    [Senate Hearing 118-337]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 118-337

                     THE PRESIDENT'S BUDGET REQUEST FOR THE
                    U.S. FOREST SERVICE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025

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

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                          ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                                  MAY 16, 2024

                                   __________

                           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
    55-899                  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

                          Renae Black, Staff Director
                          Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
                     Sean Mullin, Professional Staff Member
                  Justin J. Memmott, Republican Staff Director
               Patrick J. McCormick III, Republican Chief Counsel
             Kristin Sleeper, Republican Professional Staff Member

                               C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                       Page
    Manchin III, Hon. Joe, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from West
      Virginia.......................................................     1
    Barrasso, Hon. John, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from
      Wyoming........................................................     3

                                    WITNESS

    Moore, Randy, Chief, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department of
      Agriculture; accompanied by Mark Lichtenstein, Director of
      Strategic Planning, Budget, and Accountability, U.S. Forest
      Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture........................     4

              ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

    Barrasso, Hon. John:
        Opening Statement............................................     3
    Carbon County (WY) Board of Commissioners:
        Letter for the Record........................................    16
    Johnson County (WY) Board of Commissioners:
        Letter for the Record........................................    18
    Manchin III, Hon. Joe:
        Opening Statement............................................     1
    Moore, Randy:
        Opening Statement............................................     4
        Written Testimony............................................     7
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................    38

     THE PRESIDENT'S BUDGET REQUEST FOR THE U.S. FOREST SERVICE FOR FISCAL
                                   YEAR 2025

                                  ----------                              TH
    URSDAY, MAY, 2024

                                           U.S. Senate,
                     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in
    Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Joe Manchin
    III, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.

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

        The Chairman. The Committee will come to order. This
    morning we are here to discuss the President's Fiscal Year 2025
    budget request for the Forest Service. I would like to begin by
    thanking Chief Randy Moore and the Forest Service Budget
    Director, Mark Lichtenstein, for being with us this morning.
    Thank you both. I look forward to hearing about the
    justification for the 6.5 percent increase requested over
    Fiscal Year 2024 enacted appropriations.
        Although May would normally be just the start of the fire
    season, we have already had record-breaking wildfires, as is
    becoming all too common. In February, while it was still
    snowing, over one million acres in Texas burned, killing two
    people and destroying 130 homes. All signs point to a very
    active fire year in the U.S., and I know my colleagues from
    western states are on pins and needles watching for the next
    ignition that could devastate their communities.
        Our Committee has considered several bills that would
    support and improve the wildfire response network, from
    increasing the use of technology for wildfire detection, to
    integrating the local communities, loggers, and volunteer
    firefighters into wildfire suppression efforts on federal land.
    In the meantime, Congress has tried to address this problem at
    the source by investing heavily in hazardous fuels reduction.
    Between the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation
    Reduction Act, the Forest Service has been given about $12
    billion on top of your annual appropriations.
        Now that we are a few years into those laws, today is a
    good opportunity for us to take stock of how the Forest Service
    is implementing those historic investments, as well as the
    proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2025. As I mentioned, the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the IRA will add a
    significant extra boost to the Forest Service budget, around 30
    percent extra, for forest management each year.
        To be honest, Chief Moore, I am frustrated at how little
    these extra investments have moved the needle on the agency's
    performance metrics. I do appreciate that last year was a
    banner year for the Forest Service in terms of acres treated--
    more than 4.3 million acres. That is a million acres more than
    the previous year, and it sets an agency record. Some of your
    performance metrics were less encouraging.
        For example, your timber target for last year was 3.4
    billion board-feet. You missed that by about 260 million board-
    feet. You had a target of 16 improved watersheds, but you only
    managed six. You have told us before that it takes time to
    develop these projects and we should be patient. Instead of
    continuing to ramp-up in treatments, however, the agency's
    target is actually going down over the next two years.
        So one of the issues I hope we will explore today is why
    the historic funding provided by those two bills--the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the IRA--are not translating
    better into on-the-ground action. The backdrop to our
    discussion beyond the impending fire season is a rash of
    sawmill closures this year, including six in my own home State
    of West Virginia.
        I know that the wood products markets have been especially
    volatile since the pandemic. We have heard a number of reports,
    however, that longstanding sawmills are simply running out of
    nearby material and need to haul logs in from farther and
    farther away, which significantly cuts into their already thin
    margins. More consistent and reliable offerings from local
    federal forests would undoubtedly help these struggling
    operators.
        What is also concerning to me about these mill closures is
    that the Forest Service's Wildfire Crisis Strategy is
    fundamentally dependent on a robust network of mills that can
    process the material from our nation's forests. As we recently
    heard at our hearing with the Wildfire Commission, revenue-
    generating timber harvests are critical to pay for more complex
    treatments, prescribed fire, and reforestation.
        If done right, timber harvesting can provide a return to
    the federal taxpayer, increase the health of our forests, and
    support our critical industry partners. The Forest Service has
    used some innovative models in the past. For example, last
    year, the agency piloted a timber transport project to salvage
    burned timber in California and ship it to struggling sawmills
    in Wyoming. That makes all the sense in the world. We shouldn't
    just be letting salvageable timber rot. I have said this so
    many times in these hearings.
        And in the long term, Congress can also help develop
    markets for the small-diameter timber that often comes from
    wildfire mitigation projects as we are thinning and cleaning.
    In fact, several of the provisions in a bill I introduced with
    Ranking Member Barrasso, the America's Revegetation and Carbon
    Sequestration Act, would do just that.
        However, we simply cannot afford to lose all of our
    existing mill infrastructure while that market grows, and I
    hope that we will hear how the Forest Service can further
    expand on efforts like the timber transport project. Lastly, I
    know that fire and forestry often get the lion's share of
    attention, but I also want to highlight the tremendous role
    that our national forests play when it comes to our outdoor
    recreation economy. Last year, the 159 million visitors to
    Forest Service lands generated billions in economic activity
    and supported nearly 180,000 jobs.
        Unfortunately, the Forest Service has a deferred
    maintenance backlog of more than $7 billion, including $5
    billion in maintenance just for the roads alone. This should
    concern all of us. The roads don't just provide access to our
    recreation lands, but are vital arteries for rural communities.
        Perhaps even more concerning, a road in poor condition
    threatens our ability to deploy firefighters where they are
    needed to stop a wildfire before it grows to catastrophic size.
        As we approach the expiration of the mandatory funding for
    facilities maintenance that we provided in the Great American
    Outdoors Act, it is worth asking what changes could be made to
    better address the next set of hurdles facing the Forest
    Service.
        Chief Moore, I want to thank you again for being here
    today. I think I speak for all of us when I say that we don't
    just want you to succeed, we need you to succeed. I look
    forward to hearing your perspective on these issues and your
    plans for the year ahead.
        And with that, I will turn to the Ranking Member and my
    friend, Senator Barrasso, for his opening statement.

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

        Senator Barrasso. Well, thanks so much, Mr. Chairman.
    Thanks for holding today's hearing. Chief Moore, thanks so much
    for coming back.
        Mr. Chairman, I share your concerns. Historic investments
    and failure to meet the targets. I mean, that's what you
    pointed out. That's what people on both sides of this aisle
    have continued to point out year after year. Wyoming's forests,
    including our eight national forests, help sustain our way of
    life. They support our local communities. This is the case all
    across the west.
        Our forests face many challenges, including wildfire,
    drought, insect and disease outbreaks. We face additional
    pressures, as you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, from the sawmill
    closures. You know, in 1976, Wyoming sawmills could process
    over 300 million board-feet each year. Forests were healthy,
    forests were productive. According to the Forest Service's
    latest statistics, Wyoming sawmills can now process just over
    100 million board-feet. So that goes from 300 million down to
    100 million. That is a two-thirds drop in our capacity.
        And now the health of our national forests in Wyoming is
    poor. The wildfire risk is high. And if we don't make things
    better in a way to manage our national forests, the risks are
    going to keep growing and things are going to get worse. So I
    look forward to hearing how the Forest Service intends to hit
    the targets to address these critical challenges. And I am
    pleased with some of the priorities in the budget: funding to
    protect our communities from catastrophic fire, also pay raises
    for our wildland firefighters.
        I do have concerns about the budget though, because for
    years the Forest Service has asked Congress for more and more
    money, and we have heard it from both sides of the aisle. That
    money has been granted. Congress has responded by giving the
    agency billions of dollars in additional taxpayer funds.
        Since 2021, Congress has given the agency more than $40
    billion--with a B--$40 billion. Yet the Forest Service has not
    treated more acres. It has not sold more timber. It has not
    expedited the environmental review process for forest
    management projects. Mr. Chairman, the question continues--
    where have all these taxpayer dollars gone?
        Now, I acknowledge the Forest Service faces enormous
    challenges as it combats wildfires. Yet despite having more
    money than ever, the agency has not done the work on the ground
    to address the crisis. In fact, the agency expects to treat
    fewer acres this year than it did last year, and for the timber
    harvest levels to remain flat in Fiscal Year 2025. This is
    completely unacceptable.
        In Wyoming, sustainable timber harvests support our local
    communities, they reduce wildfire risk, and they improve forest
    health. But year after year, we find ourselves in the same
    situation. Inconsistent log supplies from the national forest
    undermine our local sawmills. Without a dependable and
    affordable supply of timber from our public lands, these
    family-owned businesses cannot survive, and we know it all too
    well in Wyoming.
        Just last month, Neiman Enterprises, a family business
    based in Hulett, Wyoming, had to announce layoffs. They hated
    doing it. This was a direct result of the Forest Service's
    decision to reduce timber harvest levels in the Black Hills
    National Forest. The Forest Service has upended the lives of 50
    hardworking employees and their families, jeopardized jobs at
    nearby wood product facilities, and it has put at risk the
    health of the Black Hills National Forest.
        The decision to reduce the timber sale program in the Black
    Hills will reverse years of progress. Without active
    management, that forest is going to return to the same
    condition that resulted in the wildfires and the beetle kill.
    This is exactly what we are trying to avoid, yet the Forest
    Service seems indifferent to the consequences of their own
    inaction.
        There is broad agreement on this Committee that the Forest
    Service is not meeting the challenges it confronts. The Forest
    Service no longer safeguards and promotes forest health. It's
    now just managing the deterioration of our national forests.
    The Forest Service must change course, must start managing our
    forests in a serious and credible way. Look, we know what
    works. We know what we need to do, and the forest-product
    sector is willing to help get the work done.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator. And we will start with
    our opening statement now from Chief Moore.

