[Senate Hearing 118-311]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 118-311
PENDING LEGISLATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
PUBLIC LANDS, FORESTS, AND MINING
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
on
S. 175 S. 2151 S. 3036
S. 297 S. 2581 S. 3044
S. 1348 S. 2615 S. 3045
S. 1719 S. 2855 S. 3046/H.R.
S. 1764 S. 2867 3324
S. 1889 S. 2991 S. 3062
S. 2132 S. 3033 S. 3079
----------
OCTOBER 25, 2023
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
PENDING LEGISLATION
S. Hrg. 118-311
PENDING LEGISLATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
PUBLIC LANDS, FORESTS, AND MINING
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
on
S. 175 S. 2151 S. 3036
S. 297 S. 2581 S. 3044
S. 1348 S. 2615 S. 3045
S. 1719 S. 2855 S. 3046/H.R.
S. 1764 S. 2867 3324
S. 1889 S. 2991 S. 3062
S. 2132 S. 3033 S. 3079
__________
OCTOBER 25, 2023
__________
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
55-814 WASHINGTON : 2025
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia, Chairman
RON WYDEN, Oregon JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont MIKE LEE, Utah
MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico STEVE DAINES, Montana
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana
JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
ALEX PADILLA, California JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
------
Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining
CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Chair
RON WYDEN MIKE LEE
MARTIN HEINRICH JAMES E. RISCH
MAZIE K. HIRONO STEVE DAINES
ANGUS S. KING, JR. LISA MURKOWSKI
JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER BILL CASSIDY
ALEX PADILLA JOSH HAWLEY
Renae Black, Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
David Brooks, General Counsel
Richard M. Russell, Republican Staff Director
Justin J. Memmott, Republican Chief Counsel
John Tanner, Republican Deputy Staff Director for Lands
C O N T E N T S
----------
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Cortez Masto, Hon. Catherine, Subcommittee Chair and a U.S.
Senator from Nevada............................................ 1
Lee, Hon. Mike, Subcommittee Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator
from Utah...................................................... 2
Heinrich, Hon. Martin, a U.S. Senator from New Mexico............ 4
Hickenlooper, Hon. John W., a U.S. Senator from Colorado......... 19
WITNESSES
Culver, Nada Wolff, Principal Deputy Director, Bureau of Land
Management, U.S. Department of the Interior.................... 20
Emanuel, Jacqueline, Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest
System, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.... 43
Boshell, Mark, S., Deputy Director, Utah Public Lands Policy
Coordinating Office............................................ 66
ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
Alaska Federation of Natives:
Statement for the Record..................................... 111
AFN Resolution 23-17......................................... 114
AFN Resolution 19-43......................................... 116
Alaska Native Landless Communities:
Response to a memorandum related to S. 1889.................. 118
Alaska Rainforest Defenders:
Statement for the Record dated November 3, 2023, with
attached 1993 letter from ISER director Lee Gorsuch to
Alaska Public Radio........................................ 259
Statement for the Record dated August 4, 2022................ 427
Allen, Marian:
Letter for the Record........................................ 129
American Rivers et al.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 8
Andersson, Lisa:
Letter for the Record........................................ 130
Baca, Sylvia and Jim Lyons:
Letter addressed to Representative Don Young, dated July 24,
1996....................................................... 421
Backcountry Hunters and Anglers:
Letter for the Record........................................ 137
Barnes, Beret:
Letter for the Record........................................ 139
Beebe, David:
Statement for the Record dated November 14, 2023............. 141
Statement for the Record dated October 19, 2023.............. 145
Bernstein, Mary-Claire:
Letter for the Record........................................ 151
Black, Michael:
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Indian, Insular, and
Alaska Native Affairs, House Natural Resources Committee,
U.S. House of Representatives, June 17, 2015............... 407
Boshell, Mark S.:
Opening Statement............................................ 66
Written Testimony............................................ 68
Brakel, Judy:
Letter for the Record........................................ 155
Brown, Zachary:
Letter for the Record........................................ 160
Budd, Jeff:
Letter for the Record........................................ 161
C'Bearing, Crystal:
Letter for the Record........................................ 162
Chaplin, Keith:
Article entitled ``Sealaska Representative Says Bill Could
Serve as Precedent'' published in the Wrangell Sentinel,
April 15, 2010............................................. 412
Chew, Gordon:
Letter for the Record........................................ 163
Chicagof Conservation Council:
Letter for the Record with attached Salmon Strongholds
brochure................................................... 164
Chugachmiut:
Letter for the Record........................................ 168
Coffman Cove, AK (City of):
Resolution No. 24-01, dated September 21, 2023............... 169
Cortez Masto, Hon. Catherine:
Opening Statement............................................ 1
Craig Tribal Association:
Letter for the Record with attached satellite map imagery.... 178
Resolution 2019-26, dated May 21, 2019....................... 200
Crandall, Karen and Pete:
Letter for the Record........................................ 206
Culp, Wanda J.:
Statement for the Record..................................... 207
Culver, Nada Wolff:
Opening Statement............................................ 20
Written Testimony............................................ 23
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 90
Danton, Linda:
Letter for the Record........................................ 209
Dayo, Dixie:
Letter for the Record........................................ 140
Dinovelli-Lang, Danielle:
Letter for the Record........................................ 210
Dunne, Jared:
Letter for the Record........................................ 213
Elliot, Elleana:
Comments for the Record...................................... 236
Emanuel, Jacqueline:
Opening Statement............................................ 43
Written Testimony............................................ 45
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 98
Emerson, Earl:
Statement for the Record..................................... 237
Environmental Health Trust:
Statement for the Record..................................... 214
Fecko, Cheryl:
Statement for the Record..................................... 240
Franklin, Cynthia:
Statement for the Record..................................... 242
Gilbert, Patricia:
Statement for the Record..................................... 441
Gorsuch, Lee:
Letter addressed to Amy Miller of Alaska Public Radio, dated
December 7, 1993........................................... 420
Gray, Sonya M.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 244
Harold, Stephanie:
Comments for the Record...................................... 248
Heinrich, Hon. Martin:
Opening Statement............................................ 4
Hickenlooper, Hon. John W.:
Opening Statement............................................ 19
Proclamation made by John Evans, Governor of the Territory of
Colorado, dated August 11, 1864............................ 82
Message from John Evans, Governor of the Territory of
Colorado, addressed to the ``Friendly Indians of the
Plains'' dated June 27, 1864............................... 83
Hiersche, Robin:
Letter for the Record........................................ 251
Hoonah Indian Association:
Statement for the Record..................................... 252
Howell, Wayne:
Letter for the Record........................................ 258
Institute of Social and Economic Research:
Report entitled ``A Study of Five Southeast Alaska
Communities'' published in February 1994................... 263
Jemez, NM (Pueblo of):
Letter for the Record........................................ 7
Kauter, Joan:
Letter for the Record........................................ 396
Kennedy, Terry:
Letter for the Record........................................ 398
Knight, Rebecca:
Statement for the Record with attached documents............. 399
Op-ed entitled ``There Are No Landless Natives in Alaska''
published in the Juneau Empire, September 20, 2023......... 404
Op-ed entitled ``Sealaska Bill a Can of Worms'' published in
SitNews, June 15, 2011..................................... 430
Lee, Hon. Mike:
Opening Statement............................................ 2
Leffler, June:
Article entitled ``With $500,000 in Support From Sealaska,
Landless Alaska Native Communities Continue Push for Their
Own Village Corporations'' published by KSTK, September 6,
2019....................................................... 415
Lewis, Stephen W.:
Statement for the Record on S. 1889.......................... 434
Statement for the Record specific to S. 1889, Section 7...... 438
Lindmark, Jessica:
Letter for the Record........................................ 439
Mapes, Craig:
Letter for the Record........................................ 440
McCarthy, Kathrin:
Letter for the Record........................................ 443
McCormick, Patrick:
Letter for the Record........................................ 444
McCowan, Nathan:
Statement for the Record..................................... 131
McDonald, Victoria:
Letter for the Record........................................ 445
McManus, Jill:
Letter for the Record........................................ 447
Merry, Marjorie:
Statement for the Record..................................... 152
Miller, Debbie S.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 448
Moller, Sondra:
Statement for the Record..................................... 485
Moody, Justin:
Letter for the Record........................................ 450
Moody, Megan:
Letter for the Record........................................ 451
Murkowski, Hon. Lisa:
Statement for the Record..................................... 107
Murray, John:
Letter for the Record........................................ 452
National Association of Counties:
Statement for the Record..................................... 453
National Call for Safe Technology:
Letter for the Record........................................ 456
National Forest Counties and Schools Coalition:
Letter for the Record........................................ 462
Organized Village of Kake:
Letter for the Record dated November 3, 2023................. 386
Letter addressed to the Petersburg Landless Committee, with
attachments, dated April 5, 2022........................... 387
Outdoor Alliance:
Statement for the Record..................................... 464
Pearce, Tony Scott:
Letter for the Record........................................ 474
Pecos, NM (Village of):
Letter for the Record........................................ 5
Petersburg (AK) Borough Assembly:
Letter for the Record........................................ 433
Petition signatures from residents of Coffman Cove, AK........... 170
Potter, Beth:
Letter for the Record........................................ 475
Prouty, Carolyn D.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 477
Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility:
Statement for the Record..................................... 478
Representatives of the Southeast Alaska Landless Native
Communities:
Statement for the Record dated December 2, 2020.............. 501
Statement for the Record dated November 8, 2023.............. 529
Rhodes, Doug:
Letter for the Record........................................ 481
Ridley, Brian:
Statement for the Record..................................... 156
Rural Voices for Conservation Coalition:
Statement for the Record..................................... 482
Saign, Geoffrey:
Letter for the Record........................................ 484
San Miguel County (NM) Board of Commissioners:
Letter for the Record........................................ 17
Santa Fe County (NM) Board of Commissioners:
Letter for the Record........................................ 15
Sebastian, Forest:
Letter for the Record........................................ 486
Shaw, Linda:
Letter for the Record........................................ 488
Sitka Conservation Society:
Letter for the Record........................................ 489
Southeast Alaska Conservation Council:
Statement for the Record..................................... 491
Stats, Laura:
Letter for the Record........................................ 536
Stein, Allen:
Letter for the Record........................................ 538
Strong, Laura:
Letter for the Record........................................ 540
Tall Timbers:
Statement for the Record..................................... 541
U.S. Department of the Interior:
Statement for the Record on H.R. 2386 for the Subcommittee on
Indian, Insular, and Alaska Native Affairs, House Natural
Resources Committee, U.S. House of Representatives, June
17, 2015................................................... 410
U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service:
Statement for the Record..................................... 212
Utah Department of Transportation:
Letter for the Record........................................ 74
Waterman, Nancy:
Letter for the Record........................................ 543
(The) Wilderness Society:
Statement for the Record..................................... 544
Wilson, Jeffrey:
Letter for the Record........................................ 549
Worhatch, Max:
Letter for the Record........................................ 550
Wright, Brenda:
Letter for the Record........................................ 551
Wyoming Wilderness Association:
Statement for the Record..................................... 552
----------
The text for each of the bills addressed in this hearing can be found
on the Committee's website at: https://www.energy.senate.gov/hearings/
2023/10/subcommittee-hearing-to-receive-testimony-on-pending-
legislation
PENDING LEGISLATION
----------
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2023
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m., in
Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Catherine
Cortez Masto, Chair of the Subcommittee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA
Senator Cortez Masto. The hearing will come to order.
We have a full agenda this afternoon, with 20 bills,
including several addressing forest and wildfire management
issues. These bills represent priorities of members of both
sides of the aisle, including several members of the Committee.
A number of the bills on the agenda were considered by the
Committee last Congress. Although many of these issues are
familiar, we wanted to allow Committee members the opportunity
to get updated information and ask any questions that they
might have. After Subcommittee members have an opportunity to
make an opening statement, the Subcommittee will then hear from
representatives of the Bureau of Land Management and Forest
Service, who will provide the Administration's testimony on the
bills, and Mark Boshell, with the Utah Public Lands Policy
Coordinating Office.
At this time, I would like to briefly comment on two of the
bills that I have sponsored. Regarding S. 1764, this is the
Western Wildfire Support Act. This summer, I spoke to
firefighters across Nevada who are combating increasingly
frequent and dangerous wildfires. We need to be doing more to
support these brave men and women and help keep our
communities, businesses, and families safe, and we need to take
a meaningful, holistic look at how we combat the growing and
longer wildfire seasons. My bill will do just that. It will
address efforts for wildfire prevention, suppression, and
recovery. Specifically, my bill would direct the Interior
Department and the Forest Service to create wildfire plans for
federal lands to include pre-fire planning, wildfire response
management, and post-fire recovery. It provides funding to help
communities, homeowners, and businesses prepare for wildfires
by increasing their defensible space, and implements community
cleanup efforts. It expedites the placement of wildfire
detection equipment, including cameras and sensors, and creates
a grant program to help local agencies acquire firefighting
equipment, including slip-on tank units and air tankers. And it
provides funding to help communities impacted by wildfires
conduct long-term rehabilitation projects, and creates a
program to reduce the spread of invasive species. We have
already delivered funding to help support wildfire risk
reduction in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Passing my
legislation is a critical next step to combat the threat of
wildfires, really, across the country.
Regarding S. 3079, this is my Accelerating Appraisals and
Conservation Efforts Act. This bill would alleviate the land
appraisal bottleneck, which is slowing progress on key land
transactions and impairing progress on longstanding projects
and partnerships that inhibits states, municipalities, and
communities nationwide from accomplishing their conservation,
economic development, and housing goals. Specifically, this
bill would enable DOI to contract with private appraisers who
are credentialed in one state to perform appraisal and
valuation services on DOI's behalf in any state. Just for
example, with the Land and Water Conservation Fund now
permanently and fully funded, and with communities across the
country actively seeking to collaborate with DOI on land
transactions vital to progress and preservation alike, the
demands on the Department grow greater day by day. This bill
provides an additional tool that, when needed, can be utilized
to decrease the backlog of those land projects that are under
review.
So at this time, I would also like to recognize my friend
and colleague, Senator Lee, for his opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH
Senator Lee. Thanks so much, Madam Chair, for convening
this hearing, and I also wish to express thanks for our
witnesses who have joined us today.
Among our witnesses today is Mr. Mark Boshell, who has
traveled here all the way from Panguitch, Utah, a small town in
southern Utah where my great, great, grandfather happens to be
buried. Mark is the son of a forester and is himself a former
BLM wildland firefighter. Mark currently serves as the Deputy
Director of an important office in Utah called the Public Lands
Policy Coordinating Office, known as PLPCO. In Utah, PLPCO
spearheads a collaborative approach among local, state, and
federal stakeholders for land and forest management. This
office works diligently across the state, coordinating land
management issues and genuinely addressing the needs of both
the land itself and local communities affected by the land. I
commend PLPCO for its great work and Mr. Boshell for his
leadership, hard work, and his willingness to be here today.
I am pleased to have worked with stakeholders in Utah to
introduce three bills that are on today's agenda--S. 2151, the
Utah Wildfire Research Institute Act, S. 2132, the Catastrophic
Wildfire Prevention Act, and S. 3036, the Mountain View
Corridor Completion Act.
This past summer, the East Coast experienced what we in
western states deal with all the time--one could argue every
year--and that is thick smoke from catastrophic wildfires that
are clouding the horizon, and in the process, causing dangerous
air quality. It was shocking to look out from the capitol and
not be able to see clearly down the National Mall, even to the
Washington Monument, but Westerners live with this kind of haze
often every summer, when out-of-control wildfires rage from
Alaska all the way to New Mexico and everything in between. S.
2151, the Utah Wildfire Prevention Act, establishes a new
resource for wildfire prevention efforts. In 2004, as part of
the Southwest Forest Health and Wildfire Prevention Act, three
Southwest Ecological Restoration Institutes, or SWERIs, were
founded at universities in Arizona, New Mexico, and Colorado--
three of the Four-Corner States. My bill proposes a fourth
institution in Utah aiming to harness top-tier resources and
collaborate with local, state, and federal wildfire prevention
initiatives.
Collaboration at all levels is critical for mitigating
wildfire risk and responsible stewardship of our forests on
state and federal land. These institutes attract the best in
the field to research forest science, watershed health and
restoration, and then build partnerships to execute real
projects on the ground. The impact of the institute extends far
beyond Utah. Their research, testing, and practices can be
broadly applied and lessen the impact of catastrophic wildfires
across the West. Wildfires have burned across the country since
the beginning of time, since long before we even were a
country. But it was not until the last century that low-
severity fires became catastrophic burns with such wide-ranging
impacts, affecting not only air quality, but water quality and
vegetation, flora, fauna--you name it, it affects it.
