    [Senate Hearing 117-477]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 117-477

                              PENDING LEGISLATION

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

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                          ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                       on

    		S. 4729                              S. 4891
    		S. 4833                              S. 4904
    		S. 4835                              S. 4935
    		S. 4837                              S. 4942
    		S. 4877                              S. 4944
    		S. 4884                              S. 4945

                                   __________

                               SEPTEMBER 29, 2022

                                   __________

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

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

                                  __________

                       U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    49-443                      WASHINGTON : 2024

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES

                    JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia, Chairman
    RON WYDEN, Oregon                    JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
    MARIA CANTWELL, Washington           JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
    BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont             MIKE LEE, Utah
    MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico          STEVE DAINES, Montana
    MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii              LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
    ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine            JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
    CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada       JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
    MARK KELLY, Arizona                  BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana
    JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado       CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
                                         ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas

                          Renae Black, Staff Director
                          Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
                  Bryan Petit Senior Professional Staff Member
                 Richard M. Russell, Republican Staff Director
                  Matthew H. Leggett, Republican Chief Counsel
                       James Willson, Republican Counsel

                               C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                       Page
    Manchin III, Hon. Joe, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from West
      Virginia.......................................................     4
    Barrasso, Hon. John, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from
      Wyoming........................................................     5

                                   WITNESSES

    Crockett, John, Associate Deputy Chief, State and Private
      Forestry, USDA Forest Service..................................    12
    Rupert, Jeff, Director, Office of Wildland Fire, U.S. Department
      of the Interior................................................    26
    Hourdequin, James, W., CEO, The Lyme Timber Company..............    39
    O'Toole, Patrick, President, Family Farm Alliance................    49

              ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

    Barrasso, Hon. John:
        Opening Statement............................................     5
    Center for Biological Diversity et al.:
        Letter for the Record........................................   135
    Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs:
        Letter for the Record........................................     2
    Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation:
        Letter for the Record........................................   139
    (The) Corps Network:
        Letter for the Record........................................    83
    Crockett, John:
        Opening Statement............................................    12
        Written Testimony............................................    15
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................   101
    Feinstein, Hon. Dianne:
        Statement for the Record.....................................   125
    Forest Resources Association:
        Letter for the Record........................................    84
    Grassroots Wildland Firefighters:
        Letter for the Record........................................    85
    Hourdequin, James W.:
        Opening Statement............................................    39
        Written Testimony............................................    41
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................   123
    Kaplan, Adiel and Monica Hersher:
        NBC News article entitled ``The Forest Service Is Overstating
          Its Wildlife Prevention Progress to Congress Despite
          Decades of Warnings Not To'' dated August 9, 2022..........    68
    Manchin III, Hon. Joe:
        Opening Statement............................................     4
    National Federation of Federal Employees:
        Letter for the Record........................................    87
    National Job Corps Association:
        Letter for the Record........................................    89
    O'Toole, Patrick:
        Opening Statement............................................    49
        Photograph of grazing allotment..............................    50
        Written Testimony............................................    53
        Questions for the Record.....................................   124
    Padilla, Hon. Alex:
        Statement for the Record.....................................   130
    Rupert, Jeff:
        Opening Statement............................................    26
        Written Testimony............................................    29
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................   114
    Smith, Nick:
        Editorial entitled ``Defining `Old Growth' Is a Futile
          Exercise When Our Forests Are Burning'' published in The
          Hill, August 10, 2022......................................     7
    (The) Wilderness Society:
        Statement for the Record.....................................   133
    Ziegler, Amy:
        Letter for the Record........................................    73

    ----------
    The text for each of the bills that were addressed in this hearing can
    be found at: https://www.energy.senate.gov/hearings/2022/9/full-
    committee-hearing-to-consider-pending-legislation

                              PENDING LEGISLATION

                                  ----------

                          THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2022

                                   U.S. Senate,
                     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in
    Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Joe Manchin
    III, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
        The Chairman. The Committee will come to order.
        At this time, I take the privilege of recognizing Senator
    Wyden for some comments here, and then we will get right into
    it.
        Senator Wyden. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for your
    courtesy and also thank Senator Barrasso, and I will be very
    brief. We just had a couple of finance matters come up here in
    the last 20 minutes or so.
        I just want to take a minute and mention the Tribal
    Resources Restoration Act, a priority for my constituents to
    help protect the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs and their
    reservation from the threat of wildfire. It also will help us
    improve our partnership, one we value with the Forest Service,
    by embracing co-management on parts of the Mt. Hood National
    Forest. The bill directs the USDA and the Forest Service to
    enter into an MOU with the tribe and develop a management
    strategy that incorporates the tribe's traditional knowledge of
    the area and reduces wildfire risk. The Warm Springs Tribe is
    the largest neighbor to the Mt. Hood National Forest, and is
    often the first impacted by wildfires that spark in the area.
        Mr. Chairman, I would just ask unanimous consent to be able
    to submit a question to Jeff Rupert, Office of Wildland Fire at
    Interior, and I would also, as part of the unanimous consent
    request, Mr. Chairman, would like to submit for the record a
    letter from the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs in support
    of this legislation and of how it would increase restoration
    work and restore forest resources in the forest.
        I want to thank my colleagues, all of them, for this
    indulgence, and the Chairman and the Ranking Member.
        The Chairman. Without objection, the letter will be
    submitted for the record.
        [Senator Wyden's question for the record appears in the
    Appendix with all other written questions for the record. The
    letter referred to follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Wyden. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.

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

        The Chairman. The Committee will come to order.
        This morning we are here to discuss a number of pieces of
    legislation related to wildfires and to forestry. The bills we
    will be discussing today represent the priorities of members on
    both sides of the aisle, including many members of this
    Committee, who are more than familiar with the topic of
    wildfire. Furthermore, the bills before us today demonstrate
    our shared interest in improving the condition of our nation's
    forests and in addressing our nation's wildfire problem. Our
    Committee has discussed, at length, the impacts of worsening
    climate conditions and the past mismanagement that has ushered
    in a new era of fuels and wildfires. Decades of fire
    suppression and reduced harvesting has led to the historic
    buildup of vegetation, or fuel load, which makes our forests
    unable to withstand the warming temperatures and drier
    conditions.
        In fact, Forest Service research has published a study in
    Forest Ecology and Management earlier this year documenting
    that between 1911 and 2011, the density of trees in the dry
    forests of the West increased six to sevenfold. This
    overcrowding has also resulted in the average size of trees in
    these forests being 50 percent smaller than in 1911. We have
    essentially created a perfect storm. And as a result, we have
    witnessed an increase in the occurrence of megafires, and
    communities across the West are suffering from tragic loss of
    life and property. While agency leaders have talked about
    correcting this course for some time, it seems that with each
    passing decade, we are slipping further behind. For example, in
    the past ten years, 25 percent of California's forests burned
    in wildfires. The Forest Service's land was hit particularly
    hard. While 15 percent of California's private forest land
    burned in the past ten years, 39 percent of national forests
    burned.
        In May 2021, this Committee held a hearing to discuss the
    critical role that our forests play in absorbing and storing
    carbon emissions and the worsening impact of wildfire on our
    climate. We concluded that promoting low-density forests
    through mechanical thinning treatments, prescribed fire, and
    other methods will help clear out the excess growth and make
    way for healthier trees that can withstand fire and other
    disturbances. Since that hearing, Congress has provided record
    levels of funding--over $10 billion--to help the federal
    agencies achieve the paradigm shift. However, despite this
    unprecedented level of funding and new authorities that
    Congress has provided, I understand the Forest Service only
    treated eight percent more acres this year--eight percent. I
    also understand that the Forest Service is on track to have its
    third straight year of declining timber sales. I look forward
    to hearing from our witnesses today about the bottlenecks they
    face in ramping up these important treatments and what we can
    learn from private industry. It is non-negotiable at this
    point. We must get to work at changing the status quo. Both the
    health of our forests and the safety of our communities is at
    stake.
        I believe the legislation we have on the agenda today
    offers some creative, common-sense solutions for addressing
    these problems. First, I have a bill, Senate bill 4935, which
    is the More Hasty Response to Firefighting Act. It will enable
    loggers to better assist in firefighting efforts when they
    start. In the coal industry, in coal country, mining companies
    are required--if you have a mining permit, you must have a
    certified mine rescue team, because sometimes they are in
    remote areas, and we cannot get there quick enough with first
    responders, so you better have someone to save a life
    immediately--no different than saving the forest. We can do the
    same. My bill directs the Forest Service to offer basic
    firefighting training to loggers working on or next to fire-
    prone national forests and gives them the ability to extinguish
    a wildfire if they happen to see one start. Right now, if
    lightning strikes and a wildfire starts, workers in the area
    cannot take action to stop it from spreading.
        Second, I have co-sponsored the Promoting Effective Forest
    Management Act, introduced by my friend, Senator Barrasso
    sitting here, which directs the agencies to undertake a range
    of activities aimed at reducing fire risk on federal lands.
    This includes raising the acreage targets for mechanical
    thinning projects and establishing a training program to
    modernize and grow the logging workforce. Importantly, the bill
    also significantly modifies a current agency policy related to
    retirement benefits for firefighters. Currently, if a federal
    firefighter has longer than a three-day break in service over a
    20-year career, he, or more often, she, must forfeit his or her
    previously made retirement contributions. It makes no sense.
    This outdated practice is something I will talk more about when
    we get our time for questions. Our Committee will continue to
    look at ways to increase retention in our shrinking wildland
    firefighting workforce, but we hope that addressing this issue
    today will be another milestone in our efforts.
        I want to thank our witnesses for being here today. I look
    forward to hearing your perspectives on these 12 bills and the
    issues they seek to address.
        With that, I am going to turn to Ranking Member Barrasso
    for his opening statement.

