[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 10]
[House]
[Pages 14007-14042]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




         RESTORING HEALTHY FORESTS FOR HEALTHY COMMUNITIES ACT


                             General Leave

  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. 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 bill, H.R. 1526.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hultgren). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Washington?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 351 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 1526.
  The Chair appoints the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Woodall) to 
preside over the Committee of the Whole.

                              {time}  1814


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 1526) to restore employment and educational opportunities in, and 
improve the economic stability of, counties containing National Forest 
System land, while also reducing Forest Service management costs, by 
ensuring that such counties have a dependable source of revenue from 
National Forest System land, to provide a temporary extension of the 
Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000, and 
for other purposes, with Mr. Woodall in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  The gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) and the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.

                              {time}  1815

  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Over the last few months, deadly wildfires, especially in California, 
Arizona, and Colorado, and wildfires in other western States, have 
highlighted the growing problem with our current Federal forest 
management plans.
  Like all public lands, our national forests should, unless otherwise 
designated, be open for multiple use, for everything from recreation to 
job-creating economic activities; but instead, Federal regulations and 
lawsuits have effectively shut down our national forests. Timber 
harvests have dropped by 80 percent over the last 30 years in our 
national forests.
  While the Forest Service once received $2 for every $1 spent, it now 
spends $2 for every $1 it produces. Our Federal forests are being badly 
managed, and there have been devastating consequences to that 
management.
  First, rural communities are struggling to survive and no longer have 
stable funding to pay for vital services. The Federal Government made a 
promise over a century ago to actively manage our forests for the 
benefit of rural schools and communities. Under a Federal law passed in 
1908, the U.S. Forest Service has historically shared 25 percent of all 
timber revenues with rural counties containing national forestland. 
Since the Federal Government doesn't pay local taxes, those counties 
depended on this revenue to help fund essential needs like schools and 
local infrastructure.
  But as timber sales declined, Mr. Chairman, so did the revenue to 
those counties. Counties struggled to find the resources needed to keep 
teachers in the classroom and police on the streets. Congress provided 
a short-term solution in 2000 by passing the Secure Rural Schools Act, 
which continued to provide funding as timber sales declined. SRS was 
created to provide ``transition payments'' over a 6-year period while 
these counties diversified their economies. But the fact is, Mr. 
Chairman, their economies are built on natural resources--in this case, 
timber.
  With a national debt measuring in the trillions of dollars, it is 
becoming increasingly difficult to finance this program that costs 
several hundred million dollars annually, especially when it fails to 
address the fundamental problem of declining forest management. A new 
approach is needed now.
  The Federal Government's lack of forest management has cost tens of 
thousands of American jobs. These forests are the backbone of these 
communities' economy. From the logging to the mill work to the truck 
drivers, our forests put thousands of people to work. I should say had 
put thousands of people to work.
  Additionally, as I have mentioned, the lack of active forest 
management has caused a significant degradation of forest health and 
made them increasingly susceptible to bug infestations and catastrophic 
wildfires.
  Mr. Chairman, this is an interesting statistic. Last year--just last 
year--9.3 million acres of national forests burned in wildfires. By 
comparison, only 200,000 acres were harvested by the U.S. Forest 
Service. That means that 44 times more acres burned compared to those 
acres that were responsibly harvested. We cannot continue to sit idly 
by while wildfires rage, homes are destroyed, and lives are lost.
  H.R. 1526, the Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act, 
is a long-term solution to put Americans back to work to restore our 
forest health and help prevent catastrophic wildfires by renewing our 
Federal Government's commitment to actively manage our national 
forests.
  The bill requires responsible timber production on at least half of 
our Federal Forest Service's commercial timberlands. These lands, by 
the way, Mr. Chairman, were specifically identified by the Forest 
Service for timber harvest.
  By helping to restore active forest management, this bill is 
estimated to create over 200,000 direct jobs and would provide nearly 
$400 million in savings over 10 years.
  As required by law in 1908, H.R. 1526 would again share 25 percent of 
the revenue from the timber sales with the counties containing this 
national forestland.
  The bill will also allow us a short-term extension of the Secure 
Rural School payments to provide funding to counties as the Forest 
Service transitions back into active management.
  H.R. 1526 would also help prevent deadly and catastrophic wildfires 
by focusing on hazardous fuels reduction and empowering States to take 
a more active role in reducing those wildlife risks.
  Finally, this bill recognizes that States and counties are often 
better at managing forestlands than the Federal Government. States have 
shown that they are able to produce more revenue from timberlands than 
the Federal Government.
  Let me give you an example in my home State of Washington. Washington

