       561,816                877       4       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eldorado National Forest                 Supervisors Office--Central Zone                              1       2
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Eldorado National Forest  Pacific Ranger District         199,660.132        311.9689236       1
Eldorado National Forest  Placerville Ranger              205,504.264        321.1003786       2
                           District
Eldorado National Forest  Georgetown Ranger               193,082.902        301.6920026       1
                           District
Eldorado National Forest  Amador Ranger District          195,405.308        305.3207612
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                       793,652              1,240       4       1       2
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inyo National Forest                      Supervisors Office--South Zone                               1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Inyo National Forest      Mt. Whitney Ranger              594,693.306        929.2081935       1
                           District
Inyo National Forest      Mammoth Ranger District         167,275.265        261.3675743       2
Inyo National Forest      Mono Lake Ranger                  484,973.3         757.770702
                           District
Inyo National Forest      White Mountain Ranger           849,963.807        1,328.06831
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,096,905              3,276       3       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Klamath National Forest                   Supervisors Office--North Zone                               1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Klamath National Forest   Salmon River Ranger             371,773.336        580.8957763       1
                           District
Klamath National Forest   Oak Knoll Ranger                335,238.595          523.81025       1
                           District
Klamath National Forest   Happy Camp Ranger               359,549.495        561.7960278       1
                           District
Klamath National Forest   Ukonom Ranger District           190,355.51        297.4304535       1
Klamath National Forest   Goosenest Ranger                361,460.835        564.7824955       1
                           District
Klamath National Forest   Scott River Ranger              277,428.094        433.4813515
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,895,805              2,962       5       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lake Tahoe Basin                                LTBMU--Central Zone                            2
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  [Total]                                                                                      2
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lassen National Forest                    Supervisors Office--North Zone                               1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Lassen National Forest    Hat Creek Ranger                541,876.456        846.6818738       1
                           District
Lassen National Forest    Almanor Ranger District         549,816.542        859.0882572       2
Lassen National Forest    Eagle Lake Ranger               397,018.986        620.3421003       1
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,488,711              2,326       4       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Los Padres National                       Supervisors Office--South Zone                               1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Los Padres National       Mt. Pinos Ranger                493,625.377        771.2895711       1
 Forest                    District
Los Padres National       Monterey Ranger District        333,703.014        521.4109047       1
 Forest
Los Padres National       Ojai Ranger District            323,861.482        506.0335136       1
 Forest
Los Padres National       Santa Lucia Ranger              514,028.633        803.1696555       1               2
 Forest                    District
Los Padres National       Santa Barbara Ranger            305,051.648        476.6431506
 Forest                    District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,970,270              3,078       4       1       2
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mendocino National                        Supervisors Office--North Zone                               1       1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Mendocino National        Grindstone Ranger               534,154.737        834.6166892       1
 Forest                    District
Mendocino National        Upper Lake Ranger               312,110.887        487.6732102       2
 Forest                    District
Mendocino National        Covelo Ranger District          227,019.158        354.7173979
 Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,073,284              1,677       3       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modoc National Forest                     Supervisors Office--North Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Modoc National Forest     Devils Garden Ranger            596,525.506        932.0710064       1
                           District
Modoc National Forest     Big Valley Ranger               495,241.585        773.8148958
                           District
Modoc National Forest     Warner Mountain Ranger          361,422.456        564.7225286
                           District
Modoc National Forest     Doublehead Ranger               569,835.487        890.3678553
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,023,025              3,160       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plumas National Forest                   Supervisors Office--Central Zone                              1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Plumas National Forest    Feather River Ranger            392,504.844        613.2887552       1               1
                           District
Plumas National Forest    Beckwourth Ranger               492,556.063        769.6187679       1
                           District
Plumas National Forest    Mt. Hough Ranger                 546,739.06        854.2796929       1
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,431,799              2,237       3       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Bernardino National                   Supervisors Office--South Zone                               1       1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
San Bernardino National   Mountaintop Ranger              285,393.382        445.9271135       1
 Forest                    District
San Bernardino National   Front Country Ranger            270,913.954        423.3030096       2
 Forest                    District
San Bernardino National   San Jacinto Ranger              249,175.377        389.3364858       2
 Forest                    District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                       805,482              1,258       5       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sequoia National Forest                   Supervisors Office--South Zone                               1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Sequoia National Forest   Kern River Ranger               663,351.396       1,036.486448       2
                           District
Sequoia National Forest   Western Divide Ranger           337,715.415         527.680281       1
                           District
Sequoia National Forest   Hume Lake Ranger                183,462.992        286.6608949       1
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,184,529              1,850       4       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shasta-Trinity National                   Supervisors Office--North Zone                               1       2
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Shasta-Trinity National   Hayfork Ranger District           356,869.7        557.6088484
 Forest
Shasta-Trinity National   Yolla Bolla Ranger              239,483.664         374.193186       1
 Forest                    District
Shasta-Trinity National   Big Bar Ranger District         444,415.519        694.3991758
 Forest
Shasta-Trinity National   Weaverville Ranger              435,074.817        679.8043311       1
 Forest                    District
Shasta-Trinity National   Shasta Lake Ranger              435,936.848        681.1512533       2
 Forest                    District
Shasta-Trinity National   Mt. Shasta Ranger                383,605.57        599.3836411       1
 Forest                    District
Shasta-Trinity National   McCloud Ranger District         420,114.313        656.4285458
 Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,715,500              4,242       5       1       2
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sierra National Forest                   Supervisors Office--Central Zone                              1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Sierra National Forest    Bass Lake Ranger                482,227.063        753.4797075       2
                           District
Sierra National Forest    High Sierra Ranger              912,076.034       1,425.118654       2
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,394,303              2,178       4       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Six Rivers National                       Supervisors Office--North Zone                       2       1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Six Rivers National       Lower Trinity Ranger            225,251.129        351.9548523       1
 Forest                    District
Six Rivers National       Gasquet Ranger District         358,968.124        560.8876356       1
 Forest
Six Rivers National       Orleans Ranger District         219,101.375        342.3458635
 Forest
Six Rivers National       Mad River Ranger                280,272.721        437.9260815
 Forest                    District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,083,593              1,693       4       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stanislaus National                      Supervisors Office--Central Zone                              1       1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Stanislaus National       Calaveras Ranger                329,506.565        514.8539549
 Forest                    District
Stanislaus National       Summit Ranger District          308,933.844        482.7090808       2
 Forest
Stanislaus National       Mi-Wok Ranger District          209,918.127        327.9970386
 Forest
Stanislaus National       Groveland Ranger                241,995.661        378.1181815       1
 Forest                    District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,090,354              1,703       3       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tahoe National Forest                    Supervisors Office--Central Zone                              1       2
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Tahoe National Forest     Truckee Ranger District         247,235.479        386.3053955
Tahoe National Forest     American River Ranger           235,338.636        367.7165807       1
                           District
Tahoe National Forest     Yuba River Ranger                465,732.37        727.7067522       2
                           District
Tahoe National Forest     Sierraville Ranger              231,171.682        361.2057152
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,179,478              1,842       3       1       2
                                                   =============================================================
    Total for Region                                       2,349,5230             36,711      66      16      17
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                          USDA Forest Service Region 6
                                   LEI Field Staffing and Forest/District Size
                                                November 1, 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     National Forest              District                Acres            Sq. Miles        LEO     CPT     SA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colville National Forest         Supervisors Office: North Central Washington Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Colville National Forest  Republic Ranger District        244,492.445        382.0194049
Colville National Forest  Newport Ranger District         257,738.558         402.716455       1
Colville National Forest  Sullivan Lake Ranger            304,257.868        475.4028691
                           District
Colville National Forest  Three Rivers Ranger               547,875.5        856.0553801       1
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,354,364              2,116       2
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Columbia River Gorge                                        292,500.0          457.03125       1
 National Scenic Area
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     292,500.0          457.03125       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deschutes National                    Supervisors Office: Central Oregon Zone                          1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Deschutes National        Crescent Ranger District        410,536.964        641.4639392       1
 Forest
Deschutes National        Bend/Fort Rock Ranger         1,061,746.112       1,658.978127       1
 Forest                    District
Deschutes National        Sisters Ranger District         397,832.939        621.6139017       1
 Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,870,116              2,922       3       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fremont-Winema National               Supervisors Office: Central Oregon Zone                                  1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Fremont-Winema National   Lakeview Ranger District        443,737.617        693.3399536       1
 Forest
Fremont-Winema National   Silver Lake Ranger              443,202.799        692.5043011
 Forest                    District