      STATEMENT OF RANDY MOORE, CHIEF, U.S. FOREST SERVICE, U.S.
     DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE; ACCOMPANIED BY MARK LICHTENSTEIN,
      DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC PLANNING, BUDGET, AND ACCOUNTABILITY,
          U.S. FOREST SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

        Mr. Moore. Chair Manchin, Ranking Member Barrasso, and
    members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me to testify
    today, and we are grateful for your continued support.
        The President's budget names three primary goals for us: to
    modernize wildland fire management, to sustain investments
    critical to our mission, and to ensure equitable access and
    benefits to America. Today, I will share our progress as we put
    money to work to confront serious challenges. I will share how
    our work will continue to be a sound investment.
        We directly steward 193 million acres of National Forest
    System lands, and we reach across boundaries to assist states,
    tribes, and communities, as well as private landowners to keep
    millions of forested acres healthy and productive. Every
    American benefits from these forests directly or indirectly.
    Together, these lands provide basic needs for life, clean air
    and water, and while they contribute to the energy production
    and they support the local economies, national forests alone
    contribute more than 410,000 jobs and $44.3 billion to the
    gross domestic product. To sustain productivity and health,
    forests must be able to withstand threats posed by wildfires,
    climate change, drought, insects, and disease. We invested
    resources to act and to ensure that we do just that.
        Foremost, we prioritize work to reduce wildfire risk,
    safeguard communities, and create resilient forests. In 2022,
    we launched a 10-year Wildfire Crisis Strategy, and we have
    moved to implement it. Annual appropriations, coupled with the
    historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction
    Act, provided us an extraordinary opportunity to take bold and
    strategic actions. We did just that.
        We progressed to deliver on a promise to increase the pace
    and scale of our treatments. We are not just treating any acre,
    we are treating the right acres in the right places, and at the
    right scale. We focused initial efforts on 21 priority
    landscapes within western firesheds that are at the highest
    risk. They account for roughly 80 percent of the wildfire risk.
        These investments are paying dividends. Experts report that
    roughly $700 billion worth of housing and infrastructure are at
    risk within these priority landscapes, and this includes $6.5
    billion of municipal watersheds, which supply drinking water to
    12 million people. In the last two years, we reduced the
    average wildfire risk to these assets by eight percent for
    infrastructure, eight percent for housing, and then we also
    reduced the risk to watersheds by 12 percent.
        So what does that mean? It means that more than $175
    million worth of homes were at risk. In Stanislaus National
    Forest, 17 communities are at lower risk, including the towns
    of Cold Springs and Strawberry. One million socially vulnerable
    people are at less risk. Nearly half of the nation's
    forestlands in priority landscapes are now considered unlikely
    to burn at high intensity.
        We must remain on course and build on these gains. We must
    also invest in our firefighters. We recognize the urgency of
    investing in a permanent and comprehensive pay increase to
    provide a more livable wage, enhance recruitment, and stabilize
    retention. We must also improve housing conditions and provide
    better care for firefighters' physical and mental health. We
    look forward to seeing an end to reports of firefighters living
    in cars with few benefits and limited mental health care.
        In addition to working to address the wildfire crisis and
    firefighters, we continue to take actions that support access
    and benefits from forests. Visitor use, hunting and fishing,
    energy and minerals development, forest products, and livestock
    grazing generate 69 percent of the contributions to the
    economy.
        Thanks to the Great American Outdoors Act funds, we
    relieved some of the pressure from the $8.6 billion maintenance
    backlog. The budget requests $58 million to maintain critical
    recreation services with a focus on offering welcoming and
    equitable opportunities. We are also making a difference in our
    urban environments. The Forest Service and partners are
    planning and maintaining trees in cities and suburbs where
    about 84 percent of Americans live.
        Trees combat extreme heat and climate change, and it also
    improves access to nature. The 2025 budget returns basic
    funding to most programs. This includes forest products, which
    are vital to sustaining rural communities. This includes
    sustainable timber supply. We know it's a critical component
    and is part of a complex market-driven system. While we don't
    control markets, we can support industry through forest
    products and wood innovations, which help mills adapt and
    modernize.
        While the current industry adapts, the agency has taken
    strides to support the existing industry by investing nearly
    $80 million over the last three years, by directly supporting
    sawmills and other forest products manufacturing facilities,
    expanding wood baskets to the mills through the build and
    timber transport program, and authorizing extensions to timber
    sale contracts to provide relief from the decline of demand for
    paper products.
        So in closing, we are fully committed to meeting the
    challenges before us with resources that Congress has provided,
    and the people of America deserve nothing less than to see
    their money put to work for the benefit of all. Thank you, and
    I welcome your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Moore follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. We will start our questions now. Thank you.
    Thank you, Mr. Moore.
        Chief, your budget indicates you have increased the size of
    your workforce by more than 3,000 employees since 2021--3,000.
    I understand about a month ago, you instituted a 30-day hiring
    pause for non-fire staff in order to conduct a strategic
    assessment of your staffing and get a handle on your budget. So
    we would like to know what you came up with.
        Mr. Moore. Yes, Mr. Chairman, actually, we have increased
    our workforce by 4,000 people. And that was our plan from the
    beginning. We lost about 40 percent of our non-fire workforce
    over the last 20 years.
        The Chairman. How many were hired in areas that were vacant
    for years, and you just filled those positions, or an area that
    you beefed up where it was needed?
        Mr. Moore. Well, so we did a number of things. We had to
    bring in a new skill set to complement the skill sets that we
    currently have, and we looked at the trends that are developing
    in this country, and it's things around working with partners,
    working with communities. And so we also needed to add to our
    skill set people that know how to work with communities, know
    how to bring people to the table to facilitate and convene
    meetings because what we ultimately want to do is share the
    decision space with local communities. And so we had to invest
    in skill sets.
        The Chairman. Got it. How much of this was going to your
    bonuses for your present employees? I am saying the people you
    have on staff, did much of that percentage of the money you
    received go for that or for actually hiring new people?
        Mr. Moore. No. We routinely provide bonuses based on
    performance at the end of the year. So it was nothing extra
    with this money.
        The Chairman. If you could give us a breakdown on what kind
    of employees were hired and how they are contributing to the
    agency's mission, that would be very helpful for this
    Committee.
        Mr. Moore. I would be glad to do that.
        The Chairman. Second thing is, since 2020, the amount of
    National Forest System lands in need of manual reforestation
    has increased by more than 260 percent, you know, due to
    catastrophic wildfires. Yet the Forest Service has said that
    only six percent of post-wildfire planning needs are met
    annually. It is growing at that rate and you are not even
    touching it.
        Mr. Moore. Well, first, Mr. Chairman, I want to say thanks
    to Congress for the REPLANT Act.
        The Chairman. Sure.
        Mr. Moore. Because it has given us the ability to lift the
    cap that we had on reforestation.
        The Chairman. Is my figure wrong here? Have you done more
    than six percent?
        Mr. Moore. No, no. I wouldn't argue with your figures.
        The Chairman. This is a pretty poor performance, sir, early
    on, as far as getting up to speed. Does the----
        Mr. Moore. May I respond, Mr. Chairman?
        The Chairman. Let me just say this. Does the need to clear
    hazardous trees from burned acres increase the cost for
    reforestation projects? So you have a burnt-out area. The way I
    understand it is, it kind of sits there until it rots away and
    nothing gets reforested in those areas. Can you do both
    simultaneously?
        Mr. Moore. No. So for context, you know, prior to the
    REPLANT Act, we had a cap of about $30 million for
    reforestation. The problem that we have been having over the
    last, let us say 15 to 20 years, is that every year the number
    of acres burned has been increasing. And so, on average, you
    add in about 500,000 acres per year. And we have only been able
    to treat about anywhere between 100,000 to 200,000 acres based
    on the funding level we had.
        The Chairman. Let me ask you, the one thing that bothered
    me more than anything is basically not salvaging the burned
    timber that we have that still has value to it. Why are we not
    able to do that?
        Mr. Moore. Well, it is an excellent question. And it is a
    really complex answer, at least multiple reasons that
    contribute to this. One is that, you know, when we try and have
    large timber sale projects to recoup the salvage, many times we
    get litigated on that. And even where we are litigated many
    times----
        The Chairman. Who litigates it? Why would they litigate?
    Because you can reforest--you can basically cut and salvage and
    reforest at the same time.
        Mr. Moore. Mr. Chairman, with our democratic process and
    the fact that we are a public agency, 300 million people can--
    --
        The Chairman. Someone was upset, right?
        Mr. Moore. Yes. And so, our challenge is, as we go through
