[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                    H.R. 674, H.R. 4297, H.R. 5443, 
                       H.R. 6994, AND H.R. 7072

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

                          LEGISLATIVE HEARING

                               before the

                     SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERAL LANDS

                                 of the

                     COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION 
                               __________

                      Wednesday, January 31, 2024 
                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-94 
                               __________

       Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources 
       






             [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 



             


        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
                                   or
          Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov 
                                 ______

                  U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 

54-710 PDF               WASHINGTON : 2024 












          
      

                     COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES

                     BRUCE WESTERMAN, AR, Chairman
                    DOUG LAMBORN, CO, Vice Chairman
                  RAUL M. GRIJALVA, AZ, Ranking Member

Doug Lamborn, CO                     Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Robert J. Wittman, VA                Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, CNMI 
Tom McClintock, CA                   Jared Huffman, CA  
Paul Gosar, AZ                       Ruben Gallego, AZ  
Garret Graves, LA                    Joe Neguse, CO    
Aumua Amata C. Radewagen, AS         Mike Levin, CA     
Doug LaMalfa, CA                     Katie Porter, CA 
Daniel Webster, FL                   Teresa Leger Fernandez, NM   
Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, PR         Melanie A. Stansbury, NM           
Russ Fulcher, ID                     Mary Sattler Peltola, AK  
Pete Stauber, MN                     Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, NY
John R. Curtis, UT                   Kevin Mullin, CA  
Tom Tiffany, WI                      Val T. Hoyle, OR
Jerry Carl, AL                       Sydney Kamlager-Dove, CA 
Matt Rosendale, MT                   Seth Magaziner, RI        
Lauren Boebert, CO                   Nydia M. Velazquez, NY       
Cliff Bentz, OR                      Ed Case, HI
Jen Kiggans, VA                      Debbie Dingell, MI        
Jim Moylan, GU                       Susie Lee, NV       
Wesley P. Hunt, TX                            
Mike Collins, GA                                 
Anna Paulina Luna, FL                                
John Duarte, CA                                  
Harriet M. Hageman, WY                    
                                                                       
                    Vivian Moeglein, Staff Director
                      Tom Connally, Chief Counsel
                 Lora Snyder, Democratic Staff Director
                   http://naturalresources.house.gov 
                   
                                 ------                                

                     SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERAL LANDS

                       TOM TIFFANY, WI, Chairman
                     JOHN R. CURTIS, UT, Vice Chair
                     JOE NEGUSE, CO, Ranking Member

Doug Lamborn, CO                     Katie Porter, CA
Tom McClintock, CA                   Sydney Kamlager-Dove, CA
Russ Fulcher, ID                     Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, CNMI 
Pete Stauber, MN                     Mike Levin, CA
John R. Curtis, UT                   Teresa Leger Fernandez, NM
Cliff Bentz, OR                      Mary Sattler Peltola, AK
Jen Kiggans, VA                      Raul M. Grijalva, AZ, ex officio
Jim Moylan, GU                       
Bruce Westerman, AR, ex officio

                                 ------ 
















                                 
                               CONTENTS

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Hearing held on Wednesday, January 31, 2024......................     1

Statement of Members:

    Tiffany, Hon. Tom, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Wisconsin.........................................     2

    Panel I:

    Newhouse, Hon. Dan, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Washington........................................     5

    Neguse, Hon. Joe, a Representative in Congress from the State 
      of Colorado................................................     6

    Lee, Hon. Susie, a Representative in Congress from the State 
      of Nevada..................................................     7

    Kim, Hon. Young, a Representative in Congress from the State 
      of California..............................................     9

Statement of Witnesses:

    Panel II:

    Smith, Greg, Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest System, 
      U.S. Forest Service, Washington, DC........................    11
        Prepared statement of....................................    12
        Questions submitted for the record.......................    16

    Panel III:

    Tallier, Hon. Tom, Supervisor, Forest County Board of 
      Supervisors, District 8, Wabeno, Wisconsin.................    24
        Prepared statement of....................................    25
    Munsey, Dan, Fire Chief, San Bernardino County Fire 
      Department, San Bernardino, California.....................    27
        Prepared statement of....................................    28

    Adomatis, Sandy, President, The Appraisal Institute, Chicago, 
      Illinois...................................................    30
        Prepared statement of....................................    31
    Roman, Siri, General Manager, Eagle River Water and 
      Sanitation District, Vail, Colorado........................    33
        Prepared statement of....................................    34
    Downey, Hannah, Policy Director, Property and Environment 
      Research Center, Bozeman, Montana..........................    38
        Prepared statement of....................................    39

Additional Materials Submitted for the Record:

    Submissions for the Record by Representative Tiffany

        Wabeno Chamber of Commerce, the Forest County Economic 
          Development Partnership, and the Town of Wabeno, 
          Letters of support.....................................     3
    Submissions for the Record by Representative Kim

        Motorcycle Industry Council, Specialty Vehicle Institute 
          of America, and Recreational Off-Highway Vehicle 
          Association, Letter to Rep. Kim........................    10
          
 
LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 674, TO CODIFY THE AUTHORITY OF THE 
 SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE AND THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR TO 
 CONDUCT CERTAIN LANDSCAPE-SCALE FOREST RESTORATION PROJECTS, 
 AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES, ``ROOT AND STEM PROJECT AUTHORIZATION 
  ACT OF 2023''; H.R. 4297, TO AMEND THE JOHN D. DINGELL, JR. 
   CONSERVATION, MANAGEMENT, AND RECREATION ACT TO ALLOW FOR 
ADDITIONAL ENTITIES TO BE ELIGIBLE TO COMPLETE THE MAINTENANCE 
  WORK ON BOLTS DITCH AND THE BOLTS DITCH HEADGATE WITHIN THE 
  HOLY CROSS WILDERNESS, COLORADO, ``BOLTS DITCH ACT''; H.R. 
 5443, TO ESTABLISH A POLICY REGARDING APPRAISAL AND VALUATION 
  SERVICES FOR REAL PROPERTY FOR A TRANSACTION OVER WHICH THE 
   SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR HAS JURISDICTION, AND FOR OTHER 
 PURPOSES, ``ACCELERATING APPRAISALS AND CONSERVATION EFFORTS 
 ACT'' OR ``AACE ACT''; H.R. 6994, TO REQUIRE THE REOPENING OF 
COVERED RECREATION SITES CLOSED DUE TO A NATURAL DISASTER, AND 
    FOR OTHER PURPOSES, ``RESTORING OUR UNOPENED TRAILS FOR 
ENJOYMENT AND SAFETY ACT'' OR ``ROUTES ACT''; AND H.R. 7072, TO 
REQUIRE THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE TO CONVEY CERTAIN NATIONAL 
 FOREST SYSTEM LAND IN THE CHEQUAMEGON-NICOLET NATIONAL FOREST 
    TO TONY'S WABENO REDI-MIX, LLC, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES, 
          ``WABENO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2024''

                              ----------                              


                      Wednesday, January 31, 2024

                     U.S. House of Representatives

                     Subcommittee on Federal Lands

                     Committee on Natural Resources

                             Washington, DC

                              ----------                              

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in 
Room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Tom Tiffany 
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Tiffany, Fulcher, Stauber, Bentz; 
Neguse, and Peltola.
    Also present: Representatives Kim, Newhouse; and Lee.

    Mr. Tiffany. The Subcommittee on Federal Lands will come to 
order.
    Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a 
recess of the Subcommittee at any time.
    I hope it is not me why there aren't people around the dais 
here. I suspect they will be coming in as we move along here 
from the witching hour.
    The Subcommittee is meeting today to consider five bills: 
H.R. 674, the Root and Stem Authorization Act of 2023 from 
Representative Newhouse; H.R. 4297, the Bolts Ditch Act from 
Ranking Member Neguse; H.R. 5443 by Representative Lee of 
Nevada, the Accelerating Appraisals Act; H.R. 6994, 
Representative Kim of California, the ROUTES Act; and my 
legislation, the Wabeno Economic Development Act of 2024, H.R. 
7072.
    I ask unanimous consent that the following Members be 
allowed to participate in today's hearing from the dais: the 
gentlewoman from Nevada, Ms. Lee; the gentleman from 
Washington, Mr. Newhouse; and the gentlewoman from California, 
Mrs. Kim.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    Under Committee Rule 4(f), any oral opening statements at 
hearings are limited to the Chairman and the Ranking Minority 
Member. I therefore ask unanimous consent that all other 
Members' opening statements be made a part of the hearing 
record if they are submitted in accordance with Committee Rule 
3(o).
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I will now recognize myself for an opening statement.
    Thank you very much, Mr. Fulcher, for coming in and joining 
us. I was feeling lonely.

        STATEMENT OF THE HON. TOM TIFFANY, A REPRESENTATIVE   
             IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN 

    Mr. Tiffany. Today's hearing focuses on several pieces of 
legislation that aim to enhance rural economies and improve 
Federal land management. From outdoor recreation to mining and 
timber harvesting, our Federal lands offer significant 
potential for economic development.
    However, for decades, this potential has been hampered by 
poor Federal land management that limits multiple use and 
leaves rural communities struggling to survive. This is 
particularly true in counties and states where the Federal 
Government is the primary landowner. I represent many of these 
counties in northern Wisconsin, including Forest County, a 
historic logging community. Roughly 50 percent of the land in 
Forest County is federally owned, and only about 10 percent of 
the land is fully taxable.
    Located in Forest County, Tony's Wabeno Ready Mix is a 
small ready mix company that has supplied the surrounding 
community with concrete for more than 22 years. The company's 
concrete has been used to build homes, fire and rescue 
buildings, shops and offices, and even barns for local farmers. 
This small business in my district has been pursuing a land 
exchange with the Forest Service for the past 7 years to 
acquire a mere 14 acres of Forest Service land. Without this 
parcel, Tony's will run out of necessary aggregate and needs to 
produce concrete in the next 2 to 3 years.
    Wabeno is a small town, with a population of just over 
1,100. This company employs 17 hard-working people who could 
lose their jobs if this bill does not pass. That may not seem 
like much for somebody coming from a big city, but I can assure 
you the jobs and economic benefit provided by this small 
business are critically important to this rural community. That 
is why I introduced the Wabeno Economic Development Act of 
2024, which would expedite this conveyance and ensure that 
Tony's stays in business for years to come.
    This is an important conveyance that will provide much-
needed economic growth and jobs for the people in Wabeno. It 
has strong local support, and I would like to ask unanimous 
consent to enter into the record letters of support from the 
Wabeno Chamber of Commerce, the Forest County Economic 
Development Partnership, and the Town of Wabeno.
    Without objection, so ordered.

    [The information follows:]

                              WABENO AREA

                          Chamber of Commerce

                                              September 8, 2023    

    To Whom it May Concern:

    This letter from the Wabeno Area Chamber of Commerce is written in 
support of the sale or trade of land between Tony Smith, owner of 
Tony's Wabeno Redi-Mix LLC and the U.S. Forest Service. It was brought 
to our attention that his purchase or trade is needed to provide the 
materials needed to continue production in the future.
    Tony's Redi-Mix has been in our community for over 20 years and is 
currently providing employment for approximately 25 employees, which 
enables them to provide for their families. Tony and his employees are 
active community members and essential to the economic growth of 
Wabeno. We support all efforts that will help him to sustain his 
business.

            Sincerely,

                                             Dawn Jakubiec,
                                                          Treasurer

                                 ______
                                 

             FOREST COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP

Re: Tony's Wabeno Redi-Mix

    Greetings,

    The Forest County Economic Development Partnership is pleased to 
support the request of Tony Smith, OBA Tony's Wabeno Redi-Mix, with the 
purchase or trade of U.S. Forest Service to ensure the sustainability 
of his business and employment opportunities in Forest County, 
Wisconsin.
    The need for expansion was highlighted in 2022, revealing only a 
few years of sustainable sand and gravel to continue production and 
employment for his business. He has been in contact with Forest County 
in discussions on land purchases or trades to sustain the demand of 
sand and gravel for business purposes. Currently his site will only 
sustain his business until late 2025 or early 2026.
    With the success of land purchase or trade between Tony's Wabeno 
Redi-Mix and the U.S. Forest Service he will be able to provide Forest 
County with steady employment and growth of his company. The company 
currently employees around 25 individuals from around the area, and 
works on many jobs that increase the growth of the county. Sustaining 
this business for Forest County and its economic development is 
critical to the success and growth of the County as a solid unit.

            Sincerely,

                                              Chris Shafer,
                                                 Executive Director

                                 ______
                                 

                             TOWN OF WABENO

    The Town of Wabeno is in support of the request to purchase or 
trade of the U.S. Forest Service land to Tony's Wabeno Redi-Mix LLC 
Tony Smith owner.
    The need was brought to our attention last year, revealing only a 
few years of sand and gravel to continue production and the employment 
of approximately 25 employees and their families.
    Tony has been actively searching for property and so far has not 
found any other options.
    With this purchase or trade between Tony's Wabeno Redi-Mix and the 
U.S.Forest Service he will be able to provide steady employment and 
growth for his company and our community. Tony's Redi-Mix LLC is one of 
the largest employers in the community and we would to support him any 
way we can.

                                      Jim Smith,
                                      Chair

        Randy Johnson,                Benjamin Hermus,
        Supervisor                    Supervisor

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Tiffany. Unfortunately, this is not the first time this 
Subcommittee has heard the story of a local community 
struggling to develop because the Federal Government is 
dragging its feet conveying land. In many instances, this 
process can take years before local communities have to resort 
to passing an entire Act of Congress to get their simple land 
exchanges done. This is unacceptable, and we need to find ways 
to streamline and enhance this process. That is why I am glad 
to see bipartisan legislation being considered today from 
Representatives Lee and Joyce that would reduce red tape that 
is holding up the appraisal process for land conveyances.
    We will also be examining two bills today that streamline 
processes for improving forest management while boosting rural 
economies. The Root and Stem Act, which is being led by 
Congressman Newhouse, promotes an innovative new model to 
finance forest restoration that reduces fire risk while 
encouraging more timber harvesting.
    This is truly a win-win for rural communities with fire-
prone, overgrown forests, as well as for local sawmills that 
struggle to get a steady supply of timber from our Federal 
lands.
    We will also consider the ROUTES Act from Representative 
Kim that would expedite forest restoration work after wildfires 
in order to reopen popular recreation sites. The outdoor 
recreation economy grew to $1.1 trillion this year, and the 
backbone of that economy is made up of the small businesses 
that rely on access to Federal lands. When these lands are 
closed indefinitely due to wildfires, those businesses suffer 
greatly as visitors stop coming and spending money in nearby 
gateway communities.
    Representative Kim introduced this legislation in response 
to an overwhelming amount of feedback she received in her 
district about closed trails in the Cleveland National Forest. 
Her leadership on this issue will not only help improve 
recreation access in her district, but in districts across 
America.
    Both the Root and Stem Act and ROUTES Act remind us of an 
important fact: There is no amount of funding that will solve 
our need for greater forest management achievements. Rather, we 
must address the regulatory impediments and litigation hurdles 
preventing that work if we ever want to make meaningful 
progress.
    I would like to thank all the Members on both sides of our 
dais for their leadership on the bills before us today. I also 
want to thank all the witnesses for being here and traveling 
long distances to provide your expert testimony. I look forward 
to hearing from each of you.
    When Representative Neguse arrives, we will get his opening 
statement.
    For now, we will now move on to our first panel, which 
consists of Members who are sponsoring today's bills. I will 
now recognize Representative Newhouse for 5 minutes on H.R. 
674.

    STATEMENT OF THE HON. DAN NEWHOUSE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
             CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

    Mr. Newhouse. Thank you, and good morning, Chairman 
Tiffany. And when Ranking Member Neguse comes, also I would bid 
him good morning. I appreciate the opportunity to testify in 
support of my bill, H.R. 674, which is called the Root and Stem 
Project Authorization Act.
    In short, it would allow the Forest Service and the Bureau 
of Land Management to efficiently treat forests through a 
collaborative process.
    I want to start off with a little background to the bill. 
In 2013, the Forest Service announced a forest restoration 
project of about 54,000 acres in the Colville National Forest 
in my home state of Washington. In most projects of this 
nature, Federal lands are sold only after the Forest Service 
has conducted a necessary environmental analysis, as required 
by NEPA, or the National Environmental Policy Act. The Forest 
Service decided for this project, however, to contract out its 
NEPA responsibilities. They awarded the contract for a 10-year 
ecosystem restoration project to a local lumber company. Under 
this contract, the lumber company selected and paid a third-
party contractor to prepare the environmental assessment 
required of them. The Forest Service approved the subcontractor 
and the subcontractors environmental assessment.
    This concept became known as the A to Z Project, because 
the entire restoration process became the responsibility of the 
timber contractor. This arrangement was challenged, but 
ultimately was upheld in Federal District Court in 2018.
    My bill, the Root and Stem Project Authorization Act, works 
to provide clear statutory authority for the Forest Service and 
the Bureau of Land Management to continue this type of 
collaborative forest management. By authorizing these agencies 
to propose and enter into collaborative stewardship contracts 
and agreements, this legislation will allow them to accomplish 
more hazardous fuels reduction, and empower the agencies to 
engage with state, local, and tribal partners to ensure forest 
management projects complement ongoing conservation efforts, 
benefit communities, and protect local ecosystems.
    These collaborative projects have extraordinary benefits to 
both local economies and the environment. The Root and Stem Act 
will be helpful in accelerating these forest management 
projects to restore Federal forests that have suffered from 
years of poor or even, in some cases, non-existent management.
    Wildfires are absolutely getting worse and more frequent 
across the United States, and we need to do all that we can to 
improve our forest management and add tools to our toolbox, and 
this bill is just one way of doing that.
    I appreciate your time today again, Mr. Chairman. I also 
thank Mr. Neguse, now that he has arrived. Thank you for your 
consideration of my legislation.
    Mr. Tiffany. I appreciate your testimony, Mr. Newhouse. 
Now, I would like to turn to the Ranking Member, Mr. Neguse, 
for his opening statement.