Fremont-Winema National   Chemult Ranger District         422,191.889        659.6747571
 Forest
Fremont-Winema National   Klamath Ranger District         203,475.186        317.9299454       1
 Forest
Fremont-Winema National   Chiloquin Ranger                475,550.886        743.0481827
 Forest                    District
Fremont-Winema National   Paisley Ranger District         323,464.915        505.4138769
 Forest
Fremont-Winema National   Bly Ranger District              504,323.71        788.0057143
 Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,815,947              4,399       2               1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gifford Pinchot National             Supervisors Office: Southwest Oregon Zone                         1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Gifford Pinchot National  Mt. Adams Ranger                  710,549.6       1,110.233635       1
 Forest                    District
Gifford Pinchot National  Mount St. Helens                132,561.073        207.1266554       1
 Forest                    National Volcanic
                           Monument
Gifford Pinchot National  Cowlitz Valley District             292,500          457.03125       1
 Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,496,966              2,339       3       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Malheur National Forest              Supervisors Office: Northeast Oregon Zone                 1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Malheur National Forest   Blue Mountain Ranger            744,118.577       1,162.685155
                           District
Malheur National Forest   Emigrant Creek Ranger           651,936.334       1,018.650415
                           District
Malheur National Forest   Prairie City Ranger             390,486.212        610.1346421
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,786,541              2,791       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie                 Supervisors Office: Northwest Oregon Zone                         1
 National Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie      Mt. Baker Ranger                556,067.449        868.8552981       1
 National Forest           District
Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie      Darrington Ranger               565,321.013         883.313991       1
 National Forest           District
Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie      Snoqualmie Ranger               536,774.313        838.7097772       2
 National Forest           District
Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie      Skykomish Ranger                367,399.942          574.06235       1
 National Forest           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,025,562              3,164       5       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mt. Hood National Forest                        Supervisors Office:                            2       1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Mt. Hood National Forest  Barlow Ranger District          178,500.588        278.9071396       1
Mt. Hood National Forest  Zigzag Ranger District          266,679.211        416.6862232       1
Mt. Hood National Forest  Clackamas River Ranger          407,078.558        636.0601806
                           District
Mt. Hood National Forest  Hood River Ranger               207,901.605        324.8462246       1
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,060,159              1,656       5       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ochoco National Forest                Supervisors Office: Central Oregon Zone                  1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Ochoco National Forest    Paulina Ranger District         383,582.797        599.3480577
Ochoco National Forest    Crooked River National          173,645.752        271.3214591       1
                           Grassland
Ochoco National Forest    Lookout Mountain Ranger         355,546.464        555.5412914
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                       912,775              1,426       2
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okanogan-Wenatchee               Supervisors Office: North Central Washington Zone                     1       1
 National Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Okanogan-Wenatchee        Naches Ranger District          560,541.671        875.8462692       1
 National Forest
Okanogan-Wenatchee        Entiat Ranger District          276,563.781         432.130862
 National Forest
Okanogan-Wenatchee        Cle Elum Ranger District        477,292.668        745.7697162       2
 National Forest
Okanogan-Wenatchee        Wenatchee River Ranger          795,896.628       1,243.588352       1
 National Forest           District
Okanogan-Wenatchee        Methow Valley Ranger          1,334,630.525       2,085.359978       1
 National Forest           District
Okanogan-Wenatchee        Tonasket Ranger District        398,630.248        622.8596977
 National Forest
Okanogan-Wenatchee        Chelan Ranger District          412,358.027        644.3093499
 National Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     4,255,913              6,649       5       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Olympic National Forest              Supervisors Office: Northwest Oregon Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Olympic National Forest   Hood Canal Ranger               157,090.127        245.4532973
                           District/Quilcene
Olympic National Forest   Hood Canal Ranger               227,473.748        355.4276942       1
                           District/Hoodsport
Olympic National Forest   Pacific Ranger District/        165,823.041        259.0984739
                           Forks
Olympic National Forest   Pacific Ranger District/        147,023.649         229.724427       1
                           Quinault
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                       697,410              1,089       2       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rogue River-Siskiyou                 Supervisors Office: Southwest Oregon Zone                         1       1
 National Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Rogue River-Siskiyou      Siskiyou Mountains              231,330.912        361.4545129       1
 National Forests          Ranger District
Rogue River-Siskiyou      High Cascades Ranger            459,259.701        717.5932088       1
 National Forests          District
Rogue River-Siskiyou      Powers Ranger District          162,340.066        253.6563265
 National Forests
Rogue River-Siskiyou      Gold Beach Ranger                490,521.69        766.4400605       1
 National Forests          District
Rogue River-Siskiyou      Wild Rivers Ranger              509,254.026        795.7093325       1
 National Forests          District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,852,706              2,894       4       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Siuslaw National Forest             Supervisors Office: Northeast Oregon Zone1                 1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Siuslaw National Forest   Hebo Ranger District            179,722.853        280.8169282       1
Siuslaw National Forest   Central Coast Ranger            655,885.777       1,024.821419       1
                           District--ODNRA
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                       835,608              1,305       3
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Umatilla National Forest             Supervisors Office: Northeast Oregon Zone                         1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Umatilla National Forest  Walla Walla Ranger              408,273.007        637.9265068       1
                           District
Umatilla National Forest  North Fork John Day             512,458.491        800.7163082
                           Ranger District
Umatilla National Forest  Pomeroy Ranger District         347,550.626        543.0477971
Umatilla National Forest  Heppner Ranger District         229,818.381        359.0911833
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,498,100              2,340       1       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Umpqua National Forest               Supervisors Office: Southwest Oregon Zone                 1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Umpqua National Forest    Cottage Grove Ranger             88,730.257        138.6410127       1
                           District
Umpqua National Forest    Diamond Lake Ranger             316,631.984        494.7374227
                           District
Umpqua National Forest    Tiller Ranger District           362,434.89        566.3044571
Umpqua National Forest    North Umpqua Ranger              268,045.44        418.8209571       1
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,035,842              1,618       3
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wallowa-Whitman National             Supervisors Office: Northeast Oregon Zone
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Wallowa-Whitman National  Hells Canyon National            25,115.873        39.24354739
 Forest                    Recreation Area
Wallowa-Whitman National  Hells Canyon National           114,989.505        179.6710833
 Forest                    Recreation Area
Wallowa-Whitman National  Eagle Cap Ranger                391,530.927         611.767009
 Forest                    District
Wallowa-Whitman National  La Grande Ranger                459,055.435        717.2740429       1
 Forest                    District
Wallowa-Whitman National  Hells Canyon National           510,611.642        797.8306072       1
 Forest                    Recreation Area
Wallowa-Whitman National  Wallowa Valley Ranger           356,707.568        557.3555167       1
 Forest                    District
Wallowa-Whitman National  Whitman Ranger District         667,191.625       1,042.486806       1
 Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,525,202              3,945       4
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Willamette National                   Supervisors Office: Central Oregon Zone                                  1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Willamette National       Middle Fork Ranger               725,799.32        1,134.06132       1
 Forest                    District
Willamette National       Detroit Ranger District         323,869.189        506.0455543       1
 Forest
Willamette National       McKenzie River Ranger           520,794.207        813.7408636       1
 Forest                    District
Willamette National       Sweet Home Ranger               230,829.262        360.6706844       1
 Forest                    District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,801,291              2,814       4               1
                                                   =============================================================
    Total for Region                                       27,824,935             43,475      51       7       6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                          USDA Forest Service Region 8
                                   LEI Field Staffing and Forest/District Size
                                                November 1, 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     National Forest              District                Acres            Sq. Miles        LEO     CPT     SA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chattahoochee-Oconee      Supervisors Office: (CPT) (Chattahoochee/Francis Marion); (SA)               1       1
 National Forest                           (Chattahoochee/Francis Marion)
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Chattahoochee-Oconee      Chattooga River Ranger          452,013.464        706.2709642
 National Forests          District
Chattahoochee-Oconee      Blue Ridge Ranger               583,696.312        912.0253922       2
 National Forests          District: LEO; LEO
Chattahoochee-Oconee      Conasauga Ranger                484,335.157        756.7736034
 National Forests          District
Chattahoochee-Oconee      Oconee Ranger District:         276,261.735        431.6589164       1
 National Forests          LEO
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,796,306              2,806       3       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cherokee National Forest    Supervisors Office: (CPT) (NF in Alabama/Cherokee NF); (SA)                        1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Cherokee National Forest  Unaka Ranger District:          342,490.036        535.1406255       1
                           LEO
Cherokee National Forest  Tellico Ranger District:        216,849.617        338.8274905       1
                           LEO/FTO
Cherokee National Forest  Ocoee Ranger District:          240,193.532        375.3023539       1
                           LEO
Cherokee National Forest  Watauga Ranger District:        428,755.686        669.9306896       1
                           LEO
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,228,288              1,919       4               1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Boone National                        Supervisors Office: (CPT)                                 1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Boone National     Cumberland Ranger               473,612.902        740.0200825       3               1
 Forest                    District: LEO; LEO;
                           LEO; (SA) (Daniel Boone
                           NF/LBL)
Daniel Boone National     Stearns Ranger District:         379,998.15        593.7470472       1
 Forest                    LEO
Daniel Boone National     London Ranger District:         507,308.506        792.6694577       2               1
 Forest                    LEO; LEO; (SA) (Daniel
                           Boone NF/LBL)
Daniel Boone National     Redbird Ranger District:        682,149.695       1,065.858788                       1
 Forest                    (SA) (Daniel Boone NF/
                           LBL)
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,043,069              3,192       6       1       3