Most western ecosystems depend on periodic fires to
maintain their well-being naturally. And over the last century
or so, these fires have been suppressed aggressively and often
prematurely. The largely successful fire suppression techniques
of recent history have left our forests denser and increasingly
vulnerable to catastrophic burns. The Forest Service sets a
maximum stand density index, or SDI, which represents the
number of trees per unit area at 35 percent. However, a recent
study indicates that this metric may be set far above the
naturally occurring stand density index of 15 to 25 percent
prior to aggressive fire suppression efforts in the West
beginning a century ago. An artificially inflated stand density
index forces the plants in the ecosystem to compete for
resources that simply are not available. It leaves the entire
ecosystem weak and susceptible to catastrophic fires. In Utah,
there are other adverse consequences, including exacerbation of
drought conditions and unhealthy air quality. As it turns out
in our state, very often, an excessive stand density index
leads to more evaporation of the snow. The snowpack provides
most of our water for the year. And with more evaporation, it
means less water going into our rivers, streams, and ultimately
our lakes and reservoirs.
S. 2132, the Catastrophic Wildfire Prevention Act,
establishes a Forest Service pilot program in conjunction with
state and local input to further research and establish the
proper pre-fire-suppression stand density index. My bill does
not prescribe which metric must be preferred, rather, it simply
directs a determination and a subsequent adjustment of forest
management plans to reflect the naturally occurring stand
density index for a particular forest. Accurate forest
management metrics will help reduce the chances of catastrophic
wildfires, promoting ecological health and strengthening local
watersheds at the same time.
Lastly, I would like to spotlight S. 3036, the Mountain
View Corridor Completion Act. This legislation would facilitate
a straightforward land conveyance of some small BLM parcels
within the Camp Williams National Guard Training Center. The
Utah Department of Transportation will purchase the land at its
fair market value and the land will be used by the state to
complete a critical highway that will alleviate congestion
along the I-15 corridor. I am glad to support this legislation
and appreciate good-faith efforts by the Utah Department of
Transportation, the Utah National Guard, and the Bureau of Land
Management to identify a map that all parties are pleased with.
Thank you.
Senator Cortez Masto. Senator Heinrich, do you have an
opening statement?
Senator Heinrich. I do.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN HEINRICH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I want to
thank you for including the Pecos Watershed Protection Act on
today's agenda.
The Pecos Valley is home to a diverse community of farmers,
ranchers, hunters, anglers, and business owners, who are united
by their reliance on the Pecos River and the expansive
watersheds that feed that river. Members of the Jemez and
Tesuque Pueblos have lived in the region and practiced their
cultural traditions on the river since time immemorial. And
unfortunately, this is also a region that has a history of
poorly managed mining projects that have put local residents
and their traditional way of life at risk. In 1991, a spill of
toxic waste from an abandoned mine killed tens of thousands of
fish--primarily trout--in the river for more than 11 miles. And
it took decades and millions of dollars to clean up that mess.
The last thing this area needs is new mines that would pose a
threat to the Pecos River itself. This legislation would
protect the Upper Pecos watershed from new mining claims that
could threaten the health of the Pecos River and everyone who
relies on it. This bill has overwhelming support from the local
community, including Jemez Pueblo, Tesuque Pueblo, San Miguel
County, Santa Fe County, and the Village of Pecos itself.
Madam Chair, I would like to ask unanimous consent to
submit for the record letters and resolutions from these and
other local supporters of the legislation.
Senator Cortez Masto. Without objection.
[Letters and resolutions of support for S. 3033 follow:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Heinrich. Madam Chair, my father worked for
Anaconda Copper. My grandfather was a gold miner in your state.
There are many, many places in this country where new mining
can be done safely and responsibly and with strong local
support. This watershed just isn't one of them. And I hope that
we can protect this incomparable landscape so that generations
to come can rely on it just as the Pecos community does today.
Thank you.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Senator.
And then, finally, Senator Wyden is unable to attend the
hearing and asked if I would make a few remarks on his bill,
which is S. 2581. I am a co-sponsor. This is the Secure Rural
Schools Program. We know on this Committee and in our
communities that the Secure Rural Schools Program has provided
billions of dollars of support to rural counties and schools
for essential services for more than 20 years. This legislation
today reauthorizes this program for an additional three years.
It has strong bipartisan support because of its critical
importance to rural services, such as education, road
maintenance, search and rescue, and fire prevention. This
three-year reauthorization is necessary because the program
lapsed at the end of FY23, and the additional time is needed to
maintain these services in rural communities while a permanent
fix is worked on to provide long-term certainty.
Senator Hickenlooper, do you have an opening statement?
Senator Hickenlooper. I do.
Senator Cortez Masto. All right. Please go right ahead.
Senator Hickenlooper. I appreciate it.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO
Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I will be
brief. I appreciate having our bill, the Mount Blue Sky
Wilderness Act, included in today's hearing.
This bill is going to help Colorado move past a very dark
chapter of our history, one in which our former territorial
governor, John Evans, endorsed and encouraged unthinkable
atrocities against more than 200 Cheyenne and Arapaho people at
what became known as the Sand Creek Massacre. I think even more
insidious--about six months before that, he issued a
proclamation declaring any Native American not on their
reservation as an enemy of the state and encouraged--and in
essence authorized--the people of Colorado to kill any Native
American they encountered as a hostile Native American, and not
only that, he specifically acknowledged that their property
should become their bounty for having done this so-called
service to the state. And he had a promise to pay for arms,
ammunition, and horses, to commit this really unthinkable
injustice. This all led to the Sand Creek Massacre--almost 200,
largely older men, women, and children, who were killed. The
massacre was truly horrific and the mutilation of bodies has
been well documented. The massacre has had long-lasting
repercussions with the Cheyenne and Arapaho, who--both tribes
were ultimately forced out of Colorado and traveled great
distances to find safety.
Despite that legacy of cruelty, one of Colorado's most
iconic and beloved peaks has held Evans's name for well over
half a century, Evans being the Governor who perpetrated this
initiative. But that isn't the case anymore. The U.S. Board on
Geographic Names has changed the name of the mountain to one
proposed and agreed to by the Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes:
``Mount Blue Sky.'' The name is a bit of poetry, but it is also
much more. The Arapaho are also known as the Blue Sky people
and the Cheyenne have an annual ceremony of renewal of life
that is called Blue Sky. The new name is already in effect for
the mountain itself, but not for the surrounding wilderness
area. That is something only Congress can change. For me, this
is a full circle. I issued, while I was Governor, a formal
apology on behalf of the State of Colorado on the 150th
anniversary of the massacre.
I am proud to lead this bill, which would change the name
of the Mount Evans Wilderness to the Mount Blue Sky Wilderness.
I look forward to working with my colleagues on the Committee
to make sure we get swift passage.
Thank you. I yield back.
Senator Cortez Masto. At this time, I would like to
introduce our witness panel. Providing the Administration's
testimony are Nada Wolff Culver, the Principal Deputy Director
at the Bureau of Land Management, and Jacqueline Emanuel, the
Associate Deputy Chief for the Forest Service. And then, as you
have heard, also testifying is Mark Boshell, the Deputy
Director of the Utah Land Policy Coordinating Office, who will
be providing testimony on three of Senator Lee's bills.
I would ask each of you, if you could, to limit your
remarks to no more than five minutes. After everyone on the
panel has given their statement, we will turn to a round of
questions from Committee members.
Ms. Culver, we will have you begin. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF NADA WOLFF CULVER, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY
DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPART-
MENT OF THE INTERIOR
Ms. Culver. Thank you. Chairwoman Cortez Masto, Ranking
Member Lee, and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to provide testimony today on 16 bills related to
the Bureau of Land Management. I am Nada Wolff Culver, the
BLM's Principal Deputy Director.
The BLM manages approximately 245 million surface acres
located primarily in 12 western states, as well as 700 million
subsurface acres under the Federal Land Policy and Management
Act, or FLPMA. The BLM is committed to its core mission of
multiple use and sustained yield, which provides for a careful
balancing across many uses and resources to steward the public
lands for all people. The BLM manages public lands for a broad
range of uses, such as renewable and conventional energy
development, livestock grazing, timber production, hunting and
fishing, recreation, wilderness, and conservation more broadly,
including restoration and protecting cultural and historic
resources. Lands managed by the BLM also provide vital habitat
for more than 3,000 species of wildlife and support valuable
fisheries. Public lands are an important economic driver for
communities across the West, from commercial activities on
public lands, to people drawn to visit or live near them, and
they generate significant revenues that support state and local
governments. We appreciate the sponsors' work on the bills
under consideration today, which apply to almost every facet of
the BLM's broad multiple-use mandate. I will briefly touch on
the 16 bills on the agenda regarding the BLM, referencing them
by number for efficiency in my five minutes.