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

        Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    I appreciate your leadership in dealing with this issue, your
    co-sponsorship, and then the two of us working together on
    several pieces of legislation that are on the agenda today,
    because we have had another devastating wildfire season this
    year. Make no mistake, America's western forests are facing a
    wildfire crisis, and this crisis is not going to solve itself.
    Roughly 63 million of the 193 million acres of the National
    Forest System are at either high or very high risk of
    catastrophic fire. These at-risk forests are in dire need of
    management to reduce fire damage. Congress has provided the
    Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management with increased
    resources and tools, and it is good to have Senator King here
    because you pointed that out at the last hearing, that we have
    done what they have asked and there is more work to be done on
    their part to respond to the direction of Congress.
        So this is why the Chairman and I have introduced the
    Promoting Effective Forest Management Act.
        Senator King. Let the record show that he said that it is
    good that I am here because he does not always think that.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Barrasso. Well today, we are all rowing in the same
    direction because there is work to be done and so thank you,
    Senator King, for being here and for your active involvement
    and interest in this issue.
        This is a bipartisan bill. That does not always happen
    either, but in this Committee, we try to do that, and this
    bipartisan bill is going hold agencies accountable for the
    results that they, themselves, have told us that they must
    achieve. Forest Service officials have repeatedly testified
    before this very Committee that they need to dramatically
    increase the pace and scale of wildfire mitigation treatments.
    Our legislation will hold them to the task by prioritizing
    results over rhetoric. The legislation directs land management
    agencies to set annual acreage treatment targets and to
    drastically increase those targets in the coming years. If
    these targets are not met, agencies must report to Congress any
    limitations or challenges that have hindered their progress.
    That includes litigation challenges and permitting delays.
        Our bill also contains a number of measures to help set
    agencies up for success. It requires the Forest Service and the
    BLM to use their existing streamlining authorities for projects
    that would reduce wildfire risk and improve forest health.
    Currently, these authorities are optional and are often unused,
    significantly slowing down vital projects. Making them
    mandatory will help cut red tape and protect our forests. The
    bill that Senator Manchin and I have worked on together also
    recognizes and enhances the vital role our ranchers and farmers
    play in reducing wildfire risk. Specifically, it directs
    agencies to develop a strategy to increase the use of grazing
    as a wildfire mitigation tool. And I had an opportunity this
    morning to meet with a number of the members of the Wyoming
    agriculture community who are in this very room to hear about
    that and to talk about the issues of grazing as a management
    tool and mitigation tool. This includes expanding the use of
    targeted grazing and increasing issuances of temporary grazing
    permits. As we have seen in Wyoming, ranchers contribute to
    practices that create healthier and more resilient landscapes
    and forests.
        This bill, the Promoting Effective Forest Management Act,
    will also halt the Biden Administration's destructive efforts
    to restrict responsible management of mature forests. According
    to a recent piece written by Nick Smith, published in The Hill,
    ``At a time when we need more management of fire-prone federal
    lands, this is a formula for more bureaucracy and red tape. It
    further ties the hands of our public lands managers.'' So
    instead of blindly following the misguided agenda, our bill
    makes it clear that agencies must adhere to the law and to
    sound science.
        [The article referred to follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Barrasso. Finally, our legislation will benefit our
    wildland firefighters. As Senator Manchin mentioned, among
    other changes, it places a cap on the rent that they are forced
    to pay for agency-provided housing. The provision will help
    federal agencies hire and retain wildland firefighters. Our
    bill enjoys broad support from a wide range of organizations,
    including sportsmen's groups, agriculture organizations, timber
    companies, private forest owners, and firefighter advocates.
        Mr. Chairman, I am very grateful for your partnership in
    moving this vital legislation forward. I would also like to
    welcome Pat O'Toole of Savery, Wyoming, who is going be
    testifying today. I will have a bit more to say about Pat in a
    few minutes. There are a number of good bills on the agenda
    today and I look forward to today's hearing.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
        And before we go to our panel, we will take the liberty to
    recognize Senator King. He can't miss a meeting he has to go
    to, and I know which one it is. Senator King.
        Senator King. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I
    appreciate your indulgence.
        I don't have a dog in this fight in the sense that Maine's
    forests are almost entirely privately owned. We have a little
    bit of the White Mountain National Forest in Western Maine. I
    guess the phrase ought to be, I do not have a tree in this
    forest.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator King. But I feel strongly that we have to move on
    the bill that Senator Barrasso outlined. In 1986, we harvested
    something like 13 billion board feet off the national forest.
    Last year, it was about three. I don't know what the right
    number is, but it is somewhere between 13 and three, and I
    think it is a lot more than three. In my view, we are doing a
    grave disservice to this country by not managing the federal
    forests adequately on several fronts. One is, of course, the
    fire front that Senator Barrasso has talked about. By not
    managing forests, there is more debris on the floor. There is
    more on the forest floor. There is more underbrush, and that is
    what really makes these fires so destructive. So forest fire
    management is number one.
        Number two is the environment itself. The science is that a
    growing tree as opposed to a mature tree sequesters more
    carbon, and to the extent that we are managing the forests and
    encouraging the growth of younger, smaller-diameter trees to
    become larger-diameter trees, we are sequestering more carbon,
    and thereby helping to cope with the climate crisis. And then,
    finally, is the economic effects. Senator Risch is not here,
    but I have often heard him say that in Idaho, 20 or 30 years
    ago, there were 20 or 30 sawmills. Now, there is something like
    three. And we are really substantially undermining the
    economics of the forest products industry in the West by not
    having sufficient wood supply.
        So I think on all three of those bases, we really have to
    move forward with legislation to increase the sustainable
    harvest. Forestry is almost the definition of a sustainable
    industry. The trees grow back, and they grow back better if
    they are thinned, if they are managed, if they are pre-
    commercially thinned, and that is what we really need to do. So
    from an environmental point of view, as well as from an
    economic point of view, I think this legislation is critically
    important and, of course, the fire issue is high on our agenda
    right now.
        I am afraid I am only going to listen to your testimony,
    but I do not think I will be here for questions. But one of the
    issues I would like to hear about is, to what extent is
    litigation the problem? And if it is, we have to figure that
    out. We cannot allow protracted litigation. We want people to
    have their say. We want people to be involved. But when we
    allow litigation itself to become a weapon--not in terms of
    what the outcome is, but in terms of the delay--that is
    unacceptable. And we have to find a path that allows people to
    be engaged, to make their case, but ultimately, we have to make
    decisions and move forward. And as I say, Maine is the most
    forested state in the nation. We have a strong Forest Practices
    Act that controls things like clear cutting and stream
    amelioration and management effects on streams. All of those
    issues can be dealt with without constraining forestry to the
    point where we are losing the benefits that it brings about.
        Senator Barrasso, thank you for your indulgence, and I look
    forward to the hearing.
        Senator Barrasso [presiding]. Well, thanks so much, Senator
    King. You know, I agree, it took about----
        Senator Marshall. Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Barrasso. I turn to Senator Marshall.
        Senator Marshall. Would it be out of order to ask them to
    answer Senator King's question on the litigation before he
    leaves because I would love to hear the answer too.
        Senator Barrasso. That would be fine with me, and now that
    the Chairman has returned, if we want to run that down the
    panel.
        Yes, Senator King had one question and he has to get to his
    important meeting.
        Senator King. My question was to what extent is litigation
    the problem?
        You can start at either end. Go ahead, yes, Pat.
        Mr. O'Toole. Thank you, Senator.
        So I have a philosophy of natural resources, it is called
    the hopefuls and the hatefuls. And what we are trying to do is
    empower the hopeful people to do things. The litigators, as you
    talked, and let's use the example of the giant sequoias, where
    litigation stopped forest management that caused destructive
    fires this year in California. And it, you know, I am going to
    show an example of what our forest looks like right now, and
    the reason we are not moving forward is the litigation from the
    industry, I mean, it is an industry, Senator.
        Senator King. So you are saying that the stoppage of
    responsible forestry has, in fact, endangered the giant
    sequoias?
        Mr. O'Toole. Absolutely, you know, there is prodigious
    reporting on it in all the media and there was a Forest Service
    plan to clean that area up to prevent exactly what happened. So
    yes, that is the most recent example that I can tell you of,
    but it is happening in the forest where we are working on the
    Medicine Bow-Routt Forest in Colorado and Wyoming. It is
    absolutely what has stopped every effort that we have had to
    try to clean up that forest, which is the headwaters of the
    Colorado River. Thank you.
        Mr. Hourdequin. Thank you, Senator.
        I do not have extensive experience with harvesting on
    federal lands. I can say that I think the industry has come to
    expect relatively low levels of harvesting from federal lands,
    and the understanding is that the Forest Service does not put
    up as much timber for sale in part because of their expectation
    that litigation would slow it down. And I think, in many
    respects, the industry has kind of recalibrated and gotten used
    to that over the last several years and even decades. So,
    obviously, this legislation, if it is going to unjam some of
    that and create more direction to engage on some of these
    thinning treatments that are so needed, that would certainly be
    a very good thing for the forest products industry.
        Mr. Rupert. Thank you, sir. From my perspective, I think,
    clearly litigation has an impact on our planning and delivery
    of programs and projects. I appreciate your observation that,
    which is not to say that the outcome is necessarily on either
    end of the spectrum, wrong, but undoubtedly, litigation has an
    effect on how we plan and deliver programs and projects. I
    think that is undeniable.
        Mr. Crockett. And I will round this out here. Thanks for
    the question.
        So within the Forest Service we do value the role that the
    public voice gets to play and the role of implementing work on
    the ground, but unnecessary litigation does have a significant
    impact on our ability to get that work accomplished. And so,
    while we value the voice on one end, having some type of a
    balance of what litigation is would be something that we would
    be interested in.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Now, we will get back to our presentation, and Mr.
    Crockett, we will start with you with your statement.