    the litigation to defend why we are wanting to do what we want
    to do, winning is not the answer. Delaying these salvage sales
    long enough so that they begin to lose value so that they are
    not worth purchasing after a period of time. And depending on
    where you are, blue stain sets in, which reduces the value of
    the wood.
        The challenge we have is how to remove a lot of that timber
    in a really quick way. And so, our approach has been to take
    small pieces of that and to do what we can to remove the timber
    while it has value.
        The Chairman. Let me ask one more question. Around 25 mills
    have shut down this year near our federal forests, including
    several in my own home State of West Virginia. I know the
    reasons for the shutdowns vary, but I am concerned about the
    impact they are going to have on rural communities as well as
    the impact on carrying out Forest Service management goals.
        What authorities do you have to ensure a consistent supply
    of federal timber to give these sawmills some ability to
    weather the current market volatility?
        Mr. Moore. So we have been working with a lot of the
    sawmills, in fact, we have been looking at wood innovations,
    and over the last three years, we have invested $79 million
    specifically to sawmills and to the industry to help them
    transition while this has been going on in our country. And so,
    we----
        The Chairman. The only way they are going to transition is
    basically to have access to the product.
        Mr. Moore. Well, they are market-driven conditions that
    they are responding to, which also has an impact on whether
    they are interested in a lot of the timber sales from national
    forests. When you look at the economy in and of itself, it is
    moving away from paper products. So that has a negative impact
    on some of the mills that produce that type of material.
        When you look at small-diameter or low-value type material,
    most of our facilities use the large commercial saw logs. And
    so, a part of what we want to do is to help and work with
    industry to transition to have a more diversified portfolio, if
    you will, and look at some of the products--biofuel, biochar,
    nanocellulose material, cross-laminated timber. These are the
    types of technologies that are emerging, but our infrastructure
    in general is not set up to use that type material in
    abundance.
        And so, we are trying to work with industry to transition
    to that. And I think that you are going to see some really
    interesting things come from industry sometime later this
    summer.
        The Chairman. We hope.
        Mr. Moore. I do think that they are making the adjustment.
        The Chairman. Senator Barrasso.
        Senator Barrasso. Well, thanks, Mr. Chairman. Chief Moore,
    63 million acres of our national forest are at high or very
    high risk of wildfire right now. In the past year, the agency
    treated fewer than four million of those 63 million acres. Your
    agency plans this coming year to treat even less than that. It
    has 63 million, last time 4 million, now less than that this
    year with a budget, we have got more and more money going,
    getting less and less. At this declining rate, it is going to
    take your agency about two decades just to treat all the high-
    risk areas within our national forests today, but trees are
    going to continue to grow.
        Is this really a credible strategy--with all the money that
    has been moved to the Forest Service--a credible strategy to
    address this wildfire crisis that Congress is clearly behind
    the efforts financially to help commit to get done?
        Mr. Moore. Yes, you know, Senator Barrasso, I think that we
    are at a crossroads in this country. And I think a part of it
    is that for the last 100 years, we measured our performance on
    acres treated. And I think what the Wildfire Crisis Strategy
    has given us an opportunity to do is take a look and see, is
    that the right metric for performance? And when you look at how
    this country has changed over the last 100 years since the
    Forest Service's existence, the number one land use in this
    country is wildland-urban interface development.
        And so that has had an impact on the national forests
    because you have a lot of communities that are sitting adjacent
    to and right next to national forests. And so we have to ask
    ourselves, and I would love to dig deeper into this, with you
    and this Committee, what is the appropriate performance metric?
    Is it acres treated or is it the right acres treated? And if
    our job is to protect communities from wildfires, we have to
    look at outcome-based reporting rather than output-based
    reporting, or at least a combination of the two. And so the
    outcome would be, did we protect the community from the risk of
    wildfire?
        Senator Barrasso. Well, we haven't been doing a very good
    job of protecting against wildfire. I mean, to me, this seems
    like just a complete lack of urgency by your department in
    dealing with all of this. If you don't like the results, then
    you change the metrics. That's ridiculous. We don't like the
    results. We have more and more wildfires.
        We had a hearing in Washington State about what was
    happening a number of years ago. It doesn't seem to be
    improving. It doesn't seem to get better at all in spite of
    massive additional expenditure of taxpayer money. To say we are
    going to change the metrics is absolutely ridiculous.
        Neiman Enterprises announced layoffs and a shift reduction
    at its Spearfish Forest Products facility. I understand that
    the owner, Jim Neiman, did everything possible to avoid the
    layoffs. These layoffs are a direct result of reductions to the
    timber sale program for the Black Hills National Forest. What
    is the agency doing to help retain the remaining forest
    products infrastructure in the Black Hills?
        Mr. Moore. Yes, you know, as I indicated earlier, we have
    invested about $79 million specifically to sawmills. And we
    have worked directly with Mr. Neiman and his facility. As a
    matter of fact, when we look at the Timber Transport Authority,
    it originated in order to help him. So we move timber from
    Northern California over to Wyoming to his facility. There are
    market-driven conditions that are not coming into play during
    these discussions.
        And it's multiple reasons why the industry is going through
    a transition now. And it's not just Forest Service supply, it's
    market-driven conditions, it's the cost of labor that's
    continuing to increase, it's the of labor shortages, it's a
    number of things that's contributing to these facilities----
        Senator Barrasso. We are not having a labor shortage, we
    are having a job shortage as a result of these decisions that
    have been made. So I find the answer unacceptable. Another
    question, commissioners from Carbon County and Johnson County,
    Wyoming wrote to you specifically. I have copies of the letters
    opposing the Forest Service's plan for old growth areas on our
    national forests.
        Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to put these in the
    record.
        The Chairman. Without objection.
        [The letters referred to follow:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Barrasso. Both counties asked to be made a
    cooperating agency. These requests were made in January and
    February. When can they expect to receive a response?
        Mr. Moore. Well, I am not aware of specifically what you
    are talking about, but I will look into that Senator and get
    back with you on that.
        Senator Barrasso. So will you agree to make these counties
    a cooperating agency?
        Mr. Moore. I can't say that without looking at what they
    are requesting, because, you know, when you look at--what do
    they mean when they say a cooperating agency? And so, we would
    want to dig into that to see specifically what they mean by
    that. There's a little C and a big C.
        Senator Barrasso. Because the concern clearly is that the
    Forest Service is drafting the old growth plan without state
    input, without local input, and that is why I have a bill that
    would stop the disastrous proposal.
        My final question, Mr. Chairman, is, Chief Moore, you talk
    a lot about the abundance of low- and no-value material in our
    national forests. The agency's own data also shows an abundance
    of large-diameter, high-value material in our national forests.
        Since 2021, Congress has given the Forest Service a massive
    infusion of taxpayer dollars. How is it that timber harvest in
    our national forests today are below what they were six years
    ago in 2018?
        Mr. Moore. You know, actually, Senator, since 2002, we have
    seen a gradual increase in the amount of timber that is removed
    as well as the number of acres that are treated. So I would
    say--and I have a chart here that will show you the increase
    from 2002 all the way into 2023. And so we are seeing a slight
    increase over that period of time, not a decrease.
        Senator Barrasso. I am talking about the last six years,
    well, 2018 down to where they are now.
        Mr. Moore. I could go all the way back to the 1980s,
    where----
        Senator Barrasso. Go back to when America wasn't
    discovered. We weren't harvesting anything. And now we got all
    the way up, but now we are dropping down in spite of the
    massive amount of resources--Mr. Chairman, my time is up.
        The Chairman. Are you done?
        Senator Barrasso. I am done.
        The Chairman. Senator Cantwell.
        Senator Cantwell. Well, Chief Moore, I think the
    frustration you are hearing is that if you look at this panel
    here, we are on the front lines, and we all see innovative
    opportunities to have a better response. And that's what we
    want to see. We know that the ponderosa pine is going to burn
    down. And so, we think, well, that's what the predictions are
    because of the dry conditions. Why not harvest that, put it
    into cross-laminated timber, make great economies and local
    communities and store carbon instead.
        So I think that's something probably everybody on this
    panel would agree with. But as Senator Barrasso said, we are
    not moving fast enough to do that. And so, I think we have very
    historic policies that need to shift. One of those I believe
    that needs to shift faster is the Small Business Administration
    Timber Set-Aside Program for stewardship contracts, because
    these smaller mills are taking these innovation risks. They are
    saying, we will do cross-laminated timber, we will do
    innovative things, but you are not giving them the supply.