      STATEMENT OF THE HON. JOE NEGUSE, A REPRESENTATIVE  
           IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO 

    Mr. Neguse. Thank you, Chairman Tiffany, and I am glad to 
be here, and certainly glad to see once again a slate of 
several bipartisan bills on the agenda for today's legislative 
hearing.
    And welcome to the members of the Committee who have joined 
us.
    I certainly appreciate the opportunity to talk, in 
particular, to the Forest Service and our panel of witnesses 
about a variety of different pieces of legislation related to 
public land management. Of course, in particular, I want to 
welcome a witness from my home district, Ms. Siri Roman, the 
General Manager of Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, 
who will be speaking on legislation that I have introduced, 
H.R. 4297.
    I am delighted to partner with my Colorado and Natural 
Resources Committee colleague, Representative Lamborn, on the 
bill. It is the Bolts and Ditch Act, which just by way of 
background, Bolts Ditch is located in the White River National 
Forest, which is part of the 2nd Congressional District that I 
have the privilege of representing. The ditch was mistakenly 
included in the boundaries of the Holy Cross Wilderness when it 
was originally designated, which prevented the maintenance and 
the use of this particular ditch.
    In 2019, we passed, as some of you will recall, the John D. 
Dingell, Jr. Conservation Act. It included a variety of 
different pieces of legislation, including legislation that I 
had authored to authorize non-motorized access to the town of 
Minturn to use, maintain, and repair the Bolts Ditch structure. 
This bill is a much-needed amendment to that legislation, 
authorizing the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District and 
the Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority to also access that 
headgate for maintenance and repairs.
    I know that the sanitation district has been working in 
partnership with the town of Minturn, which both support the 
legislation, so I am glad to see it on today's agenda, and I am 
hoping we can move it swiftly out of this Committee.
    And I want to thank Ms. Roman and the representatives from 
the town of Minturn for making the long journey here to testify 
and be here with us today.
    There are several other bills that we are considering today 
which I strongly support, and am grateful that we are 
considering. They relate to the authority of the Federal land 
management agencies to undertake various projects in their 
jurisdictions.
    I am certainly encouraged by the recent Forest Service 
report that summarizes and celebrates the historic investments 
made across the National Forest System in 2023. I serve as one 
of the co-Chairs of the Bipartisan Wildfire Caucus, and I know 
I speak for many when I say we were proud to support 
investments that were made last Congress to increase forest 
resilience, respond to the increasing threat of longer and more 
intense wildfire seasons in Colorado, in Utah, in Nevada, in 
Idaho, Rocky Mountain West. As Members of Congress, it is our 
No. 1 responsibility to continue supporting their efforts, in 
my view, and to provide further resources to our Federal land 
management agencies as they prepare for the wildfires to come, 
and plan for long-term forest resilience.
    I also think it is an important moment to recognize the 
work done by the Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management 
Commission which was established through the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The Commission recently 
released a report. Many of you attended a briefing that we 
conducted just a few weeks ago to review the 148 consensus 
recommendations that they made, so I am certainly excited at 
the potential of this Committee taking some of those 
recommendations up.
    Finally, I just want to thank one of my colleagues in 
particular for her strong leadership, and that is 
Representative Lee of the great state of Nevada, for her bill, 
H.R. 5443, the Accelerating Appraisals and Conservation Efforts 
Act. It is just a great example of common-sense legislating 
that cuts through the partisan divide.
    The bill would allow private appraisers to contract outside 
of their credentialed state to perform appraisals and valuation 
services on the Department of the Interior's behalf. I think it 
is just a great example of proactive legislation, non-partisan 
legislation that cuts through red tape. So, I credit 
Representative Lee for her initiative in that regard, and I am 
excited to consider that bill, as well as the others.
    With that, I will yield back to you, Mr. Chairman.

    Mr. Tiffany. Thank you, Ranking Member Neguse, and now I 
recognize representative Lee from Nevada for 5 minutes on her 
bill, H.R. 5443.

     STATEMENT OF THE HON. SUSIE LEE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN  
             CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEVADA 

    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ranking 
Member. It is a privilege to join you today as you consider my 
bipartisan bill to cut through government red tape for the 
benefit of public lands stakeholders nationwide, as well as the 
Department of the Interior itself.
    The Accelerating Appraisals and Conservation Efforts Act, 
or the AACE Act, is legislation that I was pleased to write, 
together with my good friend from Ohio, Representative David 
Joyce. It is a bill that we believe would better position 
America's principal land management agency to complete land 
transactions of all kinds more effectively and more 
efficiently.
    Members of this Subcommittee know well that DOI oversees 
hundreds of millions of acres of public lands nationwide. The 
Bureau of Land Management alone stewards roughly 70 percent of 
the lands in my home state of Nevada. But before DOI is able to 
buy, sell, lease, trade, or conduct any type of land-related 
transaction, it must first make sure that these activities are 
done at a fair market value to protect the public trust.
    However, while full-time appraisers are able to work 
quickly and easily across state lines, the private appraisers 
on whom DOI must rely to satisfy the growing demands on the 
agency can only work in the specific states or territories in 
which they are individually credentialed. This is slowing 
progress throughout the United States on a range of 
conservation, economic, and infrastructure goals all dependent 
upon DOI's ability to complete land transactions promptly.
    The AACE Act would help alleviate and prevent appraisal 
bottlenecks by building upon a decades-old precedent of limited 
license reciprocity for appraisers that was established under 
the Bush-Quayle administration. It would enable DOI to contract 
with private appraisers who are appropriately credentialed in 
one state to perform an appraisal and valuation services on 
DOI's behalf in any state.
    Importantly, it would require DOI to continue to prioritize 
working with local appraisers, unlocking the enhanced 
flexibility provided by this bill only when no assignment 
qualified or cost competitive local appraisers are available.
    In short, this legislation would maximize DOI's efficiency 
without spending a single additional dollar of taxpayers' 
money, benefiting everyone from conservationists to developers, 
who all now find themselves waiting at the back of the same 
Federal appraisals line. That is why the bill has the support 
of the DOI and organizations ranging from the Conservation 
Lands Foundation to Trout Unlimited to the Nevada Housing 
Coalition and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
    It is also why I am pleased to be able to join the Chairman 
and the Ranking Member in welcoming Sandy Adomatis of the 
Appraisal Institute here today, as she provides her unique 
expertise and perspective in detailing the Institute's own 
support of this bill.
    Thank you, Ms. Adomatis, for being here, and thanks again 
to all of my colleagues for your consideration of the AACE Act, 
and I yield.

    Mr. Tiffany. Thank you much, Representative Lee. Now, we 
will move on to Representative Kim for 5 minutes in regards to 
H.R. 6994.
    Welcome to the Committee.

     STATEMENT OF THE HON. YOUNG KIM, A REPRESENTATIVE IN    
           CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

    Mrs. Kim. Thank you, Chairman Tiffany and Ranking Member 
Neguse for holding this hearing, and I want to thank Chairman 
Westerman and your staff for your leadership on the issues 
before us today.
    I represent California's 40th District that covers parts of 
Orange, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties in Southern 
California, and my district includes unincorporated areas 
spanning several canyon communities in Cleveland National 
Forest, Trabuco District. I am proud to see that H.R. 6994, the 
Restoring Our Unopened Trails for Enjoyment and Safety Act--in 
short, the ROUTES Act--is being considered in today's hearing.
    The ROUTES Act requires Federal land management agencies to 
reopen trails, roads, campgrounds, and recreation sites that 
are damaged and closed by natural disasters like wildfires 
within 2 years of the disaster. To do so, my bill streamlines 
the resources needed to restore Federal trails and roads, and 
expedite certain activities like hazard tree removal, soil 
erosion mitigation, and drainage pattern and site restoration. 
It also codifies existing emergency hazard tree removal 
authorities that can be used prior to a full NEPA review. 
Region 5 of the U.S. Forest Service had previously used these 
authorities across multiple national forests, allowing 
recreation sites to reopen years sooner.
    In my district, the 2018 Holy Fire burned through more than 
23,000 acres of the Cleveland National Forest, severely 
damaging trails, campsites, and recreational areas. More than 5 
years later, several of the most popular trails remain closed. 
Prolonged closures of our Federal recreation sites and roads 
can negatively impact the local economy, impede firefighters' 
access to wildland fires, and trigger post-fire hazards. Less 
trail-based recreational means fewer visitors to small 
businesses in the area, and damaged roads may limit fire truck 
access to put out a fire or bulldozer access to clear debris 
and heavy rocks blocking a path.
    Routine trail maintenance is also essential for post-fire 
and non-fire related risk mitigation efforts. Burn areas are 
subject to soil erosion, flooding, and destructive debris flows 
that endanger nearby homes and civilian lives. For example, the 
2020 Bond fire which burned through parts of Silverado Canyon 
in my district weakened the soil and, years later, left the 
nearby residential area vulnerable to mudslides and debris 
flows during the unprecedented storms and heavy rains that we 
saw last year.
    Restoring and reopening our Federal roads and trails in a 
safe and timely manner are essential to community and forest 
health. Federal land management agencies have been appropriated 
significant amounts of funding in these past few years, and we 
need to ensure they prioritize funds for areas that need it the 
most, and use their existing authorities to complete their 
duties safely and expeditiously.
    I want to thank the Committee for considering my bill, H.R. 
6994, and I also want to thank Representative LaMalfa for co-
leading this bill with me to ensure our Federal land management 
partners have all the tools they need to take care of our 
forests in Southern California and across the nation.
    I also ask for unanimous consent to insert into the record 
a support letter from the Motorcycle Industry Council, 
Specialty Vehicle Institute of America, and Recreational Off-
Highway Vehicle Association.
    Thank you, and I yield back.
    Mr. Tiffany. In regards to the unanimous consent, so 
ordered.

    [The information follows:]

                      MOTORCYCLE INDUSTRY COUNCIL

                 SPECIALTY VEHICLE INSTITUTE OF AMERICA

              RECREATIONAL OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE ASSOCIATION

                                               January 29, 2024    

Hon. Young Kim,
U.S. House of Representatives
1306 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

    Dear Representative Kim:

    On behalf of the Motorcycle Industry Council \1\ (MIC), Specialty 
Vehicle Institute of America \2\ (SVIA), and Recreational Off-Highway 
Vehicle Association \3\ (ROHVA)--together referenced as the 
Associations, I write in support of H.R. 6994, the Restoring Our 
Unopened Trails for Enjoyment and Safety Act (ROUTES Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The Motorcycle Industry Council (MIC) is a not-for-profit, 
national trade association representing several hundred manufacturers, 
distributors, dealers and retailers of motorcycles, scooters, 
motorcycle parts, accessories and related goods, and allied trades.
    \2\ The Specialty Vehicle Institute of America (SVIA) is the 
national not-for-profit trade association representing manufacturers, 
dealers, and distributors of all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) in the United 
States. SVIA's primary goal is to promote safe and responsible use of 
ATVs.
    \3\ The Recreational Off-Highway Vehicle Association (ROHVA) is a 
national, not-for-profit trade association formed to promote the safe 
and responsible use of recreational off-highway vehicles (ROVs--
sometimes referred to as side-by-sides or UTVs) manufactured or 
distributed in North America. ROHVA is also accredited by the American 
National Standards Institute (ANSI) to serve as the Standards 
Developing Organization for ROVs. More information on the standard can 
be found at https://rohva.org/ansi-standard/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The powersports industry (motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), 
and recreational off-highway vehicles (ROVs)) are a $47.7 billion/year 
industry in the United States with a significant majority of the 
vehicles being utilized off-road. This includes dual sport and 
adventure touring motorcycles which are the quickest growing segment of 
motorcycle sales. As a result, the Associations strongly support 
ensuring sustainable off-highway vehicle (OHV) recreation opportunities 
continue to be available on our public lands.
    We support the ROUTES Act provisions requiring the Forest Service 
to restore and reopen trails, roads, campgrounds, and recreation sites 
that have been closed from the impacts of natural disasters no later 
than two years after the end of the disaster. This includes renovating 
trails and removing hazard trees to be performed under a Categorical 
Exclusion, instead of requiring a complex Environmental Assessment 
under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
    The OHV community has faced closures of recreational opportunities 
due to natural disasters in the past that unnecessarily took years to 
reopen and yet others remain closed to this day. That is not prudent 
use of federal lands that we as taxpayers support. The ROUTES Act would 
fix that by ensuring the Forest Service acts in a timely manner after a 
natural disaster and provides the tools to ensure that necessary on-
the-ground efforts needn't become mired in lengthy environmental 
reviews. It is important to remember that trails, campgrounds, and 
recreation sites closed by natural disasters were subject to NEPA 
analysis prior to being designated, and simply restoring the 
opportunity shouldn't require a duplicative analysis.
    The Associations would also like to call attention to 
recreationists who serve as volunteers that can help in any number of 
ways with restoring opportunities after a natural disaster. As 
examples, we highlight RestoreTrails.org and the Post Wildfire OHV 
Recovery Alliance (PWORA). RestoreTrails.org is a non-profit 
organization that focuses on protecting and restoring sustainable 
multi-use trail recreation from the damaging impacts of intense 
wildfires and other natural disasters. PWORA, RestoreTrails.org's 
official partner, develops alliances with local user groups that 
streamlines the creation of volunteer events with our federal agency 
partners. These events typically remove downed trees, replace damaged 
signage, and trail barriers, and repairs other recreational 
infrastructure such as staging areas and campgrounds. Recovery efforts 
often include re-establishing watershed protections, monitoring 
environmental conditions, conducting general trail maintenance along 
with minor reforestation if necessary. In short, the OHV and broader 
recreation communities stand ready to help ensure the timely reopening 
of recreational opportunities.
    Thank you for introducing this important legislation and please 
feel to reach out if there is anything we can do to help ensure its 
ultimate passage.

            Sincerely,

                                              Duane Taylor,
                      Director of Safe and Responsible Use Programs

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Tiffany. And thank you for your testimony, 
Representative Kim.
    Next, we are going to move on to our second panel, and I 
think the gentleman that is before us knows the drill quite 
well.
    You will have 5 minutes, Mr. Smith, to give your testimony.
    Mr. Greg Smith is with us. He is the Associate Deputy Chief 
of the National Forest System.
    Associate Deputy Chief Smith, you are recognized for 5 
minutes.

   STATEMENT OF GREG SMITH, ASSOCIATE DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL 
       FOREST SYSTEM, U.S. FOREST SERVICE, WASHINGTON, DC

    Mr. Smith. Good morning, Chairman Tiffany and Ranking 
Member Neguse and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for 
the opportunity to share the USDA Forest Service's perspective 
on the four public land bills that are under consideration for 
today.
    Again, my name is Greg Smith. I have been with the Forest 
Service for approximately 30 years, and currently serve as the 
Associate Deputy Chief of the National Forest System.
    The Forest Service, as you know, manages 193 million acres 
of national forest and grasslands across the country for many 
purposes, including clean drinking water, timber, recreational 
opportunities for the American public. This wide-ranging nature 
of the bills we are discussing today demonstrates the breadth 
of the agency's work, which is both local and community-
centered, as well as national in scope and impact.
    The first piece of legislation, H.R. 674, the Root Stem 
Project Authorization Act, would authorize the Forest Service 
to enter into agreements with external parties to advance 
collaboratively designed Federal land projects. The Act would 
enable outside entities to provide funding to enlist 
contractors to conduct environmental analysis and 
implementation of the work, and allow the Forest Service to 
repay those cooperators with receipts revenues from the 
projects.
    We support the goals of H.R. 674, but we would like to work 
with the Committee to better understand how the project would 
work, and to offer technical assistance to ensure authorities 
do not already exist to achieve the bill's intent.
    The second piece of legislation, the Restoring Our Unopened 
Trails for Enjoyment and Safety Act, this would require the 
Forest Service to reopen such sites as campgrounds, day use 
facilities, roads on the National Forest System lands that have 
been closed due to natural disasters within 2 years. The bill 
would establish a categorical exclusion under the National 
Policy Environmental Act for addressing repair and restoration 
of covered recreation sites.
    The Forest Service currently has the legal authority it 
needs, including categorical exclusions, to reopen recreation 
infrastructure closed by natural disasters. Because the ROUTES 
Act would mandate reopening closed sites within 2 years without 
exception, and regardless of whether critical safety mitigation 
is completed, the agency has significant concerns about the 
risk of exposure for the recreating public and the liability 
for the U.S. Government. We do not support the bill as 
currently drafted, but would welcome an opportunity to continue 
working with the Committee to address the goals of quickly 
reopening recreation sites following natural disasters.
    The third bill, H.R. 4297, the Bolts Ditch, seeks to 
resolve issues associated with the use and maintenance of Bolts 
Ditch, a headgate and a ditch near Minturn, Colorado. Bolts 
Ditch is located within the Holy Cross Wilderness Area of the 
White River National Forest, and on a creek that has been 
identified by the Forest Service as an eligible Wild and Scenic 
River. The bill, if passed, would amend the Dingell Act 
requiring the Secretary to issue special use permits for non-
motorized access to local water providers in order to maintain, 
repair, and operate these facilities.
    We do not oppose H.R. 4297, but we do anticipate minor 
impacts to wilderness resources and the potential impact to 
Wild and Scenic River suitability if the bill is passed.
    The final bill, H.R. 7072, the Wabeno Economic Development 
Act, would require the Forest Service to convey a 14-acre 
parcel located on the Chequamegon-Nicolet Forest to a local 
company for market value.
    We look forward to working with the Chairman and the 
Committee as these bills move forward.
    Chairman Tiffany, Ranking Member Neguse, and members of the 
Subcommittee, this concludes my testimony. I look forward to 
answering any questions that you may have.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:]
  Prepared Statement of Greg Smith, Associate Deputy Chief, National 
     Forest System, U.S. Department of Agriculture--Forest Service
            on H.R. 674, H.R. 4297, H.R. 6994, and H.R. 7072

    Chairman Tiffany, Ranking Member Neguse, and Members of the 
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Forest Service, regarding 
various Federal land management bills.
H.R. 674, ``Root and Stem Project Authorization Act of 2023''

    H.R. 674 authorizes the Forest Service and BLM to enter into an 
agreement with a person for a project on federal land that was 
developed through a collaborative process and that meets local and 
rural community needs. The person entering into the agreement would 
initially provide all or a portion of funding necessary to complete any 
necessary environmental analysis. The Secretary would use this funding 
to select and pay a contractor on a set list to conduct the analysis, 
and if choosing to move forward with the project the Secretary would 
solicit bids and then enter into a Stewardship contract or agreement 
(16 U.S.C. 6591c) to carry out the project. Any receipts generated by 
the project that would normally go to the Treasury would be used to 
repay the person providing initial funding for the environmental 
analysis.
    The Administration is supportive of increasing capacity and working 
collaboratively with partners to facilitate efficient and science-based 
forest management but would like to work with the committee to better 
understand how a root to stem project would work and to offer 
additional technical assistance to ensure authorities do not already 
exist to achieve the intent of the proposed legislation and that we are 
able to implement it effectively.
    For example, requiring the agencies to use a list of contractors 
provided to Congress would provide less flexibility to the agencies in 
fulfilling their environmental analysis obligations. We would like to 
better understand the intent of creating such a list and discuss 
possible issues including setting fair and transparent criteria and 
vetting of contractors to be on the list, ensuring a contract with a 
person on the list is the best value for the government in terms of 
price reasonableness, quality control, and liability for unfinished or 
poorly done environmental analysis. We would also like to better 
understand if this authority is intended to supplant the new Section 
107(f) in NEPA that allows project sponsors to prepare NEPA documents 
under the supervision of the agency.
    Additionally, we would like to better understand the committee's 
intent concerning repayment of initial funding for the environmental 
analysis, and work with the committee to understand the benefits and 
challenges for federal land managers associated with full versus 
partial upfront payment. For most projects using contracts or 
agreements under the stewardship authority, either revenue is not 
generated or any revenue that is generated becomes retained receipts 
for use on additional stewardship contracting projects, rather than 
being deposited into the Treasury.
    The Stewardship authority requires that stewardship contracting 
projects achieve land management goals for the national forests, and 
that they meet local and rural community needs. Because H.R. 674 
requires that any project that moves forward will use a Stewardship 
contract or agreement to carry out the project, we recommend clarifying 
in the bill language that when a person submits a proposal for a root 
and stem project, it should not only meet local and rural community 
needs but also help achieve tribal interests and the land management 
goals for the national forests. We believe this will lead to more 
projects being carried out under this potential future authority.
    Finally, we would like to work with the sponsor to clarify the role 
that participants in the collaborative process have in settlement 
negotiations. A participant in the collaborative process may not be a 
necessary party to litigation and therefore not a necessary party to a 
settlement. Guaranteeing participation in settlement negotiations may 
therefore result in unnecessary complication and delay. We also want to 
ensure the conflict-of-interest requirements appropriately safeguard 
against self-dealing on the part of the person submitting the proposal. 
We also believe that defining the term ``person'' could avoid future 
confusion about the ability of an organization or business entity to 
submit a proposal.
    The Administration also recommends that the Committee seek 
Department of Interior (DOI) input on provisions that apply to DOI.
H.R. 4297, ``Bolts Ditch Act''