[[Page 14008]]

State is able to harvest seven times more timber and generate 200 times 
more revenue on one-fourth of the land compared to what the Forest 
Service has. They do that by better management.
  This bill would allow counties to actively manage portions of 
national forestland through the creation of Community Forest 
Demonstration Areas.
  H.R. 1526 has broad support. Over 140 local and national 
organizations, including 68 counties in 17 different States, have 
endorsed this vital, commonsense legislation to restore active forest 
management that will protect American jobs and livelihoods. These 
communities, their families, and their businesses deserve better than 
the status quo and the current failure of our forest management plans 
today.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  As someone who represents rural, forested communities that depend on 
our national forests, this is an issue I care deeply about. I know my 
colleagues on the other side care deeply about this, too. We have many 
common concerns in terms of forest health, in terms of fuel reduction, 
in terms of dealing with bug infestations and other things.
  There is, I think, a common interest in finding solutions to better 
manage our Federal forests. Millions of acres are in need of 
restoration to address disease, bugs, climate change, and fire, which 
was made painfully clear again this summer.
  We need a long-term plan to provide for our rural forested counties. 
Right now, many of these counties are struggling to stay afloat. 
Counties in my district, for example, are near bankruptcy. Critical 
county services like public health, education, roads, and, most 
importantly, law enforcement have been slashed to the point where some 
counties have no rural sheriff's patrols and prisoners have been let 
out of jail, prisoners who should not be let out of jail.
  The Federal Government made a commitment to these counties 100 years 
ago. Congress should honor that commitment. I think there are 
bipartisan ways to honor that commitment.
  The inclusion of 1 year of county payments at fiscal year 2010 
levels--substantially more than those proposed in recent legislation in 
the Senate--will provide a lifeline to more than 600 forested counties 
in 41 States.
  I want to thank the chairman for his hard work on this provision in 
the bill. Any long-term solution on forest management will require 
bridge payments to counties. This bill provides a bridge payment.
  This bill includes an extension of stewardship contracting authority 
and allows our Federal agencies to offer contracts up to 20 years. 
Stewardship contracts can help reduce the cost of restoration to our 
Federal agencies--and, thus, the U.S. taxpayer--to help treat large 
landscapes to prevent catastrophic wildfires we saw in the West this 
summer and provide predictability to local businesses and industry that 
incentivizes investment and creates jobs.
  I met with a gentleman who is going to open a 2.5 megawatt biomass 
plant in Colorado in November. He is doing that with a 10-year 
stewardship contract on dead bug kill in the vicinity of his plant. It 
was done through a collaborative process. The result is the Forest 
Service will be able to do fuel reduction on twice as much acreage as 
if they had to appropriate taxpayer money to do it. He told me if that 
was extended to 20 years, which this bill does, that the cost would 
come down even more. So we would create electricity and make these 
forests more healthy by utilizing that biomass.
  I particularly want to thank the chairman for working with 
Representative Walden, Representative Schrader, and myself to include 
our balanced, bipartisan solution for the statutorily unique O&C lands. 
These lands exist nowhere else in the country. They are historically, 
statutorily, and geographically unique.
  The solution we came up with for these unique lands would not be 
appropriate for other land included in the larger bill. I spent many 
hours with Representative Walden and Representative Schrader and with 
you, Mr. Chairman, to work out a reasonable and fair solution to an 
incredibly complex and longstanding controversy in western Oregon. I 
admit it's not a perfect solution. There are things I would change. 
There are things that Representative Walden would change. There are 
things that Representative Schrader would change, and, Mr. Chairman, 
I'm certain there are things that you would have done differently. But 
that's the legislative process at its best. We did the best we could do 
and came up with a strong proposal. It's an Oregon solution to an 
Oregon problem, and I am pleased to see it included in this 
legislation.
  That doesn't mean that I don't have strong concerns about other 
provisions in the underlying bill. I do. Members should know that H.R. 
1526 would dramatically alter the way we manage our national forest 
system and would threaten the multiuse mission on our public lands.
  The bill would establish ``timber production zones'' in every 
national forest and more than double timber harvest levels nationwide. 
In order to meet these targets, Federal forest managers would be 
required to allow logging and road building in current roadless areas 
and sharply curtail public review of proposed logging projects.
  The bill would close the courthouse door to citizens concerned about 
their communities and quality of life in the neighboring forests by 
requiring plaintiffs to post bonds, a new precedent, in order to 
challenge Federal management decisions.
  I have had communities in my district litigate against the Forest 
Service over timber projects that they felt threaten their drinking 
water supply. I have had the timber industry litigate, as we have had 
environmental groups. It doesn't mean it is not frustrating, but we can 
work on streamlining that process without shutting the door to the 
courthouse, as we did in the HFRA legislation, a bipartisan bill a 
number of years ago.
  This bill would also devolve national forest management currently 
under the stewardship of the Forest Service to State boards and exempt 
these areas from major national environmental laws.
  The practical impact would be to reverse 100 years of national forest 
precedent and undermine--or in some cases, eliminate--multiple use of 
the national forests over substantial parts of our forest, harming 
recreation, hunting, fishing, and tourism.