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
El Yunque National           Supervisors Office: (CPT)--(Vacant currently filled with
 Forest                              Detailer); (SA) (NF in Florida/El Yunque)
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
El Yunque National        Catalina Field Office:            55,829.81        87.23406857       2
 Forest                    LEO; LEO
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                        55,829                 87       2
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Francis Marion and        Supervisors Office: (CPT) (Chattahoochee/Francis Marion); (SA)
 Sumter National Forest                    (Chattahoochee/Francis Marion)
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Francis Marion and        Enoree Ranger District:         396,057.024        618.8390362       1
 Sumter National Forests   LEO
Francis Marion and        Long Cane Ranger                424,273.558        662.9273645       1
 Sumter National Forests   District: LEO
Francis Marion and        Andrew Pickens Ranger           140,435.805        219.4309222       1
 Sumter National Forests   District: LEO
Francis Marion and        Francis Marion Ranger           420,401.751        656.8776669       1
 Sumter National Forests   District: LEO
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,381,168              2,158       4
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
George Washington and           Supervisors Office: (CPT); (SA) Vacant at this time                    1
 Jefferson National
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
George Washington and     Clinch Ranger District:         319,084.203        498.5690147       1
 Jefferson National        LEO
 Forest
George Washington and     Warm Springs Ranger             316,979.924        495.2810792
 Jefferson National        District: Vacant
 Forest
George Washington and     Glenwood and Pedlar             446,753.988        698.0530333
 Jefferson National        Ranger Districts:
 Forest                    Vacant
George Washington and     Mount Rogers National           424,125.884        662.6966244       1
 Jefferson National        Recreation Area: LEO
 Forest
George Washington and     James River Ranger              359,368.973         561.513961       1
 Jefferson National        District: LEO
 Forest
George Washington and     Eastern Divide Ranger           776,693.667       1,213.583728       1
 Jefferson National        District: LEO
 Forest
George Washington and     Lee Ranger District: LEO        301,836.862         471.620048       1
 Jefferson National
 Forest
George Washington and     North River Ranger              543,120.036        848.6249683
 Jefferson National        District: Vacant
 Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     3,487,963              5,449       5       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kisatchie National        Supervisors Office: (CPT) (NF in Texas/Kisatchie NF); (SA) (NF
 Forest                                        in Texas/Kisatchie NF)
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Kisatchie National        Catahoula Ranger                188,377.981        294.3405642       1
 Forest                    District: LEO
Kisatchie National        Caney Ranger District:           59,462.128        92.90956563       1
 Forest                    LEO
Kisatchie National        Kisatchie Ranger                175,685.477        274.5085295       1
 Forest                    District: LEO
Kisatchie National        Calcasieu Ranger                312,685.528        488.5710861       1
 Forest                    District: LEO
Kisatchie National        Winn Ranger District:           326,815.507         510.649176       1
 Forest                    LEO
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,063,026              1,660       5
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Land Between the Lakes     Supervisors Office: (CPT) Vacant; LEO; LEO; LEO; (SA) (Daniel       3
 National Recreation       Boone NF/LBL); (SA) (Daniel Boone NF/LBL); (SA) (Daniel Boone
 Area                                                 NF/LBL)
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                       170,000                267       3
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Forests in         Supervisors Office: (CPT) (NF in Alabama/Cherokee NF); (SA)                1       1
 Alabama
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
National Forests in       Talladega Ranger                 247,902.82        387.3481158       1
 Alabama                   District: LEO
National Forests in       Bankhead Ranger                 348,735.861        544.8997261       1
 Alabama                   District: LEO
National Forests in       Conecuh Ranger District:        171,329.656        267.7025597       1
 Alabama                   LEO
National Forests in       Tuskegee Ranger                  15,649.837        24.45286764
 Alabama                   District: Vacant
National Forests in       Oakmulgee Ranger                329,347.264        514.6050465       1
 Alabama                   District: LEO
National Forests in       Shoal Creek Ranger              176,550.779        275.8605635
 Alabama                   District: Vacant
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,289,516              2,014       4       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Forests in          Supervisors Office: (CPT); (SA) (NF in Florida/El Yunque)                 1       1
 Florida
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
National Forests in       Osceola Ranger District:        337,981.867        528.0966129     1 &
 Florida                   LEO; RLEO                                                         (1)
National Forests in       Seminole Ranger                 210,273.081        328.5516546       2
 Florida                   District: LEO; LEO
National Forests in       Lake George Ranger              232,923.967        363.9436601       2
 Florida                   District: LEO; LEO
National Forests in       Apalachicola Ranger             314,236.081        490.9938262       1
 Florida                   District: LEO
National Forests in       Wakulla Ranger District:        327,796.289        512.1816487
 Florida                   Vacant
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,423,211              2,223       7       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Forests in                       Supervisors Office: (CPT); (SA)                              1       1
 Mississippi
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
National Forests in       Homochitto Ranger               380,642.161        594.7533143       1
 Mississippi               District: LEO
National Forests in       Holly Springs Ranger            529,166.081         826.821915     1 &
 Mississippi               District: LEO; RLEO                                               (1)
National Forests in       Bienville Ranger                388,448.533        606.9507689       1
 Mississippi               District: LEO
National Forests in       Tombigbee Ranger                119,671.372        186.9864987       1
 Mississippi               District: LEO
National Forests in       Delta Ranger District:          120,747.749        188.6683374     (1)
 Mississippi               RLEO
National Forests in       Chickasawhay Ranger             193,951.557        303.0492769       1
 Mississippi               District: LEO
National Forests in       De Soto Ranger District:        640,678.532       1,001.060102       1
 Mississippi               LEO
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,373,305              3,708       8       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Forests in                       Supervisors Office: (CPT); (SA)                              1       1
 North Carolina
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
National Forests in       Tusquittee Ranger               397,612.931        621.2701406       1
 North Carolina            District: LEO
National Forests in       Cheoah Ranger District:         205,349.027        320.8578213       1
 North Carolina            LEO
National Forests in       Nantahala Ranger                691,398.924       1,080.310707       1
 North Carolina            District: LEO
National Forests in       Croatan Ranger District:        307,599.781        480.6246085       1
 North Carolina            LEO/FTO
National Forests in       Grandfather Ranger              429,209.075        670.6391101
 North Carolina            District: Vacant
National Forests in       Pisgah Ranger District:         311,086.809        486.0730891
 North Carolina            Vacant
National Forests in       Appalachian Ranger              464,261.716        725.4088562
 North Carolina            District: Vacant
National Forests in       Uwharrie Ranger                 219,721.745        343.3151901       1
 North Carolina            District: LEO
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     3,026,240              4,728       5       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Forests in       Supervisors Office: (CPT) (NF in Texas/Kisatchie NF); (SA) (NF               1       1
 Texas                                         in Texas/Kisatchie NF)
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
National Forests in       Angelina Ranger                 398,146.476        622.1038045       1
 Texas                     District: LEO
National Forests in       Caddo--Lyndon B. Johnson        183,888.085        287.3251021       1
 Texas                     National Grasslands:
                           LEO
National Forests in       Davy Crockett Ranger            389,609.015        608.7640226       1
 Texas                     District: LEO
National Forests in       Sabine Ranger District:         454,542.489         710.222565       1
 Texas                     LEO
National Forests in       Sam Houston Ranger              495,315.845        773.9309274       2
 Texas                     District: LEO; LEO
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,921,501              3,002       6       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ouachita National Forest                  Supervisors Office: (CPT); (SA)                              1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Ouachita National Forest  Cold Springs Ranger             192,550.649         300.860358
                           District: Vacant
Ouachita National Forest  Kiamichi Ranger                 126,353.337        197.4270678       1
                           District: LEO (Kiamichi
                           and Choctaw are
                           combined)
Ouachita National Forest  Choctaw Ranger District         138,918.461        217.0600732
Ouachita National Forest  Poteau Ranger District:         241,949.877        378.0466428
                           Combined with Cold
                           Springs
Ouachita National Forest  Winona Ranger District:         158,864.261        248.2253826       1
                           LEO David Cadle
Ouachita National Forest  Oden Ranger District:           226,999.245        354.6862828
                           combined with Mena
Ouachita National Forest  Jessieville Ranger               248,905.44        388.9147095       1
                           District: LEO Greg
                           Burden
Ouachita National Forest  Tiak Ranger District:           444,936.429         695.213098       1
                           LEO Josh Collins
Ouachita National Forest  Mena Ranger District:           246,863.451        385.7241026       1
                           LEO Joe Liles
Ouachita National Forest  Womble Ranger District:         248,260.859        387.9075517       1
                           LEO Chris Johnson
Ouachita National Forest  Fourche Ranger District:        196,852.112        307.5813928
                           Combined with
                           Jessieville/Winona.
Ouachita National Forest  Caddo Ranger District:          252,966.382        395.2599314
                           Combined with Womble
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,724,420              4,256       6       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ozark-St. Francis                         Supervisors Office: (CPT); (SA)                              1       1
 National Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Ozark-St. Francis         St. Francis Ranger               31,135.214        48.64876617
 National Forest           District: Vacant
Ozark-St. Francis         Magazine Mountain Ranger        132,417.669        206.9025857
 National Forest           District: Vacant
Ozark-St. Francis         Bayou Ranger District:          301,006.578        470.3227298
 National Forest           Vacant
Ozark-St. Francis         Buffalo Ranger District:        315,733.622        493.3337334
 National Forest           Vacant
Ozark-St. Francis         Boston Mountain Ranger          308,968.379        482.7630412
 National Forest           District: Vacant
Ozark-St. Francis         Sylamore Ranger                 171,622.466        268.1600745       1
 National Forest           District: LEO
Ozark-St. Francis         Big Piney Ranger                          1
 National Forest           District: LEO
Ozark-St. Francis         Pleasant Hill Ranger            272,012.545        425.0195579       1
 National Forest           District: LEO
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,532,896              2,395       3       1       1
                                                   =============================================================
    Total for Region                                       25,516,745             39,871      71      10       1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                          USDA Forest Service Region 9
                                   LEI Field Staffing and Forest/District Size
                                                November 1, 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     National Forest              District                Acres            Sq. Miles        LEO     CPT     SA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegheny National                      Supervisors Office--South East Zone                                    1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Allegheny National        Marienville Ranger              367,113.051        573.6140831       1