    H.R. 4297, the ``Bolts Ditch Act,'' seeks to resolve issues 
associated with the use and maintenance of Bolts Ditch near the Town of 
Minturn, Colorado. The headgate and approximately 450 lineal feet of 
the ditch are located within the Holy Cross Wilderness Area on the 
White River National Forest. These features were included within the 
Holy Cross Wilderness Area when Congress passed the Colorado Wilderness 
Act designating this Wilderness Area in 1980. The structure and ditch 
were constructed in 1882 and previously delivered water to Bolts Lake 
via Bolts Ditch. Section 1101(a) of the John D. Dingell, Jr. 
Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act (the ``Dingell Act,'' 
Public Law 116-9) was enacted in 2019, requiring the Secretary of 
Agriculture to issue a special use authorization to the Town of Minturn 
for nonmotorized access and use for the purposes of the diversion of 
water and use, maintenance, and repair of Bolts Ditch and Bolts Ditch 
headgate. Presently, the Town of Minturn has no right to water from 
Bolt's Ditch. In 2021, the Town of Minturn filed an Application for 
Water Rights and Approval of Plan for Augmentation and Exchange in Case 
No. 21CW3030. This application includes the Bolts Ditch. No decree 
concerning water rights has been issued for this case as of January 
2024.
    H.R. 4297, the ``Bolts Ditch Act,'' would amend Section 1101(a) of 
the Dingell Act to additionally require the Secretary of Agriculture to 
issue special use authorizations to the Upper Eagle River Regional 
Water Authority and Eagle River Water and Sanitation District for the 
same use and access as currently mandated for the Town of Minturn, i.e. 
nonmotorized access and use of the Bolts Ditch Headgate and the Bolts 
Ditch, for the purposes of the diversion of water and use, maintenance, 
and repair of the ditch and headgate.
    Given the location of these features within the Holy Cross 
Wilderness, maintenance, repair, and operation of these permanent 
facilities may have minor impacts on the Wilderness character of the 
area. Additionally, Bolt's Ditch is located on Cross Creek, which was 
identified as an eligible Wild and Scenic River by the White River 
National Forest Plan in 2002. The plan directs that each eligible 
stream identified will be managed to maintain eligibility until a 
suitability study can be completed. Individual suitability studies can 
be initiated when a project is proposed that may alter the free-flowing 
character or would affect the resources that made the stream eligible. 
The action of diverting water to Bolt's Ditch may impact the 
suitability of Cross Creek, but no study has yet been undertaken to 
confirm that potential outcome.
    USDA does not oppose H.R. 4297 but anticipates minor impacts to 
Wilderness resources and a potential impact to Wild and Scenic River 
suitability if the bill is enacted.
H.R. 6994, ``Restoring Our Unopened Trails for Enjoyment and Safety 
        (ROUTES) Act''

    H.R. 6994, the Restoring Our Unopened Trails for Enjoyment and 
Safety Act or ``ROUTES Act,'' requires the reopening of covered 
recreation sites closed due to natural disasters. The Administration 
does not support the bill as currently drafted, but we would like to 
continue working with the bill sponsor and the Subcommittee to address 
the goal of expediting the restoration of recreation opportunities for 
public use and enjoyment following natural disasters.
    The ROUTES Act would apply to ``covered recreation sites,'' which 
the bill defines as a trail, campground, developed day-use recreation 
site, or road that is located on ``Interior recreational lands'' or 
National Forest System (NFS) lands and operated by the Secretary 
concerned. As defined, the scope of this bill would affect all roads 
(not just those providing primary recreation access) and all trails 
under Federal jurisdiction in all types of areas, including wilderness 
areas and campgrounds and developed day-use recreation sites. If a 
covered recreation site were fully or partially closed to public use 
due to a natural disaster, the bill would mandate the reopening of the 
site within two years after the date on which the natural disaster 
ends. The bill would establish a categorical exclusion (CE) from 
documentation in an environmental assessment or an environmental impact 
statement under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for repair 
and restoration of covered recreation sites and hazard tree removal at 
or along covered recreation sites. The bill would specify that the CE 
would still be subject to the extraordinary circumstances provisions of 
40 CFR 1501.4 that would limit the ability to rely on the CE and would 
authorize use of emergency response provisions in 36 CFR 220.4(b) for 
hazard tree removal at or along covered recreation sites for up to two 
years following a natural disaster. Additionally, the bill would 
require the Secretary to report to Congress not later than two years 
after its enactment on the number of covered recreation sites that are 
closed due to natural disasters and the number of covered recreation 
sites reopened utilizing authorities in the bill.
    The Forest Service manages 193 million acres of national forests 
and grasslands across 43 States and territories. These lands include 
more than 370,000 miles of NFS roads, 13,400 bridges, 163,000 miles of 
NFS trails, and 30,000 recreation sites (10,700 of which are developed 
recreation sites). Forest Service units prioritize keeping recreation 
sites, NFS trails, and NFS roads open to the best of their ability with 
the resources available to them. The primary challenges NFS units face 
in providing safe, accessible recreation opportunities following a 
natural disaster are financial resources and staff capacity, rather 
than a lack of legal authorities.
    As with lands managed by other Federal agencies, not all roads, 
trails, and recreation sites are located in sustainable locations. 
Natural disasters can lead to dramatic changes to local environments, 
and as drafted the bill lacks flexibility to address circumstances 
where repairs may be complex, such as altering design or site location 
for rebuilding, or where a recreational site may be totally destroyed 
or eliminated, or where conservation of fish, wildlife and their 
habitats are impacted. For example, if roads, trails, campgrounds or 
other facilities are completely washed away, rebuilding could result in 
campgrounds existing in a flood plain, or reconstituted trails that 
would now border a newly created cliff face. Additionally, recreational 
lands as described in the bill may be managed by third parties, 
including concessioners or lessees. And on certain federal lands, 
habitat restoration and other conservation priorities may have to be 
initially addressed prior to any repair work. In all these cases, it 
may not be feasible or even desirable to reopen and may not be possible 
within the time frame provided in the bill. Likewise, there may be 
safety issues that necessitate longer term closures.
    The Forest Service currently has the legal authorities it needs, 
including CEs, to reopen NFS trails, NFS roads, and federally owned 
campgrounds and day-use developed recreation sites closed by wildfire 
and other natural disasters. These existing authorities include CEs for 
repair and maintenance of trails (36 CFR 220.6(d)(4)); repair and 
maintenance of recreation sites and facilities (36 CFR 220.6(d)(5)); 
post-fire rehabilitation activities on roads, trails, and facilities 
(36 CFR 220.6(e)(11)); and removal of debris after other disturbances 
(36 CFR 220.6(e)(19)). Hazard tree removal is covered by existing CEs 
at 36 CFR 220.6(d)(4) (roads and trails) and (d)(5) (recreation sites 
and facilities). The emergency response provision requires further 
clarification of its scope, intent, and avoidance of conflicts with 
existing law and other provisions of this bill to achieve its intended 
effect.
    Because the ROUTES Act would mandate reopening of closed recreation 
sites by an arbitrary two-year deadline, without exception and 
regardless of whether all needed safety mitigation work has been 
completed, the Administration has significant concerns about risk 
exposure for the recreating public and liability exposure for the 
United States. This bill would remove agency discretion to consider 
other management options or approaches to fit the local circumstances. 
The arbitrary deadline would also create additional risk to Federal 
employees and contractors by constraining risk management decisions 
regarding whether to remove hazards, including hazard trees.
    While the Administration does not support the bill as currently 
drafted, we would be pleased to work with the bill sponsor and the 
Subcommittee to address the goals of the bill and the underlying 
challenge of adequate agency resources and capacity to manage and 
expedite the provision of recreation opportunities to the public 
following natural disasters. The Administration also recommends that 
the Committee seek Department of Interior (DOI) input on provisions 
that apply to DOI.
H.R. 7072, ``Wabeno Economic Development Act''

    H.R. 7072, the Wabeno Economic Development Act, would require the 
Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Chief of the Forest 
Service, to convey a parcel of approximately 14 acres of National 
Forest System (NFS) land located in the Chequamegon-Nicolet National 
Forest to Tony's Wabeno Redi-Mix, LLC. The parcel, located on the 
Lakewood-Laona Ranger District, is adjacent to and southwest of the 
Town of Wabeno and can be accessed off of Smith Rd. The parcel is 
surrounded on three sides by private land and adjacent to other Forest 
Service land on the fourth side to the south. It contains upland 
northern hardwood with a year of origin of 1927.
    Subject to provisions in this Act, if the Tony's Wabeno Redi-Mix, 
LLC offers to acquire the NFS property for market value, the Secretary 
shall, not later than 180 days after receiving the offer, convey to 
Tony's Wabeno Redi-Mix, LLC all right, title, and interest of the 
United States in and to the property as described in the Act. As a 
condition of the conveyance, Tony's Wabeno Redi-Mix, LLC would be 
required to pay an amount equal to the market value of the land to be 
conveyed and all costs associated with the conveyance including for 
surveys, appraisals, and any environmental analysis required by Federal 
law.
    The Act would also require the Department of Interior (DOI), in 
consultation with other federal agencies, industry stakeholders, and 
states to review federal permitting processes related to stone, sand, 
and gravel development on federal land, and to submit a report on this 
topic to the committee within 180 days of enactment. This report would 
overview current federal permitting processes and associated economic 
impacts, identify inefficiencies, and recommend legislative or 
administrative actions to streamline processes.
    We look forward to working with the Chairman and committee as H.R. 
7072 moves forward and recommend the Committee seek DOI input on 
provisions under their jurisdiction.

                                 ______
                                 
Questions Submitted for the Record to Mr. Greg Smith, Associate Deputy 
   Chief--National Forest System, U.S. Forest Service, Washington DC

Mr. Smith did not submit responses to the Committee by the appropriate 
deadline for inclusion in the printed record.

            Questions Submitted by Representative Westerman

    Question 1. I have heard from various interested stakeholders that 
there has been a notable delay in processing the National Environmental 
Policy Act review for the Mount Magazine State Park campground 
expansion in the Ozark National Forest. This project will expand the 
state park campground onto U.S. Forest Service land in the Ozark 
National Forest.

    Mount Magazine is Arkansas's highest point at 2,753 feet. Mount 
Magazine State Park is located within the Ozark National Forest and is 
a destination for outdoor sports, extreme adventures, rock climbing, 
horseback riding, and more.

    A categorical exclusion (CE) was applied for in January 2023, and 
there has been little progress made since that time frame. I am 
concerned with how long the review process is taking.

    1a) Will you please provide an update on where the process 
currently stands?

    1b) Will you commit to providing the necessary USFS personnel and 
resources to meet timelines to review this permitting application?

    1c) Please provide a list of any other special project requests 
that are currently undergoing a NEPA review within the Ozark National 
Forest, and the current status of each of those projects.