The Department appreciates the Subcommittee's continued
interest in addressing the risk of wildfire on our public
lands. We support the intent of the spatial fire management
plans in S. 1764, and would like to work with the Committee on
technical modifications to ensure effective implementation of
the bill.
We also support the goals of S. 2151 and the research
institutes that further our collective abilities to achieve
effective ecological restoration that increases the natural
resilience of public lands to wildfire.
Likewise, the Department supports the goal of S. 1719 to
address catastrophic wildfires, although we oppose the broad
categorical exclusions. Given the extent of wildfire risk
across the nation, we recommend that this bill be broadened to
include all types of public lands.
The BLM appreciates the sponsor's efforts to resolve the
longstanding disputes regarding Alaska Native Claims Settlement
Act eligibility for several Southeast Alaska Native communities
through S. 1889, and to further the process to clear the title
to lands conveyed to village corporations through S. 2615. The
BLM opposes S. 175, as the bill would enact certain public land
orders without allowing time to correct the legal defects in
the previous decision-making process and ensure adequate
engagement with affected parties.
Federal lands are home to many of the nation's mature and
old-growth forests that are critical to the health, prosperity,
and resilience of our communities. To this end, the Department
supports the revegetation action plan required in S. 2991. We
support the goal of S. 3062 to facilitate efficient fuels
reduction and recommend that O&C lands be excluded from the
bill's provision disallowing fees and payments.
The Department looks forward to working with Congress on
the extension of the Secure Rural Schools Act provided in S.
2581. The act provides valuable funding for schools, roads, and
other services and activities to over 700 counties with federal
lands.
The Department supports the withdrawal and protection of
the Pecos River Watershed in S. 3033, as it aligns with the
Administration's conservation and environmental justice goals.
However, the BLM cannot support S. 1348, as it would remove
over 130,000 acres of public lands in Wyoming with valuable
natural and cultural resources from protection as wilderness
study areas and more broadly prohibit the application of BLM
regulations.
The Biden-Harris Administration is committed to
guaranteeing affordable, reliable high-speed internet to rural
communities, and has committed $65 billion in funding for these
efforts. As such, the BLM supports the goal of S. 2855, which
also aligns with an ongoing BLM rulemaking.
The BLM has no objection to the proposed conveyance of
lands in S. 3036, which will be used to facilitate the
completion of the Mountain View Corridor highway in Utah.
In addition, the Department is actively working to identify
ways to enhance the efficiency of the land appraisal process.
The Department supports S. 3079, and would appreciate the
opportunity to work with the sponsor on technical amendments.
Finally, the National Park Service has submitted a
statement for the record in support of S. 3045, concerning the
transfer of administrative jurisdiction over certain federal
land in California.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify today. I
look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Culver follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
Ms. Emanuel.
STATEMENT OF JACQUELINE EMANUEL, ASSOCIATE DEPUTY
CHIEF, NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM, U.S. FOREST SERVICE,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Ms. Emanuel. Chair Cortez Masto, Ranking Member Lee, and
members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
testify today. I am Jacqueline Emanuel, Associate Deputy Chief
of the National Forest System for the USDA Forest Service. My
work in the National Forest System includes policy oversight
and direction for programs across the 193 million acres of
national forests and grasslands in 44 states and territories
that make up the National Forest System.
Over the last two decades we have witnessed bigger and more
destructive wildfires that are extremely challenging and costly
to suppress. This growing wildfire crisis created the need for
a new land management strategy. We are in our second year of
carrying out our ten-year strategy for confronting the wildfire
crisis in the West. Our wildfire crisis strategy aims to
increase science-based fuels treatments by up to four times
previous treatment levels, especially in those areas most at
risk. The bills that I am here to testify on today vary in
specifics, but most are trying to help the Forest Service
achieve the goals of reducing fire risk to communities and
accomplishing critical work. The Forest Service is very
grateful to Congress for providing resources through the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation
Reduction Act. It has seeded our initial work and it put the
wildfire crisis strategy in motion, and we look forward to
continuing to work with Congress on these critical issues.
S. 1764 calls for increased fire planning on federal lands,
provides funding to prepare for wildfires, and establishes a
grant program for firefighting equipment. The bill also
authorizes specific funding for aircraft use in wildfire
management operations and funding for post-fire rehabilitation.
USDA supports the intent of the bill and looks forward to
working with the Committee and bill sponsors.
While we appreciate all the efforts that Congress is making
to advance the wildfire crisis strategy, we are concerned that
S. 1719 could replace our science-based approach to fire
management, and we have concerns about the bill's additional
procedural and process requirements.
S. 2132 requires the Forest Service to establish a pilot
program to identify research and establish a pre-fire-
suppression stand density index for certain areas of the
National Forest System, and to use this information as a
benchmark for forest treatments. While we support several of
the goals of the bill, we would like to work with Congress to
address agency concerns.
S. 2867 proposes several changes and updates to Forest
Service policies and regulations with the intent of providing
more effective forest management. While we support several of
the goals of the bill, we would like to work with Congress to
address concerns with the bill's language.
S. 2991 focuses on the need to increase revegetation of
national forests post-event, in addition to including
provisions to increase carbon storage in forests, encourage the
use of mass timber in buildings, and expand research and data
collection in these areas. USDA supports these goals and would
like to work with the Committee and the bill sponsors on
technical assistance.
S. 297 requires the USDA to develop a pilot program to
establish and operate nurseries on National Forest System land.
USDA supports the goals of this bill and looks forward to
working with Congress to address the nation's replanting
backlog.
The USDA would also like to work with Congress on S. 3062,
which designates free-use areas on National Forest System land
that contains small-diameter trees in fire hazard areas.
USDA looks forward to working with Congress on S. 2581, and
would be happy to provide technical assistance to ensure
effective implementation.
USDA would also like to work with the Committee on S. 2855.
While some of this bill aligns with current Forest Service
efforts to increase efficiencies, USDA has concerns with
provisions in the bill that duplicate or potentially conflict
with existing authorities.
While I am focusing my statement today on the bills with a
nationwide scope, I want to address S. 1889. USDA recognizes
that it is the policy of the United States to restore tribal
homelands to tribal ownership and to promote tribal self-
government. The Administration recognizes the importance of the
legislation and would like to continue working through the
legislation's impact on the Tongass National Forest's program
of work.
There are several other bills on today's agenda where my
written statement expresses the Administration's official
position. We are prepared to provide technical assistance
addressing any outstanding issues and concerns. This concludes
my statement, and I would be happy to take your questions.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Emanuel follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
Mr. Boshell.
STATEMENT OF MARK S. BOSHELL, DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
UTAH PUBLIC LANDS POLICY COORDINATING OFFICE
Mr. Boshell. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Good afternoon. My name is Mark Boshell. I am the Deputy
Director of Utah's Public Lands Policy Coordinating Office, a
division within the Utah Department of Natural Resources. Our
office is tasked by the Utah legislature to coordinate and
promote the state's interest in public lands. Prior to my work
with the Department of Natural Resources, I was a Bureau of
Land Management wildland firefighter. I am also the son of a
retired Forest Service employee who spent an entire career
working on our national forests in wildland firefighting.
Forest management and wildfire are topics very important to me,
both professionally and personally. As such, it is an honor to
address this Committee.
Recent drought and uncharacteristically large wildfires
have not only raised concerns of public safety and loss of
property, but also for the need of water conservation and
improved air quality. Over 100 years of fire suppression in
fire-dependent ecosystems, coupled with a lack of active
management, have created high fuel loads and overstocked,
unhealthy forests. Watersheds continue to be impacted by
natural and human-caused stressors statewide, leading to
unhealthy conditions. Utah, like other states throughout the
West, is wholly dependent on the healthy watersheds found in
national forests to meet our basic water needs. Wildfire-
affected watersheds is a topic that is becoming increasingly
important for the state and its cities and towns.