 Forest                    District
Allegheny National        Bradford Ranger District        373,766.939        584.0107807       1
 Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                       740,879              1,157       2               1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chequamegon-Nicolet                     Supervisors Office--North West Zone                                    1
 National Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Chequamegon-Nicolet       Washburn Ranger District        235,235.987        367.5561918
 National Forest
Chequamegon-Nicolet       Medford-Park Falls               346,779.01        541.8421462       1
 National Forest           Ranger District
Chequamegon-Nicolet       Great Divide Ranger             457,570.639        714.9540484       1
 National Forest           District
Chequamegon-Nicolet       Eagle River-Florence             429292.201        670.7689942
 National Forest           Ranger District
Chequamegon-Nicolet       Lakewood-Laona Ranger           536,465.272        838.2268997       1
 National Forest           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,005,343              3,133       3               1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chippewa National Forest                Supervisors Office--North West Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Chippewa National Forest  Blackduck Ranger                458,601.328        716.5645009
                           District
Chippewa National Forest  Deer River Ranger               660,671.695       1,032.299415       1
                           District
Chippewa National Forest  Walker Ranger District          478,866.021        748.2280799       1
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,598,139              2,497       2
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Green Mountain and                      Supervisors Office--North East Zone                            1       1
 Finger Lakes National
 Forests
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Green Mountain and        Manchester Ranger                 600,709.2        938.6080278       1
 Finger Lakes National     District
 Forests
Green Mountain and        Hector Ranger District           16,811.219        26.26752666
 Finger Lakes National
 Forests
Green Mountain and        Middlebury Ranger               117,113.996        182.9905991
 Finger Lakes National     District
 Forests
Green Mountain and        Rochester Ranger                119,267.066        186.3547712       1
 Finger Lakes National     District
 Forests
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                       853,901              1,334       2       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hiawatha National Forest              Supervisors Office--North Central Zone                           1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Hiawatha National Forest  Rapid River Ranger              295,604.204        461.8815201       1
                           District
Hiawatha National Forest  Manistique Ranger               198,266.808        309.7918555
                           District
Hiawatha National Forest  Munising Ranger District        303,625.207        474.4143364
Hiawatha National Forest  Sault Ste. Marie Ranger         303,206.228        473.7596821
                           District
Hiawatha National Forest  St. Ignace Ranger               199,624.021        311.9125008       1
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,300,326              2,031       2       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hoosier National Forest               Supervisors Office--South Central Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Hoosier National Forest   Tell City Ranger                364,656.443        569.7756324       1
                           District
Hoosier National Forest   Brownstown Ranger               282,292.399        441.0818279       1
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                       646,948              1,010       2
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Huron-Manistee National               Supervisors Office--North Central Zone                                   1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Huron-Manistee National   Baldwin Ranger District          377,372.18         589.643968       1
 Forest
Huron-Manistee National   Cadillac Ranger District        217,031.039        339.1109636
 Forest
Huron-Manistee National   Huron Shores Ranger             270,845.197        423.1955769       1
 Forest                    District
Huron-Manistee National   Manistee Ranger District        244,667.312        382.2926346       1
 Forest
Huron-Manistee National   White Cloud Ranger              493,953.803        771.8027371
 Forest                    District
Huron-Manistee National   Tawas Ranger District           198,792.072        310.6125798
 Forest
Huron-Manistee National   Mio Ranger District             225,546.533        352.4164212       1
 Forest
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     2,028,208              3,169       4               1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Twain National                     Supervisors Office--South West Zone                            1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Twain National       Potosi/Fredericktown            605,865.429        946.6646346       1
 Forest                    Ranger District
Mark Twain National       Salem Ranger District           309,564.541        483.6945451       1
 Forest
Mark Twain National       Ava/Cassville/Willow             732,308.05       1,144.231209       1               1
 Forest                    Springs Ranger District
Mark Twain National       Houston/Rolla/Cedar             579,156.931        904.9326106       1
 Forest                    Creek Ranger District
Mark Twain National       Poplar Bluff Ranger             339,182.211        529.9721495       1
 Forest                    District
Mark Twain National       Doniphan/Eleven Point           505,402.169         789.690807       1
 Forest                    Ranger District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     3,071,479              4,799       6       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Midewin National          South Central Zone                    8,094          28.271875       1
 Tallgrass Prairie
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                        18,094          28.271875       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monongahela National                    Supervisors Office--South East Zone                    1               1
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Monongahela National      Gauley Ranger District          293,583.508        458.7241839       1
 Forest
Monongahela National      Cheat Ranger District/          257,581.018        402.4702988       1
 Forest                    Potomac Ranger District
Monongahela National      Marlinton Ranger                311,249.399        486.3271357       1
 Forest                    District/White Sulphur
                           Ranger District
Monongahela National      Greenbrier Ranger               402,327.545        628.6367234
 Forest                    District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,703,694              2,662       4               1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ottawa National Forest                Supervisors Office--North Central Zone
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Ottawa National Forest    Bergland Ranger District        268,259.981         419.156176
Ottawa National Forest    Watersmeet Ranger               261,339.148        408.3423764       1
                           District/Iron River
                           Ranger District
Ottawa National Forest    Bessemer Ranger District        358,846.298        560.6972822
Ottawa National Forest    Kenton Ranger District          264,042.827        412.5668741
Ottawa National Forest    Iron River Ranger               227,134.894        354.8982346
                           District
Ottawa National Forest    Ontonagon Ranger                182,803.747         285.630825       1
                           District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     1,562,462              2,441       2
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shawnee National Forest               Supervisors Office--South Central Zone                   1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Shawnee National Forest   Hidden Springs Ranger           556,396.607        869.3696075       2
                           District
Shawnee National Forest   Mississippi Bluffs              373,630.965        583.7983216       1
                           Ranger District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                       930,027              1,453       4       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superior National Forest                Supervisors Office--North West Zone                            1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Superior National Forest  Laurentian Ranger               751,115.442       1,173.617756       1
                           District
Superior National Forest  Lacroix Ranger District       1,035,050.412       1,617.266099       1
Superior National Forest  Gunflint Ranger District        644,051.342       1,006.330117       1
Superior National Forest  Kawishiwi Ranger                718,380.285       1,122.469078
                           District
Superior National Forest  Tofte Ranger District            739,307.99       1,155.168614
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     3,887,905              6,074       3       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wayne National Forest                   Supervisors Office--South East Zone                    1       1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Wayne National Forest     Athens Ranger District          539,178.652        842.4665566
Wayne National Forest     Ironton Ranger District         316,982.265        495.2847367       1
(Wayne National Forest)   Marietta Ranger District                  1
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                       856,160              1,337       3       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White Mountain National                 Supervisors Office--North East Zone
 Forest
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
White Mountain National   Massabesic Experimental          11,790.618        18.42283985
 Forest                    Forest
White Mountain National   Saco Ranger District            283,321.891         442.690407       1
 Forest
White Mountain National   Androscoggin Ranger             239,236.341        373.8067434       1
 Forest                    District
White Mountain National   Pemigewasset Ranger             412,965.848        645.2590702       2
 Forest                    District
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                       947,314              1,480       4
                                                   =============================================================
    Total for Region                                       22,132,756             34,582      44       6       8
    58 total positions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                          USDA Forest Service Region 10
                                   LEI Field Staffing and Forest/District Size
                                                November 1, 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     National Forest              District                Acres            Sq. Miles        LEO     CPT     SA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chugach National Forest                   Supervisors Office--North Zone                               1       1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Chugach National Forest   Glacier Ranger District       2,600,495.976       4,063.273947       2
Chugach National Forest   Cordova Ranger District       2,776,136.787       4,337.673193       1
Chugach National Forest   Seward Ranger District          868,071.225       1,356.361648       2
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                     6,244,703              9,757       5       1       1
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tongass National Forest                   Supervisors Office--South Zone                               1
                         ----------------------------------------------------------------
Tongass National Forest   Yakutat Ranger District       1,255,372.161       1,961.518198
Tongass National Forest/  1,942,532.97                   3,035.207467                  1
 Petersburg Ranger
 District
Tongass National Forest   Wrangell Ranger District      1,737,306.921       2,714.541516       1
Tongass National Forest   Ketchikan--Misty Ranger       3,328,718.695       5,201.121958       1
                           District
Tongass National Forest   Thorne Bay Ranger             1,021,659.879       1,596.343472       1
                           District
Tongass National Forest   Craig Ranger District         1,288,078.366       2,012.622158       1
Tongass National Forest   Sitka Ranger District         1,926,141.142       3,009.595201       1
Tongass National Forest   Hoonah Ranger District          673,051.995       1,051.643629
Tongass National Forest   Juneau Ranger District        3,498,555.692       5,466.491118       2
Tongass National Forest   Admiralty National             1,019,255.04        1,592.58585
                           Monument
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
  Total                                                    17,690,672             27,641       8       1
                                                   =============================================================
    Total for Region                                       23,935,376             37,398      13       2       1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             [attachment 1]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