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Tiffany. Thank you, Associate Deputy Chief Smith. We 
appreciate you being here today and your testimony. Next, we 
are going to recognize Members for questions, and I would turn 
to Representative Fulcher first for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Fulcher. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Smith, thank you for being here, and we have 
communicated before.
    In my home state of Idaho, unlike most other states--not 
all, but most--we have a very significant presence of Federal 
land, and a lot of that is under the auspice of the Forest 
Service Department of Ag. So, these types of pieces of 
legislation are very impactful for us. Unlike states where most 
of it is privately controlled, everything we do seemingly runs 
through Federal channels because basically two-thirds of our 
land mass falls under that category.
    So, I appreciate Mr. Newhouse's legislation. I think this 
is going to be helpful to us. But it seems like, especially on 
this Subcommittee, we always come back to trying to nibble 
around the edges to figure out legislative workarounds to just 
simply make things more manageable.
    You did mention briefly H.R. 674, but I would like to have 
you go just a little bit further on that. How do you anticipate 
that being a benefit for states and locals to help work through 
some of these NEPA problems that we all have right now?
    Mr. Smith. Certainly, we always are going to consider 
collaboration, so you look at the locals. They are best knowing 
what is happening in the local area, in the sawmills and the 
towns. So, it is imperative that we work and have a 
collaborative relationship with them so that we can work out 
those issues so that it is not falling back on environmental 
analysis, which people tend to blame that is the case. But we 
want to work collaboratively with those individuals because 
they have the experience, they have been there, so that is the 
whole purpose of doing that.
    As you know, we have talked about the A to Z, so we have 
looked at opportunities where we said, OK, we will let the 
cooperators take care of the environmental analysis and pay for 
the cost, and then we can see how we could reimburse at a later 
date, which this bill is talking about. So, we have already 
been doing it for a while. We think that is very important 
because we always want to be collaborative to work those 
situations out.
    Mr. Fulcher. OK. My follow-up to that, which came to mind 
just as a function of your response, is let's say that we have 
a successful collaboration, and the project or whatever is 
being jointly worked on goes through. How often do you then run 
into some kind of a litigation-related problem, that next step, 
how often is the frequency of a litigation problem after a 
collaboration takes place?
    Mr. Smith. I don't have an exact percentage of how that is.
    Mr. Fulcher. If you could just generalize, I mean, are we 
talking, is it rare? Is it frequent?
    Mr. Smith. I think somewhere in between, I would say. I 
don't think it is always we get litigated, but it depends on--
--
    Mr. Fulcher. It is certainly fair to say it is not 
uncommon.
    Mr. Smith. Yes, I would agree with that.
    Mr. Fulcher. OK. Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, 
the legislation we have before us, I think, is going to be 
helpful. I really do.
    As we, as a Subcommittee, continue to work with the 
challenges of interacting with Federal lands, we are going to 
have to continue to take steps to empower, I think, our locals 
more when it comes to areas and regions around the country 
where it is dominated by Federal lands, because that control is 
being choked off either through the process or through 
litigation after the process.
    And it is a much bigger problem we are trying to address 
today, but the legislation we have before us is a helpful step, 
so I want to thank the sponsors for that.
    And with that, I yield back.
    Mr. Tiffany. The gentleman yields. I would turn next to the 
Ranking Member, Mr. Neguse, for 5 minutes of questions.
    Mr. Neguse. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you, Mr. Smith, for both your written testimony and 
your oral testimony. I, like my former Ranking Member, Mr. 
Fulcher, represent a state that has significant Federal public 
lands, as you know, the state of Colorado. Roughly half of my 
congressional district, which is larger than nine states, is 
Federal land.
    And we have a good relationship with our Forest Service 
supervisors, with the BLM, a variety of the different land 
management agencies that, of course, play a pivotal role in the 
management of those lands in our district. And I will just say 
I am grateful to you and to the work that the Forest Service is 
doing and has done over the course of the last several years in 
terms of implementing the laws that we have passed and the 
resources that we and the Congress provided to do critical 
wildfire resiliency work and trail restoration efforts, and so 
much more.
    That doesn't mean that there aren't significant challenges, 
and I am going to talk about one that I would like to have an 
exchange with you about. But nonetheless, I think it is 
important to preface my remarks with a note of gratitude to the 
folks at the Forest Service, to the Chief on down.
    I also, of course, with respect to the bills that we are 
considering today, appreciate the Forest Service's position on 
the Bolts Ditch Act, and I think it is a common-sense bill, and 
my hope would be that we can move that quickly through the 
Committee.
    Mr. Smith, I know you are not here to testify about 
wildland firefighter pay issues, and I suspect that that may be 
out of your province or your jurisdiction. But nonetheless, as 
a representative for the Forest Service, I do want to ask you a 
particular question about housing.
    We have received some pretty disturbing reports from a 
variety of different public sources, and also individuals, that 
housing costs in terms of housing that is being managed by the 
Forest Service for wildland firefighters have gone up 
dramatically--a series of announcements made in just the last, 
I think, several weeks to months about, in particular, housing 
rents that have in some cases doubled, in other cases gone up 
100 percent.
    I wonder if you might be able to, I suspect you are aware 
of this, and if you could provide maybe the Committee some 
clarity on that front.
    Mr. Smith. Housing is certainly a priority. And we have 
been engaged in several opportunities to try to correct that, 
whether we are allowing some pay for some of our firefighter 
employees or some of our lower grade employees. So, that is 
ongoing. I don't have the specifics, but I know that it is a 
high priority, and I do know the agency is responding to that.
    Mr. Neguse. OK. Well, I would just simply say I am going to 
read something here that we found online, and again, perhaps 
you can confirm the veracity of this. We are working on a 
letter that we intend to send to your agency, and we hope that 
you will provide us an answer forthwith.
    But this particular example, it is a new rental market 
survey and change in a rural Forest Service district where the 
previous net daily tenant rent was $23.73, the new net daily 
tenant rent $52.76, which means an $871 monthly increase in 
rent for wildland firefighters that can barely afford to live 
and survive in these communities that they are serving.
    Again, I am hoping that you all can provide some further 
clarity as to the veracity of this, and I am hoping it is not 
true. In the event that it is true, I think the Forest Service 
is going to have to take some significant, immediate actions to 
ensure that these Federal wildland firefighters are not 
negatively impacted.
    And we can talk with you. And I suspect that there would be 
interest on a bipartisan basis, and perhaps we can engage some 
of our appropriators about how to best mitigate this kind of 
increase. But as I am sure you could imagine, it would be 
untenable for a wildland firefighter in Colorado or any other 
western state to all of a sudden face a $900 or $800 monthly 
rent increase. Pay isn't going up, as you know, I am sure.
    We have been fighting here in Congress, myself and several 
others, to try to get wildland firefighters paid a decent wage, 
the wage that they deserve. We have a bill, Tim's Act, I know 
you are familiar with, that we have been pushing every day for 
the last several years. And you will pardon my frustrations 
here, but on behalf of these Federal wildland firefighters, as 
we prepare for what is likely to be another tough year, we have 
to get this right.
    So, I would just ask for your commitment to work with us on 
that, and we will follow up via letter.
    Mr. Smith. Ranking Member Neguse, I assure you that is one 
of the highest priorities in the agency, and we will be happy 
to work with the Committee to do so.
    Mr. Neguse. Thank you.
    Mr. Tiffany. The gentleman yields. Next, Representative 
Newhouse, you have 5 minutes for questioning of our witness.
    Mr. Newhouse. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the 
opportunity.
    And thank you, Mr. Smith, for your comments on the Root and 
Stem Act. I appreciate your positive comments, but also look 
forward to working with you to make sure it accomplishes what 
we want it to, which is basically to codify the ability of the 
Forest Service to use this authority on forest restoration 
projects.
    We have seen a lot of successful collaboration efforts, 
absolutely, but we have also seen challenges. So, I think Mr. 
Fulcher's point was well taken that this would be a good 
opportunity for us to ensure that the Department continues to 
have a successful program moving forward.
    So, maybe a question along the lines of, in your 
estimation, and maybe this will point to some of the potential 
solutions that we could come up with, why do you think that 
these projects are not used more often?
    What are some of the challenges that we should be 
overcoming?
    And maybe we could do that through this Act.
    Mr. Smith. I generally think that what we can do--we have a 
lot of tools and opportunities to do that. We have lots of CEs 
that we can work, as you already know, and our major priority, 
the wildfire crisis strategy, is to make sure that we get into 
areas and treat areas, thin areas, do burning, and all that. 
So, I think that we have the tools and the opportunities.
    The length and the difficulty sometimes is depending on the 
environmental analysis that we are doing, whether you are 
talking about a categorical exclusion or EA, whatever we think 
the appropriate analysis is, and that can take some time.
    There is also cost on both sides. You are talking about 
cost for environmental analysis, and you are talking about 
project costs. So, those things can run a course, and sometimes 
you can get obstacles in those.
    Mr. Newhouse. Well, again, I appreciate your support of the 
concept, and look forward to working with you to make this 
something that will be a benefit for the agency and for our 
national forests. So, thank you very much.
    Mr. Smith. Thank you.
    Mr. Newhouse. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Mr. Tiffany. The gentleman yields. Next, Mr. Bentz, you 
have 5 minutes if you choose.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Thanks for being here today, and this gives me an 
opportunity to talk about some events of just last week when I 
was down in southern Oregon, in my district, and we were 
talking about the challenges that the Medford and Grants Pass 
communities in that area face every summer now because of 
smoke.
    And the challenges are extraordinarily difficult for many 
of the businesses that either have vineyards or have any type 
of recreational activity. For example, the Shakespeare Festival 
in Ashland, which has national notoriety for being an 
excellent, incredible production facility, has been hugely 
damaged, as have all outdoor activities by virtue of the smoke 
that now comes into those valleys during the summer. You can 
almost set your clock by knowing when this is going to happen. 
And it has been so damaging.
    The question, of course, is what can we do about it? And 
they are surrounded by, the Klamath forest, of course, is to 
the south, and the Rogue-Siskiyou is adjacent. We have these 
bills before us today that try to help, but these bills address 
thousands of acres when the problem is in the millions. So, my 
question to you, Mr. Smith, is, in your opinion, after your 
years of service, what is the solution that actually is working 
on the ground right now?
    Mr. Smith. I think the 10-year wildfire crisis strategy 
that we are doing will address a lot of that. We are looking at 
the most vulnerable areas, and trying to treat those in the 
priority landscapes. So, I think that is the best effort that 
we have going. It has been very successful. We were able to cut 
more timber, thin more areas under that particular strategy.
    So, I think the current strategy that we have in place, 
which our No. 1 priority in the agency is the wildfire crisis 
strategy, is trying to address that, and we will address that.
    Mr. Bentz. And I am happy to hear that. But I guess my 
question to you would be what would you recommend we do to 
accelerate your excellent efforts in that regard?
    I have heard good things about that program, but the 
numbers, the time--it is almost as though, as good of work as 
you are doing, we are all falling behind. So, what do you need?
    Mr. Smith. I don't have an answer right now, but we would 
certainly be willing to work with you and the Committee to come 
up with some ideas if there are some things that we should be 
doing that we are not currently addressing.
    Mr. Bentz. Let me make it easier. To whom should I address 
the question? Awkward for you to answer it in this environment, 
I understand that, but tell me who would you point us toward?
    And by the way, I work with every group you can imagine. 
All you have to do is suggest which ones you think are the most 
effective in trying to actually do something, because I want to 
emphasize this. The people I met with last week, this is an 
existential issue for them. This is destroying the opportunity 
for economic advancement. But worse, it is harming people who 
have to breathe that air, the little kids and everybody else. 
This is real. So, who would you point us toward?
    Mr. Smith. I know that our Secretary Vilsack is very 
supportive of the efforts that we are doing. So, if you wanted 
to start somewhere, I would start with the Secretary of 
Agriculture, Tom Vilsack.
    Mr. Bentz. Let me shift to another issue. Thank you for 
that. We will follow up.
    One of the things that is not often spoken about in 
following these terrific and horrific hundreds of thousands-of-
acre fires that are happening out in Oregon and California, 
Washington, Idaho, Montana areas is what happens after the fire 
is over and that timber does not get removed. And in a couple 
of years, no one can go into the space for fear of some of this 
rotting timber falling on them and crushing them.
    At the Forest Service, do you have a record, a map that 
shows areas that now are off limits by virtue of the sheer 
danger of going into that space with all of this standing and 
rotting timber?
    Mr. Smith. I am not aware of that. I certainly will get 
back to you to answer to that question. I am sure some of our 
experts in state and private forestry probably have a better 
handle on that. But I could certainly get you that information.
    Mr. Bentz. It would seem to me that you would have it 
readily available because it is so hazardous not to have it. 
And you guys are in charge of that space. And even a new 
lawyer, and I am definitely not a new lawyer, an older lawyer, 
knows that if someone came in and asked if it was foreseeable 
that a tree would fall down in that forest, the answer is yes. 
It is extraordinarily foreseeable, they are going to fall down.
    So, I look forward to you getting back to me on that, and 
we will reach out to the Secretary.
    Thank you, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
    Mr. Tiffany. The gentleman yields. I would like to take a 
couple of minutes for questioning here. I have a couple of 
specific questions, Mr. Smith, and then I want to get into some 
more general stuff.
    We heard the testimony from Representative Kim in regards 
to the Cleveland National Forest being closed. And if I heard 
you correctly, you said 2 years is not going to be enough to do 
the repairs to make sure that it is safe for people to be able 
to go in there. Did I hear that accurately?
    Mr. Smith. Yes. We think that the 2-year limit may be 
limiting, because the first priority is to make sure that it is 
safe for the recreation public, and also liability for the 
Forest Service and U.S. Government in general.
    Mr. Tiffany. Why does it take so long?
    Mr. Smith. It really depends on the situation, a case by 
case. And based on what the analysis is, we try to prepare to 
do what we need to do based on analysis that we got.
    So, if you are talking about environmental analysis, that 
takes a while. You are talking about cost. Those costs are not 
necessarily readily available, so we have to plan for those 
costs to do those type of treatments. That is part of it.
    Mr. Tiffany. So, when you say ``analysis,'' are you 
referencing to NEPA?
    Mr. Smith. Yes.
    Mr. Tiffany. OK. So, NEPA is an impediment here for being 
able to expeditiously go in and be able to get this cleaned up 
and make it safe?
    Mr. Smith. I don't think it is an impediment. We have lots 
of CEs and we have emergency authorities to get in and take 
care of stuff after disasters and fires.
    Mr. Tiffany. OK, so NEPA is not a problem. You have a 
categorical exclusion, right? Why not exercise it?
    Mr. Smith. We do. We very often do. And I know we have been 
utilizing it particularly under this new wildfire crisis 
strategy we have. We are using all the tools that we have, 
including emergency authorities, including the CEs that we 
already have.
    Mr. Tiffany. It was said that this Bolts Ditch headgate was 
mistakenly put in a wilderness area. Is that right?
    Mr. Smith. I think it was located there before the 
wilderness area.
    Mr. Tiffany. But it was mistakenly put in the wilderness 
area.
    Mr. Smith. Yes.
    Mr. Tiffany. Isn't that an indictment of wilderness areas, 
which are the most restrictive designation that is out there, 
and that we must be really careful before we put properties 
with the wilderness designation?
    Mr. Smith. Before we do a wilderness designation, there is 
a lot of public involvement, so you have lots of comments and 
opportunities before we make such decisions. So, we try to take 
that into account before we designate those areas. That is why 
you have a study and suitability for those areas.
    Mr. Tiffany. So, you do the consultation and stuff like 
that with the local communities. You say you hear from them, 
all the rest. Do you coordinate with the local municipalities 
that are affected by something like this?
    Do you go in and do an official coordination as stipulated 
under Federal law, and review with the municipalities not just 
the consultation, not just hearing from people, but where you 
sit down and really figure out what the concerns are, and then 
help alleviate those concerns before executing something like 
placing land into a wilderness?
    Mr. Smith. Well, that is certainly supposed to be the 
outcome of that collaboration. That should be the outcome, that 
you have considered all that, that you have had those 
conversations with the locals, how would it affect them, what 
it is going to affect. So, I would assume that is what we would 
be doing.
    Mr. Tiffany. Do you believe coordination and collaboration 
are two different things under the Federal law?
    Mr. Smith. Yes.
    Mr. Tiffany. So, they are two different things, right?
    Mr. Smith. Yes.
    Mr. Tiffany. Yes, OK. I appreciate it very much. We really 
appreciate the work you have done with us, my office and our 
staff here in regards to the Forest County Wabeno project. Do 
you have any concerns, I didn't hear them in the testimony, are 
there any immediate concerns you have with this?
    Mr. Smith. The land transfer?
    Mr. Tiffany. With the land, yes, thank you.
    Mr. Smith. No, not at this time.
    Mr. Tiffany. So, should we expect that to be able to 
advance here, provided we choose to do that, I understand you 
can't control that, but what I am seeing and hearing here is 
that there really aren't any concerns with the conveyance 
happening. Is that accurate, from the Forest Service's 
perspective?
    Mr. Smith. Yes. I mean, there are always technicalities 
that we need to work out, but we try to be as judicious and 
expeditious as we can.
    Mr. Tiffany. Well, I appreciate that very much, because we 
will hear from the local testimony that we will get how 
important this is, and you certainly heard the comments that I 
shared.
    I want to follow up on Mr. Bentz's question. I am going to 
take the liberty of taking a few more seconds here. Are there 
specific impediments that are preventing the Forest Service 
from completing more of these land conveyances administratively 
that require congressional action?
    I mean, do we need to be more active in this area as 
Congress?
    Mr. Smith. I don't think so. I think we have the authority 
to do it. Again, when you are talking about doing these type of 
activities, you first must make sure that it is suitable within 
the current forest plan, you need to consider whether there are 
any enhancement activities under the CERCLA, you need to 
consider any Wild and Scenic Rivers, you need to consider any 
endangered species. So, there are a lot of factors that we look 
at.
    I think we have the authority that we need already, it is 
just when you do the analysis sometimes it takes time.
    Mr. Tiffany. Yes, my time has expired. Thank you very much 
for appearing today, Mr. Smith, and we look forward to 
continuing to work with you on all of these bills. And we 
appreciate you and your staff joining us today.
    Mr. Smith. Thank you.
    Mr. Tiffany. OK. With no further questions, I don't see 
anyone else around the dais, we will now move on to our third 
panel. Thank you, Associate Deputy Chief Smith.
    And while the Clerk resets our witness table, I will remind 
the witnesses, under Committee Rules, they must limit their 
oral statements to 5 minutes, but their entire statement will 
appear in the hearing record.
    I would also like to remind our witnesses of the timing 
lights, which will turn red at the end of your 5-minute 
statement, and to please remember to turn on your microphone.
    As with the second panel, I will allow all witnesses to 
testify before we have Member questioning.
    It is good to have you all here today. Thank you very much 
for joining us, and with the Chairman's prerogative, of course, 
I am going to call the gentleman from Wisconsin first, as you 
can only imagine.
    And I would now like to introduce the honorable Tom 
Tallier. He is the District 8 Supervisor at the Forest County 
Board of Supervisors.
    Supervisor Tallier, you have 5 minutes to share your 
testimony, and it is good to have you visiting us here in the 
nation's capital.

 STATEMENT OF THE HON. TOM TALLIER, SUPERVISOR, FOREST COUNTY 
      BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, DISTRICT 8, WABENO, WISCONSIN

    Mr. Tallier. Thank you and good morning, Congressman 
Tiffany. And good morning also to all the members of the 
Natural Resources Committee.
    First of all, I want to really thank everyone for the 
invite and the opportunity to come to Washington, DC, our 
nation's capital, and present my testimony on H.R. 7072.
    But I would kind of like to tell you a few facts about 
Forest County and the town of Wabeno, first of all. Of course, 
I think you all know it is located in northern Wisconsin, and 
Forest County, it got its name because of all the trees. It has 
been reported that Forest County has more trees in it than 
stars in the sky. And I think that is factual, to be truthful.
    And on the subject of numbers, Forest County only has about 
9,000 people in the entire county. So, we don't have a lot of 
numbers up there, but I just want to say our representation is 
very good. Congressman Tiffany was at a Forest County 
Supervisors Committee meeting about 3 weeks ago or so. We have 
had both Senators from Wisconsin come and talk to us up there 
in northern Wisconsin. So, I think our representation does a 
good job for us.
    The other thing about Forest County, I think, that is 
really interesting, we have two federally recognized tribes in 
Forest County, and I believe we are the only county in the 
Lower 48 states that can say two federally recognized tribes 
call Forest County their home. I think it is rather 
interesting.
    One of the main concerns, really, about Forest County is a 
lack of private land. And we have heard this a number of times 
in this statement today. The Forest Service controls pretty 
much 50 percent of our county, 50 percent of the land. That is 
roughly 340,000 acres that they control. We are talking about 
14 acres in this bill. Just think about that. But we will go 
from there.
    The other important fact about Forest County with the non-
taxable land between the Federal, the tribes, the state, a lot 
of the agricultural lands, and whatever, we are down to 10 
percent taxable land. And we have to try to provide services, 
law enforcement, health, social services, all of this on this 
amount of land. It is very, very difficult. It is very trying.
    So, here we are. We are coming to Tony's Ready Mix. And I 
want to talk just a little bit about this because we have to 
look at every business in Forest County, small businesses or 
whatever. He employs roughly 18 full-time people. Think about 
this, 18 full-time people, but our community is only about 
1,000 people. I mean, you start taking 18 full-time jobs out of 
1,000 people, where are we going to go?
    I mean, right now Tony is very reputable. He is not a fly-
by-night operator by any means. He has a home and a family, his 
kids go to school there. I think that we really need to keep 
this business in Forest County and in Wabeno to keep things 
moving forward.
    I can see I am getting close on my time, so I just want to 
add one point here. I am the Supervisor of Forest County. This 
land is in my district. I really think we need this bill to 
pass. Without it, I am really afraid. And as I think 
Congressman Tiffany had mentioned, we have some letters from 
the Chamber of Commerce, and the Forest County Economic 
Development Partnership, and the town board.
    Again, I see my time is just about done, so I had better 
say thank you.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Tallier follows:]
 Prepared Statement of Tom Tallier, Forest County Board of Supervisors 
                               District 8
                              on H.R. 7072

    Honorable Congressman Tom Tiffany and members of the Natural 
Resource Committee:

    First I would like to thank everyone for the invite and the 
opportunity to come to Washington, D.C. our Nation's capital to present 
my Testimony on H.R. Bill #7072.
    I also would like to tell you some facts about Forest County and 
the Town of Wabeno, which is located in northern Wisconsin. Forest 
County got its name because of all its trees. It has been reported that 
Forest County has more trees than stars in the sky. On the subject of 
numbers, approximately 9,000 people call Forest County their home. 
Forest County is also home of two federally recognized tribes 
(Potawatomi and Sokaogon Chippewa) and is the only county in the lower 
48 states that have two tribes within their boundaries.
    A main concern in Forest County is the lack of private land. The 
major landowner is the United States Forest Service which controls 
approximately 50% of the land. When you put together all non paying 
taxable lands it comes to approximately 90%, which means only 10% of 
the land in Forest County is fully taxable.
    Here lies the problem. To help solve the problem I offer the 
following. Tony's Ready-Mix is a sand gravel ready-mix company, a small 
business by some big city standards. But here in Forest County we need 
every business to survive. Tony's Ready-Mix has been in business for 
20+ years and hires 16-18 full time employees and has a yearly outlay 
of capital of approximately 1 million dollars. Forest County and the 
Town of Wabeno need this business to keep moving forward. We need this 
14 acres of land so local residents can keep working, living and 
sending their kids to school here in Forest County.
    I would be happy to answer any questions on this matter. Attached 
are letters of support from the Wabeno Chamber of Commerce, Town of 
Wabeno, and the Forest County Economic Development Partnership.

                                 *****

                              ATTACHMENTS

                              WABENO AREA

                          Chamber of Commerce

                                              September 8, 2023    

    To Whom it May Concern:

    This letter from the Wabeno Area Chamber of Commerce is written in 
support of the sale or trade of land between Tony Smith, owner of 
Tony's Wabeno Redi-Mix LLC and the U.S. Forest Service. It was brought 
to our attention that his purchase or trade is needed to provide the 
materials needed to continue production in the future.
    Tony's Redi-Mix has been in our community for over 20 years and is 
currently providing employment for approximately 25 employees, which 
enables them to provide for their families. Tony and his employees are 
active community members and essential to the economic growth of 
Wabeno. We support all efforts that will help him to sustain his 
business.

            Sincerely,

                                             Dawn Jakubiec,
                                                          Treasurer

                                 ______
                                 

                             TOWN OF WABENO

    The Town of Wabeno is in support of the request to purchase or 
trade of the U.S. Forest Service land to Tony's Wabeno Redi-Mix LLC 
Tony Smith owner.
    The need was brought to our attention last year, revealing only a 
few years of sand and gravel to continue production and the employment 
of approximately 25 employees and their families.
    Tony has been actively searching for property and so far has not 
found any other options.
    With this purchase or trade between Tony's Wabeno Redi-Mix and the 
U.S.Forest Service he will be able to provide steady employment and 
growth for his company and our community. Tony's Redi-Mix LLC is one of 
the largest employers in the community and we would to support him any 
way we can.