My small hometown of Panguitch, in southern Utah, sits in a
mountain valley surrounded by the Dixie National Forest. For
years, the city feared that its water system and supporting
watershed were at risk of wildfire. Despite years of formal
requests for proactive management and thinning, one of the
state's largest wildfires burned significant portions of the
municipal watershed. Subsequent flooding led to a broken and
contaminated municipal water system, temporarily cutting off
access to the city's drinking water. To fix the damaged system,
the city had to clean its water tanks, replace spring boxes,
and drill a new well at the cost of $2 million, a significant
cost for a small community. This small-scale, yet highly
impactful incident highlights both the unhealthy state of our
forests and the increased risk it poses to more densely
populated cities throughout the state and the West.
The State of Utah is being as proactive as possible to
better manage its forests by partnering with the United States
Forest Service through its Shared Stewardship program. The
Shared Stewardship program commits to protecting communities
and watersheds by addressing the threat of catastrophic
wildfire on our National Forest System lands in Utah. A
priority area identified by state and Forest Service officials
through the Shared Stewardship program were the canyons east of
Salt Lake City, managed by the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National
Forest Salt Lake Ranger District. Maintaining the resilience of
our drinking water is imperative when faced with the challenges
of drought and rapid population growth in the Salt Lake Valley.
Suppressing fires has resulted in heavy accumulation of
dead surface fuels and unnaturally dense stands of mature
trees. Additionally, over the last few decades, trees have died
from various diseases and insects, such as spruce and mountain
pine beetles. These dead and dying trees increase the potential
for severe fires and may impact drinking water and other values
we care about, like recreation opportunities, wildlife habitat,
infrastructure, and human life. Senate Bill 2132, titled the
Catastrophic Wildfire Prevention Act of 2023, if passed, would
be a step toward improved management of our forests. The
proposed pilot program is intended to facilitate collaboration
between the Forest Service and state forest management agencies
to identify areas to study and research ``pre-fire-suppression
stand density,'' which would help drive important management
objectives and benchmarks for better management of our forests.
Stand density index is an important parameter for wildland fire
management, particularly when working to reduce wildfire risk
and establish appropriate thinning/density levels to promote
healthier forests while reducing the risks of fires and
associated negative impacts.
S. 2151 would add Utah to the Southwest Ecological
Restoration Institute, which is currently made up of three
western states: Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona. Utah's
Division of Forestry, Fire, and State Lands currently
collaborates with the institute through several state programs.
Specifically, our Forest Products and Businesses Program has
been working with the institute on several efforts to
strengthen our mutual capacity for infrastructure and workforce
development in the forest products sector aimed at better
finding markets for wood products in order to reduce the costs
to thin our forests. Our Forestry, Fire, and State Lands
Division has also engaged with the same state forestry agencies
and universities to conduct research and develop initiatives
for post-disturbance reforestation. Utah could greatly benefit
by more direct involvement with the institute with one of our
very own state universities acting as Utah's lead participant.
These bills are important, and I applaud this Committee for
considering this critical legislation and encourage their
passage. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Boshell follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Mr. Boshell.
Now we will start with the Subcommittee members' questions
for the panel, and I will begin.
Ms. Culver and Ms. Emanuel, let me start with my bill, S.
1764, which is the Western Wildfire Support Act. Thank you for
your comments regarding the bill and the need for technical
support there. Happy to work, Ms. Culver, with you and the
Department. But can you both talk about the importance of a
comprehensive approach to wildfire management? Quite often
everybody talks about the suppression because that is the most
reactive we have to be when a fire occurs, but quite often
there is little support for the pre-fire planning and post-fire
recovery efforts that are just as important as the suppression.
So I would like both of you, if you don't mind, to talk a
little bit about that and how the creation of fire management
plans, in general, can help communities. And maybe, Ms. Culver,
we will start with you.
Ms. Culver. Thank you very much, Chairwoman.
The idea of a spatial forest management plan is something
we support because, as you noted, once we are fighting the
fire, that is what we have to focus on. And these plans would
give us a chance to build on what we continue to learn, the
cooperation we continue to have with local communities, with
our partners in other agencies, to try to control fire ahead of
time, to control the need for fire, the risk of fire, and to
ensure we have a plan as it happens and after. And we
appreciate the funding in this bill.
Senator Cortez Masto. And thank you. And you know, quite
often--listen, we all have wildfires, unfortunately, in the
West. We see that. And part of that is that pre-fire planning,
not just for our fire officials, but our communities, to have a
better understanding of how they can mitigate around where they
live or their businesses or in their communities, the wildfires
as well.
And I know in Tahoe, we have a great working relationship
with the Forest Service. Ms. Emanuel, can you talk a little bit
about the front end and the back end as well, about the
importance of managing those?
Ms. Emanuel. Yes. Thank you for that question, and we, too,
support a holistic approach. We have learned that when we just
focus singularly on suppression, it just doesn't work. And so,
putting equal focus to prevention and reforestation is really
important. And cross-boundary and interagency work, and work
with states and local governments can really help safeguard
communities, providing technical assistance and grants and
resources and knowledge so that communities can be better
prepared for and understand that a resilient community is a
planned community. And to the extent we can do more of that, we
will definitely be able to better protect communities on the
front end.
Senator Cortez Masto. And so, can I ask the both of you,
how can communities that are surrounded or within federal land
areas collaborate with federal agencies to ensure this
preparation? Let me just give you an example. I just recently
heard from Nevada community foundations and Lake Tahoe
representatives who say they are unable to utilize the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Community Wildfire Defense Grant
Program that helps at-risk communities plan for and reduce
wildfire risk because these grants cannot be applied to federal
forest lands that are interspersed throughout the Lake Tahoe
area. And I am just curious why that is the case, or is there a
way that we need to change federal legislation to help these
communities?
And Ms. Emanuel, I might ask you to address that, if you
can.
Ms. Emanuel. Sure. Yes, you know, I don't know what the
specific situation is there, but I do know that expanding the
definition of wildland urban interface could be helpful in
reaching a broader extended community. There might be some
things we can work on. I would be happy to work with the
Committee staff and your staff too.
Senator Cortez Masto. I appreciate that. Thank you.
And then, finally, let me talk a little bit about S. 3079.
And Ms. Culver, as you touched on, the bill is really--we are
looking at reducing the bottleneck of appraisals required for
federal land transactions. Can you talk about how this bill can
enhance the efficiency of that appraisal process and reduce
that backlog? Give us a sense of what is happening there.
Ms. Culver. Certainly. As the bureau that does land
conveyances and exchanges, we follow the Federal Land Policy
and Management Act, which ensures that we get fair market
value. Part of that is ensuring adequate appraisals. Right now,
somebody we might contract with in one state would still need
to get approved in another. And this bill would really increase
our efficiency and ability to have somebody just to go through
that process once, so that we could continue to contract and
really expand the pool of qualified appraisers we have.
Senator Cortez Masto. And there is a staffing shortage, is
that accurate? And that's why there is this backlog and why we
need to think outside the box?
Ms. Culver. Yes, we are doing everything we can to become
more efficient with the resources we have, but additional
resources would be incredibly beneficial here.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
Ranking Member Lee.
Senator Lee. Thank you.
Mr. Boshell, thanks again for traveling to be with us
today. As the Deputy Director of PLPCO, you help oversee the
collaboration with local partners on land and forest management
projects. S. 2151, the Utah Wildfire Research Institute Act,
would establish an Ecological Restoration Institute in Utah.
Our state would become one of the states--in fact, the fourth
state of the Four-Corner States to host such an institute,
hosted at one of our fine universities, unlocking potential for
additional collaboration, additional research, and on-the-
ground efforts to help enhance forest management and wildfire
prevention efforts across the state, which would be very
helpful, because our state has been ravaged, as you know, by
wildfires in recent years.
Mr. Boshell, how will a dedicated Utah-based institute
benefit from the state's forest management and wildfire
prevention efforts--or how will it benefit them--not from them?
Mr. Boshell. You know, Senator, complicated problems
require creative solutions, and I think Utah would
significantly benefit from more involvement in the institute. I
think those creative solutions will come out of the institute.
Collaboration, research, and development of initiatives are
cornerstones of moving the needle on the forest problem in
Utah, and our involvement in that process could be huge. Local
specific problems require local solutions, and if we could
involve ourselves in that institute, I think we would have a
much higher success rate getting a handle on the problem.
Senator Lee. Indeed.