      OPENING STATEMENT OF JOHN CROCKETT, ASSOCIATE DEPUTY CHIEF,
            STATE AND PRIVATE FORESTRY, USDA FOREST SERVICE

        Mr. Crockett. All right. Good morning, Chairman Manchin,
    Ranking Member Barrasso, and members of the Committee. Thank
    you for the opportunity to provide the perspectives of the USDA
    Forest Service on the 12 public land bills under consideration
    today. The Forest Service manages 193 million acres of land for
    multiple uses, provides technical and financial assistance to
    state and private forestry agencies, and makes up the largest
    forestry research organization in the world. I look forward to
    discussing these bills with you today.
        Over the last two decades, we witnessed what has become now
    a familiar pattern--bigger and more destructive wildfires that
    are extremely challenging and costly to suppress. This wildfire
    crisis calls for a new paradigm, which is outlined in our ten-
    year Wildland Fire Crisis Strategy. We greatly appreciate the
    significant down payment that Congress has provided through the
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that is allowing us to
    take the initial steps to perform this critical work. The bills
    we are discussing today will help the agency accomplish more
    work as efficiently and effectively as possible. The bills will
    hold us to a higher standard of accountability so we can better
    meet the goals of the American public that we serve.
        The Civilian Conservation Center Enhancement Act supports a
    specialized training program focused on forestry and rangeland
    management, wildland firefighting, and more. These provisions
    support the Administration's priorities of wildland fire
    management and workforce development. The USDA strongly
    supports the intent of this bill and looks forward to working
    with Congress on technical changes.
        The Save our Sequoias Act provides administrative tools and
    procedures to help address the threats that our giants are
    facing. We recently initiated emergency fuel reduction
    treatments to provide for the long-term survival of Giant
    Sequoia growth against immediate threats of wildfire. While the
    USDA has concerns with the litigation, we appreciate the intent
    and look forward to continued discussions with Congress on ways
    to expedite this important work.
        USDA would like to work with Congress to provide technical
    assistance on the Small-Diameter Timber and Underutilized
    Material Act, which designates free-use areas on National
    Forest System lands that contain small-diameter trees in a fire
    hazard area.
        The Natural Infrastructure Act establishes a new science
    program to respond to the emerging research needs of the
    private sector and local governments. We support the goals of
    this bill and would like to work with Congress to provide
    technical assistance.
        The More Hasty Response to Firefighting Act requires the
    Forest Service and the Department of the Interior to build a
    cadre of local individuals to support initial attack on
    wildfires. USDA supports the intent of this bill and would like
    to work with Congress to address some concerns.
        The Promoting Effective Forest Management Act proposes
    several changes and updates to Forest Service policies and
    regulations with the intent of providing more effective
    management. While we support several of the goals in the bill,
    we would like to work with Congress to address concerns within
    the bill language.
        The Catastrophic Wildfire Prevention Act requires the
    Forest Service to work collaboratively with state and local
    forest management agencies to establish a pilot program to
    identify research and establish pre-fire suppression stand
    density indices for certain areas of the National Forest
    System, and to use this information to benchmark our forest
    treatments. While we support several of the goals in the bill,
    we would like to work with Congress to address agency concerns.
        The Watershed Restoration Initiative Act would provide for
    the establishment of a new Southwest Ecological Restoration
    Institute in the state of Utah. USDA would like to work with
    Congress to make additional improvements to the underlying
    authorities for these institutes.
        S. 4891 amends Title VI of the Federal Land Management
    Policy Act of 1976, requiring USDA to develop a pilot program
    to operate nurseries on National Forest System land. USDA
    supports the goal of this bill and looks forward to working
    with Congress to address the nation's replanting backlog.
        The Firewood Banks Act establishes grants for operation of
    firewood banks on federal land and provides trees for firewood.
    We support the use of firewood banks for those in need of
    emergency heating and would like to work with Congress to
    ensure the bill is in line with the Infrastructure Investment
    and Jobs Act and addresses concerns with existing bill
    language.
        S. 4837 amends the the Omnibus Public Land Management Act
    of 2009, establishing a Treaty Resources Emphasis Zone within
    the Mt. Hood National Forest. USDA is committed to fulfilling
    the trust relationship between the United States and tribes and
    supports the spirit and intent of the bill and would like to
    work with Congress on technical clarifications.
        And finally, the Hermit's Peak/Calf Canyon Forest
    Restoration Program Relief Act amends the emergency forest
    restoration program, waving the cost-share requirement for
    lands damaged by the Hermit's Peak/Calf Canyon Fire. USDA looks
    forward to working with Congress to provide timely compensation
    for the victims of the Hermit's Peak/Calf Canyon Fire.
        This concludes my remarks, and I look forward to answering
    any questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Crockett follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you.
        First of all, I am going to introduce the panel. We got a
    little bit off-base here, but we are going to get back.
        Mr. Crockett is the Associate Deputy from the Forest
    Service, and thank you for your testimony.
        We have also, Mr. Jeff Rupert from the Department of the
    Interior's Office of Wildland Fire.
        We have Mr. Jim Hourdequin, CEO of Lyme Timber Company.
        And finally, we have Mr. Pat O'Toole from the Family Farm
    Alliance.
        And now, we will go to Mr. Rupert.

    OPENING STATEMENT OF JEFF RUPERT, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WILDLAND
                 FIRE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

        Mr. Rupert. Good morning, Chairman Manchin, Ranking Member
    Barrasso, members of the Committee. Thank you for the
    opportunity to appear before you to provide testimony on
    wildland fire management and forest management legislation. I
    believe that the bills being discussed today provide important
    tools, authorities, and resources to reduce wildfire risk and
    improve the resiliency of our nation's forests, rangelands, and
    grasslands.
        Climate change continues to play an oversized role in the
    extreme fire weather that we are experiencing across the
    nation. A drier and hotter climate results in low fuel moisture
    that frequently leads to extreme conditions that produce the
    larger, more intense wildfires that we are experiencing. In
    recent years, nearly every western state has experienced
    prolonged periods of high to extreme fire danger, affecting
    hundreds of millions of acres of land. Many of these areas are
    in the Wildland Urban Interface, where communities in the West
    are increasingly exposed to wildfire. This year, the nation
    reached a high of preparedness level (PL) 4 on September 8th,
    and remained there for ten days. This is in contrast to last
    year, when the nation remained at PL 4 or 5 for a record 99
    consecutive days, starting in late June. What we have observed
    this year is more of a gradual movement of wildfire across the
    nation. Even with this, many geographic regions of the country
    experienced catastrophic wildfire events, including in the
    Southwest, where New Mexico experienced the largest wildfire in
    its history. We are undeniably in the midst of a wildfire
    crisis that is being driven by climate change.
        Through President Biden's Bipartisan Infrastructure Law,
    the Department is receiving nearly $1.5 billion to manage and
    reduce wildfire risk by improving the resiliency of our
    nation's forests, rangelands, and grasslands through hazardous
    fuels management and post-fire restoration. Funding also
    supports efforts to bolster wildland firefighter pay and
    promote firefighter safety and long-term mental health. So far
    this year, the Department has allocated $180 million in
    funding, with plans to address a program totaling nearly two
    million acres of hazardous fuels and one million acres of
    restoration treatments. A portion of this investment also
    supports short-term supplemental pay increases for 3,800
    Interior firefighters and programs that expand support for
    firefighter mental health and wellness as well as science and
    research to improve the monitoring and assessment of mitigation
    and restoration work and to better understand the impacts of
    climate change on wildfire.
        I believe the goals and objectives of the bills being
    considered today, in combination with the backing of the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, can further advance the
    Department's efforts to reduce wildfire risk, achieve
    additional wildland firefighter workforce reforms, and
    strengthen the interagency response to wildfire.
        S. 4833, the Save our Sequoias Act, would codify the Giant
    Sequoia Lands Coalition to provide recommendations on the
    stewardship of giant sequoias. The bill authorizes emergency
    response activities to protect giant sequoias, and establishes
    strike teams to carry out protection projects. The Department
    supports the goals of the legislation and would like to work
    with the sponsor on additional clarifications to the bill.
        S. 4835, the Small-Diameter Timber and Underutilized
    Material Act, provides for the removal of small-diameter trees
    from fire hazard areas at no cost to individuals. The
    Department supports the goals of this legislation and would
    like to work with the sponsor to minimize any potential
    economic impacts to counties that receive a portion of receipts
    from timber sales, particularly those in western Oregon.
        S. 4877, the Civilian Conservation Centers Enhancement Act,
    would establish civilian conservation centers to train youth in
    forest and rangeland management, wildfire management, and other
    mission areas. The Department supports the goals of the
    legislation and would like to work with the sponsor to ensure
    that the interests of the Department are incorporated into the
    training, in addition to addressing other technical changes.
        S. 4884, the Natural Infrastructure Act, would establish a
    joint natural infrastructure science program with the USDA
    Forest Service for the purpose of fostering and disseminating
    science on natural infrastructure. The Department strongly
    supports the legislation as a way to utilize nature-based
    infrastructure solutions to address climate goals, and would
    like to work with the sponsor on technical modifications to the
    bill.
        S. 4891, to amend the Federal Land Policy and Management
    Act of 1976, directs the Department to establish and operate
    tree nurseries on Bureau of Land Management public lands. The
    Department supports the goals of the bill and would like to
    work with the sponsor to expand the scope to include nurseries
    propagating native species in order to address a wider range of
    restoration needs.
        S. 4904, the Promoting Effective Forest Management Act,
    includes a wide range of forest management provisions and
    wildland firefighter workforce reform. The Department supports
    the goals of the legislation and we would like to work with the
    sponsor to address issues.
        S. 4935, the More Hasty Response to Firefighting Act, would
    establish a training program for landowners and employees of
    companies authorized to carry out activities on Forest Service
    and BLM lands. The Department supports the objectives of the
    legislation and would like to work with the sponsors to
    facilitate and encourage more rapid response, as well as to
    ensure that appropriate training and safety measures are in
    place.
        And finally, S. 4944, the Firewood Banks Act, would
    establish a pilot program to provide affordable firewood as a
    heating source for individuals for residential use. The
    Department supports the goals of the bill and would like to
    work with the sponsor on several clarifications.
        This concludes my statement.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Rupert follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Hourdequin.