        So what can we do to make sure that the Small Business
    Timber Set-Aside Program actually works and you actually give
    these mills a supply and that they're not--because right now
    they're not getting that supply, so they're barely hanging on.
        Mr. Moore. Yes. Senator, first of all, I would support the
    SBA Set-Aside. I would like to point out to you that we have
    what I would consider a significant success on the Manti-La Sal
    in Utah, where you had a small logger, and we worked with him
    to do his own marketing for material. And while that forest had
    not cut a lot of timber traditionally, historically they have
    gone from almost no program to--this logger now went from one
    truck to nine trucks, they cannot keep up with----
        Senator Cantwell. Great. I only have a few minutes, so I
    have to get to some other things. Would you provide me with an
    overlay map of where we think our highest risk pine forests are
    going to burn down, and show me where you are willing to put
    set-aside small business agreements in the Pacific Northwest? I
    appreciate what you did in Utah, but I need to know what you
    will do for the Pacific Northwest. Could you provide that to
    us?
        Mr. Moore. Sure. Yes.
        Senator Cantwell. Okay. So Senator Cruz and I introduced a
    Fire Ready Nation bill to try to get more information out of
    NOAA because their weather service forecast information is
    critical. Do you think that this legislation could help you in
    becoming aware of what the risks are for the Forest Service
    with better science coordination with NOAA?
        Mr. Moore. Yes, I do. And in fact, we have a longstanding
    agreement with NOAA and we do include them. I would also just
    like to add, in looking at the fires that happened down in New
    Mexico, we also, in addition to the larger weather station
    information, we also want to be able to have local and portable
    weather stations because of the local weather bursts that
    sometimes the larger weather stations don't pick up.
        And so, in that, we also need to look at some additional
    types of equipment that would give our on-the-ground people
    better information and better real-time information before they
    begin to do a lot of prescribed burning.
        Senator Cantwell. Well, this is what we need. We absolutely
    need this. We lost firefighters because in the central part of
    our state, they had one weather forecast, and in Seattle, just
    over the ridge, over the mountains, they were saying it's
    something else--high volatility, and we lost firefighters
    because we didn't have that information. We want the best
    information.
        I need to ask you about fixed anchors in wilderness areas.
    These are important aspects of climbing that were there prior
    to designations of wilderness. Do you think that fixed anchors
    should be prohibited in wilderness areas?
        Mr. Moore. So Senator, there are people on both sides of
    that issue, and we are in the process now----
        Senator Cantwell. I am asking you. I am asking you whether
    you think that----
        Mr. Moore. Well, you know, I can't give you an opinion
    until we reach out to our public, right? We are in the process
    now of having draft directives being put out. We did receive
    comments back in January. In fact, we received about 9,000
    comments. And so we are in the process of analyzing that before
    we move out with a final.
        Senator Cantwell. What do you want people to do in
    wilderness areas? Because I would like them to go hiking and
    climbing, but if people have installed anchors and you are
    spending your time, instead of helping us get a CLT bill,
    focusing on removing fixed anchors, that's the wrong priority.
    So maybe we will have to do legislation, but I believe the
    answer is that they belong, particularly in areas where they've
    already been before the wilderness designation, fixed anchors
    belong.
        Please support the climbing industry that is benefiting
    from wilderness. That's why we have it, so people can go and
    enjoy it. Thank you very much, Chief Moore.
        Senator Barrasso [presiding]. Senator Lee.
        Senator Lee. Chief Moore, I would like to begin by asking
    you to clarify something, a term that I am not familiar with.
    What do you mean by ``big C'' versus ``little c'' cooperating
    agency?
        Mr. Moore. Well, so you know, and it goes back to my
    experience from many years ago, working with the county
    supervisors, county commissioners, wanting to have a say in
    what finally happens, you know, in our documents. And there is
    a way to do that. And I think the way to do that is to have a
    collaborative process with our public, and particularly our
    elected officials. And so, we think that it is imperative that
    they be included in what's going on in their part.
        Senator Lee. It doesn't answer my question in any way.
    Look, I have got limited time. Maybe you can respond in
    writing. I really do need to know what the difference is
    between a ``big C'' and a ``lower c'' cooperating agency. It's
    not defined in law. I have never heard of it before. Not in any
    of your guidance documents, rules, anything like that. But
    look, I have got to move on. Just respond to that one in
    writing, if you can.
        Look, the draft plan for the Manti-La Sal National Forest
    proposes 122,780 acres of ``recommended wilderness.'' This is
    really concerning to me. Congress passed the Utah Wilderness
    Act in 1984. It is a product of a long, protracted, hard-fought
    compromise made by the State of Utah, and it is something that
    designated wilderness in exchange for assurance--assurance that
    no future Utah wilderness designations would be made.
        Now, the Forest Service appears to be ignoring this history
    and both the state and the individual county resource
    management plans applicable to that area. The only way we get
    healthy forests is by having flexibility to perform active
    management of the forest. It turns out, as we have learned over
    the last few decades, if you let the thing just go, that is
    terrible for forest health.
        What we are dealing with throughout Utah is this
    patchwork--this patchwork of designated wilderness, recommended
    wilderness, and inventoried roadless areas that make active
    management a nightmare, and frankly practically unachievable.
    These updated forest plans will only make the situation worse
    as you have them drafted.
        Can you explain how these new wilderness recommendations
    were developed and why the state and local county's input was
    apparently disregarded completely in the preferred alternative?
        Mr. Moore. Yes, so the Forest Supervisor is planning to
    meet with the County Supervisors to cooperate on that forest
    plan issue.
        Senator Lee. And how did that go?
        Mr. Moore. It has not taken place yet. They are scheduled
    to have a meeting to discuss this very issue that you are
    bringing up. We will be happy to let you know how that goes
    once the meeting takes place.
        Senator Lee. Yes. After the draft plan was released, but
    before that, apparently it didn't happen that way. I don't know
    why I should have any assurance that it will go any better now.
        Now, look, every single state official and county
    commissioner that I talk to seems to be increasingly frustrated
    with the way that the Forest Service manages Forest Service
    land. All these local officials ask for is a real seat at a
    real table in these important decisions that have to be made.
    Decisions that affect us, our local communities very directly,
    much more directly than they do anybody else. We all want
    healthy forests, and we all want to avoid catastrophic
    wildfires, but the consequences of bad policy hit some of us a
    lot more than they hit others.
        For example, in both the Ashley and the Manti-La Sal
    proposals, the Forest Service appears willing to enter into co-
    management arrangements with tribes, but it refuses to
    incorporate state and county comments into the planning
    process. If the Forest Service can enter co-management
    arrangements with the tribes, why exactly can't it enter into
    similar arrangements with county governments and the state
    government?
        Mr. Moore. Senator, we do honor the county governments, and
    we do work with them the same as we work with tribes. In fact,
    we probably work more with the county governments than we do
    with tribes.
        Senator Lee. With co-management, the same way you have done
    with the tribes?
        Mr. Moore. No, it's----
        Senator Lee. It has not been my experience.
        Mr. Moore. Yes. Well, you know, tribes are sovereign
    nations, so we deal with them differently than----
        Senator Lee. States also are sovereign. They are co-
    sovereigns. States are co-sovereigns and tribes also have their
    own elements of co-sovereignty.
        Mr. Moore. Senator, we deal with the counties and we work
    with the counties. They have a seat at the table. And I am not
    sure--I am not sure we are not doing just exactly what you are
    saying because----
        Senator Lee. Well, I am certain that you're not. I am
    certain that you're not. Look, the 2001 roadless rule
    establishes prohibition on road construction and timber
    harvesting on 58.5 million acres of inventoried roadless areas
    on National Forest System lands. Has the 2001 roadless rule
    helped or hindered with wildfire mitigation efforts?
        Mr. Moore. I suppose that is going to depend on your
    perspective, Senator.
        Senator Lee. Helped or hindered? Which one?
        Mr. Moore. Well, I don't have a say in whether it helps or
    hinders, you know, I have to----
        Senator Lee. Well, regardless of what you do, does it? Just
    describe it, in your assessment, has it helped or hindered
    wildfire mitigation efforts?
        Mr. Moore. Well, I don't think it was designed to help
    wildfire mitigation, sir.
        Senator Lee. Understood. Thank you.
        Senator Barrasso. Senator Heinrich.
        Senator Heinrich. Chief, welcome. A number of us on this
    Committee worked really hard on the Great American Outdoors Act
    that gave five years of extra funding to tackle the maintenance
    backlog at a number of public land agencies, including yours.
    It is fixing up places like Sandia Crest Recreation Area. It is
    fixing up campsites in the Jemez National Recreation area. We
    are now in year four of the five.
        Can you walk through for me what percentage of Forest
    Service funds from Fiscal Year 2021 and 2022, the first two,
    are actually under contract now?
        Mr. Moore. Senator, can I get you that information?