                              {time}  1830

  H.R. 1526 represents the largest proposed change to the modern Forest 
Service since it was created by Gifford Pinchot and Theodore Roosevelt 
in 1905.
  I want to reiterate that the Democrats stand ready to work with our 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle on forest management. There 
is common ground. There is bipartisan agreement on some issues. 
Hopefully, this bill is the beginning of that conversation, not the 
end, as we attempt to have a real legislative process with the Senate 
on these issues.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                                                     Wasco County,


                               Board of County, Commissioners,

                            The Dalles, Oregon, September 4, 2013.
     Congressman Doc Hastings,
     Chairman Natural Resources Committee,
     Washington, DC.
     Congressman Peter DeFazio,
     Ranking Member, Natural Resources Committee, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Hastings and Ranking Member DeFazio: In 
     America's national forests money and jobs do grow on trees. A 
     failed Federal Forest management system has led to the loss 
     of thousands of family wage jobs and has left our rural 
     forested counties with a host of preventable social and 
     economic problems that need to be addressed; action is long 
     overdue. For most Oregon counties the only solution is to 
     return to a sustainable harvest level that provides reliable 
     family-wage jobs and provides a solid tax base to support 
     crucial services.
       There are three main recurring themes choking sustainable 
     forest management:
       1. Litigation that stalls or prevents much of the harvest 
     necessary for responsible, sustainable forest management.

[[Page 14009]]


       2. Funding to prepare sales.
       3. The environmental analysis and review time for 
     management activities.
       An increase in sustainable forest management is essential 
     if we are to ever create and support the healthy forests 
     envisioned by President Theodore Roosevelt. The Forest 
     mortality we are facing destroys wildlife habitat and creates 
     a platform for catastrophic wildfires that leave millions of 
     forest acres bare and susceptible to erosion and extensive 
     insect infestation.
       H.R. 1526 provides a common sense approach for returning to 
     sustainable forest management where planned harvests occur at 
     a reasonable pace. While we appreciate legislation that 
     allows for a temporary extension of the Secure Rural Schools 
     and Community Self Determination Act, the long term social 
     and financial health of rural forested communities depends on 
     family-wage jobs that stem from a healthy forest products 
     industry. Wasco County fully supports H.R. 1526 and will 
     contact our House members to speak in support of and vote for 
     the bill.
     Rod Runyon,
       Chair.
     Scott Hege,
       County Commissioner.
     Steve Kramer,
       County Commissioner.
                                  ____


               IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

                     IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF GRANT


                            RESOLUTION 13-41

     In the Matter of Supporting H.R. 1526
     Restoring Healthy Forests for
     Communities Act
        This being the 18th day of September, 2013, and a regular 
     meeting of the County Court of Grant County and there being 
     present County Judge Scott W. Myers and County Commissioners 
     Boyd Britton and Chris Labhart; and
       Whereas, the Grant County Court recognizes that Oregonians 
     in our forested communities are facing extreme poverty, 
     systemic unemployment, and thousands of children on free and 
     reduced lunch; and
       Whereas, Grant County, Oregon currently faces 12.20% 
     unemployment; and
       Whereas, 51.6% of school children in Grant County are 
     eligible for free or reduced lunch programs; and
       Whereas, Grant County's poverty rate is 15.8%; and
       Whereas, these negative economic conditions can be 
     attributed to the reduction in timber harvests in our 
     National forests (93.78% reduction over the past 30 years) 
     and corresponding mill closures; and
       Whereas, Grant County cannot afford for any more mills to 
     close and desire to recover our lost mill capacity; and
       Whereas, H.R. 1526 is a bipartisan effort that aims to put 
     people back to work in the woods, reduce litigation, provide 
     certainty for counties so that they can provide essential 
     services, lift families out of poverty, and prevent 
     catastrophic wildfires that we have been experiencing,
       Now therefore, be it Resolved, the Grant County Court 
     hereby resolves to support H.R. 1526, Restoring Healthy 
     Forests for Healthy Communities Act, and urge all member of 
     the U.S. House of Representatives to support the passage and 
     implementation of this important legislation.
       Done and dated this 18th day of September, 2013.
     Scott W. Myers,
       County Judge.
     Chris B. Labhart,
       County Commissioner.
     Boyd Britton,
       County Commissioner.
                                  ____

                                                   Gilliam County,


                                                 County Court,

                                                   Condon, Oregon.
     Hon. Greg Walden,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative Walden: I am writing this letter in 
     support of HR 1526. HR 1526 aims to put people back to work 
     in the woods, reduce litigation, and provide certainty for 
     counties so that they can provide essential services, lift 
     families out of poverty, and prevent catastrophic wildfires 
     that we have been experiencing. Last year, 10 times as many 
     Forest Service acres burned as were harvested. 2.8 million 
     acres--a size equivalent to all of Grant County.
       One thing is clear. The status quo in our federal forest 
     policy is not working for our forests, and it is certainly 
     not working for the families in our rural communities.
       Even though we are a county without any Federal Forest 
     Service Land, we recognize the benefits that can be realized 
     here by the success of our neighbors Wheeler and Morrow 
     Counties.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Steve Shaffer,
     Gilliam County Judge.
                                  ____

                                                     Curry County,


                                       Board of Commissioners,

                           Gold Beach, Oregon, September 16, 2013.
       Dear Members of Oregon's House of Representatives: We are 
     writing to request your support for HR 1526, the Restoring 
     Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act, and ask that you 
     vote in favor of this bill when the opportunity arises. HR 
     1526 would renew the commitment to manage federal forests for 
     the benefit of counties impacted by federal forestland, 
     improve forest health and help prevent catastrophic 
     wildfires.
       Oregon continues to lose infrastructure and jobs due to 
     federal policies that have strangled sustainable management 
     of a renewable resource. We are harvesting less than five 
     percent of the annual growth in federal forests, resulting in 
     overstocked stands and conditions ripe for wildfire. HR 1526 
     would permit responsible, limited timber production on Forest 
     Service lands, would allow significant state and local 
     involvement, and would separately address management of the 
     unique O&C Lands by incorporating the bipartisan solution 
     crafted by Representatives DeFazio, Schrader and Walden. The 
     bill also would allow cooperative state and federal fire 
     mitigation projects in areas that cross ownership boundaries.
       The expiration of the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program in 
     2012 has resulted in drastic budget shortfalls in our 
     Counties. HR 1526 provides one year of bridge funding at the 
     SRS 2010 level, allowing transition to more active forest 
     management and a return to shared revenues from forest 
     management. These revenues would provide schools with 
     substantial funding and support public safety, road 
     maintenance, and social service programs. Improved management 
     and restoration of the nation's forests will generate 
     tremendous environmental and social benefits and create 
     desperately needed jobs and revenue for rural economies.
       Thank you for your support of Oregon counties and schools 
     and for your consideration of this request.
           Sincerely,
     David Itzen,
       Commissioner.
     Everett Dial,
       District Attorney.
     John Bishop,
       Sheriff.
                                  ____