[https://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/strategy/]
National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

          Editor's note: the image above is an animation. A video of 
        this animation has been retained in Committee file.
Cohesive Strategy News
Cohesive Strategy Crosswalk and Strategic Alignment \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Editor's note: the report and its appendices have been retained 
in Committee file.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Cohesive Strategy Crosswalk and Strategic Alignment report 
represents a deeper evaluation undertaken to ascertain national 
progress made in implementing the Cohesive Strategy, identify gaps in 
implementation, and attempt to reaffirm the Cohesive Strategy's goals 
as the pathway to achieving its vision.

          Read more about and see the Cohesive Strategy Crosswalk and 
        Strategic Alignment report.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/strategy/
thestrategy.shtml#alignment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western Regional Strategy Committee eNewsletters \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ http://westerncohesivestrategynewsarchive.blogspot.com/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Check out the latest and archived Western Regional Strategy 
Committee eNewsletters on their website,\4\ as well other information 
related to the Western Region and the Cohesive Strategy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ http://wildfireinthewest.org/.

          Cohesive Strategy News Archive.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ https://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/strategy/
newsarchive.shtml.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Follow Us
          Follow us on Twitter @US_Wildfire.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ https://twitter.com/US_Wildfire.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Follow the Cohesive Strategy on Facebook.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ https://www.facebook.com/pages/Cohesive-Wildland-Fire-
Management-Strategy/169360
363246751.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             [attachment 2]
National Wildland Fire Preparedness Levels
A Summary of the Nation's Wildfire Response Stages
    The National Multi-Agency Coordination Group (NMAC), composed of 
wildland fire representatives from each wildland fire agency based at 
the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC), establishes Preparedness 
Levels throughout the calendar year to ensure suppression resource 
availability for emerging incidents across the country. Preparedness 
Levels are dictated by fuel and weather conditions, fire activity, and 
fire suppression resource availability throughout the country.
    The five Preparedness Levels range from the lowest (1) to the 
highest (5). Each Preparedness Level includes specific management 
actions and involves increasing levels of interagency resource 
commitments. As Preparedness Levels rise, so does the need for Incident 
Management Teams (IMTs) and suppression resources, which include 
wildland fire crews, engines, helicopters, airtankers and other 
aircraft, and specialized heavy equipment, such as bulldozers. Many of 
these resources and teams are Federal and state employees.
    IMTs are specialized teams of experienced, interagency wildland 
fire personnel who manage large, complex wildland fire incidents. IMTs 
manage wildland fires so that local units can free up their resources 
to focus on new and emerging incidents.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