        Senator Heinrich. Can you get that for the record?
        Mr. Moore. Sure.
        Senator Heinrich. Because I want to make sure, you know, we
    are seeing progress, but we are well into that now, and we want
    to make sure those funds make it to the ground because they
    really open up opportunities for local communities in terms of
    the economic opportunities that come with public land
    recreation.
        The Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission and
    the GAO found that there is not enough affordable, available,
    and adequate housing to recruit and retain wildland
    firefighters, something that you referenced in your testimony.
    You know, these are folks that families count on to protect
    them from these catastrophic wildfires. Is the funding that you
    requested in this budget enough to clear the backlog on
    firefighter housing maintenance?
        Mr. Moore. No, sir. Not by a longshot.
        Senator Heinrich. How much of a dent will it make?
        Mr. Moore. So the backlog is about 350 million acres. And
    so, anything less than that is not going to really get at the
    backlog.
        Senator Heinrich. No, I am saying in terms of housing, the
    additional funds that you have requested, what scale of
    progress are you going to make in terms of making sure that our
    firefighters have access to adequate and well-constructed
    housing?
        Mr. Moore. So in the funds that we are requesting now, I
    think we have about $25 million that we are planning to put
    toward improving the housing situation. In fact, we are looking
    at completely redoing one barracks and then making a lot of
    necessary changes to many of the other barracks and houses.
        Senator Heinrich. Can you get us a full list of those?
    Because it's a cart before the horse thing. If we don't have
    adequate housing, then we are not going to have the
    firefighting force to be able to actually deal with the
    challenges that some of my colleagues have described.
        Mr. Moore. I would agree wholeheartedly.
        Senator Heinrich. When we last talked, the Forest Service
    was finalizing a contract to repair the Santa Fe National
    Forest fence that keeps cattle from trespassing onto the
    neighboring property, which is the Valles Caldera National
    Preserve. What is the status of that contract at this point?
        Mr. Moore. So we have agreed to put a million dollars
    toward the construction of the fence, and we have also agreed
    to go halves on maintenance of the fence once it is done.
        Senator Heinrich. And is that contract actually--not the
    maintenance contract, but the repair contract--has that been
    executed?
        Mr. Moore. Well, we have a meeting set up with the Park
    Service. We have an agreement in place, but we have not signed
    off on that agreement. But the agreement would be halves on
    both the actual construction of the fence and the maintenance
    of the fence.
        Senator Heinrich. This has been a long time coming, so I
    would just urge you and Director Sams to figure this thing out
    because it is a continual source of friction in the area.
        Mr. Moore. Yes.
        Senator Heinrich. Last week, the Lincoln National Forest
    shut down Sitting Bull Falls Recreation Area. It is a popular
    spot about an hour from Carlsbad that families enjoy over the
    summer in particular. Why is Sitting Bull Falls closed, and
    what's the Forest Service's plan to get it reopened?
        Mr. Moore. Yes, so my information says that that is not
    closed, even though there are some staffing challenges, but the
    facility is open and there are also maintenance needs for that
    facility. But Senator----
        Senator Heinrich. It is my understanding, at least from
    what I have heard from the public, that it is closed. So we
    need to get our staffs together on that and figure out what the
    plan is to make sure that, especially as we get into the summer
    season, when demand is particularly high, that we maximize that
    facility.
        Mr. Moore. And in fact, my information tells me that they
    are ready for Memorial Day weekend. And so I will double check
    that.
        Senator Heinrich. That would be a pleasant surprise. So
    let's work on that. Thank you, Chief.
        Mr. Moore. Thank you.
        The Chairman [presiding]. We have Senator Murkowski.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chief, good to
    see you again. You were in front of the Interior Appropriations
    Subcommittee just about a month ago. You made a comment then
    that resonated with me. You said, ``I can tell you with
    certainty that if we don't have a vibrant timber industry, we
    are not going to be able to manage our forests and make them
    healthy and resilient.'' Good statement. But it just seems
    contradictory to the way that the Tongass and Chugach National
    Forests are managed.
        The Forest Service has completely shifted away from
    offering viable inventories of timber, and in the case of the
    Tongass, they really have just pulled the rug out from under
    the industry. You and I have talked about this a lot, but they
    abandoned the transition policy that Secretary Vilsack forced
    on them during the Obama administration.
        So we have a timber industry that is practically non-
    existent right now. And it kind of speaks to your statement
    about it being impossible to have a healthy and resilient
    forest without a vibrant timber industry. Well, we don't have a
    vibrant timber industry.
        So can you share with me, other than research into end-use
    forest products, what is the Forest Service doing to help
    support the few remaining small mill operators that are located
    in the Tongass?
        Mr. Moore. Senator Murkowski, you know, better than anyone,
    just the history of timber there.
        Senator Murkowski. I know it all too well. I have lived it.
        Mr. Moore. And I still stand by my statement, that without
    a vibrant timber industry, we will not be able to manage our
    nation's forests.
        Senator Murkowski. So what do I tell our small mill
    operators there in Southeast? Is there a future for them, or do
    they need to just pack up and let their employees go elsewhere?
        Mr. Moore. Well, I certainly think there is a future there.
    I think what we need to do is work on how much of that is
    available to be harvested. And I am still committed----
        Senator Murkowski. Well, it is the largest National Forest
    in the country. There is plenty of available timber. It is the
    supply, as you well know, and the sales that are put up that
    don't result in anything for even the smallest of the small
    timber sawmills.
        Mr. Moore. And, you know, Senator, we are guided by a lot
    of policies and regulations. And so----
        Senator Murkowski. And the policies and regulations are
    such that the Tongass has been shut down effectively for timber
    harvesting. I mean, that's pretty much it.
        Let me shift to the Southeast Alaska Sustainable Strategy,
    because that was Vilsack's promise. We are going to cut off
    timber, we are going to not be harvesting, or certainly not
    putting up available sales for timber there. But we are going
    to give you resources from the Federal Government. $25 million
    was the first tranche.
        And I had asked you last month about the funding that
    Secretary Vilsack had promised. He said, again, the $25 million
    is the first tranche. I asked for an update on additional
    funding. You shared with me the same thing that Secretary
    Vilsack did, that, well, Southeast has gotten funding through
    IIJA and through IRA. That is true.
        But as I reminded everybody, this promise on the Southeast
    Sustainable Strategy was well before we had even thought about
    IIJA or IRA. And so, in fairness, that does not count. That is
    not keeping the promise of Secretary Vilsack.
        So you indicated that you were going to double check on the
    status of where we are, what Southeast might be able to expect,
    because right now I have got these small local mills that are
    thinking, well, okay, maybe that is part of our survivability
    strategy, is that we are going to be getting some kind of
    support from these additional sources of funding from this
    Southeast Sustainable Strategy.
        Mr. Moore. Yes. Senator, you are right. We had the $25
    million originally, and since then we have provided an
    additional $50 million. But I will look to see how much of that
    is IIJA and how much of that is other funding, but I know that
    it was an additional $50 million.
        Senator Murkowski. I bet I can beat you to the breakdown on
    that, unfortunately. One quick question here before my time is
    out. You know that just last week we introduced the Chugach
    Alaska Land Exchange Oil Spill Recovery Act. This grants
    Chugach ownership of approximately 65,000 acres of culturally
    significant, economically viable, full-estate and surface
    lands. This completes the promise under the Dingell Act.
        This is the result of several years of groundwork by the
    entire Alaska delegation and working with the Department of the
    Interior and Forest Service. I know you have worked on that,
    but I am hoping that I can get your commitment that Forest
    Service is going to work proactively with our office so that we
    can advance this legislation and address this split state
    ownership challenge.
        Mr. Moore. Yes. We are committed to continuing to work with
    you on that.
        Senator Murkowski. Okay. We want to get it done sooner than
    later.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Barrasso [presiding]. Senator Hickenlooper.
        Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you,
    both of you for being here today. Mr. Moore, I always
    appreciate your affection for our forests and your commitment
    to it, which I share. I feel every time I am in the forest, I
    feel like I am getting better. Somehow my life resolves itself
    in positive ways.
        I want to reiterate what Senator Cantwell talked about--the
    issues around fixed anchors in various parts of the National
    Forests. And we have got a proposal in with the Outdoor
    Recreation Act that allows those fixed anchors that are in
    place to remain in place. The House bill is coming across. We
    are trying to reconcile that. I think we are going to get it
    reconciled. So just to alert you that that is coming.
        There are two sides to this, but I look at the costs and
    the impositions to try and go out and remove fixed anchors or
    make it a decision process you have got to go through in every
    national park. It really doesn't seem to make very much sense.
    And I think there is certainly a strong sentiment that way