               OPENING STATEMENT OF JAMES W. HOURDEQUIN,
                      CEO, THE LYME TIMBER COMPANY

        Mr. Hourdequin. Chairman Manchin, Ranking Member Barrasso,
    and members of the Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to
    speak to you today about workforce development in the logging
    industry. My name is Jim Hourdequin, and I am the CEO of the
    Lyme Timber Company, a timberland investment management
    organization with 1.4 million acres of timberland in the U.S.,
    including 165,000 acres in Senator Manchin's home State of West
    Virginia. While logging does not attract much attention as an
    essential industry, it is a critical link in the forest
    products supply chain, an industry that employs over 950,000
    people and provides Americans with everything from housing to
    paper products. Loggers also play a critical role in restoring
    U.S. forests in need of thinning to prevent forest fires, work
    that is needed on a massive scale in the western U.S.
        I started my career in logging 23 years ago, when a logger
    agreed to take me on as a partner in his small logging
    business. We formed a company and borrowed $200,000 from the
    local Farm Credit to purchase a log forwarder. I started out
    felling trees with a chain saw and learned the ropes of a small
    business through trial and error. Back then, we employed eight
    people, six of whom ran chain saws. We produced about one
    million board-feet of logs per year. The business now produces
    over ten million board-feet a year, with 16 people in its
    logging division, a tenfold increase in production with only a
    doubling of the head count.
        I share this experience because it is representative of the
    transformation that has occurred in logging over the past 30
    years. Employment in logging has declined by 41 percent, from
    86,000 in 1990 to under 50,000 today, a decline of two percent
    per year. However, logging output has remained nearly flat. So
    reductions in employment have almost been completely offset by
    increases in productivity. Increased productivity and lower
    employment have been driven by mechanization. Over the past 30
    years, we have shifted from tree felling with chain saws to
    tree felling with mechanical harvesters. The industry has
    become safer and more professionalized with best management
    practices, training requirements, and forest certification.
    Mechanization and increased productivity, in combination with
    generally flat demand for logging services, have resulted in a
    logging workforce that has aged in place and become older, even
    in comparison to other industries. And now there are signs that
    logging capacity is becoming more constrained.
        In West Virginia and Tennessee, for example, we have seen
    logging businesses close because the owners could not recruit
    qualified workers. This began before the pandemic, but has
    gotten worse over the past few years. We are harvesting well
    below our growth-equivalent target levels because we do not
    have adequate logging capacity. To address safety and workforce
    recruitment, we started an in-house logging crew in West
    Virginia in 2019. The system uses a specialized base machine
    with winches to tether a machine that mechanically fells timber
    on steep slopes. While we are thrilled with the safety and
    environmental benefits of this new system, we have struggled to
    make it work financially. Our single greatest challenge has
    been the recruitment of enough qualified people--skilled
    equipment operators and leadership--to increase production and
    achieve profitability. By my rough estimate, it would take
    2,000 logging crews and maybe 10,000 additional skilled
    equipment operators to treat an additional two million acres of
    western forest per year. That is a 20 percent increase in the
    current logging workforce. Without major investments in
    workforce development, I do not see how we get there.
        In my written testimony, I have described the challenges to
    workforce recruitment in the logging sector, including low
    profit margins and wages, physically demanding work, safety
    challenges, and limited technical training. I believe the
    market for logging services, principally landowners and mills,
    is beginning to address profit margins and logger compensation,
    but many of the other challenges cannot be addressed by the
    private sector alone. I have identified four approaches the
    Federal Government could take to begin addressing the
    challenges.
        First, long-term contracts on federal lands to invest in
    thinning equipment and workforce training. Logging companies
    need to be able to combine traditional timber sales with
    stewardship projects that make sense within a logical work area
    and provide security of work for multiple years.
        Second, incentives for apprenticeship programs. Hiring an
    inexperienced worker to learn how to operate a $500,000 machine
    is expensive and risky. The government could create tax credits
    or direct reimbursements to help contractors with costs of
    establishing apprenticeship programs.
        Third, we need public-private partnerships to assist the
    logging industry, equipment manufacturers, and equipment
    dealers in developing and deploying technical training to
    logging crews that are starting up new systems and hiring new
    employees.
        And finally, if we are going to meet the challenge of
    thinning western U.S. forests to reduce fire risk, we will need
    to make large and long-term investments in vocational and
    technical education. Sustaining the forest products industry in
    the U.S., while responsibly growing, harvesting, and restoring
    our nation's forests, will require government and industry to
    collaborate in new ways to develop the logging workforce of the
    future.
        And with that, I would like to thank you for the
    opportunity to speak to the Committee today.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Hourdequin follows:]
     [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Now, I will turn to Senator Barrasso for our next
    introduction.
        Senator Barrasso. Well, thanks, Mr. Chairman. And I would
    like to introduce and welcome Pat O'Toole back to the
    Committee. He is the President of the Family Farm Alliance. He
    is a rancher and a hay grower and a former member of Wyoming's
    House of Representatives. Pat and his wife, Sharon, live and
    work on a ranch located near Savery, Wyoming. Primarily a sheep
    and cattle operation, the ranch has been in Sharon's family
    since 1881, which I point out, Mr. Chairman, was nine years
    before Wyoming even became a state. The O'Toole family and the
    Ladder Ranch were the recipients of the 2014 Wyoming Leopold
    Conservation Award, and just last month, Pat was inducted into
    the Wyoming Agriculture Hall of Fame. Needless to say, he is
    very well equipped to discuss the nexus between livestock
    grazing, responsible land stewardship, and wildfire mitigation.
        So, Pat, again, thank you for joining us today. Welcome to
    the Committee.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF PATRICK O'TOOLE,
                    PRESIDENT, FAMILY FARM ALLIANCE

        Mr. O'Toole. Thank you, Senator and Mr. Chairman, Senator
    Risch, Senator Heinrich. Thank you so much for this
    opportunity. And I am a little bit nervous today, not
    particularly because I am in front of the Committee, but
    because of how important this is. We have to fix this. And you
    know, in my testimony I am going to refer to my personal
    observations and Zack, if you would put this up. We graze the
    Routt-Medicine Bow National Forest, which is a forest in both
    Colorado and Wyoming. Our valley has a river that crosses the
    state line 32 times. So our ranch is in both states, Colorado
    and Wyoming. Our forests are in Colorado and Wyoming. And you
    know, it may be a benefit to the Committee, as I have pretty
    wide understanding of how the system works because we are in
    both forests within two BLMs. You know, we understand the
    concept of how the regulatory system works.
        [Photograph of grazing allotment follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9443.035