 
 
 
     Prepared       Prepared       Prepared       Prepared       Prepare
        ness         ness           ness           ness           dness
      Level 1        Level 2        Level 3        Level 4        Level
       (PL 1)        (PL 2)         (PL 3)         (PL 4)         5 (PL
                                                                  5)
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    During         At this        This           This           This is
 this time,     stage,         stage          level          the highest
 fire           several        typically      involves       level of
 personnel      geographic     involves two   three or       wildland
 are able to    areas are      or more        more           fire
 suppress       experiencing   geographic     geographic     activity.
 wildfires in   high to        areas          areas          Several
 their          extreme fire   requiring      experiencing   geographic
 respective     danger,        significant    large,         areas are
 geographic     though they    amounts of     complex        experiencin
 areas          are able to    wildland       wildfires      g large,
 without        manage fire    fire           requiring      complex
 requesting     activity       suppression    IMTs.          wildland
 additional     without        resources      Geographic     fire
 wildland       requesting     from other     areas are      incidents,
 fire           many           areas. At      competing      which have
 resources      wildland       this point,    for wildland   the
 from other     fire           NICC is        fire           potential
 areas or       suppression    moving an      suppression    to exhaust
 from the       resources      increased      resources      national
 National       from other     amount of      and about 60   wildland
 Interagency    areas. Few     wildland       percent of     firefightin
 Coordination   of the         fire           the            g
 Center         country's      suppression    country's      resources.
 (NICC),        IMTs are       resources      IMTs and       At least 80
 based at the   assigned to    around the     wildland       percent of
 National       wildland       country,       firefighting   the
 Interagency    fire           including      personnel      country's
 Fire Center    incidents.     IMTs.          are            IMTs and
 in Boise,                                    committed to   wildland
 Idaho. Fire                                  wildland       firefightin
 activity is                                  fire           g personnel
 typically                                    incidents.     are
 below normal                                                committed
 at this                                                     to wildland
 level.                                                      fire
                                                             incidents.
                                                             At this
                                                             level, all
                                                             fire-
                                                             qualified
                                                             Federal
                                                             employees
                                                             become
                                                             available
                                                             for
                                                             wildfire
                                                             response.
 