    throughout the Senate.
        Let me ask you a question about housing. We talked a little
    bit about housing for firefighters, but many of the smaller
    towns across the West, and to a certain extent in the East as
    well, are having housing issues.
        And I think local communities have asked us whether we can,
    you know, talk to the Forest Service about doing joint venture
    partnerships for housing that might be for employees of the
    Forest Service, but also for local teachers or nurses, people
    that are not sufficiently compensated to be able to afford
    housing where they live. Is that something that is--is there an
    opportunity there?
        Mr. Moore. Absolutely. In fact, I think this is one of the
    crises facing America, and it certainly has an impact on the
    Forest Service. Your own state has been one of our pilot areas
    there on the White River National Forest, where we are looking
    at working with the community to build homes in exchange for
    homes for our employees. That really has set a tone that is
    starting to be spread across the nation to be creative in how
    we really address this issue.
        But it is all of our issues. It is all of our communities'
    issues. And so, I am glad to see where the communities are
    coming together to work with us and vice versa, trying to fix
    this issue. Because at the end of the day, if we do not have
    employees in many of these locations, we cannot do the job that
    you are asking us to do.
        Senator Hickenlooper. And in the end, we are all in it
    together. And I think that approach--White River is an
    excellent example. I know there are a couple examples. You guys
    are working on it. I did not want to brag about Colorado again
    being the innovator, but such as it is.
        And Mr. Lichtenstein, you have not had a chance to really
    hold forth. I have got a more philosophical question, not in an
    adversarial tone, but really, you know, I was Governor for
    eight years, and we had some of the worst--it was the beginning
    of this phase of wildfires that were immense, I mean, enormous.
    And they continue. I mean, people could argue back and forth,
    and we don't need to debate here the causes of the changing
    climate, but clearly wildfires are increasing. The conditions,
    the humidity in the air, everything is changing to make them
    more frequent and worse.
        I was always puzzled, and I spent a lot of time on the
    firefighting out in the control centers. So often we would
    spend enormous amounts of money, and then the wind would change
    and our fire line would be overrun. The fire would go around.
    The fires are--they are so malevolent. It's almost like they
    have an evil spirit, that despite our best intentions, they
    come back in directions we can't anticipate.
        How do we study that? How do we begin looking at--you know,
    whether you are flying over and dropping retardant mixed with
    water on the fire or digging trenches. I am sure you guys must
    be doing studies, but at least at that point, we didn't have--
    there was nothing I could look at that gave me comfort that the
    increasing--every state is now--I realize you guys are spending
    more money out of your budget as well, but states are doing the
    same thing. And I think there might be need for better study.
    And you probably are way ahead of me on this. Mr.
    Lichtenstein--I want the strategic planner here.
        Mr. Lichtenstein. Well, I appreciate----
        Senator Hickenlooper. Not that you aren't both
    strategically planning. I did not mean that.
        Mr. Lichtenstein. I appreciate the question. And fire is a
    complex environment. Luckily, before I was at Budget, I oversaw
    a lot of the fire program and understand that the changing
    conditions we face with fire just create a situation that
    becomes more volatile and unpredictable.
        But we have done considerable amounts of research,
    particularly through the Rocky Mountain Research Station, which
    is kind of the hub of our fire research that has really
    developed different thoughts around potential control points
    and different strategies to be able to manage these fires a
    little bit differently, where it's not so much about
    overwhelming force the entire time, but thinking about where do
    I actually use the resources I have available and the actual
    ecological conditions and quiescent periods in weather to
    actually be able to take advantage of those to address the
    fires more effectively.
        Senator Hickenlooper. Maybe I will get our staff to reach
    out. I don't know, Mr. Moore, if you want to add anything to
    that. You don't need to add anything. I just wanted make sure
    if you wanted to add something to that.
        Mr. Moore. Well, the only thing I would add is, what you
    will see different now over the last couple of years is that
    part of the incident command team structure, we are allowing
    local people to come into the tent to share information about
    local conditions. There has been a lot of concern that
    sometimes the incident--the IC team does not have local
    knowledge. And so, we have responded to that by including some
    locals in there to share that local knowledge.
        Senator Hickenlooper. That is good additional information.
    Thank you both for being here. I have got other questions on
    the Colorado River and some of the hydrology issues. We will
    put those into writing. I yield back to the Chair.
        Senator Barrasso. Senator Daines.
        Senator Daines. Chief Moore, this is a timely discussion,
    as fires continue to multiply across our country. Many
    important forest management projects that would decrease the
    risk of catastrophic wildfires have been halted by litigation.
        In fact, in Montana alone, 300 million board-feet--in fact,
    more than 300 million board-feet is tied up by litigation. This
    stops the removal of hazardous fuels that are surrounding our
    communities as well as other high-risk areas.
        And just the threat of legal action forces the Forest
    Service to spend additional time making projects bulletproof
    against litigation. In fact, there's a small project in Montana
    where the Forest Service planned to harvest just over a
    thousand acres, but spent 19 months from scoping to decision,
    and created a 183-page environmental assessment.
        My bill that I have to fix the Ninth Circuit Cottonwood
    decision that passed this Committee last May would 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. I know it would be a huge help for what you all
    have to do.
        But it is critical, in the meantime, that the Forest
    Service press forward with forest management projects and on-
    the-ground work.
        The Forest Service treated 4.3 million acres in Fiscal Year
    2023, with nearly half of those treatment acres being
    prescribed fire, and of those acres, nearly three quarters
    being done in the South. While it is good that there is
    necessary work being done across the country, there are crisis
    landscapes in Montana and across the West, where it is a bit
    more arid, that need focus.
        The State of Montana, looking on the state efforts, more
    than tripled their acres treated from 2020 to 2023. At the same
    time, the Forest Service increased acres by about 34 percent,
    again, while the State of Montana tripled.
        We need to see the Forest Service follow the lead we are
    seeing in Montana from our state, and place a greater emphasis
    and a sense of urgency on increasing treated acres. My question
    for you, Chief Moore, is why does the Forest Service Fiscal
    Year 2025 budget decrease the target number of acres treated
    from Fiscal Year 2024?
        Mr. Moore. So here, again, Senator, there is a lot there.
    So I will try and respond to it in its entirety. When you look
    at our budget now, a lot of our budget goes toward hazardous
    fuel reduction, not timber production. When I look at the
    amount of timber that we are providing, we have seen a steady
    increase. I will go national, but I will come down to Montana.
        We have seen an increase over the last 20 years of about 30
    percent increase in timber. And so, while that perception is
    out there that we are not producing timber, it is not accurate
    when you look at what we are actually doing.
        Now, more specifically to Montana, I have gone out with
    Governor Gianforte to visit. I think it was the Basin Creek
    watershed area there, where you have a community there that is
    threatened by wildfires. And as a result of what the state is
    doing, we matched that to really treat the Basin Creek
    watershed area there.
        Montana, in and of itself, is our leader across the country
    in Good Neighbor Authority and using that authority. And so, we
    have a lot of really good work taking place in Montana. I will
    also tell you that Montana is our most litigious state in the
    country when it comes to forest products types of projects. And
    so, you have a lot of that coming to bear there.
        But here again, I think that entire region, when I look at
    Montana and Idaho for that matter, they are doing some really
    excellent work with Good Neighbor Authority and really getting
    work done.
        Senator Daines. You know, and thanks for coming out to
    Montana too, and spending time with our Governor. I appreciate
    that and seeing it firsthand. The bigger question though is,
    why would the target decrease from 4.2 million to 4 million at
    a time when we need more treatment? Your target actually
    decreased year over year.
        Mr. Moore. No, our target is actually going up. When I look
    at the 2025----
        Senator Daines. Let me make sure we are talking the same
    numbers. At least, what my numbers show is in FY24, the target
    was 4.2 million acres.
        Mr. Moore. Oh, hazardous fuel.
        Senator Daines. Hazardous fuel reduction, and the FY25
    target is 4 million. So it is 200,000 acres less in terms of
    your target. That's the question, why would it go down?
        Mr. Moore. Yes. I was thinking you meant timber production,
    not acres treated.
        Senator Daines. I am talking about hazardous fuel
    reduction.
        Mr. Moore. Yes. So one reason, the budget has gone down for
    hazardous fuel reduction, and so the----
        Senator Daines. And why would we take the budget down in
    hazardous fuel reduction?
        Mr. Moore. Well, we had a loss in--we have had a lot of
    increase in costs. You know, and the----
        Senator Daines. Because, you know, you think about it, if
    you are reducing hazardous fuels, it is a way to try to preempt
    catastrophic wildfires, which are very expensive to fight once
    they begin.
