[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 20 (Tuesday, January 31, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H568-H570]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              AERIAL FIRE RETARDANT TO PROTECT HUMAN LIFE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 9, 2023, the Chair recognizes the

[[Page H569]]

gentleman from Washington (Mr. Newhouse) for 30 minutes.


                             General Leave

  Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Washington?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me say that I associate 
myself with the remarks from the gentleman from Arizona and hope that 
many people listen to his important messages that he provides for us.
  Mr. Speaker, standing here in front of, what some would say, a 
beautiful picture, this is a photo of a fire that occurred near Grand 
Coulee Dam in my district about 1\1/2\ years ago to help depict 
something that I want to bring some attention to this evening in this 
Special Order.
  My friend from Montana, Mr. Rosendale, and I, and several others, 
will be talking about something that is critical to the people in the 
Western United States. The communities across this country who will be 
absolutely devastated if a radical environmental group gets its way in 
a courtroom in the State of Montana.
  Now, for those of you who may be unfamiliar with the Western part of 
the United States, let me just tell you a couple things.
  In many parts of the West, it gets very, very dry. And in the 
summertime, that dryness is coupled with extreme heat. And this can--
although it makes for some gorgeous, beautiful days, but you may have 
heard it often leads to catastrophic wildfires that devastate forests, 
lives, property, and even full communities.
  Now, fire in the forest is a natural occurrence and it is an 
important part of that forest's lifecycle. But as many of us have been 
saying for many years, and many of you know, much of our forest has 
been poorly managed, if managed at all. There are decades of buildup of 
dead trees, and brush, that are on our forest floors so that fires in 
recent years have been truly catastrophic, leaving swaths of our 
National Forest, nothing but ash, dead trees, blackened trees laying 
all over the Earth, scorched Earth that cannot produce another crop of 
trees.
  In my district, in Okanogan County, the Whitmore fire back in 2021, 
burned through almost 60,000 acres destroying several structures on the 
Colville Indian Reservation and had as many as 500 residences under 
level 2 evacuations. It was devastating.
  But through the hard, backbreaking work of firefighters doing 
everything that they absolutely could do to protect those communities, 
I am happy to say that no lives were lost and it was successfully 
contained.
  I think I can say that everyone in this room agrees that we have to 
do something about these catastrophic fires. And also, I think I can 
say that when faced by fire, we can all agree that we must utilize 
every tool in our toolbox to help prevent those fires from endangering 
human lives.
  I cannot say the same about a group that calls themselves the FSEEE. 
For some reason, this organization, the FSEEE, have decided to use a 
provision of the Waters of the United States Rules, or WOTUS, and put 
the lives of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people, at risk 
by removing one of the most important tools that we have to fight fires 
in the West, and that is, aerial fire retardant.
  For those who don't know, aerial fire retardant is dropped around a 
wildfire's edges in an effort to contain its spread and allow ground 
crews, those that are fighting fires by hand, the time that they need 
to help extinguish the blaze. Firefighters calls this painting the box, 
and use the respite that the retardant line gives them to safely build 
a defensible line to hold the fire.
  Aerial fire retardant is generally considered non-toxic but the 
Forest Service prohibits placing these fire retardants directly into 
water bodies or into buffer zones that surround water bodies with one 
allowed exception: to protect human life and safety.
  Between 2012 and 2019, less than 1 percent of Forest Service 
retardant drops were made into water that was allowed under this 
exception.
  According to the FSEEE, by protecting human life and safety, the 
Forest Service has violated the Clean Water Act for discharging aerial 
fire retardant into navigable waters without an NPDES, or a National 
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit.
  Even though the regulations for administering the NPDES system 
specifically state that fire control is  exempted and communications 
from EPA dating back all the way to 1993 indicate a permit was not 
required for firefighting efforts.