                                                        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                                             
National Wildland Fire Preparedness Levels
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                             [attachment 3]
Testimony of Christopher French, Deputy Chief, National Forest System, 
          U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
The Infrastructure Needs of the U.S. Energy Sector, Western Water and 
        Public Lands, and Consideration of a Legislative Proposal
    Chairman Manchin, Ranking Member Barrasso, and Members of the 
Committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to 
discuss the discussion draft of the Energy Infrastructure Act (EIA). My 
testimony today will discuss the role of forests as nature-based 
infrastructure, the threat wildfire poses to maintaining this 
infrastructure, and funding provided by the EIA to improve forest 
conditions and other natural resource-based infrastructure.
Forests as Nature-based Infrastructure
    The USDA Forest Service manages over 193 million acres of national 
forests and grasslands across 44 states and territories. These lands 
amount to approximately 30 percent of all federally managed lands and 
comprise approximately eight percent of the land area in the United 
States. Infrastructure forms a physical link between Americans and 
their National Forest System (NFS) lands, strengthening communities by 
providing safe access to the many ecological, economic, and social 
amenities NFS lands provide. Infrastructure on NFS lands affords access 
to ranching, farming, logging, outdoor recreation, tourism, and energy 
production, all of which support thriving small businesses, 
particularly in rural communities. In addition, people depend on the 
Forest Service road network to get to schools, stores, hospitals, and 
their homes.
    NFS lands are themselves critical infrastructure supporting the 
nation's drinking water supply. Approximately 20 percent of the 
nation's fresh water originates on national forests and grasslands. An 
estimated 180 million people in over 68,000 communities rely on these 
lands to capture and filter their drinking water. Major U.S. cities 
that may seem distant from forests also rely on water flowing from NFS 
lands. Los Angeles, Portland, Denver, and Atlanta all receive a 
significant portion of their water supply from national forests.
    National Forests are also part of the nation's network of public 
and private forests that serve as the most efficient carbon capture 
infrastructure mitigating the effects of climate change. Taken 
together, the nation's forests and harvested wood products capture the 
equivalent of more than 14 percent of economy-wide CO2 
emissions in the United States annually.
Wildland Fire Threat to Forests
    Devastating wildfires are the most critical threat to the ability 
of our forests to sequester carbon, support local economies, and 
provide clean water and other important resources upon which we rely. 
In the United States, there are over a billion acres at risk of 
wildland fire. This is, in part, a result of 110 years of fire 
suppression policies that have led to unhealthy forests. Forest Service 
research has identified hundreds of communities at high risk of 
wildland fire.
    About 63 million acres, or 32 percent, of the NFS lands are at high 
or very high hazard for wildfires that would be difficult to contain. 
The Forest Service carries out approximately 3 million acres of fuels 
treatments annually. Unfortunately, this is not at the scale necessary 
to address the problem. Without a paradigm shift in the way we treat 
hazardous fuels on Federal and non-Federal land, and addressing the 
impacts of climate change, we will remain in this current wildfire 
crisis and destruction from wildfires will continue to threaten 
communities across the West.
    Forest Service research indicates we need to dramatically increase 
the extent and impact of fuels treatments such as thinning, harvesting, 
planting, and prescribed burning across all landscapes. To make 
progress, we estimate that two to four times more acres than are 
currently treated each year need to undergo fuels reduction treatments. 
Our scientists have developed scenario planning tools to help target 
fuels treatments in strategic locations that will reduce fire size and 
severity. Our estimates suggest approximately 20 million acres of NFS 
land and 30 million acres of other Federal, state, Tribal and private 
lands in the West need treatment over the next 10 years in order to 
significantly reduce wildfire exposure to communities. USDA included 
these estimates among recommendations for decreasing the risk of severe 
wildfire in the Climate-Smart Agriculture and Forestry Strategy 
provided in response to Executive Order 14008: Tackling the Climate 
Crisis at Home and Abroad.
    President Biden's American Jobs Plan calls for restoring nature-
based infrastructure to increase resilience and reduce the risks 
associated with extreme wildfires. USDA supports additional investments 
in wildfire risk reduction and ecosystem restoration. We believe such 
investments will help make significant progress in reducing the threat 
of wildland fire to communities across the West.
Section 8003: Wildfire Risk Reduction
    Section 8003 of the EIA would provide $3.5 billion to USDA and the 
Department of the Interior (DOI) for activities that involve responding 
to and mitigating the threat of wildland fire. These provisions include 
increased funding for: salaries and expenses of hardworking and 
dedicated Federal wildland firefighters; mapping hazardous fuels 
treatments and their relation to wildfires; technology related to 
detecting and managing wildfires; the Collaborative Forest Landscape 
Restoration Program (16 U.S.C. 7303); mechanical thinning and timber 
harvesting focused on small diameter trees; community wildfire defense 
grants; increasing use of prescribed fire and implementation of fuel 
breaks; modifying and removing flammable vegetation on Federal land; 
post-fire restoration; and other important provisions that would 
greatly assist Federal agencies, states, and local communities in 
reducing the threat of wildland fire. If funding through these 
provisions is not obligated within 5 years of enactment it would be 
returned to the Treasury. USDA supports additional investments in each 
of these areas and would like to work with the Committee on technical 
suggestions related to this section.
    This section also directs USDA and DOI, in coordination with the 
Office of Personnel Management, to establish a new ``wildland fire 
manager'' occupational series. The new series would not affect 
hazardous duty differential pay and would provide current wildland 
firefighters with the option to either remain in their current 
occupational series or convert to the new ``wildland fire manager'' 
series. Starting in Fiscal Year 2022, USDA and DOI will seek to convert 
no fewer than 1,000 seasonal wildland firefighters to permanent, full-
time, and year-round wildland fire managers who hold responsibilities 
for reducing hazardous fuels on Federal land. Section 8003 also 
increases the base salary of wildland firefighters and wildland fire 
managers in cases where their hourly pay is below the state minimum 
wage or their position is in a location where recruitment or retention 
is difficult. The Forest Service shares the Committee's concerns about 
ensuring competitive pay for wildland firefighters. We are engaging 
with the Office of Personnel Management and the wildland firefighter 
community in seeking solutions that address this need.
    Section 8003(c) provides an additional $100 million for 
implementing Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program (CFLRP) 
projects established under 16 U.S.C. 7303. Section 8003(e) requires 
USDA to solicit new proposals, allows planning costs to be included, 
discontinues funding of any proposal selected prior to September 2018, 
and creates new selection criteria for projects, including 
consideration of acres in the wildland-urban interface or a public 
drinking water source area and costs per acre to be treated. USDA 
supports additional funding for the CFLRP. We would like to work with 
the Committee, as the new criteria would likely affect projects that 
have been submitted and approved for funding, projects that were 
eligible for extension under the 2018 Farm Bill provision, and the 
types and locations of projects eligible for future CFLRP funding.
    USDA supports the concept of a Community Wildfire Defense Grant 
Program, however we would like to work with the Committee to ensure 
that we don't have duplicative and competing programs for community 
defense. Implementing community defense projects consistent with 
Community Wildfire Protection Plans (CWPP), in areas with high or very 
high hazard potential, that are low-income, or in a community impacted 
by a severe disaster is an important component of a national effort to 
reduce risk to life and property from wildfire.
    Section 8003(g) amends Section 10 of the Cooperative Forestry 
Assistance Act (16 U.S.C. 2106) by limiting funding to any city, town, 
or unincorporated area that has a population of not more than 10,000 
inhabitants. Further, this section changes eligibility for assistance 
by requiring states to seek to improve fire data submitted to the 
National Fire Incident Reporting System and requiring a county in which 
a volunteer fire department is located to adopt an ordinance or 
regulation that requires the construction of new roofs on buildings 
before State Fire Assistance or Volunteer Fire Assistance funds can be 
disbursed. USDA would like to work with the Committee to ensure there 
are no unintended consequences to existing program delivery should 
these provisions be enacted.
Section 8004: Ecosystem Restoration
    Section 8004 provides $2 billion to USDA and DOI for various 
activities designed to improve ecosystem health. If the funding is not 
obligated within 5 years of enactment it would be returned to the 
Treasury. Of the funding provided to USDA, this section would be used 
to:

   Enter into landscape-scale contracts, including stewardship 
        contracts, to restore ecological health on Federal land;

   Provide funds to states for implementing restoration 
        projects on Federal land through the Good Neighbor Authority 
        (16 U.S.C. 2113a);

   Provide financial assistance to establish or improve 
        sawmills and wood processing facilities that process byproducts 
        from restoration projects;

   Award grants to states to establish rental programs for 
        portable skidder bridges that minimize stream bed disturbance 
        on Federal and non-Federal land;

   Detect, prevent and eradicate invasive species at points of 
        entry and grants for eradication of invasive species on non-
        Federal land and on Federal land;

   Restore, prepare or adapt recreation sites that have or may 
        likely experience use beyond their carrying capacity;

   Restore native vegetation and mitigate environmental hazards 
        on Federal and non-Federal previously mined land; and

   Establish a collaborative-based, landscape scale restoration 
        program to restore water quality or fish passage on Federal 
        land.

    USDA supports additional investments in each of these areas. We 
would like to work with the Committee on technical suggestions related 
to this section, and look forward to working with the Committee to 
explore other areas where further investment is warranted.
Other Natural Resources-Related Provisions
    There are several other provisions in the EIA that relate to 
natural resources managed by the USDA Forest Service including:
Civilian Climate Corps
    Section 8003(c)(15) of the EIA provides $200 million for removing 
flammable vegetation on Federal land and, to the extent practicable, 
producing biochar through the use of the Civilian Climate Corps 
established pursuant to E.O. 14008. USDA supports the use of the 
Civilian Climate Corps under this provision, and also would like to 
work with the Committee to make further investments that will mobilize 
the next generation of new, diverse conservation and resilience workers 
in restoring our public lands as proposed in the American Jobs Plan.
Legacy Roads and Trails Program
    Section 8001 would require the Secretary to establish the Legacy 
Roads and Trails Remediation Program. This program supports restoring 
fish passages, road decommissioning, preparing roads for long-term 
storage, relocating National Forest System roads, and converting NFS 
roads to trails. If enacted, the program will require the Forest 
Service to establish an annual process for selecting long-term storage 
and road and trail decommissioning projects, and to solicit public 
comment on these projects. The program prioritizes projects that: 
protect or improve water quality; restore habitat of threatened, 
endangered, or sensitive species; and maintain future access for the 
public, permittees and firefighters. In implementing the program, the 
Forest Service is required to ensure that the system of roads and 
trails is adequate to meet any increasing demands, provides for 
multiple use and sustained yield of products and services, does not 
damage adjacent resources, and reflects long-term funding expectations. 
USDA supports reestablishment of the Legacy Roads and Trails program.
Orphaned Well Site Plugging, Remediation, and Restoration Program
    Section 6001 of the EIA includes the ``Revive Economic Growth and 
Reclaim Orphaned Wells Act of 2021'' (S. 1076). USDA provided written 
testimony to the Committee on S. 1076 on June 16, 2021. USDA 
appreciates the Committee's attention to this important issue and 
supports the goal of S. 1076, the ``Revive Economic Growth and Reclaim 
Orphaned Wells Act of 2021,'' to remediate the thousands of orphaned 
oil and gas wells on Federal and non-Federal lands.
    S. 1076 directs the Secretary of the Interior in cooperation with 
the Secretary of Agriculture to establish a program to identify and 
permanently plug and remediate orphaned wells located on Federal lands. 
Additionally, the bill requires the DOI to establish a Tribal grant 
program administered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and a state 
program administered by the DOI that would enable qualifying Tribes and 
states to undertake the same type of activities.
    As noted in USDA's June 16th testimony, most orphaned wells on NFS 
lands originated in areas of split estate and non-Federal development 
before the Federal Government acquired the land. S. 1076 does not 
specifically address the issue of split estate and how non-Federal 
development before the Federal Government acquired the land would be 
addressed under the Federal program or under the state grant programs. 
If the intent is to manage these wells under the Federal program, we 
would welcome the opportunity to work with the Committee to clarify the 
definition of Federal land and the mechanisms for addressing these 
wells under the bill. In addition, the Administration supports the 
strengthening of Federal bonding regulations to ensure that proper 
financial assurances are in place before development occurs to avoid 
exacerbating the issue of orphaned wells in the future.
Tree Planting
    Tree planting is a critical component of ecosystem restoration 
given its role in mitigating climate change, increasing carbon storage 
in forests, providing resilience in the face of invasive pests, and 
creating and maintaining ecological services vital to this nation. The 
National Forest System has planned reforestation activities on over 1.3 
million acres of forestlands. These plans represent only about \1/3\ of 
NFS reforestation needs, which are estimated at 4 million acres. 
Wildfires create over 80 percent of reforestation needs, including 
approximately 1 million acres that burned with high severity in 2020 
alone. The Forest Service currently addresses only six percent of post-
wildfire replanting needs per year, resulting in a rapidly expanding 
list of reforestation needs from wildfire and other natural 
disturbances. To meet this challenge, we must dramatically increase the 
rate of reforestation on the national forests. Current funding, 
provided through the Reforestation Trust Fund, is capped at $30 million 
per year. Therefore, USDA recommends adding a provision to eliminate 
the cap on the Reforestation Trust Fund, as has been proposed in the 
REPLANT Act. This additional provision would close the funding gap and 
enable national forests to address reforestation needs now and into the 
future.
    This concludes my testimony. I welcome any questions the Committee 
may have.

                                  [all]