        Mr. Moore. Right. And the fundamental question that I was
    saying earlier that I think we really have to talk about--what
    is that new performance metric? Is it protecting communities
    and is it protecting those critical watersheds that these
    communities depend on?
        And if it is, those acres are more expensive to treat, and
    where we have been measured by the number of acres achieved or
    treated, we have put ourselves in a position where we are doing
    random acts of restoration across the landscapes now because of
    that metric of outputs.
        And while that is important, Senator, what we are finding
    through the Wildfire Crisis Strategy is that what's even more
    important is protecting communities. And if you agree with
    that, then perhaps we need to look at outcomes based on the
    work that we are doing. Also, you have a lot of steep slopes
    that we are trying to get to. All of that is more expensive to
    try and achieve. And you do less work because it takes more to
    work in those areas.
        Senator Daines. Yes. Well, thank you for that. I know you
    are balancing competing priorities in terms of costs, but it's
    just troubling at a time when we are seeing increasing buildups
    of hazardous fuels, that the target--the Forest Service
    actually went down year over year from 4.2 million to 4
    million. I mean, you have to look at where you have to spend,
    where you have to target, but I just raise that as a real
    concern. When you think about it, that's an investment too, to
    try to reduce the cost to fight catastrophic wildfires. This is
    kind of pay me now or pay me later, and you pay a lot more
    later.
        Mr. Moore. Well, I will give you an example. Last year, our
    target was 4 million, and we actually achieved 4.3 million. And
    so we achieved more than what our target was. And this year,
    for 2025, when you look at where the budget is going, we don't
    have the same level of budget to do that amount of work coupled
    with the areas that we are working in now, which is more
    expensive.
        Senator Daines. Thank you. I have to respect my colleagues'
    time. I am over my time. Chief, thank you.
        Senator Barrasso. Senator Padilla.
        Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Chief Moore, great
    to see you.
        Mr. Moore. Good to see you.
        Senator Padilla. Thank you for always taking my calls when
    we need you to say thank you for the great work that you have
    been doing, and obviously when we are in a pinch and dealing
    with some challenges that there is no shortage of in the State
    of California.
        So I want to begin by thanking you and your entire team at
    the Forest Service for your work in general, but more
    specifically and more recently for your support in the
    expansion of both the Berryessa Snow Mountain National Monument
    in Northern California, and the San Gabriel Mountains National
    Monument in Southern California, which includes additional
    acreage in the Western Angeles National Forest. It is a major
    accomplishment. I appreciate the partnership and working
    together, and thank you for the support of Jen Eberlien, who
    was with us at the celebration this last Saturday.
        I do want to turn to an issue that was touched on earlier
    in the hearing--that of federal firefighter pay. I was proud to
    introduce the Wildland Firefighter Paycheck Protection Act
    together with Senator Sinema, which would protect the pay
    raises secured for wildland firefighters in the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law.
        My question to you, and for the record, you know, the
    proposed budget for FY25 provides $216 million to implement a
    permanent, comprehensive pay increase for the wildland
    firefighter workforce.
        From you to the Committee, how will these pay increases
    compare to the pay raises secured in the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law?
        Mr. Moore. Yes, thank you, Senator. So one of the biggest
    differences is that the pay raise in the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law doesn't allow that increase to be carried
    over into retirement. And that's one of the biggest differences
    there.
        The other big difference between the two is that our
    recruitment and retention improves with a permanent version of
    that, as opposed to that temporary version that has been
    extended through the continuing resolution. And by the way, we
    really thank and appreciate Congress for extending it.
        We also know that we have a lot of nervous firefighters out
    there waiting to see if this is going to be permanent or not.
    And if by chance it is not, we probably could expect to see a
    lot of our firefighters leaving for better pay and better
    opportunities.
        Senator Padilla. I know there are general recruitment and
    retention issues----
        Mr. Moore. Yes.
        Senator Padilla [continuing]. Across the workforce, but I
    understand it is particularly acute amongst firefighters. So I
    think you answered my follow-up question--would it be helpful
    for your efforts for Congress to pass a permanent pay increase?
    I will assume the answer is yes.
        Mr. Moore. Yes, I think it would certainly help the federal
    workforce.
        Senator Padilla. On a different topic, recreation.gov has
    been in the news. It's a popular website for users to a book
    campsites, enter hiking lotteries, or reserve vehicle passes.
    And with each of these transactions, a small reservation fee is
    charged.
        Now, while many users expect that the entirety of their
    fees when booking on the website directly benefit the public
    lands that they treasure and they visit, there's some of the
    money that is instead funneled to the website manager, which
    has been reported to be about $140 million in profits from 2018
    to 2022.
        So I think it's important that we use thoughtful
    reservation systems that balance our conservation efforts with
    public access. But I am concerned that there is a little bit of
    lack of transparency here around the fee structure for the
    website.
        What is the status of the recreation.gov contract, and what
    is the Forest Service doing to increase transparency of
    lotteries and campsite applications?
        Mr. Moore. Senator Padilla, I can get you more of the
    specifics that I have more assurance on in terms of its
    accuracy, so I can provide that to you.
        Senator Padilla. Okay, I will take that as a follow-up, and
    include in that, please, you know, this was a topic of
    conversation in the Subcommittee hearing yesterday with the
    Park Service, where I asked them to follow up on what are the
    best practices that they are considering in ensuring that we
    design an equitable reservation system, including what they may
    need from Congress to help improve outcomes. You have to
    measure.
        The point I was making yesterday is, it's one thing to
    build on access, right? These monument expansions, for example,
    every new National Park that is created provides access for the
    American public. We know that there is a gap in access, a
    nature gap, if you will, in which particularly communities of
    color and lower income communities visit the parks less. And I
    just want to make sure that when there is a reservation system
    online, the way it is designed, the way people interface with
    it, it's a tool to help close the gap.
        Mr. Moore. Yes.
        Senator Padilla. Not exacerbate that gap. So if you can
    include some of that information in your follow-up, I would
    really appreciate it, but thank you again for your service.
        [Senator Padilla now presiding.]
        Now I pass it over to Senator Hoeven for questions.
        Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Senator Padilla. Chief, good to
    have you here. Thanks to both of you gentlemen for joining us.
    We appreciate you and your work. And Chief, we are working on
    getting you out to North Dakota on the National Grasslands the
    week of June 24th. Does that still sound like something that
    you are planning to work on with us to get done?
        Mr. Moore. Yes. All I know, Senator, is that it's June, and
    I have agreed to it. I do not know the specific date, but I
    know that we were working with your staff.
        Senator Hoeven. Yeah, they told us June 24th, that week.
    And so, we will work with your staff and look forward,
    obviously, to you getting out there and seeing our cowboys and
    energy producers and tourism officials and everybody else. They
    really appreciate it. And they'll turn out to see you and have
    an opportunity to visit with you. So we appreciate that.
        You have got a travel management plan you are working on. I
    think it really goes to where you are identifying all your
    roads and access points out in the grasslands. I guess my
    question there is, will you commit to consulting with all
    relevant stakeholders as you work on that travel management
    plan?
        Mr. Moore. Yes, absolutely.
        Senator Hoeven. Okay, and that is something obviously we
    can talk about when you are out there as well. I think it was
    last year that we had Deputy Chief Chris French out there. He
    did a great job. So he set a high bar for you.
        Mr. Moore. I know, I told him to be on standby to come with
    me.
        Senator Hoeven. Yeah, I don't know. I mean, he really put
    the pressure on. He actually did a great job. We appreciated
    him being out there, and he met with our folks. But also, as a
    result of that effort, announced additional funding for noxious
    weeds, which is really important. The first $1.7 million has
    been allocated, but there is a commitment of $4.5 million. I
    want to know that you stand behind that and that will be
    something we can talk to our grazers about.
        Mr. Moore. Yes, absolutely.
        Senator Hoeven. Good. Thank you. Senator Padilla asked you
    about staffing needs, and do you think you are making some
    progress there? That is a real issue for us as well, having the
    staff out there.
        Mr. Moore. Yes, we are making some progress on that. Our
    challenge really, and it is not something that is only a Forest
    Service issue, it is an issue for many of our communities, but
    we are struggling from time to time to find the expertise to
    come to some locations because of the cost of living. It's a
    challenge.
        Senator Hoeven. It is. And so, I just want to emphasize
    that as well. We really need folks out there, you know, in our
    part of the world too. Deferred maintenance--we passed the
    Great American Outdoors Act, as you know, to get at a lot of
    things, one of which was deferred maintenance in a big way. Not