                                      Jim Smith,
                                      Chair

        Randy Johnson,                Benjamin Hermus,
        Supervisor                    Supervisor

                                 ______
                                 

             FOREST COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP

Re: Tony's Wabeno Redi-Mix

    Greetings,

    The Forest County Economic Development Partnership is pleased to 
support the request of Tony Smith, OBA Tony's Wabeno Redi-Mix, with the 
purchase or trade of U.S. Forest Service to ensure the sustainability 
of his business and employment opportunities in Forest County, 
Wisconsin.
    The need for expansion was highlighted in 2022, revealing only a 
few years of sustainable sand and gravel to continue production and 
employment for his business. He has been in contact with Forest County 
in discussions on land purchases or trades to sustain the demand of 
sand and gravel for business purposes. Currently his site will only 
sustain his business until late 2025 or early 2026.
    With the success of land purchase or trade between Tony's Wabeno 
Redi-Mix and the U.S. Forest Service he will be able to provide Forest 
County with steady employment and growth of his company. The company 
currently employees around 25 individuals from around the area, and 
works on many jobs that increase the growth of the county. Sustaining 
this business for Forest County and its economic development is 
critical to the success and growth of the County as a solid unit.

            Sincerely,

                                              Chris Shafer,
                                                 Executive Director

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Tiffany. Thank you for your testimony, Supervisor 
Tallier. Next, I would like to recognize Representative Kim for 
an introduction of one of our witnesses.
    Representative Kim.
    Mrs. Kim. Thank you, Chairman. I am pleased to introduce 
the next witness, San Bernardino County Fire Chief Dan Munsey, 
to testify on our ROUTES Act.
    Chief Munsey has nearly 30 years of experience in the fire 
service, and his fire district serves the largest county in the 
United States. And he is also the Vice President of California 
Metro Chiefs Association and the Fire School Board of Directors 
which works to advance the fire service in California. Our 
local firefighting agencies in Southern California work 
tirelessly on the ground to keep our communities safe, and they 
are at the forefront of wildfire technology innovation, and 
they know first-hand the importance of active forest management 
and wildfire mitigation on Federal lands.
    So, I want to thank Chief Munsey for joining us today to 
testify in support of the ROUTES Act.

      STATEMENT OF DAN MUNSEY, FIRE CHIEF, SAN BERNARDINO  
      COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT, SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 

    Mr. Munsey. Thank you. Of 12,800,000,000 Federal acres 
within San Bernardino County, we serve 20,000 square miles. 
Eighty percent of our land mass is Federal. We respond with 
seven different Federal agencies.
    Mr. Neguse, I appreciate your comments on the firefighter 
pay. One correction is there are no firefighters in the Federal 
Government. There are forestry technicians. This has become 
very apparent to us as we responded to 8,133 calls on an annual 
basis into Federal land. This is $13 million of local funds 
that are spent on this expenditure. We are your all-hazard fire 
department. Your U.S. Forest Service and other fire departments 
by charter, unless there is a FEMA declaration, can only 
respond to wildfire. We found that out during our February 
storms that buried our communities in 10 feet of snow as we 
asked for their assistance.
    I want to thank Congresswoman Young Kim, along with 
Congressman LaMalfa, for introducing this Act.
    I mentioned we are fairly large. We responded to 196,000 
all-hazard calls. Our men and women are amongst the hardest 
working in the nation. They are often rated in the top 10 
busiest companies but, see, 196,000 calls are also 196,000 
failures. Because my job, my primary job, isn't to respond to 
calls; my primary job is to prevent those calls.
    This Act is important to recreation, certainly, but it is 
more important to your local fire service who is responding 
after hours, who is responding off season into Federal lands. 
If we cannot access fires, fires will continue to grow. If we 
can't get in there and mitigate certain things like flood 
control channels, then secondary emergencies will occur.
    We are known in San Bernardino County for having large, 
destructive wildfires. Last year, we had the largest fire in 
California with the York Fire. The Old and Grand Prix Fires 
destroyed 993 homes and caused 6 civilian deaths. And then, in 
2020, the El Dorado Fire resulted in a Federal firefighter 
fatality. In each one of these fires, like fires throughout our 
nation, the fire has damaged roads, trails, campgrounds, and 
other infrastructure.
    And I appreciate Mr. Smith's comments on ensuring the 
public safety is maintained in 2 years may be difficult, but I 
will ask. How long is long enough?
    When I was on the Ranch 2 Fire in the Angeles National 
Forest, I spent 4 days trying to open a road so I can access 
the firefighters edge. This year, when we had our snowstorm, 
because the road was not maintained that was critical to 911 
calls, we were forced to send in helicopters with fuel to fuel 
back-up generators. We need the ability to get in there and fix 
these roads. If the Federal Government is not able to do that, 
we will certainly undertake that task to prevent emergencies.
    Debris flows are common examples of the secondary 
emergencies that we try to prevent. A great example occurred in 
Forest Falls, California, within our communities after the El 
Dorado Fire. Our wildland crews removed 60 tons of debris from 
natural flood channels to prevent blockage. However, there 
still were several incidents that occurred that resulted in 
flooding in September 2022. The flooding, unfortunately, buried 
a house and a civilian.
    In August 2023, a similar incident occurred in the nearby 
Seven Oaks community, and an elderly resident was swept away. 
It has been frustrating to watch fires get bigger, and it has 
been frustrating to not allow local resources to respond to 
assist the Federal Government in preventing these emergencies.
    In closing, San Bernardino County in our jurisdiction we 
represent 66 communities, 80 percent of our land mass is 
Federal land. These communities are surrounded by your land 
areas. It is very important to us that we have access to these 
Federal lands in order to effectively respond and prevent 
emergencies.
    Thank you for your time.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Munsey follows:]
   Prepared Statement of Dan Munsey, Fire Chief and Fire Warden, San 
               Bernardino County Fire Protection District
                              on H.R. 6994

    I am the Dan Munsey, the Fire Chief and Fire Warden for San 
Bernardino County Fire Protection District. I am here today in response 
to the Committee's invitation to testify in support of H.R. 6994. I 
have 28 years of experience in the fire service, and for the last four 
years I have served as the fire chief of the largest fire district in 
our nation. I have served with Federal Incident Management Teams for 
over two decades facing some of the most complex emergency incidents in 
history. Incidents that have killed firefighters, civilians, and caused 
massive losses to public infrastructure. I serve as a director on 
FIRESCOPE, a board that provides recommendations and technical 
assistance to the fire service including the FIRESCOPE Incident Command 
System (ICS) and the Multi-Agency Coordination System. I am also the 
vice-president of the California Metro Chief Association, an 
association that is inclusive of the largest fire departments in the 
nation.
    I want to thank our Congresswoman, Young Kim, along with 
Congressman Doug LaMalfa for introducing this act. This bill would 
benefit us by allowing improved maintenance on roads and trail networks 
used by our firefighters and by restoring public land in ways to 
prevent secondary emergencies.
    San Bernardino is the largest county in the continental United 
States, with a land mass of almost 20,000 square miles, larger than New 
Jersey, Connecticut, Delaware, and Rhode Island put together. The 
County is a diverse geographical region with large coastal valleys, 
mountainous terrain, and expansive desert areas. San Bernardino County 
is home to two of the most populated and recreated national forests, 
the Angeles National Forest, and the San Bernardino National Forest. 
Almost 80% of the county's land mass is made up of federal lands. The 
2.2 million citizens we serve in sixty-six communities are often 
largely isolated and surrounded by federal land, both mountain and 
desert areas. This means that San Bernardino County Fire is often 
impacted by all-hazard emergencies, such as wildfires, originating on 
federal lands.
    San Bernardino County has a history of large-scale destructive 
wildfires and natural disasters that pose significant challenges for 
our responders. This includes the largest fire in California last year, 
the York Fire, 2003's Old Fire/Grand Prix Fire that destroyed 993 homes 
and caused six civilian deaths; and the 2020 El Dorado Fire which 
resulted in a federal firefighter fatality.
    Each of these fires, like so many others throughout our nation, 
have resulted in damaged roads, trails, campgrounds, and other 
infrastructure. The ROUTES Act would require these areas to be restored 
and reopened. This infrastructure's restoration is important to the 
local community, not only for recreation, but for firefighting. Many of 
the fires fought in our federal lands burn in areas that had previously 
burned where infrastructure has been damaged and not restored or 
reopened.
    A lot of the same roads used for recreation are used for 
firefighting. In my 10 years commanding geographical areas of wildfires 
as a division supervisor or operations, I spent many days ``opening'' 
roads, which means repairing previously damaged roads, to the point 
that they could be used to transport firefighters, fire engines, and 
heavy equipment like bulldozers. In areas where vegetation has been 
burned, roads are often blocked by debris flow, such as rocks, 
boulders, and large dead trees caused by water running off slopes 
following the first few rain storms after the fire; this has resulted 
in delays to being able to effectively respond and mitigate fires.
    Debris flows are common examples of ``secondary incidents'', or an 
incident that is related to the initial incident. It is imperative that 
restorative efforts be undertaken to minimize or prevent secondary 
incidents from occurring. A good example occurred in the Forest Falls, 
California community after the El Dorado Fire (2020). Our wildland 
crews worked to remove over sixty tons of debris from natural flood 
channels to prevent blockage; blockage often prevents the natural flow 
of water causing additional damage to roads and our communities. 
Despite this, debris and flooding in this community has occurred 
numerous times. In September 2022, several houses were destroyed and an 
elderly resident perished as debris overtook her home. In August 2023, 
a similar incident occurred in the nearby community of Seven-Oaks 
causing an elderly resident to be swept away in flood waters and die. 
The County and private citizens work hard to reopen roads ways in our 
communities. But this is not always the case on federal land.
    It has been frustrating to watch fires get larger as we often 
worked for days to open federal roads to allow firefighters and 
firefighting equipment access to the perimeter of fire. These roads are 
often left unrepaired or abandoned for many years resulting in massive 
amount of heavy equipment work to make them usable. Campgrounds are 
important too as they are often used as incident bases and areas of 
refuge. Without campgrounds, crews are forced to drive further to areas 
that can be used for sleeping, feeding, and other logistical needs. 
Likewise, existing trail networks are used for crews to make access to 
and from remote areas. Without these trails, crews must take time to 
scout and create new trails. Fires often leave behind hazardous trees. 
Hazardous trees are those trees that are dead or dying and can fall at 
any moment to block roads, trails, strike humans, vehicles, and other 
objects. They must be removed to allow public and infrastructure 
safety.
    Failure to maintain, reopen, and restore these areas affects our 
local communities. Your local fire departments are often the first 
arriving firefighters on federal incidents. This has always occurred 
``after hours'' when federal forestry technicians are not in their fire 
stations or during the ``off season'' when many of these employees have 
been laid-off for the season. In today's federal forestry worker 
shortage, this is occurring more and more often. When our local 
firefighters are delayed due to poor road conditions, fires grow 
larger, causing large threats to our communities. Even after the fire, 
unmaintained roadways can cause difficulties. During a large February 
2023 snowstorm, several cell phone towers used by the public to access 
services including 911 services lost electrical power. San Bernardino 
County Sheriff and County Fire District crews had to use helicopters to 
fly fuel into these critical cell phone sites due to federal roads that 
were impassable due to lack of regular maintenance and repair. We could 
not even use tracked snow vehicles (snow cats) to maneuver the roads.
    In closing, San Bernardino County Fire protects sixty-six 
communities often threatened by emergency incidents occurred on federal 
lands. These communities, and many others across the United States, 
face threats originating on federal land, including fires and flooding. 
Our firefighters respond through mutual and automatic aid to suppress 
wildfires and respond to other emergencies on federal land, but we must 
be able to access the areas where these emergencies are located. It is 
important to ensure that secondary emergencies are a minimized or 
prevented, this includes removing hazardous trees and taking other 
mitigation efforts to prevent or minimize additional disasters such as 
flooding. This Act is important to allow that our public lands are 
restored and reopened which is critical to the safety of our 
communities.
    I encourage the Committee to act favorably on H.R. 6994. Thank you 
for your time and consideration.
    I am available to answer any questions you may have.

                                 ______
                                 
    Mr. Tiffany. Thank you for your testimony, Mr. Munsey. 
Next, I would now like to introduce Ms. Sandy Adomatis.
    Did I say that correctly, Sandy?
    Ms. Adomatis. You did.
    Mr. Tiffany. President of the Appraisal Institute.
    Ms. Adomatis, you have 5 minutes.

       STATEMENT OF SANDY ADOMATIS, PRESIDENT, THE   
         APPRAISAL INSTITUTE, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 

    Ms. Adomatis. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Tiffany, 
Ranking Member Neguse, and members of the Subcommittee. Thank 
you for inviting me to testify on H.R. 5443, the Accelerating 
Appraisals and Conservation Efforts, or the AACE Act. My name 
is Sandra Adomatis. I am the 2024 President of the Appraisal 
Institute, the largest professional association of real estate 
appraisers.
    The Appraisal Institute thanks Representatives Lee and 
Joyce for their leadership in introducing the AACE Act, 
legislation that aims to increase the pool of available 
appraisers to the U.S. Department of the Interior.
    This legislation will allow appraisers who carry a 
certified general credential in one state to perform appraisals 
in other states for the Department of the Interior. Similar 
allowances are enjoyed by Federal staff appraisers, and an 
extension of this benefit to the private sector will help 
expand the pool of appraisal service providers to the Interior.
    Access to appraisers has been a point of emphasis for 
Interior for several years. Since 2021, the Department has seen 
a 16 percent increase in the number of contract appraisers, and 
a 38 percent decrease in the number of appraiser position 
vacancies.
    Congressionally-approved pay raises has been a big 
contributor to the turnaround. The flexibility provided by the 
AACE Act should also assist in increasing the number of 
appraisers available to the Department.
    But there is still work to be done. We are pleased the AACE 
Act calls for the Department to look within the state where the 
appraisals or evaluation are to be performed first before they 
go outside the state. Having local appraisal expertise is of 
utmost importance, protecting taxpayer interests. This ensures 
that very best and most competent appraisers would be preparing 
appraisals in land exchanges, conservation easements, and other 
Federal acquisitions.
    Many designated appraisers of the Appraisal Institute 
perform appraisals for the Department. Maintaining state 
credentials can be an onerous, time consuming, and expensive 
task, especially for those who offer services in more than one 
state like many DOI contract appraisers. Streamlining or 
removing the regulatory hurdles helps to increase efficiencies 
and reduces the cost.
    Real estate appraisers face a complex regulatory structure 
that involves a patchwork of state licensing laws. In addition 
to the AACE Act, we have supported bipartisan legislation in 
Congress, the Portal for Appraisal Licensing Act, that would 
establish a nationwide system for appraiser licensing. 
Specifically, under the proposed PAL Act, appraisers would have 
one-stop shopping when applying for state licenses. The PAL Act 
would help users and stakeholders engage a broader pool of 
qualified appraisers throughout the country, including for 
Federal lands programs.
    We are engaged in several initiatives aimed at attracting 
the next generation of appraisers. Since 2019, the Appraisal 
Institute has helped lead the Appraiser Diversity Initiative, 
ADI, the industry collaboration with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, 
and the National Urban League that promotes appraisal 
profession to diverse communities. ADI hosts workshops to 
educate participants about professional opportunities in the 
real estate appraisal, inviting interested participants to 
apply for education scholarships. As of today, over 600 
scholarships have been awarded.
    We were also the first to bring to market an innovative 
program that enables aspiring appraisers to complete their 
requisite field experience in a virtual environment. The 
Practical Application of Real Estate Appraisal, PAREA, provides 
an alternative to the traditional supervisor training model for 
gaining real estate appraisal experience. PAREA uses a 
simulated environment leveraging technology and the vast body 
of knowledge of the Appraisal Institute to present valuation 
scenarios to aspiring appraisers. A team of experienced 
appraiser mentors monitors these scenarios. It is akin to the 
pilots who gather experience in flight simulators or surgeons 
that expand their skills virtually. Launched last year, the AI 
PAREA program currently has 125 appraisers, including veterans, 
minorities, women, and those in underserved rural areas.
    These initiatives and other efforts, such as the AACE Act 
and PAL Act, will help reduce regulatory burdens on appraisers 
and expand the pool of appraiser service providers. We urge 
their favorable consideration by Congress, and look forward to 
working with you on this enactment.
    Thank you for the opportunity to be here today, and I look 
forward to your questions.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Adomatis follows:]
   Prepared Statement of Sandra Adomatis, SRA 2024 President of the 
                          Appraisal Institute
                              on H.R. 5433

    Good morning, Chairman Tiffany, Ranking Member Neguse and Members 
of the Subcommittee: thank you for inviting me to testify on H.R. 5433, 
the Accelerating Appraisals and Conservation Efforts or ACE Act. My 
name is Sandra Adomatis, and I am the 2024 President of the Appraisal 
Institute, the largest professional association of real estate 
appraisers.

    The Appraisal Institute thanks Representatives Lee and Joyce for 
their leadership in introducing the ACE Act, legislation that aims to 
increase the pool of available appraisers to the U.S. Department of 
Interior. Specifically, this legislation will allow appraisers who 
carry a certified general credential in one state to perform appraisals 
or other valuation services in any other State if the services fall 
under the authority of the Department of Interior. Similar allowances 
are enjoyed by federal staff appraisers, and we believe extension of 
this benefit will help expand the pool of appraisal service providers 
to Interior.

    Access to appraisers and appraisals services by the Appraisal and 
Valuation Services Office (AVSO) of the Department of Interior has been 
a point of emphasis for several years. Since 2021, AVSO has seen a 16% 
increase in the number of contract appraisers and a 38% decrease in the 
number of appraiser position vacancies. Congressionally approved pay 
raise for AVSO appraisers has been a big contributor to the turnaround. 
The flexibility provided here by the ACE Act should also assist in 
increasing the number of appraisers available to the AVSO, but there is 
still work to be done.

    We are pleased the ACE Act calls for the Department to look within 
the state where the appraisals or valuation are to be performed first 
before they look at appraisers from other States. Having local 
appraisal expertise is of utmost importance to protecting taxpayer 
interests. This ensures the very best and most competent appraisers 
would be preparing appraisals in land exchanges, conservation 
easements, and other federal acquisitions. Many Designated members of 
the Appraisal Institute regularly perform appraisals for the Department 
of Interior. Maintaining state credentials can be an onerous, time-
consuming, and expensive task. Helping streamline or remove these 
regulatory hurdles helps to increase efficiency and reduces costs.

    Professional real estate appraisers face a complex regulatory 
structure that involves a patchwork of state licensing laws. It is an 
expensive and cumbersome process for all appraisers, but particularly 
those who offer services in more than one state, like many DOI contract 
appraisers. The Appraisal Institute has supported legislation in 
Congress--the Portal for Appraisal Licensing Act (H.R. 2771, S. 2692)--
that would establish a nationwide system for appraiser licensing. 
Specifically, under the proposed PAL Act, appraisers would have the 
ability to undertake ``one stop shopping'' when applying for state 
licenses. We believe the PAL Act would help users and stakeholders 
engage a broader pool of qualified appraisers throughout the country. 
Passage of the PAL Act would be another important tool to improve 
appraiser accessibility throughout federal lands programs and in the 
entire real estate sector.