                                                   Douglas County,


                                       Board of Commissioners,

                             Roseburg, Oregon, September 11, 2013.
     Hon. Peter DeFazio,
     Hon. Greg Walden,
     Hon. Earl Blumenauer,
     Hon. Kurt Schrader,
     Hon. Suzanne Bonamici.
       Dear Members of Oregon's House of Representatives: We are 
     writing to request your support for HR 1526, the Restoring 
     Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act, and ask that you 
     vote in favor of this bill when the opportunity arises. HR 
     1526 would renew the commitment to manage federal forests for 
     the benefit of counties impacted by federal forestland, 
     improve forest health and help prevent catastrophic 
     wildfires.
       Oregon continues to lose infrastructure and jobs due to 
     federal policies that have strangled sustainable management 
     of a renewable resource. We are harvesting less than five 
     percent of the annual growth in federal forests, resulting in 
     overstocked stands and conditions ripe for wildfire. HR 1526 
     would permit responsible, limited timber production on Forest 
     Service lands, would allow significant state and local 
     involvement, and would separately address management of the 
     unique O&C Lands by incorporating the bipartisan solution 
     crafted by Representatives DeFazio, Schrader and Walden. The 
     bill also would allow cooperative state and federal fire 
     mitigation projects in areas that cross ownership boundaries.
       The expiration of the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program in 
     2012 has resulted in drastic budget shortfalls in our 
     Counties. HR 1526 provides one year of bridge funding at the 
     SRS 2010 level, allowing transition to more active forest 
     management and a return to shared revenues from forest 
     management. These revenues would provide schools with 
     substantial funding and support public safety, road 
     maintenance, and social service programs. Improved management 
     and restoration of the nation's forests will generate 
     tremendous environmental and social benefits and create 
     desperately needed jobs and revenue for rural economies.
       Thank you for your support of Oregon counties and schools 
     and for your consideration of this request.
           Sincerely,
     Doug Robertson,
       Douglas County Commissioner, Chair.
     John Hanlin,
       Douglas County Sheriff.
     Rick Wesenberg,
       Douglas County District Attorney.
     Susan Acree,
       Douglas County Assessor.

  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden), who, as noted, has worked with his 
two colleagues from Oregon on the uniqueness of the Oregon forests.

[[Page 14010]]


  Mr. WALDEN. I thank the chairman of the House Natural Resources 
Committee, Doc Hastings, who has been an extraordinary leader, not only 
on our forestry issues, but on allowing us to access America's great 
energy resources in a responsible way that will create jobs, generate 
revenue for our country, and be good stewards of our land and water all 
at the same time.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank you for your work and that of your committee on 
the Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act.
  Just 2 days ago, Doug Decker, who is the State forester for the State 
of Oregon, declared that this has been the worst fire season for Oregon 
since 1951. The State of Oregon alone has already spent $120 million on 
fire suppression on over 1,000 different fires--and fire season is not 
over. According to the National Interagency Fire Center, this situation 
is the same across our forested States and communities. Last year, more 
than 9 million acres burned, and the Federal Government spent $2 
billion in fighting fires. That's ``billion'' with a ``b.''
  While these Federal forests surrounding our rural communities are 
burning, rural families are sentenced to live in poverty as the mills 
close and the jobs disappear, all because we can't access our great 
natural resources on Federal land.
  Of the 20 counties that I represent in eastern and southern Oregon, 
nine face double-digit unemployment today; 16 have over 14 percent of 
their populations living in poverty; and 14 have over half of their 
schoolchildren eligible for free and reduced lunch programs.
  Things are so bad in southern Oregon that Josephine County, which is 
bigger than Rhode Island, lost their last mill a few years ago, and 
with the closure of that mill, they lost 86 good-paying, family-waged 
jobs. A lack of timber revenue has left the county with only one patrol 
deputy. Burglary has gone up 49.7 percent; thefts have gone up 25 
percent; and disorderly conduct has gone up 17 percent in 1 year. At a 
recent roundtable I held in Grants Pass, the sheriff, Gil Gilbertson, 
told me: ``I've seen better law enforcement in Third World countries 
than we have in Josephine County.'' Remember, the sheriff spent time in 
law enforcement in Bosnia. He knows that of which he speaks.
  It's so bad that, just a year ago, a woman called 911 because her ex-
boyfriend was breaking into her home, and he had assaulted her the week 
before. She was told several times by dispatch that there were no 
deputies available, and then was told: ``If he comes inside the 
residence and assaults you, can you ask him to go away?'' The woman was 
then assaulted and raped.
  These are real issues for our rural communities today. It's clear the 
status quo is not working for families in our rural communities. This 
broken system has to change.
  Among many positive provisions in this legislation that will lead to 
healthier forests, this bill would require foresters to look at the 
sustainable yield a forest could provide and then harvest just half of 
that and only on land that is suitable for timber harvest. It also 
limits costly and complex paperwork, and it requires that it be 
completed in a timely manner. This bill also contains long overdue 
provisions for expedited cleanup and salvage. Just like we clean up 
after floods, tornadoes, and hurricanes, isn't it time that we cleaned 
up and replanted and restored after forest fires?
  This bill also includes legislation that I wrote with my colleagues 
from Oregon, Representatives Peter DeFazio and Kurt Schrader, on 
Oregon's unique O&C lands. We have worked through our differences and 
have forged a balanced, commonsense plan that would create or save 
thousands of forest jobs in Oregon. We would ensure the health of these 
lands for future generations and provide long-term funding certainty 
for Oregon's rural schools, roads, and law enforcement agencies that 
lie within these counties, and it would end the status quo of endless 
litigation.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 
seconds.
  Mr. WALDEN. This plan has broad support in Oregon--from local 
officials to sheriffs and DAs to business groups and labor unions to 
newspaper editorial boards. I have here the letters of support and 
resolutions from 24 counties across Oregon that, with your permission, 
Mr. Chairman, I would like to have entered into the Record.
  The Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act will create 
prosperous communities and healthy forests. It will provide certainty 
for teachers and law enforcement officers. It will provide tools to our 
professional forest stewards to better manage our forests, and it is 
our opportunity to make Federal forest policy work for Oregonians and 
all Americans. I urge its passage.