    only in the parks, but on the National Grasslands and other
    places as well.
        Two things I want to go at here--one is, our state's
    putting money into this on a partnership basis with you all.
    And the next thing I am going to ask you about is our Joint
    Chiefs program, you know, with the NRCS, and so both are joint
    programs where we are trying to leverage your abilities to get
    stuff done out there.
        And that includes a lot of things. I mean, you all are
    focused on a lot of the aspects that may go to tourism, some of
    those kinds of things. But our grazers and ranchers, cowboys
    out there, you know, they need some fencing, they need water
    lines, they need dugouts, all those things. They need
    enhancements on the ground, like I think both Senator Daines
    and Senator Padilla were maybe talking about, and Senator
    Hickenlooper, in terms of addressing fire, prescribed burns,
    all that kind of stuff. Talk to me about both the partnership
    with the state on those issues where we will provide money to
    partner with you as well as the Joint Chiefs program, which
    Senator Bennet and I have worked on legislatively here.
        Mr. Moore. Yes. So on the Good Neighbor Authority we have,
    that program has grown really significantly, working with the
    state and locals. We are hoping that we are seeing some
    language in the Farm Bill that would treat the counties and the
    tribes the same as the states, which would allow them to keep
    the revenues in the counties and in the areas where it was
    generated.
        So I believe that is a version of the Farm Bill as we go
    forward. But I think that would make a large difference in the
    amount of work that we are able to do on the ground.
        I think when you look at the other piece there, in terms of
    the Joint Chiefs Awards projects--we just met with NRCS and we
    have just approved, I think, ten projects. And so we do see a
    lot of value in the Joint Chiefs because it gives us an
    opportunity to, more than anything, work as one USDA, where we
    bring in a number of USDA agencies together to do work across
    jurisdictional boundaries. And so we have been seeing a lot of
    value in that work and in that effort.
        Senator Hoeven. Yes. And those are things, again, and I
    will try to get our state agriculture commissioner out there as
    well. And then finally, Mr. Chairman, I beg your indulgence.
    This is on behalf of Senator Barrasso. He had one question he
    wanted me to ask. So with your indulgence, I will go ahead and
    do that.
        The EPA recently revised its standard for particulate
    matter to 2.5 under the Clean Air Act. And so, the concern is
    that this new standard will effectively prohibit prescribed
    fires, you know, prescribed burns in the West. That is
    something obviously we are very concerned about in the
    grasslands too, under this new standard.
        So under the standard, will emissions from prescribed fires
    put communities in violation of the Clean Air Act?
        Mr. Moore. So how I would respond to that, Senator, is that
    we have to make some choices. And if we do not allow prescribed
    fires to take place, then wildfires are going to take place.
    And while we argue and debate about the amount of particulate
    matter, I think we really need to have a really honest
    conversation about what is it that we are trying to achieve,
    and what are the lesser evils of this issue around fire. But
    prescribed fire, I think, is necessary to take place.
        Senator Hoeven. Exactly. And so, does Congress need to
    provide an exemption for prescribed fires under the Clean Air
    Act, in your opinion?
        Mr. Moore. I think if Congress did provide that, we would
    be satisfied.
        Senator Hoeven. Okay. Thanks again for being here today and
    for your work. We appreciate it.
        Mr. Moore. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Padilla. Thank you, Senator. Please pass along to
    Senator Barrasso that there is a bipartisan support on that
    concept. So I am looking forward to working with him, Chief
    Moore. I now turn it over to Senator Cortez Masto for her
    questions.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. Chief, good to see you.
    Thank you for being here.
        Mr. Moore. Good to see you.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Not that you had a choice, but we
    appreciate you coming.
        Over the past few years, the Forest Service, along with
    other public land management agencies have seen a considerable
    investment, right? The Great American Outdoors Act, the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Act, and Inflation Reduction Act have
    enabled major initiatives like the Wildfire Crisis Strategy. At
    the same time, the Forest Service has made a concerted effort
    to recruit and hire new staff to implement the work borne from
    these major investments. I know this, let me just give you an
    example.
        The Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, which is mostly in
    Nevada, I understand has the highest staffing levels that you
    have had in decades. In 2022 and 2023, more permanent employees
    were hired than were lost to attrition, which had not been the
    case for many years. And last year, 64 new hires were brought
    on board in Nevada.
        But I am curious to hear your outlook for the future,
    because unless Congress enacts extensions, all of these
    authorities have an expiration date, yet the need, as you have
    been talking about here today, for all of these initiatives and
    investments still remains.
        So how do you continue the pace of work? What do you want
    us to know with respect to where we should be focusing our
    attention and what we should be doing?
        Mr. Moore. So first, I want to just acknowledge to Congress
    and this Committee how much we appreciate what we have been
    able to do with the BIL and IRA funding, because it has given
    us a chance to really hit the reset button in many ways. And
    what you mentioned on the Humboldt-Toiyabe, we had been losing
    steadily a lot of employees for the last 20 years.
        And so, the amount of requests and amount of work continues
    to go up, and the number of employees has gone down. And so we
    have been really challenged on how we work with the public
    going forward.
        And so, while we have created a lot of really great
    relationships through partners and through our community
    leaders, we really needed to beef up just the basic bare bones
    of the organization. And so, the BIL and IRA have allowed us to
    do that. And now that we have beefed it up, you know, our
    goal--we lost 40 percent of our non-fire workforce over the
    last 20 years--and our ideal was to bring back half of that and
    then leverage the other half to partnerships.
        I am happy to say that last year, when we look at partner
    contributions to what we have been able to do, they contributed
    about $970 million worth of value to the work that we do
    because of that leveraging. We have also been able to bring
    some employees back on board. And now we need to assess where
    we are with the number of employees, because when we look at
    the attrition rate, I would like to think that people are happy
    in the Forest Service, as they are not leaving as rapidly as
    they used to. But there are a lot of factors that go in there.
    So we don't have the attrition rate that we normally had been
    having.
        And so, we have to do an assessment and see, okay, what
    kind of shifts do we need to make in the organization? And so
    that is where we are from an organizational standpoint, but it
    has been so refreshing to be able to bring new employees into
    the workforce with new perspectives, new ideas, and to help us
    move into that next generation of natural resource management
    on our public lands.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Well, thank you. And I have to tell
    you, the men and women that work in the Forest Service in
    Nevada that I know love their jobs and are committed and truly
    believe in the mission. And the biggest challenge we have is
    they are overworked at times and overwhelmed because there's an
    understaffing issue. So it's nice to see that you are focused
    on addressing those issues.
        I am going to ask you, and you may not be able to answer it
    today, but if you could get back to me.
        Mr. Moore. Sure.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Last summer, storms associated with
    the Tropical Storm Hilary swept through southern Nevada,
    damaging communities and infrastructure. Among the areas
    damaged was the Spring Mountains National Recreation Area, and
    it is managed by the Forest Service. The damage caused to this
    area by floods forced closures of many areas important for
    outdoor recreation.
        While much of that has reopened, I understand that some
    sites may stay closed for the foreseeable future, either
    because a site can't be restored to as it was, or because not
    enough money is available. You may not be able to now, but at
    some point in time, can you speak to that and address why, or
    just in general, your efforts to restore that Spring Mountain
    area?
        Mr. Moore. I will get back with you on some specifics about
    that specific area. I know generally when we have these types
    of things happen, a lot of times--and I am not saying it
    happened there--but a lot of times when those facilities were
    designed, they probably put facilities in places that they
    probably should never have been. Not that this is the case.
        So we will look into the specifics of that to talk about
    why some facilities didn't come back, but then how do we
    mitigate that by adding others in other locations that are more
    suitable.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. I look forward to that
    follow-up.
        Mr. Moore. Thank you.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Padilla. Thank you, Senator Cortez Masto. I want to
    take this opportunity to thank again our two witnesses. Per
    Senator Cortez Masto, you really had no choice, but we do thank
    you for being here and for this discussion.
        A little bit of housekeeping--members of the committee will
    have until close of business tomorrow to submit additional
    questions for the record.
         And with that, this Committee now stands adjourned. Thank
    you very much.
        [Whereupon, at 11:25 a.m. the hearing was adjourned.]

                          APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

                                  ----------

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                       [all]