Now, there is a long history of successful, innovative
resource management and planning programs in Utah that add
value, and especially to wildfire prevention and restoration
efforts across the West. How will Utah's participation in the
institute benefit the broader western region?
Mr. Boshell. You know, Utah leads strong on this issue.
Utah is involved in a lot of different programs. Utah has the
Watershed Restoration Initiative, which is a program where we
have partnered with the United States Forest Service to conduct
watershed treatments on our most important watersheds to
improve water quality, water quantity, and to promote
biological diversity. We also are involved in the Shared
Stewardship program that I mentioned earlier, which is an
opportunity to partner up to target our most vulnerable
watersheds that will have the greatest impact on local
communities in the state. And we have a grazing improvement
program that restores degraded rangelands.
And so, Utah is bringing a lot of time, a lot of money, and
knowledge to the institute. We would hit the ground running and
we would provide the institute with a lot of institutional
knowledge, not just from these programs, but through our
universities that have spent a lot of time and money on these
issues.
Senator Lee. Now, turning to S. 2132, it's a bill that
would establish the Forest Service pilot program to work with
state and local forest management agencies and research and
better assess the proper pre-aggressive-fire-suppression stand
density index for certain forests. As I mentioned earlier, we
have been aggressively suppressing naturally occurring fire for
the last century or so. And as a result, we have forests where
there is a lot of fuel that is built up, and the stand density
index is higher than what Mother Nature herself can tolerate.
Now, in your testimony, you mentioned the negative impacts of
fire suppression--of overly aggressive fire suppression--over
the last hundred years. How has this approach contributed to
the current state of affairs in Utah's forests?
Mr. Boshell. We have a buildup, a buildup of fuels out on
our forests. You know, there were research studies conducted by
our universities in Utah. They call them repeat photography
studies, where they would go find old photos from the 1800s and
early 1900s, and showing the landscape and the trees and the
forests. And then they recreated those photos, went back to the
exact same spot, and retook the photo 50 to 100 years later.
And you can see this dramatic change--this increase in
vegetation from, you know, 100 years ago. So we know that there
has been a change, and we know it's significant, but when we
talk about healthy forests and natural forests, it's hard to
define exactly what that means.
Senator Lee. Right.
Mr. Boshell. And we know it isn't currently, but we want to
know what healthy is, what natural is, and this stand density
index study would help with that. It would give us something to
look for and something to manage for.
Senator Lee. Right. It looks prettier when it's denser in a
lot of ways.
Mr. Boshell. Absolutely.
Senator Lee. But it can also create problems for air
quality, the watershed, for the health of the forest, and that
is an issue.
I see my time is expired.
Madam Chair, I do want to offer up to the record a letter
from Carlos Braceras, the Director of the Utah Department of
Transportation, and Lisa Wilson, the Deputy Director, regarding
S. 3036, the Mountain View Corridor Completion Act.
Senator Cortez Masto. Without objection.
Senator Lee. Thank you.
[Letter regarding S. 3036 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you to our Chairman and Ranking
Member. Thank you for being here this afternoon to provide
testimony on these bills. I have a couple of them on the
agenda. S. 2615, the Alaska Native Village Municipal Lands
Restoration Act, this is one that I would hope that my
colleagues agree that it's about time we address this issue,
free up these lands. Got another one, S. 175, which would
codify five public land orders that were signed by the
Secretary of the Interior back in 2021. Both BLM and the state
are looking for resolutions of these long-term withdrawals that
BLM views as unnecessary. So we look forward to working with
the agencies to resolve these and with our colleagues here at
the Committee.
I have a full statement on all three of the bills before
the Committee that I will submit for the record.
But I want to direct my statements, if I may, to Ms.
Emanuel.
I appreciate that you are here today, but I have to tell
you that I am a bit confused about the testimony for S. 1889.
This is the Unrecognized Southeast Alaska Native Communities
Recognition and Compensation Act. We call it, for shorthand,
the Landless Bill, because it basically describes the
situation--five communities in Southeast Alaska that were left
out of ANCSA when it came to their land entitlements. But my
frustration here is that your testimony is so different from
what we heard from the Deputy Chief. Chris French sat in that
position just over a year ago. He assured me that the
Administration supported our legislation. And then they went
further. He said if there is anything that they wished to see
changed, he committed to having staff sit down with my staff.
And that was June of last year.
So we are a year and four months later. My office has taken
multiple trips to Tenakee. I have gone to Tenakee. We have
heard from the BLM. We have heard from some of the most remote
villages in Alaska. We have representatives from Tenakee
Springs--Councilman Mapes, who is actually here at the
Committee today. The only entity we didn't hear from was Forest
Service. And yet your testimony alludes that there are some
concerns over some of these panel selections. So I would ask
for some specifics. You don't need to do it right here, but
please get back to me about specifically which parcels your
testimony is referring to. Tell me why these concerns were not
listed as part of the Administration's testimony back, in not
only the 117th, but the 116th Congress. And then, I would just
like an explanation provided to me as to why the Forest
Service--Secretary Vilsack is pretty aware of this as well--how
come we didn't hear any concerns--your thoughts about this--
despite a commitment made in person, in front of this
Committee, to do so.
As you are thinking about how you are going to respond to
that, I just--it's really difficult not to point out the
hypocrisy that we see when the Forest Service says they have
concerns about providing Alaska Natives 115,000 acres and they
are worried about that due to the impact that it would have on
the ability of the Forest Service to meet its timber harvest
goals in the 16.7 million acres of the Tongass. To me, this is
almost laughable. It's contained in your written testimony,
but, you know, we heard last year, we have heard it in multiple
hearings. It has been almost two years now that Secretary
Vilsack called me. He told me himself that the Department isn't
going to be abiding by the Tongass Transition Strategy that he
authored back in 2016 during the Obama Administration.
Now, our forestry people are probably going to be happy to
hear that the Forest Service is looking out for their
interests, but seriously, it has been a couple years now that
the Biden Administration said we are going to prohibit old-
growth projects. We have news articles that underscore that--
``The Biden Administration ends large-scale logging of old-
growth timber in Alaska's Tongass.'' It goes on to say ``under
plans announced Thursday, large-scale, old-growth projects that
were being planned for the forest will not go forward.'' We
have email traffic from the Forest Service to my staff laying
out Forest Service intentions to revise the Tongass Forest Land
and Resource Management Plan.
So it's just, it's almost laughable, but it's so
frustrating that there is no laughing here. To suggest that
this Administration is somehow trying to meet its timber
harvest obligations in the Tongass Forest while it provides
these nice statements, kind words about their support for
Alaska Natives. It just, it's glaring to me, again, the
hypocrisy here.
So I have used my time. You know where I am coming from. I
don't get it. If you had concerns, my telephone number has not
changed since I got here. So I would like an answer to my
questions. We want to get this resolved. It has been
outstanding for far too long. We are trying to thread the
needle with some communities that want to figure out a positive
path forward. They have to live in these areas. But when we
have the agency just kind of go inside and not speak up until
they can come here to this Subcommittee and provide obtuse
testimony about some concerns without putting it forward, it's
just not right.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Senator Cortez Masto. Senator, thank you. And I know we are
all on time constraint today because of the vote that is
pending right now, but I would hope that the Forest Service
responds to the Senator's demands and request. They're not
unreasonable. So thank you.
Senator Risch.
Senator Risch. Thank you, Madam Chairman and Ranking Member
for holding this hearing today.
Our public lands in rural communities in Idaho, and really
across the West, rely on the decisions that are made in this
very room, and I am honored to have two bills included in this
hearing that are especially important to my state. The first is
the Secure Rural Schools Reauthorization Act, S. 2581, which I
introduced with my colleagues, Senator Wyden and Senator Crapo.
Nearly two out of every three acres in Idaho is owned by the
Federal Government. My colleagues east of the Mississippi River
have difficulty getting their arms around that one. I tell them
it, but it's the case. And it's true in all western states.
Senator Lee's, of course, and even much more so in your state,
Senator Cortez Masto.
In any event, because of this, the counties are put in a
serious disadvantage when it comes to funding schools and
essential infrastructure, as in the western states, with most
of America, they rely on property taxes to do this and of
course, when the government owns that much, it's hard to get
the rest of the properties to pay for that. So we have timber
lands and grazing lands that at one time were much more
productive than they are today. When I say productive, I don't
mean they are not producing as much fiber--they are--but it's
just not harvested. And so, it's important that we do something
to help these rural communities. We made a commitment to these
communities, and it's our responsibility to continue to fulfill
it. SRS recently expired. It has been incredibly successful. It
is absolutely necessary and it is imperative that we
reauthorize it.