                                 Klamath County Commissioners,

                                               September 16, 2013.
     Hon. Peter DeFazio,
     Hon. Greg Walden,
     Hon. Earl Blumenauer,
     Hon. Kurt Schrader,
     Hon. Suzanne Bonamici.
       Dear Members of Oregon's House of Representatives: We are 
     writing to request your support for HR 1526, the Restoring 
     Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act, and ask that you 
     vote in favor of this bill when the opportunity arises. HR 
     1526 would renew the commitment to manage federal forests for 
     the benefit of counties impacted by federal forestland, 
     improve forest health and help prevent catastrophic 
     wildfires.
       Oregon continues to lose infrastructure and jobs due to 
     federal policies that have strangled sustainable management 
     of a renewable resource. We are harvesting less than five 
     percent of the annual growth in federal forests, resulting in 
     overstocked stands and conditions ripe for wildfire. HR 1526 
     would permit responsible, limited timber production on Forest 
     Service lands, would allow significant state and local 
     involvement, and would separately address management of the 
     unique O&C Lands by incorporating the bipartisan solution 
     crafted by Representatives DeFazio, Schrader and Walden. The 
     bill also would allow cooperative state and federal fire 
     mitigation projects in areas that cross ownership boundaries.
       The expiration of the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program in 
     2012 has resulted in drastic budget shortfalls in our 
     Counties. HR 1526 provides one year of bridge funding at the 
     SRS 2010 level, allowing transition to more active forest 
     management and a return to shared revenues from forest 
     management. These revenues would provide schools with 
     substantial funding and support public safety, road 
     maintenance, and social service programs. Improved management 
     and restoration of the nation's forests will generate 
     tremendous environmental and social benefits and create 
     desperately needed jobs and revenue for rural economies.
       Thank you for your support of Oregon counties and schools 
     and for your consideration of this request.
           Sincerely,
     Dennis Linthicum,
       Klamath County Commissioner.
     Frank Skrah,
       Sheriff by M. Rowley, Chief Deputy.
     Greg Thede,
       Klamath County Superintendent.
                                  ____

                                                 Deschutes County,


                                Board of County Commissioners,

                                               September 18, 2013.
     Re H.R. 1526.

     Hon. Greg Walden,
     House Natural Resources Committee, Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative Walden: The Deschutes County Board of 
     Commissioners wishes to express support for H.R. 1526, the 
     Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act. This 
     proposal renews the federal government's commitment to manage 
     federal forests, improve forest health and prevent 
     catastrophic wildfires.
       Deschutes County applauds the commitment to addressing job 
     creation and enhancement of rural forest economies. The 
     management provisions in H.R. 1526 will provide a long term 
     solution to ensuring sustainable revenue sharing with 
     forested counties.
       Deschutes County, Oregon supports the preservation of 
     healthy forests. We support HR 1526 and its aim to put people 
     back to work in the woods, reduce litigation, and provide 
     certainty for counties so that we can provide services to our 
     citizens. We also support the management of the forests to 
     prevent catastrophic wildfires and believe that there are 
     forested lands that are suitable for timber harvest and 
     management to be resilient against fire.