  Now, if this group wins this case or even receives an injunction, the 
Forest Service and other firefighting organizations would be prevented 
from aerially dropping fire retardant nationwide during the coming 2023 
fire season, and even beyond, until they acquire this permit, the NPDES 
permit, which as many of you know, can literally take years to secure.
  Now, if you haven't already connected the dots, this would be 
catastrophic for Western communities who routinely experience 
wildfires.
  The 2023 fire season, if you didn't know, has already started in the 
drier parts of the country. It has already burned through over 11,000 
acres this month, January, alone. The FSEEE claims to be doing this for 
environmental reasons. I asked them:
  How environmentally friendly is it to release millions of tons of 
carbon dioxide into the atmosphere when these fires can't be 
controlled?
  How environmentally friendly is it to have burned soil, ash choke our 
rivers and our streams?
  How environmentally friendly is it to wipe out entire ecosystems, 
plant life, wildlife, the trees, the birds, the wild animals?
  And even if the FSEEE were able to prove me wrong on every single one 
of these points, is all this worth the cost of human life?
  Firefighters risk their lives to protect our communities, other 
people, and our forests, and we should listen to them when they tell us 
that fire retardant makes their job safer, and it truly is an essential 
tool to protect lives.
  Mr. Speaker, I stand here today in truly utter disbelief that I even 
have to make this statement. That, no, the value of a human life is far 
beyond that of some possible incidental disruption to aquatic 
ecosystems that would be equally, or more accurately, more damaged by 
the toxic runoff of ash following a wildfire.

                              {time}  2000

  We did ensure that fire retardant remains available to our 
firefighters for this 2023 fire season and beyond.
  Mr. Speaker, I turn to my friend from Montana, Mr. Rosendale, who is 
co-leading this Special Order with me, for his comments from his great 
State.
  Mr. ROSENDALE. Mr. Speaker, i thank Representative Newhouse for 
chairing the Western Caucus and bringing this very important issue and 
lawsuit to light.
  Let me begin by quoting President Dwight Eisenhower when he said 
farming looks mighty easy when you live a thousand miles away from a 
cornfield and use a pencil for a plow.
  The problem that we face on a regular basis across our Nation is that 
far too many individuals who are completely removed from the issues are 
making decisions about how to address them. This is exactly the case 
when we look at the current lawsuit against the United States Forest 
Service.
  First, let's shed a little bit of light on the litigants, the Forest 
Service Employees for Environmental Ethics. As Representative Newhouse 
described them, the FSEEE is not a group of Forest Service employees. 
They are a radical group out of Oregon whose goal is to stop humans 
from properly managing forests while lining their own pockets with 
taxpayer dollars after a settlement.
  The result? Severe air and water quality degradation and the risk of 
thousands of lives and livelihoods.
  Fire retardant is a vital and effective tool for Montanans and rural 
communities, slowing the spread of fires and minimizing damage.
  Wildfires burned more than 7.5 million acres across the United States 
in 2022. This number could easily be doubled or tripled if not for the 
use of safe and effective fire retardants that the litigants are suing 
to prohibit the use of.
  Anyone who has visited the site of a wildfire, even years afterward, 
recognizes the devastation and destruction

[[Page H570]]