The second is the FIRESHEDS Act, S. 1719, which I
introduced with Ranking Member Barrasso and Senators Daines and
Crapo. This bill will allow states to work with federal
agencies across jurisdictional boundaries to conduct
desperately needed land management projects. The catastrophic
wildfires in the West are exacerbated by decades-long buildup
of dry, burnable fuels. Everyone knows it. FIRESHEDS will
better protect western communities, wildlife, and firesheds by
removing needless red tape and encouraging collaborative and
proactive land management. Our forests in rural communities in
the West are in serious need of assistance.
On a more parochial note, Senator Cortez Masto, I will give
you an idea that some of the states have actually taken the
bull by the horns when it comes to these fire interfaces with
communities. When I was Governor, George W. Bush was President.
He invited the states to create a roadless rule in their state.
The roadless fight had been going on forever, and nobody knows
how many lawsuits. And so, we took it on in Idaho. I was the
only Governor that did take it on. And we wrote a roadless
rule.
I started at the counties and took it on up. And one of the
pieces of that roadless rule, we took it area by area, and
there were a large number of areas that we had in the state,
but we took it area by area. Took it with the county
commissioners and wrote the rule specifically for each of those
areas. Where we had communities--small communities out in
places that were in roadless areas that are very far from
anything--we actually prescribed in the rule that it would have
a special designation so they could do thinning and do the kind
of management immediately adjacent to these rural communities,
particularly from the side that the fire most likely comes
from. And we did a lot of those. It has actually been
successful in a couple of instances to keep communities from
burning completely to the ground, as they do.
We brought the rule back to Washington, DC to sell it to
the Forest Service, because they had to adopt it even though it
was the rule we wrote. Fortuitously, Dale Bosworth was the
Chief of the Forest Service at that time. Fortuitously because
he was in Idaho, but more importantly, he and I graduated from
the University of Idaho in the same year, both with degrees in
forest management. So we understood each other. And you won't
be surprised to hear that we got the rule passed. The next
step, of course, was that the environmentalists took off after
us. They sued us in front of the most environmentally friendly
judge in America, in Boise, Idaho. We won. And they then went
to the Ninth Circuit and we won again. And you may say, how
could that possibly have happened? Well, when I put together
the group to put this rule together, we brought both industry
and the environmental community together. And the environmental
community stood with us all the way through. We all agreed that
if we did this, we were going to stick together. They stuck
with me in the lawsuits.
I commend President Obama because when he became President,
I was done being Governor, I was back here. The lawsuit was
going to the Ninth Circuit and we now changed Administrations,
so they could have easily abandoned me. They sent me their
solicitor, who came in and sat down and said, well, what do you
want to do here? And I said, look, we were going to the Ninth
Circuit, and he said, well, you know, the environmental--there
were just a few environmental groups that sued us. And he says,
well, they want to settle. And I said, look, we did a
collaborative process. I put together a model collaborative
process. You can't do that and then have somebody who--and
these people were invited to join, and didn't. You can't do
that, have them sit on the sidelines, and then come in and sue
when it's over. And they said, well, okay. But I said I want
this so bad that if they want to make a couple of changes for
fundraising purposes or to save face, I said let them have at
it, we want to keep the rule.
He came back to me, and he said, no, they want substantive
changes to the rule. And I said, well, I don't want to settle
this. Obama's people, to their credit, said we will stick with
you. And I sat right beside him at the Ninth Circuit, and we
made the thing stand. So it stands today. Our rural communities
have special protections that were in that rule. This can be
done at the state level. So there is an idea for you for
Nevada.
Thank you.
Senator Cortez Masto. Senator, thank you. I always
appreciate all the hard work you've always done.
Senator Hickenlooper.
Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Risch, I remember similar complications when we did
our roadless rule, following your model. It's not a smoothly
paved path.
Senator Risch. It's getting better.
Senator Hickenlooper. Yes, well.
Senator Risch. The more times it's getting used, it is
getting better.
Senator Hickenlooper. Right. I mean, well, the trail gets
tamped down.
Senator Risch. That's right.
Senator Hickenlooper. Ms. Emanuel, the proposed Mount Blue
Sky Wilderness would fall within Forest Service lands. And
first, I have to ask you, does the Forest Service support our
bill, and can you speak to the support from the tribes and
stakeholders and the local community as well, just in this
specifically, but also generally?
Ms. Emanuel. Yes, thank you. And yes, we do support S.
3044, and it is my understanding that there is broad support
locally through county commissioners, tribal interests, local
interest, that all supported the name change. And we absolutely
do and understand that it takes an act of Congress to do so.
Senator Hickenlooper. All right, great, thank you.
And I, Madam Chair, I am also going to submit for the
record that I did bring with me a copy of the proclamation of
Governor Evans where he did say that any Indian encounter would
be judged to be hostile and that they--it gives the authority
to ``kill and destroy, as enemies of the country, wherever they
may be found, all such hostile Indians. And further, as the
only reward I am authorized to offer for such services, I
hereby empower such citizens, or parties of citizens, to take
captive, and hold to their private use and benefit all the
property of said hostile Indians that they may capture, and to
receive for all stolen property recovered from said Indians
such reward as may be deemed proper and just.''
It's really hard to imagine, but we will put it into the
record.
Senator Cortez Masto. Without objection.
[The proclamation referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Hickenlooper. Ms. Culver, Secretary Haaland and the
Department of the Interior have, I think, demonstrated a firm
commitment to giving tribes a seat at the table, working to
address past injustices. Under Secretary Haaland's historic
leadership, Interior has taken decisive action to remove or
replace derogatory or harmful names from some of our nation's
most beloved places. Can you tell us a little more about the
Secretary's direction on removing offensive names and why you
all at Interior believe it's so important to take this tack?
Ms. Culver. Thank you, Senator Hickenlooper.
As you noted, both President Biden and Secretary Haaland
have been incredible leaders on all aspects of tribal
engagement, and this is one that the Department of the Interior
has been very focused on in setting out a process to identify
and address names of places that should be updated. At the
Bureau of Land Management, we do engage with tribes in, for
example, our land-use planning process, to look at these
opportunities. Overall, however, the effort is led at the
Department of the Interior by the U.S. Geological Survey. They
interact with the Board on Geographic Names. So we would be
happy to also get you more information on the record from our
sister agency.
Senator Hickenlooper. Great. I appreciate it.
And you know, those were difficult times. And certainly,
having read a lot of the accounts, most people--many people
were fearful for their lives and the lives of their families.
But leaders are and should be always held to a higher standard,
I think, and the conduct, at least in this case, was really
something that should not be celebrated. And I think it really
isn't anymore.
Thank you. I will yield back to the Chair.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
Senator Hawley.
Senator Hawley. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks to the
witnesses for being here.
I want to start by saying a word in favor of two pieces of
legislation before us. S. 2581, which Senator Risch was talking
about just a second ago. This is the Secure Rural Schools
Reauthorization Act. Hugely significant for my state. The Mark
Twain National Forest in Missouri has one and a half million
acres that run across 29 counties in the State of Missouri. I
know that my western colleagues have a lot of federal land in
their states. You know, even in southern Missouri, though, our
counties there, 50 percent of the land in many of the counties
in southern Missouri is federal land. And then, in 2022, rural
areas in Missouri received $2.8 million from the Secure Rural
Schools funding. So we certainly want to see that be
reauthorized, and I am very supportive of that measure today.
I assume, Ms. Emanuel, that you are as well--you support
the Secure Rural Schools Reauthorization Act?
Ms. Emanuel. Extending the authorization of Secure Rural
Schools will undoubtedly bring much-needed resources to those
counties.
Senator Hawley. Just give me a sense of what else the
Department is doing to support counties that have significant
amounts of federal land.
Ms. Emanuel. Well, our Reimagine Recreation work is taking
a look at gateway communities and the recreation economy and
how much that actually contributes to local communities. I
think that is probably one of our most promising efforts.
Senator Hawley. Very good.
I also want to say a word in favor of Senator Barrasso's
CLOSE THE GAP Act. This is on rural broadband. This is vital
legislation, from my point of view, intended to speed
permitting for broadband infrastructure that is, again, built
within federal lands. Extremely important in my state. We are a
majority rural state in the State of Missouri, and so often,
folks in rural areas are left behind here. And you know, it has
become commonplace to have to go to the local McDonald's or
Wendy's in order to be able to get internet access, do their
homework. That should not be the case, particularly, there
shouldn't be this disparity between folks who live in urban
areas and folks who live in rural areas.