[[Page 14011]]

       For these reasons, we support the passage of H.R. 1526.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Anthony DeBone,
                                                     Commissioner.
     For the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners.
                                  ____



                                                 Crook County,

                                               September 19, 2013.
     Re Forestry Legislation HR 1526.

     Committee on Natural Resources,
     House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Greg Walden,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Peter DeFazio,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representatives Walden and DeFazio: This letter is 
     written by the Crook County Court in support of Oregon 
     'Timber Bill (HR 1526). HR 1526 includes a plan that would 
     transfer approximately 1.5 million acres from federal to 
     state management. Crook County agrees with the position taken 
     by the Association of Oregon Counties (AOC) that HR 1526 
     provides a means for reviving Oregon economies and sagging 
     county revenues of timber reliant counties.
       The Crook County Court recognizes that Oregonians in 
     forested communities are facing extreme poverty, systematic 
     unemployment, and thousands of children on free and reduced 
     lunch programs. These negative economic conditions can be 
     attributed to the reduction in timber harvest in our national 
     forests and corresponding mill closures.
       HR 1526 is a bipartisan effort that aims to put people back 
     to work in the woods, reduce litigation, provide certainty 
     for counties so that they can provide essential services, and 
     lift families out of poverty.
       A lack of management on our federal forest lands has caused 
     shortfalls for our communities, forcing counties to reduce 
     essential services and putting our forests at risk of 
     catastrophic fire. This Bill provides Oregon the opportunity 
     to manage forest land and to provide certainty of active and 
     healthy forest management.
       Crook County Court supports HR 1526, restoring healthy 
     forests for Health Communities Act, and urges all members of 
     Congress to support the passage and implementation of this 
     important legislation.
       DATED this 19th day of September 2013.
     Mike McCabe,
       Crook County Judge.
     Ken Fahlgren,
       County Commissioner.
     Seth Crawford,
       County Commissioner.
                                  ____

     To: Committee on Natural Resources
     From: Baker County Commissioners
     Subject: The urgent need to pass H.R. 1526: Restoring Healthy 
         Forests for Healthy Communities Act

       Baker County, like so many other counties in Oregon, are 
     facing the same hardship--high unemployment rates, high 
     poverty levels and poor infrastructure. These negative 
     economic conditions can be attributed to the reduction in 
     timber harvests in our National Forests (80% reduction over 
     the past 30 years) and subsequent mill closures. With an 
     unemployment rate of 9.4% and a poverty rate of 20%, Baker 
     County is in dire need of economic relief.
       The majority of the land in Baker County is owned by the 
     federal government. We are reliant on Forest Receipts and 
     PILT funding to maintain our infrastructure and provide the 
     services needed in our County. The lack of management on our 
     federal lands has resulted in catastrophic wildfires and loss 
     of services. With the-movement to high mileage vehicles and 
     dwindling forest receipts, our infrastructure and economy are 
     in jeopardy.
       H.R. 1526 is a bipartisan effort that aims to put people 
     back to work in the woods, reduce litigation, provide 
     certainty for counties so that we can provide essential 
     services, lift families out of poverty and prevent 
     catastrophic wildfires that we have been experiencing. The 
     Baker County Commissioners strongly urge all members of the 
     U.S. House of Representatives to support the passage and 
     implementation of this important legislation.
                                                  Mark E. Bennett,
     Commissioner.
                                  ____


 In the Matter of a Resolution Supporting H.R. 1526, Restoring Healthy 
        Forests for Healthy Communities Act, Resolution 13-09-17

       Now, the Lake County Board of Commissioners recognize that 
     Oregonians in our forested communities are facing extreme 
     poverty, systemic high unemployment, and hundreds of children 
     on free and reduced lunch.
       Whereas, Lake County currently faces 11.9% unemployment; 
     and
       Whereas, 55% of school children in Lake County are eligible 
     for Free or Reduced lunch programs; and
       Whereas, Lake County's poverty rate is 18.7% and
       Whereas, these negative economic conditions can be 
     attributed to the reduction in timber harvests in our 
     National Forests (80% reduction over the past 30 years) and 
     corresponding mill closures; and
       Whereas, Lake County cannot afford for any more mills to 
     close and desire to recover our lost mill capacity; and
       Whereas H.R. 1526 is a bipartisan effort that aims to put 
     people back to work in the woods, reduce litigation, provide 
     certainty for counties so that they can provide essential 
     services, lift families out of poverty, and prevent 
     catastrophic wildfires that we have been experiencing.
       Now therefore the Lake County Board of Commissioners
       Hereby Resolve to support H.R. 1526, Restoring Healthy 
     Forests For Healthy Communities Act, and urge all members of 
     the U.S. House of Representatives to support the passage and 
     implementation of this important legislation.
       Dated this 17th day of September, 2013.
     Ken Kestner,
       Chairman.
     Dan Shoun,
       Commissioner.
                                  ____



