[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 182 (Wednesday, November 8, 2017)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1529-E1530]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         OPPOSING H.R. 2936, THE RESILIENT FEDERAL FORESTS ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. SUZANNE BONAMICI

                               of oregon

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, November 8, 2017

  Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 2936, 
the Resilient Federal Forests Act of 2017. The fire season this year 
was devastating in Oregon and across the west. It destroyed forestland, 
reduced air quality, and left a lasting mark on our communities. 
Congress must increase funding for wildfire suppression and fire 
prevention actions on public lands. At the same time, Congress can and 
must do this while maintaining foundational environmental laws. I 
cannot support this bill because it undermines the bedrock science-
based decision-making processes undertaken by land management agencies, 
and would make it more difficult for states to receive federal funding 
for wildfire disasters.
   I strongly support provisions in the bill that would find new and 
innovative ways to use wood as a building material for tall wood 
buildings. Cross-laminated timber and other innovative wood products 
create sustainable building materials, generate more value from timber 
harvests, and translate into more jobs in rural Oregon and around the 
country.
   This legislation does not do enough to help communities fund 
wildfire suppression. It includes a process that would slow local 
access to much-needed funds, and it calculates funding without regard 
to true wildfire disaster needs. I joined my colleague, Congressman 
Schrader, in submitting an amendment that would address these problems 
and increase available funding for wildfire suppression. Unfortunately, 
the amendment was not accepted for floor consideration by the Rules 
Committee.
   I have heard from counties, families, teachers, and school 
administrators in forest counties in my district who have told me they 
will

[[Page E1530]]

face great hardship if they do not receive the Secure Rural Schools 
payments they are owed. The last authorized Secure Rural Schools 
payment was distributed in FY 2016. Earlier this year, I joined my 
colleague Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers in introducing 
bipartisan legislation to reauthorize the program through FY 2017. I am 
frustrated the majority did not use this opportunity to reauthorize the 
Secure Rural Schools program and provide certainty to the forest 
counties who rely on these funds to educate students.
   I am also concerned that this bill limits public participation in 
the management of public lands. It reduces the consideration of forest 
management alternatives to two options--action or no action. It creates 
overly broad exclusions for projects to skirt environmental review 
under the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species 
Act. In addition, it reduces opportunities for the public to engage 
meaningfully in these decisions. As a former consumer protection 
attorney, I am concerned about the inclusion of an arbitration pilot 
program that would force many challenges to federal forest management 
decisions to go through an agency-run arbitration process instead of 
through the judicial system.
   We must manage our federal forests better, but we can do so without 
including these harmful provisions. I urge my colleagues to come back 
to the table and develop a more appropriate and effective solution.

                          ____________________