    The availability of appraisers cannot just be about keeping 
appraisers in the business. Many practicing appraisers are nearing 
retirement, so we are engaged in several initiatives aimed at 
attracting the next generation of appraisers. Since 2019, the Appraisal 
Institute has helped lead the Appraiser Diversity Initiative (ADI), an 
industry collaboration with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the National 
Urban League that promotes the appraisal profession to diverse 
communities. ADI helps raise awareness by hosting workshops, both in 
person and virtual, throughout the United States. These workshops 
educate participants about professional opportunities in real estate 
appraisal, inviting interested participants to apply for education 
scholarships.

    Beyond the ADI, providing alternate pathways into the profession 
has been a major area of focus for our organization in recent years. We 
are the first to bring to market an innovative program that enables 
aspiring appraisers to complete their requisite field experience in a 
virtual environment. The Practical Applications of Real Estate 
Appraisals or ``PAREA'' program provides an alternative to the 
traditional supervisory appraiser-trainee model for gaining experience 
in real estate appraisal. Through PAREA, experience is cultivated in a 
simulated environment leveraging technology and the vast body of 
knowledge of the AI to present valuation scenarios to aspiring 
appraisers. A team of experienced real estate appraiser mentors 
monitors these scenarios. It is akin to pilots who gather experience in 
flight simulators or surgeons that expand their skills virtually. 
Launched last year, the Appraisal Institute's PAREA program is being 
utilized by 125 aspiring appraisers, including veterans, minorities, 
women, and those in underserved and rural areas.

    These initiatives and other efforts such as the ACE Act and PAL Act 
will help reduce regulatory burdens on appraisers and expand the pool 
of appraiser service providers. We urge their favorable consideration 
by this committee and look forward to working with you on their 
enactment.

    Thank you again for the opportunity to be before you today, and I 
look forward to answering any questions you may have.

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Tiffany. Thank you for your testimony, Ms. Adomatis. 
Next, I would like to recognize Ms. Siri Roman. She is the 
General Manager of the Eagle River Water and Sanitation 
District.
    Ms. Roman, you have 5 minutes.

      STATEMENT OF SIRI ROMAN, GENERAL MANAGER, EAGLE 
    RIVER WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT, VAIL, COLORADO

    Ms. Roman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Siri Roman, 
and I am here to testify in support of H.R. 4297 in my role as 
General Manager of the Eagle River Water and Sanitation 
District and the Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority. 
Together, we are the second largest water provider in western 
Colorado.
    The district and authority are municipal water and 
wastewater providers that serve more than 50,000 people in the 
Colorado Mountain resort communities of Vail, Beaver Creek, and 
the surrounding areas.
    This legislation is needed because a minor mapping error 
occurred in 1980, when the Holy Cross Wilderness was originally 
designated. The Bolts Ditch, which was used to fill a water 
storage reservoir that was originally constructed in the early 
1900s, was mistakenly included in the wilderness boundary. 
While the Bolts Ditch diversion structure is only 450 feet 
within the Holy Cross boundary, the wilderness designation 
prevents its continued use, maintenance, and repair.
    In 2019, the Town of Minturn sought a narrow wilderness 
exemption in order to rehabilitate Bolts Ditch as part of its 
municipal water system. The John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, 
Management, and Recreation Act directed the Secretary of 
Agriculture to permit non-motorized access exclusively to the 
Town of Minturn to use, maintain, and repair Bolts Ditch and 
its diversion structure.
    The Bolts Ditch Act is simple. It is a simple amendment to 
the Dingell Act, granting the district and authority the same 
access as the Town of Minturn. For the betterment of our 
watershed and community, the district authority and the Town of 
Minturn are working together to rehabilitate the Bolts Lake 
diversion structure and ditch.
    The Town of Minturn supports this legislation, and with me 
in the room today is Michelle Mietteer, their town manager.
    The district and authority's service area is located in the 
headwaters of the Colorado River Basin in Eagle County. Like 
many areas of the mountain west, approximately 80 percent of 
our region's precipitation falls in the form of snow in our 
high mountain peaks. The vast majority of the annual water 
supply reaches our local stream systems within a very short 
period of time during spring snowmelt. A reservoir to capture 
the spring runoff is essential to provide water on a year-round 
basis for our residents and our visitors.
    In 2021, the district and authority acquired ownership of 
Bolts Ditch and the Bolts Lake property to construct a new, 
1,200-acre-foot reservoir at the previous Bolts Lake site. It 
will be an off-channel reservoir, meaning it will not dam any 
free-flowing streams.
    Bolts Ditch is an essential filling source for the new 
Bolts Lake Reservoir, and will help to provide sufficient 
municipal water supplies for our region, including the Town of 
Minturn. Bolts Lake will boost environmental flows during times 
of low flow, and will provide additional recreational 
opportunities to support Western Colorado's recreation-based 
economy.
    The purpose of this legislation is to grant the district 
and authority access to maintain Bolts Ditch and make the 
redevelopment of Bolts Lake possible.
    Thank you for your time today, and we would be grateful for 
your support of this legislation. I would be happy to respond 
to any questions.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Roman follows:]
Prepared Statement of Siri Roman, General Manager, Eagle River Water & 
      Sanitation District and Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority
                              on H.R. 4297

    Chairman Tiffany, Ranking Member Neguse, and Members of the 
Subcommittee:

    My name is Siri Roman, and I am testifying in support of H.R. 4297 
in my role as General Manager of the Eagle River Water & Sanitation 
District and the Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority. The District and 
Authority are municipal water and wastewater providers that serve more 
than 50,000 people in the Colorado mountain resort communities of Vail, 
Beaver Creek, and the surrounding areas. Together, we are the second 
largest water provider in Western Colorado.
    This legislation is needed because a minor mapping error occurred 
in 1980 when the Holy Cross Wilderness was originally designated. The 
Bolts Ditch, which was used to fill a water storage reservoir that was 
originally constructed in the early 1900s, was mistakenly included in 
the wilderness boundary. While the Bolts Ditch diversion structure is 
only 450 feet within the Holy Cross boundary, the wilderness 
designation prevented the continued use, maintenance, and repair of 
Bolts Ditch and its diversion structure.
    In 2019, the Town of Minturn sought a narrow wilderness exemption 
in order to rehabilitate Bolts Ditch as part of its municipal water 
system. The John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and 
Recreation Act directed the Secretary of Agriculture to permit non-
motorized access exclusively to the town of Minturn to use, maintain, 
and repair the Bolts Ditch diversion structure and 450 lineal feet of 
Bolts Ditch.
    The Bolts Ditch Act is a simple amendment to the Dingell Act, 
explicitly granting the District and Authority the same access as the 
Town of Minturn.
    For the betterment of our watershed and community, the District, 
Authority, and the Town of Minturn, are working together to 
rehabilitate the Bolts Lake diversion structure and ditch. The Town of 
Minturn supports this legislation, and their Town Manager, Michelle 
Metteer, is joining me at this hearing.
    The District and Authority's service area is located in the 
headwaters of the Colorado River basin in Eagle County. Like many areas 
of the mountain west, approximately 80% of our region's precipitation 
falls in the form of snow in our high mountain peaks. The vast majority 
of the annual water supply reaches our local stream systems within a 
very short period of time during spring snowmelt. A reservoir to 
capture the spring runoff is essential to provide water on a year-round 
basis for our residents and visitors.
    In 2021, the District and Authority acquired ownership of Bolts 
Ditch and the Bolts Lake property to construct a new 1,200 acre foot 
reservoir at the previous Bolts Lake site. It will be an off-channel 
reservoir, meaning it will not dam any free-flowing streams.
    Bolts Ditch is an essential filling source for the new Bolts Lake 
Reservoir and will help to provide sufficient municipal water supplies 
for our region, including the Town of Minturn. Bolts Lake will boost 
environmental flows during times of low flow and will provide 
additional recreation opportunities to support Western Colorado's 
recreation-based economy.
    The purpose of this legislation is to grant the District and 
Authority explicit access to use, maintain, and repair the Bolts Ditch 
diversion, and it will make the redevelopment of Bolts Lake, and all 
its benefits, possible.
    We would be grateful for your support of this legislation.

                                 *****

     Attachment A: Overview of Bolts Ditch and Bolts Lake Reservoir

    Eagle River Water & Sanitation District (ERWSD) and Upper Eagle 
Regional Water Authority (UERWA) are planning to redevelop Bolts Lake 
in Minturn with a 1,200 acre-foot reservoir. The reservoir was 
originally developed as a recreational reservoir by Ben Bolt in 1890, 
when he diverted water from Cross Creek into a natural basin. The 
reservoir has been inactive since 1996, when the dam was breached by 
order of Colorado's State Engineer. ERWSD and UERWA serve 50,000 
customers and are collectively the second largest municipal water 
supplier in Western Colorado. This reservoir will provide necessary 
additional in-basin storage supplies to service their customers while 
maintaining healthy river flows. Bolts Ditch is an essential filling 
source for the new Bolts Lake Reservoir and will help to provide 
sufficient municipal water supplies for our region, including the town 
of Minturn.

      Attachment B: Map of Bolts Ditch area, south of Minturn, CO

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

   Attachment C: Photograph of Bolts Ditch intake and diversion 
                               structure

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]  

    Attachment D: Photograph of Bolts Ditch diversion structure

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]  


                                 __
                                 

    Mr. Tiffany. Thank you for the testimony, Ms. Roman. I 
appreciate it.
    I will now recognize Ms. Hannah Downey with the Property 
and Environment Research Center, where she serves as Policy 
Director.
    Ms. Downey, good to have you here.

   STATEMENT OF HANNAH DOWNEY, POLICY DIRECTOR, PROPERTY AND 
         ENVIRONMENT RESEARCH CENTER, BOZEMAN, MONTANA

    Ms. Downey. Thank you. Chairman Tiffany, Ranking Member 
Neguse, members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the 
opportunity to participate in today's hearing on forest 
conservation and how H.R. 674, the Root and Stem Project 
Authorization Act, can bring additional resources to improve 
the pace and scale of forest restoration work. My name is 
Hannah Downey, and I am the Policy Director at the Property and 
Environment Research Center.
    PERC is the national leader in market solutions for 
conservation, with over 40 years of research and a network of 
respected scholars and practitioners. Enhancing forest health 
is a primary focus of our work, especially the obstacles to 
collaborative forest restoration and the expanded use of 
prescribed burns. We are non-profit, non-partisan, and proudly 
based in Bozeman, Montana.
    But my connection to today's topic is also deeply personal. 
I will never forget the fear of seeing flames racing up a 
canyon towards my family while we were on a backpacking trip in 
the Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness when I was just 14. I know 
what it feels like to desperately pray for my husband and his 
wildland fire crew as they battle blazes around the United 
States. I have had this sobering realization that our water 
supply in Bozeman will be gone in just 3 days if a fire rips 
through our watershed. The Root and Stem Project Authorization 
Act is a tool to help tackle this huge wildfire problem.
    The reality is that large and destructive wildfires are 
becoming more common. Although several factors contribute to 
this trend, the declining health of our nation's forest is a 
primary cause. Our national forests face an 80 million-acre 
backlog in needed restoration, a backlog that leaves our 
forests more vulnerable to wildfire, less resistant to climate 
change and drought, and more vulnerable to insects and disease.
    The good news, though, is that we know that fuels reduction 
treatments, including mechanical thinning and prescribed burns, 
are effective at restoring forest health and reducing fire 
risk. During Oregon's Bootleg Fire, for example, firefighters 
reported that in areas where both treatments had been applied, 
the fire intensity was reduced, the crowns of trees were left 
intact, and the blaze became a more manageable ground fire.
    To tackle this wildfire crisis, PERC supports the Biden 
administration's ambitious strategy to significantly increase 
the forest restoration work over the next decade, including the 
goal of treating an additional 20 million acres. Yet, the 
Forest Service has struggled to treat more than just a few 
million of those acres each year.
    If the good news is that we know what we need to do to fix 
our forests, the bad news is that actually doing that 
restoration work is a long, complex process. Before any 
chainsaws or drip torches can touch our Federal forests, a 
restoration project must navigate significant bureaucratic 
obstacles, including the NEPA review. Though well-intentioned, 
it takes years for a project to get off the ground. According 
to PERC researchers, once the Forest Service initiates this 
environmental review process, it takes over 5 years to actually 
begin a mechanical treatment on the ground, and over 7 years to 
begin a prescribed burn if an Environmental Impact Statement is 
required.
    The Forest Service has also historically required these 
administrative process barriers as a factor holding up their 
goals. As a 2002 Forest Service report described it, even non-
controversial projects often proceed at a snail's pace. Twenty 
years later, the agency reached the same conclusion, that the 
environmental review processes must be streamlined to expand 
the use of prescribed fire to protect forests and wildlife 
habitat.
    We need to get more beneficial projects through the 
pipeline before it is too late. The Root and Stem Project 
Authorization Act builds on a successful pilot project, and is 
a common-sense, bipartisan proposal that does three key things 
to help achieve this goal.
    First, it increases the capacity for forest restoration by 
bringing in private resources. With this authority, a project 
supporter can provide the upfront funding for a contractor to 
do the NEPA analysis for that project. That upfront investment 
is later repaid through receipts generated by the project, 
which makes it possible for more forest collaboratives, 
conservation groups, and even private companies to provide that 
initial funding.
    Second, it frees up Federal resources to do more 
restoration work. Dollars and staff time that agencies would 
have spent conducting that environmental review can now be 
spent on additional projects and on-the-ground efforts.
    Finally, it ensures accountability by requiring Federal 
oversight and approval of the contractors and the NEPA 
analysis. We desperately need to get more forest work done.
    The Root and Stem Project Authorization Act is a popular 
proposal that will help us fix America's forests. Thank you for 
the opportunity to testify, and I welcome any questions.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Downey follows:]
  Prepared Statement of Hannah Downey, Policy Director, Property and 
                   Environment Research Center (PERC)
                              on H.R. 674

Main Points:

     Conserving forest ecosystems and solving the wildfire 
            crisis requires tackling the Forest Service's 80-million-
            acre forest restoration backlog.

     The environmental review process is a major obstacle to 
            increasing the pace and scale of forest restoration work.

     The Root and Stem Project Authorization Act (H.R. 674) 
            would enhance forest restoration by allowing third parties 
            to fund environmental reviews for restoration projects 
            while still maintaining federal oversight and authority.

Introduction

    Chairman Tiffany, Ranking Member Neguse, and members of the 
committee, thank you for the opportunity to participate in this 
important discussion on forest conservation and how the Root and Stem 
Project Authorization Act (H.R. 674) can bring in additional resources 
to improve the pace and scale of forest restoration work.
    My name is Hannah Downey, and I am the policy director at the 
Property and Environment Research Center. PERC is the national leader 
in market solutions for conservation, with over 40 years of research 
and a network of respected scholars and practitioners. Through 
research, law and policy, and innovative applied conservation projects, 
PERC explores how aligning incentives for environmental stewardship 
produces sustainable outcomes for land, water, and wildlife. Enhancing 
forest health has been a primary focus of PERC's research and policy 
efforts, with recent major reports on obstacles to collaborative forest 
restoration and expanded use of prescribed fire.\1\ Founded in 1980, 
PERC is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and proudly based in Bozeman, Montana.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ See Holly Fretwell & Jonathan Wood, Fix America's Forests: 
Reforms to Restore National Forests and Tackle the Wildfire Crisis, 
PERC Public Lands Report (2021); Jonathan Wood & Morgan Varner, Burn 
Back Better: How Western States Can Encourage Prescribed Fire on 
Private Lands, PERC Policy Report (2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Beyond my professional work, my connection to today's topic is 
deeply personal. As a young girl, I'll never forget the fear of being 
forced to evacuate a family backpacking trip in Montana's Absaroka-
Beartooth Wilderness as an out-of-control wildfire raced toward us. 
Since then, I married a wildland firefighter and have prayed for my 
husband and his fire crew as they battled blazes around the United 
States. I have seen members of my community lose their homes to a 
devastating wildfire several years ago. And as a resident of Bozeman, 
Montana--which, like many western cities, draws its water from national 
forest lands with high risk of catastrophic fire--I live with the 
sobering realization each summer that our community's water supply 
would likely be cut off in the event of a fire in the nearby watershed.
    The reality is that large and destructive wildfires are becoming 
more common across the West. Although several factors contribute to 
this trend, the declining health of our nation's forests is a primary 
cause.\2\ Our national forests face an 80-million-acre backlog in 
needed restoration--a backlog that leaves our forests with excess 
fuels, more vulnerable to insects and disease outbreaks, and less 
resilient to climate change and drought.\3\ Yet the Forest Service has 
struggled to treat more than a few million of those acres per year.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Among the four factors driving fire severity in the western 
United States, live fuel accounted for an estimated 53.1 percent of 
average relative influence, fire weather accounted for 22.9 percent, 
climate accounted for 13.7 percent, and topography accounted for 10.3 
percent. See Sean A. Parks et al., High-Severity Fire: Evaluating Its 
Key Drivers and Mapping Its Probability Across Western US Forests, 
Environmental Research Letters (2018).
    \3\ See Forest Service, Forest Products Modernization (last visited 
Mar. 17, 2023). See also Fix America's Forests, supra n. 1 at 4-16.
    \4\ See Forest Service, USDA Forest Service Celebrates Historic 
Investments in 2022 (Feb. 6, 2023) (reporting that the Service treated 
3.2 million acres in 2022); Fix America's Forests, supra n. 1 at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    PERC supports the Biden administration's ambitious strategy to 
significantly increase its forest restoration work over the next 
decade, including the goal of treating an additional 20 million acres 
of national forest above the business-as-usual rate.\5\ Meeting that 
critical target will require greater efficiency in the years-long 
process of developing, approving, and implementing forest restoration 
projects.\6\ The Root and Stem Project Authorization Act (H.R. 674) 
from Representative Dan Newhouse is a common-sense, bipartisan proposal 
that would help to get more collaborative forest restoration projects 
through the environmental review process by allowing third parties to 
contribute resources to complete environmental reviews while still 
maintaining federal oversight and authority. The Senate passed 
companion language from Senator Steve Daines and the late Senator Diane 
Feinstein in the 117th Congress and advanced the proposal again out of 
the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in the 118th Congress 
without opposition. With such broad support, and at a time of great 
need, the Root and Stem Project Authorization Act will bring additional 
private resources to help fix America's forests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ See Forest Service, Confronting the Wildfire Crisis: A Strategy 
for Protecting Communities and Improving Resilience in America's 
Forests (2022).
    \6\ See Eric Edwards & Sara Sutherland, Does Environmental Review 
Worsen the Wildfire Crisis?, PERC Policy Brief (2022). See also 
Confronting the Wildfire Crisis, supra n. 5 at 30 (predicting that 
existing ``shovel ready'' projects could be completed in years 1 and 2 
of the plan); Forest Service, National Prescribed Fire Program Review 
App. A 21 (2022) (identifying the need to ``streamline required 
environmental analysis and consultations'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Getting to the Root of the Wildfire Crisis