        Mr. O'Toole. This is my grazing allotment. This is not just
    ten acres or a hundred acres or a thousand acres. This is
    hundreds of thousands of acres in Northwest Colorado, which is
    the headwaters of the Colorado River, one of the most
    threatened water systems in the United States and the world. A
    forest like this does not generate water. Why is the Family
    Farm Alliance so strongly for this bill? Because we understand
    that the water system is dependent on the forest system. We
    work with the Bureau of Reclamation across the western United
    States. Every Bureau of Reclamation irrigation district has a
    forest with issues like this and the inability of the system to
    absorb the need. The money is there. You all have put the money
    into the system. The desire is there.
        And I will give you a couple of personal observations. The
    Vice President of the Senate in Wyoming is Larry Hicks,
    probably the best person to put conservation on the ground that
    I have ever heard of. I said to him last year, how long in your
    30-year career, how much have you gotten done of your vision?
    He said, maybe 20 percent because they won't let me in the
    forest. So we are in the joint chiefs process. This is the
    first year. So we got a late start because the dollars didn't
    come. He is going to do 2,000 acres of treatment on private and
    state land, 76 acres on the forest.
        What does that tell you? There is an impediment in the
    system to being successful in implementing. That is why your
    bill is so critically important. This is about implementation.
    There has to be a direction to the agencies that something gets
    done. And I have been on multiple tours with the Nature
    Conservancy, with Trout Unlimited, as well as forest owners. In
    southern Wyoming, the Saratoga Mill needs 25 loads a day to
    keep in business. They are getting 12 and they have been told
    we are going to cut you back 40 percent. Why is that? Why is
    there this gap between a mill in Craig, Colorado that says that
    if you will guarantee me ten years of timber, I will invest $7
    million tomorrow of my own money to expand the operation? So
    there is some disconnect going on of why the best programs that
    are out there, that supposedly are going to move us to the
    success that we know that we need, why is it not happening? And
    I think we are going to have to put the pedal down in the
    forest, in the activities that we know need to happen.
        You know, a bunch of my friends, ranchers from Wyoming, are
    here today as well as Senator Risch, a bunch of your people are
    with the Family Farm Alliance. We have had meetings all week
    with the Forest Service, with the Interior, USDA. Two things
    happen with food on the national forest. One is the grazing
    part, and our family is cattle. We tell people cattle, sheep,
    horses, dogs, and children. Our wool goes to the dress uniforms
    for the military. We are proud of being part of the system. But
    the impediments of not being able to graze this are exactly why
    our business is at risk. But the second part that really hasn't
    been well discussed is that the water that is generated from
    the National Forest System throughout the West is the water
    that we make food with. And that food is now clearly
    restricted. That food from my place on the Colorado-Wyoming
    line to the Yuma and the Imperial Irrigation District in
    California, the entire system is at risk because we can't
    generate enough water to grow the crops that we know that we
    need to have.
        You know, I would also like to support Senator Lujan's--
    both the bill on cost share, and with the terrible things that
    happened in New Mexico. We have members there and we are very
    familiar with what happened there and also Senators Merkley and
    Daines have an infrastructure bill that is critical. And this
    is going to be everything, from the sublime to the mundane, to
    fix. It is going to be big picture stuff. It is going to be
    little picture stuff. Your comments, Mr. Hourdequin, about how
    difficult it is to recruit. So I have three different groups in
    Colorado and Wyoming that want to invest money. All they need
    is a facilitated process because the, you know, the Senator
    said earlier that the litigation industry has terrorized the
    ability to fix these forests. And what we need is the tools,
    which is what you have given in this bill. And as time goes on,
    further tools, because we have to demand success. We cannot
    accept failure in this particular enterprise.
        Thank you so much.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. O'Toole follows:]
       [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. I want to thank all of you for your
    testimony. And now we will go through our questions. And if it
    seems like sometimes we are rushing you a little bit, we only
    have five minutes to try to acknowledge everybody here. So the
    quicker your answers, the better.
        And I want to start right with you, Mr. O'Toole, because
    this really piqued my interest here. I am understanding now the
    trees are diseased, so there is no value in those trees.
        Mr. O'Toole. That is actually--since I testified here in
    June, I have spent a lot of time----
        The Chairman. Yes.
        Mr. O'Toole [continuing]. Investigating. These could be a
    coal plant in Colorado that is being decommissioned. The County
    Commissioner is looking at these kinds of trees being the fuel
    for part----
        The Chairman. To cut down the pollution, air quality. I got
    that. But could those trees have been identified earlier and
    been cut and salvaged before they got diseased?
        Mr. O'Toole. Absolutely----
        The Chairman. But you are not allowed to do that, right?
        Mr. O'Toole. It is so complicated and the process----
        The Chairman. I got you.
        Mr. O'Toole [continuing]. Isn't made to deal with this, but
    I can tell you that the markets are developing for this kind
    of--for example, the fellow that wants to invest the $7
    million----
        The Chairman. Yes.
        Mr. O'Toole [continuing]. To make wood straw that is what
    you put on a forest after a fire to have a biological for the
    rejuvenation.
        The Chairman. We have a lot of western Senators here that
    know a lot more about BLM than I do, but I am learning about
    it. It does not make any sense to me at all. And we have
    horrific fires and if we could get back in early enough, we
    could salvage a lot of that, but the dead trees now stand for
    so long, and they become, basically, non-valuable. And this
    kind of common sense has to change, I think. Forget about the
    politics. It just doesn't make any sense for our country or our
    economy.
        With that, I will go to Mr. Hourdequin. First of all, I
    know that your operation is in West Virginia. I appreciate it
    very much, and the people that have opportunities appreciate
    what you do. But if you could explain to me, in your testimony
    you said several things that Lyme Timber is doing, including in
    West Virginia--the growth of the logging workforce. Tell us
    more about the type of training required to operate the
    machinery that you are describing and how an equipment dealer
    training credit for an in-the-field training or apprenticeship
    program might work. How you are navigating that?
        Mr. Hourdequin. Well, that is a great question. The
    training that we have implemented has really been on-the-job
    training, and that has really been what the industry has relied
    on for many, many years in an industry that really did not need
    to recruit labor because of the productivity gains that were
    occurring. There really has not been much in the way of
    formalized training programs. We have found in West Virginia,
    that creates a real challenge if you are taking somebody who
    has never operated a 50-ton machine before and you are putting
    them in the cab of a machine on the side of a hill. There is a
    lot to learn all at once.
        What we have found is funding that and doing that on our
    own, it is really a matter of taking a new operator, giving
    them easy ground to work on initially, having low expectations
    for productivity during the learning curve phase and then
    gradually bringing in experienced operators who can coach and
    mentor and provide additional----
        The Chairman. Working pretty well for you?
        Mr. Hourdequin. It is, but it is, I mean, the question that
    we have and what we would like to see is can we accelerate the
    learning curve? And if we have programs like those that have
    been developed, some in the United States, but more so in other
    countries----
        The Chairman. Yes.
        Mr. Hourdequin [continuing]. That really focus on intensive
    training, can we accelerate the learning curve and build up a
    workforce?
        The Chairman. Mr. Rupert and Mr. Crockett, the next one is
    for you. We talked about the firefighter retirement, the three-
    day, I mean, none of this makes sense at all. So if you can
    explain to me how we can correct this or basically, is it
    codified by law that you have to do it that way, or is that
    ``in-house'', basically, the way you operate in your agencies?
    And what can be done to change it? Or do you see a change
    coming or do you need us to make the change for you?
        Mr. Crockett. I don't mind going first on this one. Thank
    you for the question.
        It is actually statutory and regulatory, and we would
    invite a conversation. We feel like the real experts are at our
    Office of Personnel Management, OPM.
        The Chairman. Okay.
        Mr. Crockett. So we would invite a conversation between
    the----
        The Chairman. Are you all recognizing that there is just an
    inequity there? I mean, something has to change. It doesn't
    make any sense at all that if a firefighter takes more than a
    three-day break in service, and they have been there for less
    than 20 years, they not only lose their retirement benefits,
    but they also lose all the money they previously paid into the
    system, too. That is the way it is codified? Is it codified, or
    is that the way you all interpret it?
        Mr. Rupert. So there is code for that special retirement--
    those benefits. My understanding of the three-day break, that
    that is within the regulatory framework.
        The Chairman. You can change that without us codifying--
    changing the code?
        Mr. Rupert. Well, so maybe just to add a little bit--you
    know, I think one really important aspect to figure out is, as
    we talk about wildland firefighters' break in service,
    recognizing that the same sort of challenge and concern affects
    other sectors of federal employment. So this touches more than
    just federal wildland firefighters. So there is a strong
    consideration there. I think to your point, we do regulate here
    that this is an issue for firefighters.
        The Chairman. Let me ask you this. Are you all opposing the
    changes we would make if we codified and changed the law? The
    worst thing we can do is, we do something well-intended here,
    and it ends up we get in tit for tat, back and forth. We don't
    want to do that. If you see the inequity here, the unfairness
    to the system, we can clarify it for you very quickly. We just
    want to make sure you all adhere to it--if you think it is
    unfair.
        Mr. Rupert. From my perspective, I think it is really
    important to recognize, I mean, there is sort of an equity
    issue across the government.
        The Chairman. We know that----
        Mr. Rupert. And but to your point, I mean, I regularly hear
    from wildland firefighters that the three-day break in service
    has a real impact.
        The Chairman. And you all, and you are compassionate about
    that. You think we could change it. If we can carve this out
    and select, so we do not cross over into your other
    jurisdictions, I think that is what you are saying.
        Mr. Crockett, do you all agree too?
        Mr. Crockett. Yes, it is really important to our
    firefighters, and if we can get it figured out----
        The Chairman. Okay.
        Mr. Crockett [continuing]. It is going to make life easier
    for them.
        The Chairman. I got you.
        With that, we will go to Senator Barrasso.
        Senator Barrasso. Well, thanks, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. O'Toole, one of the major themes of our legislation is
    promoting positive cultural changes within the Forest Service
    and the BLM. It requires employees to become more familiar with
    the streamlining tools that Congress has given them to reduce
    wildfire hazards. It also incentivizes employees to remain in
    the communities longer. Can you talk about how these provisions
    would actually help improve agency culture and foster better
    relationships between the agency and then the state and local
    and the private sector partners?
        Mr. O'Toole. Yes, sir.
        You know, as a permittee in two states with four agencies,
    this is something we are very familiar with. I am going to lose
    a 20-year employee at the Forest Service in the Medicine Bow
    Forest this year. He is retiring. We have no idea what the
    implication of the next person is. And so, what happens is
    though, the new people come in and those of us that have been
    there for a long time become very ignorant for a while until we
    re-establish our credibility. And the long-term relationships
    that we have had--best BLM guy in the country for 40 years,
    left and retired, total change, total fundamental change. And
    now, we have in another forest, a succession of employees that
    come for a year, two years, regional foresters change or local
    foresters, and there is no incentive, it seems like, to stay
    and be with the community. And the Organic Act of the forest,
    for example, is really about communities. And we are seeing a
    vast change in, sort of, this move up the chain to the way that
    you do better in the agencies is by moving. That can't be the
    incentive.
        Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
        Mr. Crockett, last month NBC News published an article with
    the following headline. You may have seen it. ``The Forest
    Service,'' it says, ``is overstating its wildfire prevention
    progress to Congress,'' overstating the progress to Congress,
    ``despite decades of warnings not to do so.'' The article
    details how the Forest Service has, for decades, used
    misleading data. This news story from NBC says, ``The Forest
    Service has counted many of the same pieces of land toward its
    risk reduction goals for anywhere from two to six times and in
    a few cases dozens of times.'' I think anybody that has read
    this is very troubled by this report.
        Would you agree with me that transparency is vital when it
    comes to combatting the wildfire crisis?
        Mr. Crockett. Yes, I definitely would agree with you that
    transparency is very important and that's our goal, to be
    transparent in everything that we do. When we do a forest
    treatment, many times it requires multiple entries in order to
    be successful with it--generally, about three entries. And so
    we want to be accountable to Congress for every dollar we spend
    on those entries. And so the first, second, and third entries
    have reporting requirements that go along with it. So part of
    our responsibility is to be transparent, to say when an acre is
    treated, and multiple times to be able to meet that benefit.
        Senator Barrasso. So to ensure transparency and eliminate
    confusion, our bill limits reporting accomplishments to
    projects that meaningfully actually reduce wildfire risks. So I
    ask unanimous consent, Mr. Chairman, to enter into the record
    this NBC News article, ``The Forest Service is Overstating its
    Prevention Progress.''
        The Chairman. Without objection.
        [The article referred to follows:]
       [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. If I may take the privilege of also asking
    for permission to enter into the record a letter to Deb
    Haaland, Secretary of Interior and Tom Vilsack, Secretary of
    Agriculture, concerning the Wildland Firefighter Personnel
    Request we just spoke about.
        Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        [The letter referred to follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Barrasso. Mr. O'Toole, so most of our federal