So I am very supportive of what Senator Barrasso's
legislation is doing. And I would assume, Ms. Emanuel, that you
would support these efforts and that the Department is going to
do everything it can to speed up approval of rural broadband.
Is that a fair thing to say?
Ms. Emanuel. We have made a lot of strides to streamline
and gain efficiencies on that issue, and I think anything we
can do that helps us be more efficient and effective is going
to be supported.
Senator Hawley. Good, very good.
Finally, for me, Ms. Culver, if I could just ask you,
according to the numbers that I have, the Department of the
Interior issued only 120 new oil and gas leases in FY22. That
is compared to over 1,800 leases in FY19. Just to put that in
terms of acreage, in 2022, the amount of new acres leased was
75,000. That compares to two and a quarter million new acres
leased in FY19. So huge disparities, but am I right in thinking
that you oppose any new oil and gas leases on federal land?
Ms. Culver. Thanks for the opportunity to respond to that
question. We are currently conducting regular lease sales and
complying with the Inflation Reduction Act on that topic.
Senator Hawley. But you personally have criticized even
these--from my point of view--pretty paltry new oil and gas
leases. Is that right?
Ms. Culver. The BLM is continuing to conduct quarterly
lease sales and issue new oil and gas leases.
Senator Hawley. Well, I am just looking at an email of
yours that was obtained from a FOIA request that has been
published in the press, I think yesterday, in which a
Congressman from Arizona says there ought to be no new oil and
gas leases. And you respond to that and say that is an
excellent response.
Ms. Culver. I am so glad you raised that. The part of the
email that I was discussing was the Chairman's--Chairman
Grijalva's note that conducting oil and gas leasing under the
current system had significant flaws, both for environmental
reasons and fiscal returns, and that is something that we have
been working on at the Department of the Interior, at the
Bureau of Land Management, and consistent again with many of
the helpful provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act, with the
leadership of Chairman Manchin.
Senator Hawley. Well, I was just confused because his
statement--the Congressman's statement--came as a criticism of
the Secretary of the Interior announcing some additional oil
and gas leases, and he criticized that and you said that you
agreed with him. I am just trying to figure out what's going on
inside the Department.
Ms. Culver. No problem. As I said, what I was talking about
was his pointing out the challenges with leasing under the
current system that required updates. There is a reason that
the federal oil and gas program has been identified as high-
risk for over a decade by the Government Accountability Office.
And those were the comments that were the focus of my email.
Senator Hawley. He said, ``Holding more lease sales under
today's standards is economically wasteful and environmentally
destructive,'' in response to the Secretary saying that you are
going to go forward with some additional fossil fuel leasing.
So you agree with his statement, you are saying?
Ms. Culver. I agree with the point that we needed to
update, and that is what we have been doing. We have been doing
it through policy. We have been doing it in our lease sales,
and we are doing it in our proposed regulation, and Congress
has done that in many aspects of the Inflation Reduction Act.
Senator Hawley. And so, this is it, Madam Chair. I see I am
over time. So you disagree with the position of your Secretary
in moving forward with this very limited leasing? You think
that is a bad idea? You agree with the Congressman that she was
wrong to do it?
Ms. Culver. I don't disagree with the actions of the
Secretary of the Interior. I work for the Secretary of the
Interior, and we are conducting oil and gas lease sales.
Senator Hawley. Yes, that's what I found so confusing about
your email. I will ask you some additional questions for the
record.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Cortez Masto. Senator Daines.
Senator Daines. Madam Chair, thank you.
Winter is coming to Montana. We are starting to see some
snow. Starting to see some cooler temperatures. Prescribed
burning has begun in our National Forests, and I think it's
important to continue discussing reforms to our forest
management policy so we are prepared for the next fire season.
Our forests will not be able to get needed on-the-ground work
done if Congress fails to cut red tape and streamline
compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act as well
as the Endangered Species Act. Additionally, we have to take
action addressing the problem of frivolous litigation.
In Montana alone, there are over 300 million board-feet of
timber projects tied up by litigation. In the Kootenai National
Forest, nearly all of the on-ground work has been halted, with
over 165 million board-feet tied up in three enjoined projects.
Two of these projects were halted just 41 days apart this past
summer. These projects would have used timber harvest and
prescribed fire to replicate historic burn patterns and would
have protected homes and communities in the wildland urban
interface. Halting these projects harms communities. It is
devastating for local forest contracting businesses and
sawmills, who depend on this federal timber to stay in
business. Losing sawmills because of insufficient timber supply
makes no sense while our forests are overstocked and a tinder
box is waiting to burn if not actively managed. And I remind
all of my colleagues, a forest fire is a massive carbon
emission event, a healthy forest is a carbon sink. And more
sawmill losses will only increase the cost of forest treatments
and slow work as we lose our forestry workforce, unlike we have
seen happen in Colorado.
My bill to fix the Ninth Circuit decision, the Cottonwood
decision, that passed this Committee in May, will be crucial in
preventing some of the litigation that is stopping wildfire
mitigation work. And I will continue to urge its passage in the
full Senate. And I do commend my colleagues for working with me
on both sides to get that through this Committee. Additionally,
I would urge the Forest Service to use emergency authorities
like the fuel break categorical exclusion and the emergency
action determination to build defensible space around towns
that are in the wildland urban interface to protect them from
wildfire.
Associate Deputy Chief Emanuel, we have heard testimony on
several forestry bills that will increase active forest
management and encourage more collaborative approaches to
forestry, which will improve forest health. It helps protect
our watersheds and it helps provide better wildlife habitat,
reduces risk of wildfire, and of course, helps our workers with
badly needed revenues in counties that are predominantly
federal lands. However, in Montana, these forest projects are
being halted by litigation. Without reversal of the Ninth
Circuit Cottonwood decision, isn't there a risk that we will
only continue to see more projects enjoined by the courts?
Ms. Emanuel. Thank you for that, and first, I just want to
thank you for your leadership on this issue, Senator. It is
extremely concerning and important that we get a long-term fix
for Cottonwood because we cannot speculate on those impacts,
but we already see them in your state. And so, a long-term
solution is something we welcome working with you on.
Senator Daines. Well, thank you, and again, I just want to
commend my colleagues on both sides of this dais that have--it
has taken a number of years for everybody to fully understand
this--but once the understanding was there, we have had some
really strong bipartisan support now and we have to make the
final push now to get that through the floor of the Senate and
on to the President's desk.
Associate Deputy Chief Emanuel, the Forest Service released
an inventory of mature and old-growth forest in April of this
year, and then issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
relating to these forests. Now, I have been hearing some
concerns from Montanans that rulemaking on this topic will
simply be used as another way to stop and impede active
management that is so needed in our overstocked forests to
prevent catastrophic wildfires. As we say often in Montana,
either we are going to manage our forests, or our forests are
going to manage us through catastrophic wildfires. How can the
Forest Service ensure that active forest management isn't
further harmed?
Ms. Emanuel. Well, I can tell you at this point, we are
just inventorying, defining, and analyzing mature and old-
growth. No policy decisions have been made up to now. So using
all the tools that we have are the ways that we are going to
ensure that we can continue to manage for the wildfire crisis
strategy outcomes. And there is just the inventory that has
happened. And like I said, no policy has been affected.
Senator Daines. Okay, well, thank you, and thanks for
keeping an eye on that. The last thing we need are more
barriers to being better managers of our forests and actively
managing them as well. Thank you, Assistant Chief.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Senator Daines.
Seeing no further questions and knowing that some of us
have to get to the second vote on the floor that is pending, we
are going to close out the Subcommittee hearing.
I would like to thank our witnesses for their testimony
this afternoon.
Mr. Boshell, not many of my colleagues, other than the
gentleman sitting to my left, know Panguitch, or where it is. I
do. It is a beautiful place--been there fishing, grew up
spending a lot of time in Southern Utah, absolutely beautiful.
Thank you for joining us.
Some members of the Committee may submit additional
questions in writing, and so we will ask you to submit answers
for the record. Committee members will have until 6:00 p.m.
tomorrow to submit additional questions for the record.
We will keep the hearing open for two weeks to receive any
additional comments.
This Subcommittee meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:45 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]