they cause, both short and long term. The soil is rendered sterile 
because of the immense heat generated, resulting in no productive 
vegetation growth for years after the fire. This lack of vegetative 
cover then leads to major erosion problems and a dramatic reduction in 
water quality, severely damaging the fisheries, and the elimination of 
food and habitat for wildlife.
  On top of that, the reduction in air quality during wildfires is so 
severe that anyone who hasn't lived through it couldn't even comprehend 
the effects on a community.
  I have driven through these smoke-choked areas in broad daylight and 
had to use my headlights because the visibility was reduced so 
dramatically because the smoke was so thick.
  I have spoken with young and old alike who have been hospitalized due 
to severe respiratory conditions as a direct result of the smoke and 
the particulate that is produced by these wildfires.
  In Montana, we see thousands of acres burn every single year, and 
these wildfires pose a major threat to our way of life. We see property 
destroyed and crops decimated. It cripples our economy and slows our 
tourism.
  Montana is proud to have a dedicated team of first responders and 
pilots who fight tirelessly to contain these wildfires utilizing these 
retardants. Because of their ability to utilize this tool and mitigate 
fire risk, ways of life in rural communities are preserved, and those 
who choose to live in remote areas are able to do so safely.
  Wildland firefighters work to protect communities and forests from 
the spread of wildfires, and the aerial application of fire retardant 
has proven to be the most effective method of containment.
  This method is crucial at a time when government regulations tie our 
hands in regard to proper forest management. If it were not for these 
draconian regulations, fewer fires would be burning, and much of the 
retardant complained about would not even be necessary.
  Montanans have a proud tradition of responsible stewardship of our 
land and water resources. A simple review of State and private land 
conditions, as compared to the Federal lands of Montana, will prove 
that.
  The claims by environmentalists that our efforts to contain wildfires 
are harming our watersheds are blatantly false. According to the Forest 
Service's environmental impact study, 1/100th of 1 percent of all fire 
retardant drops spilled into the water. This was done either 
inadvertently or under the allowed exception to protect life and 
safety. This is because our first responders follow already-existing 
rulings prohibiting the delivery of fire retardant directly into bodies 
of water.
  We recognize the need for clean water. It is obvious that keeping our 
water clean is very important for our agricultural industry, our energy 
production, critical infrastructure development, and certainly for all 
of our citizens.
  I also ask those who allege these claims to remember that wildfires 
do not discriminate. They spread wherever there is fuel and, if left 
unchecked, can and will further threaten protected water and lands.
  The consequences of a future ruling preventing the use of fire 
retardants are especially dire for Montana. If this were to happen, 
catastrophic wildfires would threaten thousands of lives, millions of 
dollars in assets, with immeasurable destruction to air, land, and 
water quality.
  This lawsuit is a continuation of the radical environmentalists' 
agenda that has been waging war against Western and rural communities. 
Simply put, these environmentalists literally want to watch the world 
burn. I won't stand by silently and allow that to happen.
  This case needs to be thrown out. Please join me in fighting these 
misguided lawsuits, which strive to gain revenue from taxpayers at the 
expense of property and the lives of people across Montana and the rest 
of the country.
  Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Rosendale, I appreciate that, especially coming 
from the State of Montana. Your State, just like mine, has seen record 
catastrophic fires over the last several years.
  Thousands of acres have been destroyed throughout the Western United 
States, millions of dollars of damage, lives lost, and communities that 
have been totally destroyed. Untold numbers of wildlife have been lost. 
These fires have literally changed the landscape of our national 
forests for generations.
  The carbon dioxide being emitted from these devastating fires 
surpasses the auto emissions in just 1 year. The smoke from these fires 
has even recently come as far as Washington, D.C. I had hoped that that 
would get people's attention.
  We are dealing with that on a regular basis all summer long in the 
communities that I represent and that Mr. Rosendale represents, causing 
health issues and tainting agricultural crops. It truly is an issue 
that is hurting our quality of life.
  If this court case is lost, the situation is going to get much worse. 
We cannot let this happen.
  To help tell the story that we are facing in the Western United 
States, another Western Caucus member from the great State of Idaho, 
the Gem State, Mr. Russ Fulcher, is here.
  Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Speaker, my colleague from the State of Washington 
and my colleague from the State of Montana and I share some very 
similar concerns and some very similar demographics, so I am here to 
rise in opposition to the attempts to ban any kind of aerial fire 
retardant.
  Currently, the Forest Service is facing litigation that, if its 
opponent is successful, could result in the loss of this critical 
firefighting tool.
  Aerial fire retardant helps slow the spread of wildfires and creates 
a barrier between the fire and unburned fuel load. This makes it easier 
for ground crews to access and extinguish fires. It can be applied 
quickly in hard-to-reach areas where the ground crews cannot get 
access.
  Additionally, aerial fire retardant can help protect homes and other 
structures, as well as reduce the amount of smoke produced by the fire.
  We are seeing the catastrophic results of years of neglect and 
mismanagement by the Federal Government. It comes in the form of more 
frequent and more destructive wildfires. These fires not only do more 
harm to people and property but also to nature itself.
  If I can be very clear, our Federal resources are overwhelmed. In my 
own State, two-thirds of the land mass, or nearly two-thirds, is 
Federal land. They simply don't have the capacity to manage these 
lands, and so they don't.
  That results in wildfire, and we need every tool in the toolbox we 
possibly can access to fight it.
  As we prepare for the 2023 fire season, we must maximize these tools 
at our disposal in order to better fight the fires that threaten our 
local communities, economies, environment, and health.
  Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Fulcher, thanks for relating your experiences in 
the great State of Idaho.
  Mr. Speaker, fires are a huge problem in this country. We have been 
working hard over the time I have been here in Washington, D.C., to 
make this problem better.
  This action, if this court decision moves forward, as we think it 
might, is going to take us back years. It is going to make the problem 
considerably worse. We must not let this happen.
  I thank Mr. Rosendale from Montana for helping lead this Special 
Order and Mr. Fulcher from Idaho for sharing with us his thoughts from 
his home State. I thank members of the Western Caucus, almost a hundred 
of us strong in this Congress, for focusing on this issue and bringing 
to the attention of the American people how important this court 
decision could be for the future of our national forests.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________