    forested lands are already off limits to active forest
    management projects. These include lands designated as
    wilderness, as wild and scenic river corridors, as roadless
    areas. The Biden Administration's Executive Order on old growth
    in mature forests has the potential to restrict responsible
    management on many more additional acres. So at a time with 63
    million acres of our national forests at risk of being
    destroyed by catastrophic wildfires, they are finding ways to
    further restrict forest management projects. Is this a wise use
    of time and resources?
        Mr. O'Toole. Senator, that is an excellent observation. And
    you know, perhaps you all remember Carole King, the singer,
    years ago, testified and it was actually on CNN and in Time
    Magazine. It was a huge story for a few days that we should
    never touch one more acre, one more tree. This is the reality.
    You know, a picture tells a thousand words. The reality is this
    use of the old growth term to restrict use on the forest is an
    agenda, not a solution. And so, I think it is very clear that
    we, you know, base our forest management on the need, rather
    than these, you know, sort of, manufactured discussions about
    how reality works. This is reality.
        Senator Barrasso. Yes, thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
        And now we will go to Senator Heinrich.
        Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman.
        Deputy Chief Crockett, when President Biden visited New
    Mexico as the Hermit's Peak/Calf Canyon Fire still burned, he
    promised my constituents that the Federal Government would
    cover the full cost of the fire for affected residents and
    business owners, and I very much appreciate the USDA waiving
    cost shares for many of its programs, but it is my
    understanding that the Department does not have the legal
    authority to do that for the Emergency Forest Restoration
    Program, which is precisely why Senator Lujan and I introduced
    this legislation before us today.
        Will the Administration fulfill its commitment to covering
    the full cost of recovery for the Hermit's Peak/Calf Canyon
    Fire and support cost share waivers for EFRP?
        Mr. Crockett. Thank you for the question. And as you
    stated, President Biden has announced that he is fully
    committed to restoring 100 percent of the cost to the
    government for the damages for the fire. But more importantly,
    I think, the legislation that has been introduced around the
    Hermit's Peak Fire Assistance Act would help further that.
        Senator Heinrich. Great. That is a long version of a yes.
        Mr. Crockett. Yes.
        Senator Heinrich. Yes, thank you.
        Mr. Rupert, I wanted to ask you, the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Act tasks both DOI and the U.S. Forest Service
    to create permanent programs to address the mental health of
    wildland firefighters. And in June of this year, it was
    announced that the agencies would begin establishing programs
    to both recognize and address mental health needs for those
    workforces. Can you just go into a little bit more detail and
    share any updates you have on the status of that program and
    then let us know if it is going to be widely available in the
    2023 season?
        Mr. Rupert. Thank you, sir.
        Yes, so as you described, we announced a joint program. So
    for an update on the status of that work, we are actively
    leveraging existing mental health support that we have in
    place--an employee assistance program--and we have just
    expanded out some of the coverage through that existing tool.
    In addition to that, we are focused on establishing year-round
    prevention efforts for all wildland firefighters, permanent and
    seasonal. That has been a concern in the past. We are working
    to provide PTSD care and enhanced critical incident stress
    management capacity. We have allocated and are hiring
    additional employees for that capacity to provide that support.
    That is very active right now. We have just hired and onboarded
    a joint, shared position through the Public Health Service to
    help support trauma services as well as coordinate activities
    across the department. That is a joint, shared position.
        And additionally, we are actively, right now, working with
    the CDC National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
    There is a current study ongoing and a wildland firefighter
    survey that is open right now and it will be through this early
    fall, where essentially, we are identifying specific, science-
    based support measures that will inform the continued
    development of this joint program. So, from my perspective, we
    are making good progress--ramping up--to use the Chairman's
    term earlier.
        Senator Heinrich. Great. Thank you very much for the
    update.
        Mr. O'Toole, I wanted to ask you what are some of the
    markets and first, just to make sure I understand what we are
    looking at here. Is this lodgepole? Is that the----
        Mr. O'Toole. Yes, sir.
        Senator Heinrich. Okay, yes. What are some of the small-
    diameter tree markets that you see promise in, because we have
    been able to get through the sort of glut of litigation that
    was existent in the 1990s in New Mexico. We have now gotten
    through some really big NEPA planning processes for how to
    treat large landscapes. But one of the big challenges has
    simply been that the trees we really need to be taking out are
    small diameter. They don't have the same market value that a
    large DBH tree in the past would have generated. So we need to
    find a way to get these small trees out of the forest that
    really drive ladder fuels and hotter fires, but they don't have
    the same market value.
        So if you see particular areas where we can create value
    from those small trees, I would love your thoughts on that.
        Mr. O'Toole. Well, my expertise is not as a logger, I am a
    rancher, but in the last few months I have been talking to a
    whole variety of people about those markets because this has to
    be market driven. Although, I have to be honest with you, we
    cannot allow the profitability of the logging sector to be the
    only driver. We have to assist that. And so, the ideas on the
    wood straw--the fellow that is making the wood straw, 450-pound
    bales and then dropping them on a burned forest or reclamation
    project, that is where part of that is, you know, poured wood
    board, manufacturing, investing, a community investing in a
    manufacturing plant. Northwest Colorado and Southwest Wyoming
    have significant job losses because of what is happening in the
    energy sector. We think there could be a forest industry change
    that would bring people into the forest to do those kinds of
    deals.
        And so, what I would suggest from you all, and I think it
    is inherent in a lot of the IRA dollars, is a research
    component to come up with those kinds of solutions, but in just
    the short time that I have worked on it recently, solutions are
    popping up. It is just a matter of then implementing. And you
    know, I have asked the Forest Service people in my area, what
    is the forest of the future? And I get a blank stare because we
    are not planning for the future, which is a climate-driven new
    reality. We are essentially allowing, sort of, the old system
    that has not worked to perpetuate.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Risch.
        Senator Risch. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you
    to the panel for being here today.
        This issue has been around for a long, long time, and it
    has been one of the real frustrations I have had since I have
    been here is, we talk about it, we pass laws, and yet, every
    year in Idaho, we have more acres burn. We have more smoke. And
    this is true all over the West.
        Pat, I am glad you are here and brought that picture,
    particularly. There are 535 Members of Congress, and I doubt
    there is but a handful that have been on ground that looks like
    this with a lodgepole pine catastrophe like that and it is
    happening all over the West.
        You know, this fire that happened this summer in the giant
    sequoias, if that did not break a person's heart, they are a
    very unfeeling person. I mean, the giant sequoias that we have
    in America are known all over the world. The only more famous
    patch is the Cedars of Lebanon, and the only reason they are
    more famous is because they are included in the Bible. If the
    authors of the Bible had known about the Sequoias, they would
    have had included at least some head-nod to them also. But
    look, when we cannot even protect a national heritage like the
    giant sequoias, it is really time to take a look at what we are
    doing when it comes to fire suppression. And like I said, it is
    getting worse every year. We all sit here. We wring our hands
    about it. We pass all these laws and yet, it just continues to
    get worse.
        So thank you for being here, Pat, to lay this out,
    particularly where you deal with all the agencies and have a
    good, clear understanding of the kinds of issues that we face
    out there on the ground. Wyoming is a lot like Idaho, with two
    out of every three acres in Idaho being owned by the Federal
    Government. And with all due respect to my friends in the
    Federal Government, they do not take care of the land like
    state land that we have, and even more so, like private
    landowners take care of their land. Obviously, it is a
    necessity for us.
        So, in any event, I hope we are going to take a markup on
    one of these at some time in the not-too-distant future.
        The Chairman. Absolutely.
        Senator Risch. And actually scrutinize these, not for
    messaging, but for real, actual work on the ground. I know
    Senator Heinrich is involved, or is interested in this. He has
    been a vocal proponent, like a lot of us have from out West,
    that we have just got to do things differently than we have
    been doing. What we are doing is not working. And it really
    will take some major changes to make it work, and not some
    fiddling around on the edges. So, again, thank you all for
    being here.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
        And now, we have Senator Cantwell.
        Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for this
    important hearing on so many different topics, but I would like
    to ask Mr. Crockett and Mr. Rupert--obviously, fire season is
    never far from our mind in the Northwest, and the issues that
    we have been facing just continue to grow in size. It is late
    September, and we still have crews on the ground working around
    the clock in Washington to contain and suppress wildfires. The
    Bolt Creek Fire continued to shut down Highway 2, stopping
    commerce on that route that is used for transportation of goods
    and getting agricultural products to market. This is kind of a
    new normal, and we need to have more innovation and
    collaboration.
        Washington State forest managers have led the way in
    collaborating with federal and private landowners to get
    critical forest management done in these areas. On the Umatilla
    National Forest in Southwest Washington, the National Forest
    has successfully used existing authorities to expand landscape-
    scale prescribed fire planning off national forest lands to
    include state fish and wildlife lands, gaining efficiency in
    scale. In North Central Washington, the same method was used
    recently to use NEPA planning to cover adjacent private lands
    and gain efficiencies in planning, but there are challenges in
    implementing the North Central project, which is why we need
    more funding to allow federal, state, and private entities to
    coordinate using all their existing authorities. This is
    important because we know fire does not stay within the federal
    boundaries. And obviously, we need their cooperation.
        So Mr. Crockett and Mr. Rupert, are you aware of the
    collaborative approach from Washington and its state
    management? How are you using existing authorities that have
    been successful in our state and the region? And how could this
    approach be replicated and used as a national strategy?
        Mr. Crockett. All right, I will start. Thank you for the
    question.
        Yes, I am aware of the collaborative approaches that the
    State of Washington has been able to undertake. I think one of
    the key programs, the Collaborative Forest Landscape
    Restoration Program, has been key to much of the work that has
    been able to be accomplished, not only in the State of
    Washington, but nationally as well. So from the Forest Service
    perspective, we do value the role that collaboration plays in
    helping us be successful with meeting our restoration
    objectives.
        Mr. Rupert. Yes, thank you. I am also aware of the efforts
    in Washington and actually would like to briefly talk about
    some of the work that we have done with the National
    Association of State Foresters, including the State Forester in
    Washington, George Geissler. We have piloted some collaborative
    planning and reporting work in Washington over the last two
    years, and starting this fall, we are expanding that work
    nationwide where we are looking at data sharing, geospatial
    mapping to more collaboratively report and plan risk reduction
    projects. And the alignment of that work is, I mean, it is
    completely aligned with the risk reduction work that is going
    on in Washington. And in fact, is connected through this pilot
    effort, so.
        Senator Cantwell. I am going to follow up with some more
    details on that to get, kind of, a commitment, if you will.
    This is something that came up in the hearing with the Chair
    several hearings ago about why there is not more coordination
    with individuals so that they could help, and so, I want to
    follow up on that. But I do want to turn to the aerial
    resources issue. Our state has its own aerial firefighting
    program, with 39 aircraft resources that it often sends to
    other states. This flexibility in contracting has allowed our
    state to, utilizing these authorities, provide help and support
    by way of federal legislation, including the Stafford Act.
        How many wildfire aerial assets do the Forest Service and
    the Department of the Interior currently have?
        Mr. Crockett. Thank you for the question. And I was
    actually in the State of Washington last week and had an
    opportunity to see some of the state aerial resources in
    Skamania, and Jeff was there as well. So for the Forest
    Service, we have over 400--I don't have the exact number--but
    over 400 aerial assets, from helicopters to air tankers to
    water scoopers to single-engine air tankers that we are able to
    access.
        Senator Cantwell. Are you talking about those that you
    contract with?
        Mr. Crockett. It is a combination of own and contract. So
    yes.
        Senator Cantwell. Can we get a split on the difference
    between the owned versus the contract?
        Mr. Crockett. Okay. I will have to follow up with you, but
    yes.
        Mr. Rupert. Similarly with Interior, specific numbers, you
    know, between contract and owned and various, sort of,
    contract, you know, exclusive use versus, sort of, call when
    needed, we would have to pull that breakdown for you, but most
    of those aviation resources are shared between the two
    agencies. So large tankers--very large air tankers--the Forest
    Service administers. Single-engine air tankers, Interior
    administers. So, for example, like right now, as of today,
    there are 63 available. We have access through call-when-needed
    contracts to hundreds more. And helicopter assets, similarly,
    you know, today we have 50 available. We have access to over
    200 additional through contracts. So there is a pretty
    substantial----
        Senator Cantwell. Should we be reassessing the current
    contracted regulations?
        Mr. Rupert. From my perspective, I am not sure that that
    sort of assessment ever really stops. I mean, from my
    perspective, there is a very adaptive approach to contracting
    and, you know, there have been shifts in recent years to how we
    approach contracting in these various categories. And from my
    perspective, I think we have seen some success in recent years.
        Mr. Crockett. Yes, and I was hesitating because we are in