    According to the Forest Service, about 40 percent of the acres in 
the national forest system are in need of restoration.\7\ When the 
Department of the Interior's 54-million-acre restoration backlog is 
added in,\8\ the total area of federal land that needs urgent help is 
larger than the state of California. The wildfire crisis is the most 
visible symptom of this problem, but it is not the only one. Due to the 
backlog, many western forests are stocked full of overly dense, 
unhealthy, and dying stands that provide lower-quality habitat, are 
more vulnerable to insects and disease, and are less resilient to 
climate change and drought (See appendix figure 1).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ See Fix America's Forests, supra n. 1 at 4. The Forest Service 
manages 193 million acres of land, 80 million of which are in need of 
restoration, according to the agency.
    \8\ GAO, Wildland Fire: Federal Agencies' Efforts to Reduce 
Wildland Fuels and Lower Risk to Communities and Ecosystems (2019).
    \9\ See Fix America's Forests, supra n. 1 at 8-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As with any complex phenomenon, no single factor fully explains 
declining forest health or the wildfire crisis. A changing climate has 
increased the risk of drought and extended the West's ``wildfire 
season.'' \10\ A massive jump in the number of people living near or 
recreating in forests has increased opportunities for human-caused 
ignitions.\11\ But the largest factor, according to a study by Forest 
Service scientists, is excessive forest density and the buildup of 
fuels due to a lack of forest management and decades of fire 
suppression.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ See Burn Back Better, supra n. 1 at 4.
    \11\ See id.
    \12\ See High-Severity Fire: Evaluating Its Key Drivers and Mapping 
Its Probability Across Western US Forests, supra n. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Fire is nothing new to western forests, which were traditionally 
adapted to flames due to climate, terrain, and Indigenous tribes' use 
of controlled fire for millenia.\13\ However, recent catastrophic 
wildfires are far more destructive than historical fire regimes. They 
are more likely to threaten old-growth trees, wipe out habitat for 
wildlife, and cause erosion that degrades watersheds and fish 
habitat.\14\ Even mighty giant sequoias, one of the most fire-adapted 
tree species, are at risk. The National Park Service estimates that 10-
20 percent of the world's remaining members of this species have been 
killed by wildfires since 2020.\15\ Wildfire emissions are also a major 
climate concern. California's record wildfire year in 2020, for 
example, released twice the amount of carbon emissions than the state 
had cut between 2003 and 2019.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ See Burn Back Better, supra n. 1 at 4.
    \14\ See Fix America's Forests, supra n. 1 at 8-10.
    \15\ See Dr. Kristen Shive, et al., 2021 Fire Season Impacts to 
Giant Sequoias (last visited Mar. 19, 2023).
    \16\ Michael Jerrett, Amir S. Jina, Miriam E. Marlier, Up in smoke: 
California's greenhouse gas reductions could be wiped out by 2020 
wildfires, 300 Env'tl Pollution 119888 (2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 2015, for the first time, the United States eclipsed 10 million 
acres burned by wildfires in a year--an unfathomable total just a few 
decades ago--with the vast majority of that acreage concentrated in the 
West. Since then, we have passed that milestone twice more.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\ National Interagency Fire Center, ``Total Wildland Fires and 
Acres (1983-2022).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And due to growing populations near forests, modern fires threaten 
communities and property in ways not seen before.\18\ Nearly 100,000 
structures have burned in wildfires since 2005, with two-thirds of that 
destruction occurring since 2017.\19\ California's Camp Fire in 2018, 
for example, was the deadliest and most destructive in that state's 
history, killing 85 people and destroying most of the town of Paradise 
in less than 24 hours.\20\ In my home of Bozeman, our whole city's 
water source would be depleted in just three days if our neighboring 
forests went up in flames. Yet, despite this risk, the collaboratively 
designed Bozeman Municipal Watershed Project was tangled in red tape 
and litigation for 15 years before restoration activities could begin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\ See Burn Back Better, supra n. 1 at 4.
    \19\ Headwaters Economics, Wildfires Destroy Thousands of 
Structures Each Year (2022).
    \20\ National Institute of Standards & Technology, New Timeline of 
Deadliest California Wildfire Could Guide Lifesaving Research and 
Action (Feb. 8, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Forest restoration efforts, including mechanical thinning and 
prescribed fire, are urgently needed to reduce wildfire damage and 
promote forest resilience. The effectiveness of these tools was 
demonstrated in 2021 during Oregon's Bootleg Fire, which ultimately 
burned more than 400,000 acres (see appendix figure 2).\21\ 
Firefighters reported that where both treatments had been applied, fire 
intensity was reduced, the crowns of trees were left intact, and the 
blaze became a more manageable ground fire. Reports also indicated that 
an area where scheduled prescribed burns had been delayed suffered more 
damage than areas where treatments had been completed.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\ See Burn Back Better, supra n. 1 at 5.
    \22\ See Sara Sutherland & Eric Edwards, How Environmental Red Tape 
Inflames Wildfire Risk, PERC Reports (2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Forest Service has simply not been able to keep up with forest 
restoration needs. In 2023, the agency completed more hazardous fuels 
work than any prior year in its history, treating more than 4.3 million 
acres.\23\ The Forest Service is doing the right thing in working to 
increase treatments, but with tens of millions of additional acres of 
forests in need of restoration, we need to dramatically increase the 
pace and scale of this work. The Forest Service's method of tracking 
and reporting these acres has historically overstated the agency's 
progress at addressing the restoration backlog, which makes it even 
more challenging to evaluate how to allocate resources and the 
effectiveness of treatments.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\ U.S. Forest Service, USDA Forest Service celebrates historic 
investments in 2023, (January 23, 2024).
    \24\ See Accurately Counting Risk Elimination Solutions (ACRES) 
Act, H.R. 1567. See also Adiel Kaplan & Monica Hersher, ``The Forest 
Service is Overstating its Wildfire Prevention Progress to Congress 
Despite Decades of Warnings Not To,'' NBC News (August 9, 2022); GAO, 
Wildland Fire Management: Additional Actions Required to Better 
Identify and Prioritize Lands Needing Fuels Reduction (2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overcoming Red Tape

    While the good news is we know how to reduce wildfire risk through 
forest restoration activities, the bad news is it is exceptionally 
difficult to get that work done on the ground and at the scale needed. 
Before any chainsaws or drip torches can touch a federal forest, a 
restoration project must navigate complex bureaucratic procedures, 
including review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 
Depending on the extent of anticipated impacts, NEPA may require the 
Forest Service to analyze a project through, in order of increasing 
complexity and expense, a categorical exclusion, environmental 
assessment, or environmental impact statement. The agency may also need 
to develop a range of alternatives to the project and analyze their 
impacts as well.
    While well-intentioned, extensive NEPA reviews can significantly 
increase project costs and inject substantial delays. In PERC's recent 
policy report Does Environmental Review Worsen the Wildfire Crisis?, 
researchers compiled and analyzed a novel NEPA dataset and found that 
the average time to conduct an environmental impact statement is over 
2.5 years.\25\ Even a categorical exclusion, which is designed to 
exempt a project from stringent environmental review, takes an average 
of nine months to complete.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \25\ Eric Edwards and Sara Sutherland, Does Environmental Review 
Worsen the Wildfire Crisis? How Environmental Analysis Delays Fuel 
Treatment Projects, PERC Policy Brief (June 2022).
    \26\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    NEPA delays contribute substantially to an overall approval and 
implementation process that holds up projects for many years. According 
to PERC researchers, once the Forest Service initiates the 
environmental review process, it takes an average of 3.6 years to 
actually begin a mechanical treatment on the ground and 4.7 years to 
begin a prescribed burn--and those numbers increase to 5.3 years and 
7.2 years, respectively, if an environmental impact statement is 
required (see appendix figure 3).\27\ Given the time it takes to 
conduct environmental reviews and implement fuel treatments, it is 
unlikely that the Forest Service will be able to achieve its goal of 
treating an additional 20 million acres over the next 10 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Evaluating the costs associated with NEPA compliance is challenging 
largely because, similar to many other federal agencies, the Forest 
Service does not routinely track or report the associated costs and 
personnel time.\28\ The Forest Service has, however, historically 
identified administrative process barriers as a major factor holding up 
forest restoration goals. As a 2002 Forest Service report on The 
Process Predicament described it, ``Even noncontroversial projects 
often proceed at a snail's pace.'' \29\ In 2022, the Forest Service 
likewise concluded that environmental review processes must be 
streamlined to give the agency more tools to use prescribed fire to 
protect forests and wildlife habitat.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \28\ Katie Hoover & Anne Riddle, National Forest System Management: 
Overview and Issues for Congress, Congressional Research Service (May 
18, 2023).
    \29\ U.S. Forest Service, The Process Predicament: How Statutory, 
Regulatory, and Administrative Factors Affect National Forest 
Management (2002).
    \30\ U.S. Forest Service, Nat'l Prescribed Fire Program Review 
(2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Root and Stem Project Authorization Act

    The Root and Stem Project Authorization Act (H.R. 674) is a 
bipartisan proposal to add more resources to advance forest restoration 
projects through the often-cumbersome environmental review process. For 
projects on Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management land that have 
been collaboratively developed and meet local and rural community 
needs, a sponsor can front the funding for an approved outside 
contractor to complete the NEPA analysis for the project and be repaid 
through any receipts generated by the project that would otherwise go 
to the federal treasury.
The ``A to Z'' Project

    The Root and Stem Project Authorization Act builds on the ``A to 
Z'' pilot project in the Colville National Forest in Washington.\31\ 
This innovative project was highlighted in PERC's 2021 Fix America's 
Forests report as a way to leverage the value of timber to reduce 
bureaucratic burdens.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \31\ See Fix America's Forests, supra n. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Several years ago, the Northeast Washington Forest Coalition, a 
collaborative group of public and private partners, was looking to 
advance a forest project, but the Colville National Forest did not have 
the financial or staff resources to complete environmental reviews for 
the project. The coalition proposed allowing timber contractors who 
would perform the harvesting and restoration work to also bear the 
costs of doing the NEPA analysis. This ``A to Z'' project--so named 
because the winning bidder would be responsible for the entire process 
from initiating the project, to environmental review, to 
implementation--presented the opportunity to use the commercial value 
of harvested timber to advance the project and fund forest restoration.
    A local sawmill, Vaagen Brothers Lumber, won the 10-year Forest 
Service stewardship contract in 2013 to test the privately funded, 
publicly managed NEPA process. It subcontracted with a third party to 
plan and perform the environmental analysis. To avoid any conflict of 
interest, the subcontractor's performance was overseen by agency 
personnel rather than Vaagen Brothers. The NEPA analysis was completed 
in 2016, and the Vaagen Brothers began commercial thinning operations 
on more than 4,500 acres of national forest lands that contain excess 
wildfire fuels.
    With a mill that can process small-diameter trees and nearby 
processing facilities that can turn that timber into laminated building 
products, the contract provides Vaagen Brothers with a supply of 
merchantable wood products. In exchange, the terms of the stewardship 
contract also require that the private company rehabilitate streams, 
replace culverts, restore roads, and control noxious weeds, leaving the 
forest ecosystem more resilient to insects and disease, enhanced 
wildlife habitat, and a substantially reduced risk for severe wildfire.
How It Works

    The Root and Stem Project Authorization Act establishes a formal 
process for a project sponsor to provide the Forest Service and Bureau 
of Land Management upfront funding to hire an approved contractor to 
conduct the NEPA analysis for a collaboratively designed restoration 
project. It also adds the requirement that receipts generated by the 
project can be used to repay the sponsor instead of being deposited 
into the general fund of the treasury. Building on the success of the 
``A to Z'' project, this approach could substantially speed up needed 
activities while freeing up agency resources and personnel for other 
projects.
    The Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management can currently 
contract with non-federal parties for environmental analysis and accept 
outside funds to pay for that review, as demonstrated by the ``A to Z'' 
project.\32\ The significant reform that the Root and Stem Project 
Authorization Act would make is to allow a project's timber revenues to 
reimburse the party who funds the environmental review. This 
improvement would create more opportunity and motivation for forest 
collaboratives, conservation organizations, timber companies, and other 
entities who would benefit from the restoration project to provide the 
initial funding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \32\ 40 CFR Sec. 1507.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under this proposal, the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land 
Management would maintain an approved list of non-federal, third-party 
contractors in each state that the agency can hire to complete NEPA 
analyses and any consultations required under the Endangered Species 
Act. For forest restoration projects that have been collaboratively 
developed on federal lands, a project sponsor could propose a 
stewardship contract and provide the federal land management agency 
with the funding to hire one of the approved contractors to conduct the 
necessary project analysis. Once the project was approved, the federal 
land manager would have to solicit bids to carry out the project and 
use any available receipts generated by the project to repay the 
sponsor.
    Though outside parties would be providing upfront funding and 
completing the environmental review documents, the federal land 
management agency would still retain authority over the environmental 
review and the project. Additionally, the relevant secretary would 
still be required to determine the sufficiency of any documents and 
authorize the project to proceed.
Improving Forest Restoration

    At a time of great need for more forest restoration activities, the 
Root and Stem Project Authorization Act would bring more resources to 
the table to get important work done. Bringing in outside funding will 
not only benefit the collaborative projects reviewed under the Root and 
Stem authority but will also allow limited Forest Service and Bureau of 
Land Management resources to be spent on other priorities. Ultimately, 
more needed forest restoration projects--both ones that do and do not 
generate revenues--will make it through the environmental review 
process so that work can begin on the ground to reduce fuel-loading and 
protect our forest ecosystems from catastrophic wildfires.
    This tool is a voluntary approach that can certainly help advance 
collaborative projects in areas of need. Beyond adding additional 
financial and human capacity to the environmental review process, this 
opportunity also recognizes and rewards collaboration on forest 
projects and maintains federal oversight. Congress should explicitly 
grant the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management the ability 
to have outside parties pay for contractors to conduct the 
environmental review analysis and documentation for forest projects so 
more restoration work can begin in the forests.
Conclusion

    Solving the wildfire crisis requires more forest restoration work. 
Environmental reviews are a major hindrance to achieving that goal. The 
Root and Stem Project Authorization Act is a bipartisan and bicameral 
proposal that would help bring in additional funding and capacity to 
the environmental review process, freeing up other federal resources to 
conduct even more needed projects. Congress should act now to authorize 
this tool to help fix America's forests.

                                Appendix 

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    The Federal Emergency Management Agency wildfire risk index 
rates a community's relative risk for wildfire. The map above displays 
FEMA wildfire risk by census tract for the 11 western states.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    As the Bootleg Fire ripped through the Fremont-Winema National 
Forest in southern Oregon in 2021, firefighters reported that in places 
where prescribed fires and forest thinning had been carried out, flames 
returned to the ground, where they moved slower, did less damage, and 
were easier to fight.  S. Rondeau/Klamath Tribes' Natural Resource 
Department 

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    The timeline for a U.S. Forest Service fuel treatment project 
includes the following steps: Initiation of the NEPA environmental 
review process, NEPA decision, first on-the-ground activity (often an 
inventory of fuels or similar preparation step) begins and, finally, 
treatment begins. Once the Forest Service initiates the environmental 
review process, it takes an average of 3.6 years (1,325 days) to begin 
a mechanical treatment. Prescribed burns average 4.7 years (1,711 days) 
from initiation to beginning of treatment. For both types of treatment, 
projects that require rigorous review in the form of an environmental 
impact statement take significantly longer to begin on average: 5.3 
years (1,924 days) in the case of mechanical treatments and 7.2 years 
(2,643 days) in the case of prescribed burns.

