[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]