    the same spot. We are always assessing regulations and
    contracts and availability. So it is an ongoing process for us.
        Senator Cantwell. I think you are going to hear more and
    more about the needed resources in the West and the fact that
    ``on call'' is a little different when our whole strategy is
    hasty response, right? As to not get fires to scale. So I am
    quite familiar with this issue in talking with the past U.S.
    Forest Service Chief. And I think we will just follow up for
    the record with more questions there.
        But I think we are only going to see an acceleration of
    this. And I think the question is, how can those ``on call''
    assets really be as effective as we need them to be? I get once
    the fire is already at scale and then you decide to put in
    resources. But the problem is, we have warmer and drier
    conditions everywhere, and we need more hasty response. And so,
    how do we get that out of our aerial system?
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Daines.
        Senator Daines. Chairman, thank you.
        Just earlier this month the Cottonwood Environmental Law
    Center filed yet another notice of intent to sue the Forest
    Service based on consultation requirements established by the
    Ninth Circuit Cottonwood decision. The notice of intent demands
    the agency reinitiate consultation on the Northern Rockies Lynx
    Amendment, which covers 18 national forests and site-specific
    projects, many of which have already recently gone through re-
    consultation. I want to thank Chairman Manchin and the members
    of this Committee for supporting my legislation, which would
    stop this very abuse by bad-faith actors in the courts by
    codifying the position taken by the Obama Department of
    Justice. The Forest Service has previously testified on the
    workload and litigation risks that await us if Congress does
    not address this issue before the end of the year. And that is
    why I continue to believe any comprehensive environmental
    permitting bill must also include my bill that passed from this
    Committee with strong bipartisan support, 16 to 4.
        Mr. Chairman, I know that you and Senator Capito are both
    eager to negotiate a bipartisan permitting bill that is
    considered as a stand-alone bill or perhaps adding it to the
    annual national defense measure. I will tell you, if my
    Cottonwood fix were included as part of permitting reform in
    that bipartisan agreement, you are likely going to have my
    support. This provision is a critical first step to improving
    forest management. And the thing about permitting is, it comes
    in a lot of different forms. The Cottonwood fix is one of
    those. Sustainable forest management creates sustainable rural
    economies. It leads to more carbon sequestration, important
    mitigation strategies that relate to warmer summers and longer
    fire seasons, healthier watersheds and air, and productive
    wildlife habitat. Better forest management can also help
    Montana's housing shortage. At one time, nearly one quarter of
    all new U.S. homes were built with lumber harvested from
    national forests, but now that number is actually closer to
    zero. We have to do more to manage our forests or our forests
    are going to manage us. And that is why I have authored two
    bipartisan forest management bills that have already passed
    this Committee, and I call on my colleagues to enact these
    common-sense policies before the end of the year.
        Switching gears for a moment. Montana's Job Corps: these
    centers help train and prepare young Montanans in the
    workforce. In fact, in 2019 I was very glad to lead the fight
    in Congress to keep these centers open serving our students in
    our communities. But now, Congress and the Forest Service must
    work together to ensure these centers are the best they can be.
    The Civilian Conservation Center Enhancement Act does just this
    by expanding the forestry curriculum, ensuring that graduates
    have a pipeline of fulfilling careers and granting the Forest
    Service more flexibility in the day-to-day operation of the
    centers. This bill has the support of several organizations,
    and I would like to ask for unanimous consent to enter these
    letters of support in the record.
        The Chairman. Without objection.
        [Letters of support for S. 4877 follow:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Daines. The Anaconda and Trapper Creek Job Corps
    Centers have already seen successes in applying many of these
    same principles and goals that are contained in this bill. I am
    proud to support their ongoing efforts. I visited them. They
    are great operations. I am excited to see the success
    replicated in other centers across the country.
        Mr. Crockett, labor shortages are one of the top issues I
    hear about all across our state in Montana. How would my bill
    assist in establishing a pipeline of workers for the wood
    products sector?
        Mr. Crockett. Thank you for the question and thank you for
    your prior advocacy and current advocacy for those centers.
        This bill would provide a pipeline for the CCC centers to
    have a direct pipeline into the Forest Service. We really do
    like the direct hire authority that is in there because that
    gives the student the ability to go directly from the center
    into employment with the Forest Service. So we do support it.
    Thank you.
        Senator Daines. Thanks for that support. Thanks for your
    comments.
        Mr. Crockett, as you know, the lack of affordable housing
    is another contributing factor to labor issues we are seeing
    across this country, and more specifically, in Montana. In
    fact, according to a forest-to-market report, at one time
    nearly a quarter of all new U.S. homes were built with lumber
    harvested from national forests. Today, that number is close to
    zero. At the end of the third quarter, Region 1's timber
    harvest was nearly 40 percent lower than it was at the same
    time last year. And last year, by the way, Region 1 missed its
    timber volume target by around 30 percent. These downward
    trends are coming on the heels of Congress providing the Forest
    Service with unprecedented funding and new authorities.
        Mr. Crockett, what is the Forest Service doing to correct
    these significant declining trends to restore the health of our
    forests and importantly, our wood products sector?
        Mr. Crockett. Thank you for the question. And we do agree
    that having a balanced timber supply is vitally important for
    the industry in the area. So with the new funding that has been
    put in place through bill and through IRA, we feel that those
    resources are going to help us stabilize and have that balanced
    flow of volume to the local mills in Region 1.
        Senator Daines. Thank you.
        Mr. Chairman, I know I am into extra innings. I just have a
    final statement and I will be finished.
        In contrast to the trends we have seen in our national
    forests, I would say, our Governor of Montana, Governor
    Gianforte, has doubled the amount of acres treated under Good
    Neighbor Authority in just one year, and our state timber lands
    continue to be healthy, productive, and sustainable. It is such
    a contrast from our state lands to our federal lands back home.
    It is unreasonable to me, therefore, that the Forest Service
    has not prioritized allocating Good Neighbor Authority funds to
    states, and Montana was not asked for input on the GNA project
    that did receive funding. This contradicts the very principles
    that have made GNA successful to date.
        Mr. Chairman, I am out of time here, so I will respect that
    and----
        The Chairman. Well, thank you, Senator, we appreciate that.
        Senator Hirono.
        Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I would like to briefly discuss the importance of S. 4884,
    the Natural Infrastructure Act of 2022. Natural infrastructure,
    or using nature as a way to reduce natural hazards, like
    erosion and flooding, is becoming an increasingly popular and
    effective alternative to the more traditional so-called gray
    infrastructure solutions such as pipes and concrete throughout
    our country. Congress has recognized the benefits of natural
    infrastructure by passing bills directing agencies to
    prioritize projects that utilize natural infrastructure, like
    the 2016 Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act
    and the recent Senate-passed Water Resources Development Act.
    Natural infrastructure provides a variety of ecosystem
    benefits, like helping to combat climate change, improving the
    health of watersheds, and protecting coastal communities, to
    name just a few. It is often more cost-effective than
    installing pipes or pouring concrete, and is preferred by local
    communities, and that is why I have introduced this important
    legislation.
        Natural infrastructure solutions are already popular in
    Hawaii. For example, groups all across the state have come
    together to form watershed partnerships, which work with local
    partners to protect forested watershed lands. Hawaii's forested
    watersheds recharge our island's water supplies, protect our
    ocean by controlling erosion, mitigate flooding, provide
    important plant and animal habitats, serve as recreational
    educational opportunities, protect public health by supplying
    clean water and air, support our local economy, and mitigate
    climate change by absorbing carbon dioxide. A study by the
    University of Hawaii estimates that the Kohala Mountains, which
    provide an estimated 135 billion gallons of water to Oahu
    residents each year, provided up to $14 billion worth of
    watershed services. Efforts to restore areas within the Kohala
    Mountains using natural infrastructure would likely be more
    cost-effective than efforts to replicate those watershed
    services via gray infrastructure. The myriad benefits provided
    by natural infrastructure ring true for the rest of the country
    as well.
        In the American Society of Civil Engineers 2021 report card
    for America's infrastructure, they note that increasing
    resilience across all infrastructure sectors can be achieved by
    including or enhancing natural or green infrastructure.
    However, the use of natural infrastructure is a relatively new
    concept as compared to gray infrastructure. As such, more
    science and information need to be generated to inform
    decision-makers on whether the best solution for their
    infrastructure needs is natural, gray, or a combination of the
    two. That is where my bill comes in. It requires the U.S.
    Forest Service and the U.S. Geological Survey to establish a
    joint natural infrastructure science program that works with
    colleges and universities to supply the necessary research on
    natural infrastructure solutions. The research would be in
    direct response to the needs of civil engineers, local
    governments, developers, and the construction industry
    individuals tasked with carrying out these projects. The bill
    also establishes a stakeholder advisory group made up of
    technical experts tasked with providing recommendations of both
    short-and long-term natural infrastructure research needs.
    Finally, the Natural Infrastructure bill requires the Secretary
    of the Interior to annually review existing natural
    infrastructure projects to assess their effectiveness and to
    provide recommendations going forward on ways to improve the
    cost effectiveness of future natural infrastructure projects.
        As our communities face the increasing and oftentimes
    devastating impacts of climate change, natural infrastructure
    will become an increasingly important tool in our country's
    tool box. I urge my colleagues to join me, and of course, Mr.
    Chairman and Ranking Member, to advance S. 4884 out of our
    Committee so that a more robust body of research and data can
    be available to inform the use of natural infrastructure
    throughout our country.
        Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Hirono. You all were listening to this, right?
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Senator Murkowski.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you
    for the hearing this morning. Thank you to our witnesses. We
    have heard some of the stories of a tough fire season. We had
    another tough fire season in Alaska. A total of 3,107,378 acres
    have burned so far. Apparently, there are still some active
    within the state. And then something that we have not seen
    before, we saw two of the largest tundra fires on record in the
    state. So we are paying attention as we always do.
        Now, I think we made some good progress with the
    infrastructure bill that we passed in terms of providing some
    additional resources and authorities. And so, a couple
    questions for both Mr. Rupert and Mr. Crockett this morning.
        In the infrastructure bill, we provided both DOI and Forest
    Service around $600 million to be made available for salaries
    and expenses of federal wildland firefighters between FY22 and
    FY26. So can you tell me how much of these funds are still
    available? It is my understanding that we are going to be
    looking at what we are calling in the approps world, a funding
    cliff in FY24. So how much is still available, and then what is
    the long-term strategy for both the Departments in ensuring
    that we do not have this type of a funding cliff for
    firefighter salaries once the funding from the IIJA runs out?
    So, Mr. Crockett and then Mr. Rupert.
        Mr. Crockett. Thank you for the question, Senator. I do not
    have the exact number on how much is left, so I will have to
    follow up with you on that.
        Senator Murkowski. Okay.
        Mr. Crockett. But we did prioritize increasing the salaries
    for the first two years for our firefighters, and so top
    priority for the Administration, and what we would like to do
    is just follow up with you on a creative solution for finding a
    long-term solution.
        Senator Murkowski. Have the increased salaries resulted in
    better recruitment or retention?
        Mr. Crockett. I don't know those numbers just yet.
        Senator Murkowski. Okay. It is still probably early, yes?
        Mr. Crockett. Yes, I do know that we have a lot of
    satisfied firefighters as a result of them getting the funds
    earlier rather than stretching it out over the five-year
    period.
        Senator Murkowski. Yes, okay.
        Mr. Rupert.
        Mr. Rupert. Yes, thank you. Just to reinforce that we are
    literally locked together on this issue as we provided--as we
    are implementing that additional pay support this year. We have
    largely both talked about that the math is working out, that
    the support that we have in infrastructure for this temporary
    pay support, we are projecting will last the two years, and at
    least in Interior, we have tracked that funding over the course
    of this year. That is sort of the path that we are on. And
    focus on identifying a long-term solution--there is a laser
    focus on that. We have all hands on deck, working very closely
    together, and then also with OPM on that. And our vision is
    that that long-term solution is ready to go and there is
    essentially a seamless transition from infrastructure pay
    support to a long-term solution is the vision that we----
        Senator Murkowski. Well, if both of you can get back with
    us, just in terms of how much of the funds from IIJA are still
    available to you. I think that, maybe not from this Committee's
    perspective, but from my approps hat, that would be helpful for
    us to know.
         And then, also, very quickly, because I have another
    question that I want to get to here, but both the DOI and USDA
    got $50 million to assist in workforce training for non-federal
    firefighters for our native village fire crews. This has been
    an issue that I have been pushing for some-time, and can you
    give me any kind of a quick update in terms of that funding and
    what the Departments have done to help build out, whether it is
    native village fire crews or for our non-federal firefighters?
        Mr. Crockett. Yes, unfortunately, I do not have those
    numbers at my fingertips as well, and I will have to follow up
    with that.
        Senator Murkowski. Okay. All right, we will wait for those
    then too.
        Mr. Rupert. Just to add a little bit to that, in Interior