                                 ______
                                 
    Mr. Tiffany. Ms. Downey, thank you very much for your 
testimony. Now, I turn to Mr. Bentz for questioning for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I wish I had more 
time, because I have questions for all of you, but I don't have 
enough time for that.
    Mr. Munsey, the roads you are speaking about, the bridges, 
all of that, you must be incredibly challenged to try to keep 
up with the sheer demand for what needs to be done. I am just 
curious what it would really take to get back to a point of 
actually being able to protect people by having the roads, the 
bridges, all those systems actually in place.
    Mr. Munsey. Yes, sir. First I want to thank our San 
Bernardino National Forest, the road that I discussed, while 
they don't have funds to repair it, we have been able to work 
with them. And actually, I don't think it is the fund, I think 
it is the people that they need. But they have been able to get 
us supplies, the culvert, the metal that we need to repair 
those roads.
    These roads are on Federal jurisdiction. So, the question 
is probably better to Mr. Smith of what it would take. Again, I 
think that he is right, that 2 years is very ambitious. 
However, I think I am right, too. Some of these roads that I 
have experienced as a firefighter have been closed for 5 years, 
10 years, 15 years, 20 years. These aren't roads that are 
closed due to lack of will to do maintenance; these roads are 
closed because they are being abandoned for one reason or 
another, and they are hampering our firefighting efforts.
    Mr. Bentz. Right. And there is a suggestion in the county I 
live in. The county itself is 9 million acres in size, and 
there is a suggestion that a couple of million of it be made 
into a wilderness area, or a monument with no access. It 
happens that most of that area is rangeland, not trees, but the 
issue is the same: you can't get there from here unless you 
have appropriate roads that have been appropriately maintained. 
Otherwise, you are kind of out of luck. So, that issue is huge.
    I am going to shift to Ms. Downey, and you heard me asking 
questions of the Forest Service. And I am just curious if, same 
question, if you had your way, how would you fix the forest 
tomorrow?
    Ms. Downey. There is definitely a lot of work to be done, 
Congressman.
    As I stated, we have an 80 million-acre backlog of needed 
forest restoration work that is contributing to this wildfire 
crisis. There are a lot of factors that go into it.
    One, which the Root and Stem Project Authorization Act does 
help to address, is the capacity. We need more resources going 
to this problem, and external partners are going to be 
essential to getting that done.
    The second is also what we have alluded to on the NEPA 
problem, and getting more projects approved. It is a huge lift 
to get these projects through the approval process. And then 
add on litigation, and we are looking at about an additional 2 
years of delay. When all of those pieces combine, it is taking 
up an excessive amount of time that we simply don't have when 
we need to tackle this wildfire crisis.
    Mr. Bentz. Speaker Gingrich, who I met with a number of 
times now, suggests that the only way to get anything done is 
to change public opinion. So, in your opinion, how would you go 
about sharing with the nation the challenge that we are all 
dealing with?
    And to that end, I will just say in the largest part of my 
district, which is the Medford area in southern Oregon, there 
are about 300,000 people. And I guarantee you right now those 
folks, all of them, know they have a problem because they can't 
breathe during August and September. It is bad. And for a 
while, we had smoke from Oregon going over this building right 
here 3 years ago, and that gave us an opportunity to say, hey, 
this is a wreck.
    What is your organization doing to try to bring this 
incredible challenge to the attention of the nation?
    Ms. Downey. Congressman, you are absolutely correct that 
public opinion is essential on this problem.
    One of the things that we are working really actively to do 
is to try to help educate and inform the public on what 
actually is a healthy forest. For so long, we have gotten to 
this place where all fires have been suppressed, we haven't 
been conducting the mechanical thinning and prescribed burn 
work that is needed to restore the health of these forests. So, 
people go into the forest and they see them chock full of trees 
and dead fall and overgrowth, and we just kind of think that is 
what it is, when in reality we need to be actively clearing out 
some of those fuels.
    So, part of our mission at PERC is to try to better shape 
that narrative of what actually is a healthy forest. It is good 
for people to be in there and engaging and doing some of this 
needed work.
    And then, to your exact point, that is what then helps 
prevent those negative impacts around the country. When our 
forests burn in Montana, it is not just Montana that suffers, 
it is the smoke that travels across the country and harms all 
of us.
    Mr. Bentz. It certainly does. Let me, with the few seconds 
I have left, we have been trying to coordinate a messaging 
system. My personal goal is 10 million people. So, if you have 
interest, or any of you have interest, in joining us in that 
effort so we can get these kind of messages out, please let us 
know.
    With that, I yield back.
    Mr. Tiffany. The gentleman yields. I would turn to the 
Ranking Member, Mr. Neguse, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Neguse. I thank the Chairman. Again, thank you to all 
the witnesses for being here today and for your written 
testimony and your oral testimony.
    Ms. Roman, thank you so much for making the journey and 
joining us here today. As I mentioned in my opening statement, 
we granted the Town of Minturn--we, the United States 
Congress--granted non-motorized access for the Bolts Ditch in 
2019 through the Dingell Act. You touched on this during your 
testimony, but I am wondering if you can just expound a bit on 
why this particular legislation is necessary to expand access 
to the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District.
    And I guess more broadly, what benefits do you think would 
flow from this particular change to Eagle County writ large?
    Ms. Roman. I think that is a good choice of word, the word 
``flow.''
    What we are requesting is just very simple, that Minturn 
already has the access to do the maintenance needed on this 
historic Bolts Ditch and the diversion structure. And since we 
recently bought the property and the rights to redevelop Bolts 
Lake, all it is is adding our name onto that. So, it is very 
simple.
    But the benefits at large of this project are very far 
reaching. As we know, the water picture is very variable in the 
West. It ties to the forest fires. And what this will do is 
help us store that snowmelt so that we can release it because 
it is drier, warmer. We are having longer summers. And then we 
can release those flows and augment our rivers in the fall. And 
really, the whole Colorado system will benefit from this 
project.
    Mr. Neguse. Well, I couldn't agree more. And given my 
statements that this is a simple bill, I will hesitate to ask 
any further questions on this subject and complicate it, and 
will simply say that I think the bill makes a lot of sense, and 
I am hoping that we can get it done in short order.
    And I thank you for being here. And, of course, to all the 
witnesses, again, for their respective testimonies.
    And I will yield back the balance of my time.
    Mr. Tiffany. The gentleman yields. The Chairman is going to 
use his prerogative. Mr. Bentz said he had more than 5 minutes 
for questioning.
    And we will give you another few minutes.
    Mr. Bentz. You are very kind, Mr. Chair. Thank you so much.
    Mr. Tallier, on the issue of gravel, I had in my law 
practice back in Oregon lots of occasion to try to help people 
expand their gravel pit operations. And in Oregon it is 
extraordinarily difficult. Their neighbors don't like those 
kinds of activities and, for whatever reason, people have 
forgotten the absolute necessity of aggregate. I don't know 
what they think roads are made out of, but the gravel is a 
pretty essential element.
    I am just curious. In this 10 acres that you are asking 
for, as I understand it, you are asking for 10 acres or 14, 
whatever the number is. That is adjacent to an existing gravel 
pit, is that correct?
    Mr. Tallier. Correct. It is really right next to it. It is 
14 acres and it is right there, so it is just amazing how close 
it would be, and we could keep on working, you know what I am 
saying?
    And when I look at the 340,000 other acres that the Forest 
Service has, and we have to look at that big picture. And 14 
acres, I just think that we could just do it and get it over 
with.
    Mr. Bentz. Right. And I am with you completely on that, 
because if you can keep that activity in one place, you don't 
have to go through the disruption that happens to a community 
when you move to some other place to continue the effort to 
find gravel. I am very happy to support the bill.
    I want to shift to appraisers for a moment. Again, I have 
dealt with appraisers a lot. There has been a dramatic change 
after the debacle back in 2008. And I am just curious. When you 
are talking about a shortage of appraisers, but now that seems 
to be overcome, was that just as to a government agency or was 
that nationwide? I am just curious.
    Ms. Adomatis. Well, the shortage of appraisers is 
nationwide. We have an aging group of appraisers currently that 
are certified to appraise. And that is why the Appraisal 
Institute has taken a proactive approach to bring the next 
generation of appraisers forward.
    Mr. Bentz. Yes, an absolutely essential function. And I am 
happy you are here to share with us your thinking on the bill.
    With that, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
    Mr. Tiffany. The gentleman yields. I would like to 
recognize the gentleman from Minnesota, Mr. Stauber, for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Stauber. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank you for 
convening this hearing, and I want to thank the bills' sponsors 
for introducing these pieces of common-sense legislation that 
will enable communities across the nation to better manage our 
public lands.
    The district that I represent in northern Minnesota is home 
to great timberland, including on Federal lands like the 
Chippewa and Superior National Forests. Like many rural 
districts across the country, we face serious risks from 
wildfires if our forests are not properly managed.
    The Chippewa and Superior National Forests are not 
currently meeting their timber harvesting goals. While there 
are several reasons why this is the case, it is abundantly 
clear we need to be working more collaboratively together, 
involving Federal, state, local, tribal, and private entities. 
That is why I am a large proponent of expanding tools like Good 
Neighbor Authority or promoting root and stem projects, which 
Representative Newhouse's legislation would authorize.
    Our broken and lengthy NEPA permitting regime should not be 
an excuse as to why we are not taking part in proper forest 
management. It is clear our Federal land managers, just like so 
many in private industries across this nation, are being 
overburdened by the NEPA process. Representative Newhouse's 
legislation would take a small step to help alleviate that 
burden on our land managers by enabling qualified private 
contractors to lead the NEPA process while still ensuring we 
are achieving the highest possible environmental standards.
    Ms. Downey, in your written testimony you share the 
successes of the A to Z pilot project on the Colville National 
Forest in Washington State, which was led by a local sawmill. 
Can you expand upon this, specifically how having a private 
entity like the local sawmill was able to increase 
collaboration and result in a more fit-for-purpose project that 
reduced wildfire risk while serving the needs of the local 
communities?
    Ms. Downey. Congressman Stauber, you are absolutely correct 
that, in the A to Z Project, the pilot project that spawned 
this Root and Stem Project Authorization Act, the private 
company there was absolutely essential in getting that project 
off the ground. They were able to provide the initial funding, 
help get that third-party contractor to get the NEPA analysis 
done, and then go in and actually do a lot of the work on the 
ground.
    So much of this comes back to the point you were making 
that we have this massive restoration backlog on our Federal 
lands, and we are going to need external resources and partners 
to be able to get that done. With the Root and Stem Project 
Authorization Act, it reinforces that mechanism through which 
those private companies can help provide the resources to get 
that done, and then also be a true partner in actually going on 
to the landscape and getting that mechanical treatment done to 
reduce that excessive fuels load.
    Mr. Stauber. Do you think this project would have been 
completed if it were not for the private company coming in and 
leading the project, or would the work have ended up on the 
Forest Service's project backlog?
    Ms. Downey. Congressman, in the A to Z situation, the 
Vaagen Brothers Timber Company, their involvement in this 
really came about because the Colville National Forest did not 
have the resources to get this project done quickly. It was a 
collaboratively-designed project. The timber company was a part 
of it, the Forest Service and other local groups identifying 
this as a huge priority need for their community. So, the 
timber company stepping up and saying, ``We would like to help 
provide the resources and get the work done,'' that was 
essential in getting that across the finish line.
    Mr. Stauber. Once again, the private sector doing well. 
Thank you.
    Timber harvesting is one of the largest and most important 
industries in northern Minnesota. I think that the communities 
I represent would be greatly serviced by having root and stem 
projects. It would be another opportunity for the timber stock 
to drive a vitally important part of our local economy, while 
advancing forest health and conducting important forest 
management. This bill is a great tool for our communities and 
national forests, and I am proud to support it.
    Mr. Chair, I yield back. Thank you.
    Mr. Tiffany. The gentleman yields, and I am going to take a 
few minutes to ask questions here. First, I want to start with 
Mr. Tallier, the Supervisor from Forest County.
    You are a former U.S. Forest Service employee, is that 
correct?
    Mr. Tallier. Yes it is. I put in 20-plus years, plus my 
wife put in 25. So, yes, we have been involved with the Forest 
Service a long time.
    Mr. Tiffany. So, you see this project, this 14 acres that 
is contiguous with the existing aggregate pit that is there, 
you see it within the context of Forest County, being a County 
Supervisor as well as being a former Forest Service employee, 
you see it through all of those perspectives. Is that accurate?
    Mr. Tallier. Accurate, and I thank you for that because 
this whole thing is really common sense. It is a hill, it is 
right there by the existing pit. And 14 acres--and I am not 
sure what the Forest Service plan would be for it, I mean to do 
with just that 14 acres.
    So, it just seems to me that it is common sense to get rid 
of it and let economic development continue in Forest County.
    Mr. Tiffany. So, having this 14 acres go to be able to 
produce aggregate, it doesn't jeopardize any of the operations 
or any of the goals that the Forest Service has with their 
hundreds of thousands of acres, is that accurate?
    Mr. Tallier. To me, nothing.
    Mr. Tiffany. And if this goes away, let say this ready mix 
operation went away. What would be the impact to the local 
community, including for public projects?
    So, you have the U.S. Forest Service. They conduct projects 
occasionally, right?
    Mr. Tallier. Right.
    Mr. Tiffany. You have the Forest County Potawatomi that are 
right there with operations right in that immediate area in 
Wabeno. What happens to the cost of construction if this is not 
approved?
    Mr. Tallier. Well, the thing is, about this ready mix 
plant, if this closes down, then the next one is probably 50 
miles to the south, 40 miles to the southwest, and then there 
is another one 25 miles north. So, I mean, you are talking a 
major impact.
    Mr. Tiffany. If I recall accurately, they would be getting 
their aggregate or their concrete at that point from either 
Eagle River, Rhinelander, Antigo, places that are a long ways 
away.
    Mr. Tallier. A long ways. Yes, exactly. So, it is really 
important that we keep this company going where it is at, 
everything is in place.
    And I don't know these exact numbers, but when you deal 
with this many employees and this many trucks coming in and 
out, different small businesses, it could be over $1 million a 
year as far as the investment, everybody around the area, you 
know what I am saying? So, it is really important that we keep 
this business going.
    Mr. Tiffany. Yes, I would emphasize--I mean, we certainly 
have the private sector. I just think of these public-sector 
projects that they want to complete. It will cost more to 
complete them if we do not have a source of concrete, a source 
of aggregate like that.
    Ms. Downey, I want to ask a very specific question, and I 
know you guys work with sportsmen's organizations, and that is 
really a big part of America, is the opportunity for sportsmen.
    And when it comes to corner crossings, it is my 
understanding that you guys have done a lot of work where you 
have this checkerboard of public and private lands. Could you 
please explain this issue with corner crossings, and how 
legislation that streamlines parts of the land conveyance 
process, such as Representative Lee's bill, could assist in 
opening up access?
    Ms. Downey. Chairman Tiffany, in the West we have a unique 
situation, as you have described, called the checkerboarded 
land situation, wherein, similar to a checkerboard, you have 
public parcels of land, largely Federal land, where they touch 
at a corner but not along the edge. So, imagine a checkerboard. 
Part of it is public, part of it is private.
    The question begins as sportsmen, recreationists, 
conservationists want to be able to expand their access to 
those public lands, how do you get from one piece of public 
across the corner to another piece of public?
    One side of the argument sees it as public access, the 
other side sees it as crossing that line, trespassing on 
private property. So, it is a really complicated land 
jurisdictional issue. So, pieces like improving the appraisal 
process so that we can try to negotiate exchanges or to 
facilitate access agreements so that we are respecting property 
rights while still promoting access are going to be really 
important and help solve a big Western access issue.
    Mr. Tiffany. I appreciate that.
    Ms. Adomatis, do you have anything you would like to add to 
that?
    Ms. Adomatis. No, but I will say that this AACE Act will 
help speed up the ability for them to get appraisals in these 
instances where they need appraisals on access.
    Mr. Tiffany. It goes back to the fundamental issue of the 
bill that is before us. Is that right?
    Ms. Adomatis. Yes.
    Mr. Tiffany. Yes, for sure.
    Ms. Roman, in the district that you chair, what is your 
official title again, once again?
    Ms. Roman. General Manager.
    Mr. Tiffany. General Manager--that you operate, is there 
water used in that area for the ski resorts and things?
    What is the water all used that you manage, what is it used 
for?
    Ms. Roman. The water that we manage is mostly used for 
domestic and outdoor irrigation, but of course you can imagine 
the Town of Vail, when it was developed, it was largely 
developed by the ski resorts. It was all around the same time. 
But our water is largely used for outdoor irrigation and for 
drinking.
    And then we also treat the water and return clean water 
back to the streams.
    Mr. Tiffany. OK. And it does help you provide to your 
constituents to have more water storage. Is that accurate?
    Ms. Roman. Yes.
    Mr. Tiffany. Yes, because it sounds like it is a somewhat 
complex issue that is before us in regards to the Bolts Ditch.
    Ms. Roman. I think what is before you is probably very 
simple, but water in the West is very complex.
    Mr. Tiffany. Always. Us Midwesterners, when we come to 
Congress and we deal with natural resources, we find that out 
real fast.
    Finally, Mr. Munsey, based on your testimony, it sounds 
like these issues before us that we are talking about today, 
they are life and death issues. Is that right?
    Mr. Munsey. Yes, sir. I also want to point out again that 
not only life and death with wildfire or secondary emergencies, 
but as your all-hazard fire department responding to Federal 
land, these are often things like all-terrain vehicles, people 
riding horses, lost hikers, people going into mine shafts. And 
being able to access these individuals quickly can very likely 
lead to life or death.
    Mr. Tiffany. Do you folks try to prevent fires or try to 
stop fires before they spread?
    Mr. Munsey. Yes, sir. As I mentioned, we responded to 
196,000 calls for service last year. Again, those are 
considered failures. While we are really good at responding, 
our primary job is to prevent.
    In our local jurisdiction, I have my Division Chief of 
Wildland behind me. His wildland crews spend hours in and 
around our communities with community chipper days, cutting 
fire breaks, doing inspections on private homes. But there is a 
great deal of effort that is expended on the local government 
to keep our communities safe.
    Mr. Tiffany. So, per what we are talking about here today, 
what is stopping you from preventing some of those fires?
    Mr. Munsey. Well, as we mentioned, it is not just fires. It 
is the all-hazard nature that is going to occur on Federal 
land. But I would say here is where we have improved in the 
last couple of years. CAL FIRE, the U.S. Forest Service, the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs, BLM have all been working a lot 
closer with County Fire to ensure that the efforts that we are 
putting in are congruent.
    A few years ago, we would see a patchwork quilt, where 
maybe the Forest Service would take a project that was in the 
middle of the forest, and then our county fire would take a 
project that is in the county areas. We weren't working 
together, and I think that has continued to move that forward.
    The second is to continue to fund these projects.
    The third, and I want to emphasize this, and I know it is 
not in this Committee's purview, you need to pay your Federal 
firefighters. There has been a massive loss of experience from 
individuals that are going to work anywhere but the U.S. Forest 
Service. CAL FIRE is hiring many of them. In Congresswoman 
Kim's area in the Cleveland National Forest, 25 percent of the 
stations 25 percent of the time are staffed. If you don't have 
that workforce in place, then it is really hard for the Federal 
Government to do its part in maintaining these fuel breaks and 
working with local agencies to prevent these fires.
    Mr. Tiffany. So, the burden ends up falling on you and 
departments like yours. Is that accurate?
    Mr. Munsey. Yes, sir. As I mentioned, about $13 million is 
spent from local taxpayers to respond. There is much more money 
that is spent from us to protect our communities, which is our 
responsibility.
    We also use our hand crews to augment the Federal hand 
crews on their projects for free, because we know that if we 
can minimize the impact of fire in the natural resources, that 
we can keep that from going into our communities.
    Mr. Tiffany. We have had organizations in this country, 
well known organizations, that have fought tooth and nail to 
prevent access. And as a result, maybe they didn't do it 
intentionally, but the ultimate result was that we have had 
these massive fires as a result of not taking the proper 
approach to it. Is that turning in the West?
    Mr. Munsey. Not from my perspective, sir. I think 
everybody's intentions are correct, and they want to be 
environmentally friendly and they want to protect our natural 
resources, and I can certainly align with those viewpoints. 
However, we need to make sure that we are doing our half to 
make sure that our first responders can access these 
emergencies quickly.
    I would also take note that these individuals that complain 
about maintaining room through the forest, the moment their 
cell phone is not working they are going to be calling your 
office and every elected official's office complaining about 
it. Literally, as I recounted a story in our snowstorm where we 
could not access the repeaters, the utilities went out and 
40,000 people were without utilities. We had to fuel those 
generators, but we couldn't make access on the road.
    So, those things need to stop in order to protect the 
public and make sure that they are able to access needed 
service.
    Mr. Tiffany. I am taking you back one more time. What 
prevented access to that road in the situation that you just 
highlighted?
    Mr. Munsey. Maintenance. That road had not been maintained 
for years.
    Again, the U.S. Forest Service is now working with San 
Bernardino County Fire. We are putting our heavy equipment and 
our crews working with our department that maintains a repeater 
on top of one of the mountains in order to be able to repair 
that road. The U.S. Forest Service has been great at getting us 
the supplies we need to maintain it, and getting the CEs to do 
it. But for years leading up to that, that road had not been 
maintained. We could not even drive it in a tracked vehicle, a 
snowcat, to get up there because of the maintenance and the 
slide, the rockslides that occurred on that particular roadway.
    Mr. Tiffany. Well, I would like to thank all the witnesses 
for your testimony today. It is greatly appreciated.
    Members of the Subcommittee may have some additional 
questions for you, and we will ask that you respond to those in 
writing. Under Committee Rule 3, members of the Subcommittee 
must submit questions to the Subcommittee Clerk by 5 p.m. on 
Monday, February 5, 2024. Somebody has 2023 here yet. I will 
have to tease him.
    The hearing record will be held open for 10 business days 
for those responses.
    I made that same mistake writing checks. Of course, these 
young people don't write checks anymore, do they?
    If there is no further business, without objection, the 
Subcommittee on Federal Lands stands adjourned.

    [Whereupon, at 11:45 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

                                 [all]