    we very recently allocated training funding to support work out
    at the fire center, out at NIFC, with the National Wildland
    Fire Coordinating Group, to update qualifications and
    standards. And all of that is foundational to the training that
    we provide across the entire interagency community. So it is
    work that will be ongoing, that benefits the entire interagency
    community. We also have recently allocated some support for
    additional training capacity within Interior with the bureau
    training officers that has a strong connection to much of the
    online training system that we have developed and that we are
    jointly utilizing that reaches well beyond just federal
    firefighters and----
        Senator Murkowski. Okay. Know that I am going to keep
    pushing everybody all the time on our native village fire
    crews. There is nobody that knows the ground better than these
    folks. They live out there. They know what is happening. And
    when you talk about online, I know we are making great headway
    with what we put in the infrastructure bill with broadband, but
    online training for many out in the rural areas like that just
    does not work.
        I want to very quickly ask a question, and I am going to
    ask the indulgence of the Chairman on this one, because this is
    something that came to me just yesterday, and this is a Forest
    Service pressurization requirement for air tanker services. So
    it is my understanding that the Forest Service is set to
    release updated requirements for firefighting suppression
    aircraft on their multiple award task order contract, and that
    for the first time, they are requiring a pressurized cabin in
    firefighting aircraft. This previously, as I understand, was a
    consideration, but it was not a requirement, and I have looked
    at questions that have been asked to the Forest Service about,
    you know, can you provide research studies or investigation in
    terms of why we are imposing this new requirement? Can you
    really show that pressurization drastically reduces crew
    fatigue? Results in greater safety? And I have to say, I am a
    little bit surprised by the response that I see from Forest
    Service here that says that pressurized aircraft do not
    guarantee safety, less fatigue, or fuel efficiency, but it does
    make these possible when an aircraft has it. It effectively
    looks like, they say, the Forest Service is committed to
    safety, fatigue management, and using less fossil fuel when
    possible to combat climate change.
        But I guess I am looking at that and saying, all we want to
    do is, we want to make sure that we get to a quick response. We
    want to get the fire out quickly. We obviously want to do it
    ``safety, safety, safety,'' but I look at this, and it seems
    that if you have got regulations like this that are potentially
    going to result in fewer air tankers available to rapidly
    respond and to suppress the fires, doesn't this then delay the
    response to the fires and then result in a wildfire that's just
    going to produce more greenhouse gases than you are supposedly
    worried about saving with fuel efficiency?
        I am trying to understand the logic here and I don't
    understand why it has gone from a factor for consideration to
    now seemingly a requirement with not a lot of hard rationale to
    it.
        Mr. Crockett. So I don't have a lot of details around the
    pressurization component of your question, but what I will say
    is that yes, we would like to have more aviation assets
    available to us so that we can be responsive to the fires when
    the fire bell rings and we want to do that in a manner that is
    safely done as you mentioned in your statement. So we will have
    to follow up with you on the specifics for the pressurization
    question, but I do know the focus around safety is priority for
    us.
        Senator Murkowski. As it should be.
        I guess I would just ask you to follow up with us because
    it is my understanding that this is going into place like in a
    matter of days, if not weeks. It is further my understanding
    that there was no Administrative Procedure Act process here,
    like publishing a notice in the Federal Register for public
    comment before imposing this. So I have a lot of questions
    here. If----
        The Chairman. We can have a second round.
        Senator Murkowski [continuing]. There was not adequate
    input, we would certainly like to understand that.
        The Chairman. I will do a second round, if you want. I
    mean, real quick.
        Senator Murkowski. Okay.
        The Chairman. I will just go to Catherine and come back.
        Senator Murkowski. Sure.
        The Chairman. Senator Cortez Masto.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to
    the panelists. I so appreciate you being here.
        Mr. O'Toole, it is great to see you again as well.
        Let me just say I also am interested in the answers to the
    questions posed by Senator Murkowski. So as you provide that
    information, if you could provide it to my office as well, I
    would really appreciate that.
        I am glad that the Committee is holding a hearing to
    discuss these important pieces of legislation. We need to use
    all of the tools at our disposal, and we need to innovatively
    think about how we protect our forests and rangelands through
    enhanced wildfire mitigation techniques that are so vital to
    our forest and rangeland ecosystems in Nevada, as well as the
    rest of the country.
        My Western Wildfire Support Act would complement many of
    the policies set forth in the bills that we have discussed
    today. My bill received a hearing in this Committee a few
    months ago. It would provide at-risk communities across the
    western United States with additional resources to help prevent
    wildfires before they start, combat those that do spark a fire,
    and then help those communities impacted by wildfire to recover
    and rebuild. My bill would allow communities in Nevada and
    across the western U.S. to acquire the training, the equipment,
    and funding they need to combat the increasing dangers posed by
    wild and rangeland fires that we are seeing across the western
    United States, including in Nevada. So I hope that this bill,
    in addition to the legislation discussed today, will soon
    receive further attention from this Committee as well, and I
    would ask members to join me in this legislation.
        Thank you, gentlemen, for being here today to discuss this
    important legislation.
        And Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time to
    Senator Murkowski.
        The Chairman. I am going to sneak one question in quickly.
    To Mr. Crockett and Mr. Rupert, in my opening remarks, I said
    over the last year, Congress provided you with more than $10
    billion--$10 billion--to carry out forest management projects
    on federal land. Okay. This is essentially a tripling of your
    entire discretionary budget and nearly a tenfold increase in
    several of your budgets for specific programs, like vegetation
    management. I cannot understand why you are not getting more
    accomplished with the funding that we provided. Tell us what is
    preventing you all from using this money as expediently as you
    can and as effectively as you can.
        So how many of these acres have you significantly changed
    the conditions on to date? What do you think you have
    accomplished? The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law specifically
    required you to use the money and other funding Congress has
    provided to significantly change the risk from wildfire on ten
    million acres, or half of the land your scientists have
    identified as posing the greatest hazard. Where do you stand,
    and why are we not doing anything?
        Mr. Crockett. I will jump in here.
        We certainly appreciate the funds that the Congress has
    provided to us, and so as I mentioned in my opening statements
    around the connection to those funds, we consider them as a
    down payment for our success related to the wildfire
    conditions.
        The Chairman. We don't think you, I mean, you have to be
    honest, we just don't think the success is there, or you have
    anything to show for the $10 billion of public funds that has
    been invested.
        Mr. Crockett. Right. So to be clear, it is a ten-year
    strategy, so we are in the early stages of it now with
    implementing it. So it is going to take a couple years before
    we get to that measurable success.
        The Chairman. What you are seeing today is bills being
    introduced to bypass you all, if we have to.
        Mr. Crockett. Say that again.
        The Chairman. We are seeing bills being introduced to do
    some bypassing of how you normally do business, if Senators
    believe we have to. I will give you the bill that I introduced
    as an example. I could not make any sense at all of this
    situation with firefighting. If there is a logging company that
    basically has a permit to log on federal land, and they see a
    lightning strike, by law, they can't go fight that fire. They
    have to call the land management agency. And by the time the
    first responders or whoever your firefighter is shows up, this
    is a raging forest fire that is out of control. So the reason I
    brought the bill into play that we are hearing now is that
    basically we need to change this. It is no different than a
    coal mine. For every logging company permitted on federal
    lands, their permit will not even be entertained if they do not
    have a certified firefighting team. We trained coal miners that
    are mining the coal to actually be the first responders in case
    an accident happens, because they are certified as rescuers
    until the cavalry comes. That is all we are asking for. We can
    prevent a lot of these fires if we stop them before they get
    going.
        Mr. Crockett. Sure, and our Chief has committed to finding
    a creative solution on that, I think, the last time he
    testified on it. What I will share is for timber sale operators
    who have a contract with the Forest Service, generally there is
    a stipulation in their contract that allows them to do initial
    attack until that incident is set up. So we can look at ways of
    expanding that work to provide more opportunity----
        The Chairman. Here is the thing, I am running out of time
    because we have to go vote. I hear the bells going off. But
    what I will say is this: we will look for an accounting of how
    you have spent the money, how you have invested, what you have
    done with it, and what type of track you are on, because right
    now we can't explain it. I can't, and my counsel here and all
    the people that work with me are having a hard time. So if we
    can get with your staff and someone can show us a roadmap of
    what you have done and what you are going to do, and if we can
    expedite that, help you in any way. If not, we have to make
    some adjustments and changes.
        With that, Senator Murkowski, I will get right to you real
    quick.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
        And just to follow up with the discussion about the
    pressurization requirement, again, I am trying to understand if
    Forest Service has made this commitment for requirement. So can
    you tell me, Mr. Crockett, if this requirement is going in
    place in October as I have been told? Is that your
    understanding?
        Mr. Crockett. So I am not familiar enough with it to know
    the details of when it is going to go into effect. Because
    timeliness is a concern here, we will definitely follow up with
    you pretty quick to determine those dates of when it is going
    to go out.
        Senator Murkowski. Well, again, this is something that I
    have been read into it just this week. I understand that there
    is a company out there that has some P-3s up there that used to
    be pressurized. They took the pressurization out because it
    basically was 600 extra pounds of weight, and when you are
    looking for fuel efficiency, it helps when your aircraft is not
    so loaded. But if this pressurization requirement does advance,
    you basically have four aircraft that you have had previously
    available to you that are no longer in place. And I don't think
    that this is just about one company. My concern is that this is
    going to be a broader policy going forward that will impact
    more aircraft that are providing these necessary services,
    again, at a time when we are seeing a heightened and a growing
    need for that aircraft support.
        So I guess what I would ask of you, and it doesn't sound
    like you have a lot of familiarity or information for me at
    this point in time, but if you can get back to me, what I am
    looking for is, I want to understand why we have not gone
    through the APA requirements with regards to publishing a
    notice for comment before just deciding to move forward with
    the requirement--what actually the Forest Service did then in
    order to get comment. I would be curious to know what kind of
    negative comment you received on that, but what probably is
    more important than even that is to understand what background,
    what research, what studies, what investigations Forest Service
    has done that has moved you to this place where you are looking
    at imposing this new requirement of pressurization. So, whether
    or not there have been any studies out there that show that
    pressurization really does reduce crew fatigue, okay, that
    would be important to know, or whether or not there have been
    any crashes that NTSB has attributed to lack of pressurization.
        So if you can, just help us with this background
    understanding of why this step is being taken, and what the
    Forest Service process was that got us to this point. Because
    again, what we are all trying to do, we are all on the same
    side here. We all want to focus on safety, safety, safety. And
    so, what we do to make sure that safety is paramount is key,
    but if what we are looking at here is that we just want these
    aircraft to be more climate friendly, but in fact, it does not
    create any more safety benefits and it does not necessarily
    make them more efficient, I am not sure that this is the best
    space because if we have fewer aircraft up there, it just means
    a slower response and room for tougher fires for our
    extraordinary men and women who are fighting these fires to
    take on.
        So if you can get back to me with that information, and it
    sounds like Senator Cortez Masto is also equally interested in
    that, I would appreciate it.
        Mr. Crockett. Okay, we will follow up.
        Senator Murkowski. Super. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Let me thank you.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator. They are calling for us
    for the votes.
        Senator Murkowski. They are?
        The Chairman. Yes.
        Anyway, let me just thank you all. I think you have done a
    great job. You see the interest that we have.
        Mr. O'Toole, I just thank you. I mean, you are on the front
    lines there and we really need your input. James, you too, I
    mean, you guys are out there, and I think the only feedback we
    get is people out there actually doing the job that we need
    done and finding out what the impediments might be for you to
    do a better job, and we have got to get through this BS and
    politics and use common sense and make it happen. That is what
    we are here to do.
        And also, to help you all, you know, sometimes we make it
    so complicated, writing a piece of legislation that you are
    covering this and covering every angle you can. So litigation,
    I mean, we are afraid to death of the litigious mental state
    that this country has gotten itself into. We have to do stuff.
    We have got to perform now. We have got to produce. So that is
    what we are going to try to get done.
        So I want to thank all of you for joining this morning for
    this discussion. It has been great.
        Members will have until the close of business tomorrow to
    submit additional questions for the record.
        The Committee stands adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:52 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]

                          APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

                                  ----------
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                       [all]