                                     Josephine County, Oregon,

                                               September 16, 2013.
     Hon. Peter DeFazio,
     Hon. Greg Walden,
     Hon. Earl Blemenauer,
     Hon. Kurt Schrader,
     Hon. Suzanne Bonamici.
       Dear Members of Oregon's House of Representatives: We are 
     writing to request your support for HR 1526, the Restoring 
     Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act, and ask that you 
     vote in favor of this bill when the opportunity arises. HR 
     1526 would renew the commitment to manage federal forests for 
     the benefit of counties impacted by federal forestland, 
     improve forest health, and help prevent catastrophic 
     wildfires.
       Oregon continues to lose infrastructure and jobs due to 
     federal policies that have strangled sustainable management 
     of a renewable resource. We are harvesting less than five 
     percent of the annual growth in federal forests, resulting in 
     overstocked stands and conditions ripe for wildfire. HR 1526 
     would permit responsible, limited timber production on Forest 
     Service lands, would allow significant state and local 
     involvement, and would separately address management of the 
     unique O&C Lands by incorporating the bipartisan solution 
     crafted by Representatives DeFazio, Schrader, and Walden. The 
     bill also would allow cooperative state and federal fire 
     mitigation projects in areas that cross ownership boundaries.
       The expiration of the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program in 
     2012 has resulted in drastic budget shortfalls in our 
     Counties. HR 1526 provides one year of bridge funding at the 
     SRS 2010 level, allowing transition to more active forest 
     management and a return to shared revenues from forest 
     management. These revenues would provide schools with 
     substantial funding and support public safety, road 
     maintenance, and social service programs. Improved management 
     and restoration of the nation's forests will generate 
     tremendous environmental and social benefits and create 
     desperately needed jobs and revenue for rural economies.
       Thank you for your support of Oregon counties and schools 
     and for your consideration of this request.
           Sincerely,
     Simon G. Hair,
       Commissioner.
     Stephen Campbell,
       District Attorney.
     Connie Roach,
       Assessor.

  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to my colleague from 
Oregon, Representative Schrader.
  Mr. SCHRADER. I would like to thank the chairman and ranking member 
for bringing a bipartisan and actual job-creating piece of legislation 
to the Chamber in these highly divisive times. This is the type of 
legislation we should be talking about.
  Mr. Chairman, rural counties across America, not just in my home 
State of Oregon, are dying. Unemployment is still in the double digits 
as you've heard. Schools are closing. Infrastructure is deteriorating, 
and crime is increasing. There is really no recovery in rural America. 
The dwindling amount of county funding from our national forests and 
Secure Rural Schools system has left local governments unable to afford 
even the basic services that every American should have. They are 
making our communities unhealthy and unsafe. In Oregon, we currently 
have two counties going bankrupt while we stand idly by. The status quo 
is no longer acceptable. Moreover, due to the lack of proper active 
management, our forests are diseased, dying, and overstocked, leaving 
them susceptible to the catastrophic wildfires we have been seeing on 
TV every night this past summer and fall.
  In this year alone, the U.S. Forest Service has spent over $1 billion 
in fighting forest fires. These wildfires not only burn millions of 
acres of public and private forests every year, but

[[Page 14012]]

they cause serious harm to the environment--water, air quality--and to 
our public health. The Biscuit Fire in Oregon in 2002 alone produced as 
much as one-third of all the carbon released through fossil fuel 
burning in Oregon annually. That cannot continue.
  Title III of H.R. 1526 is a bipartisan solution to a unique set of 
Oregon forestlands that was drafted by me and my colleagues, 
Congressmen DeFazio and Walden. The Oregon and California Railroad 
lands, commonly known as the O&C lands, have a unique mandate which 
differs from other BLM and Forest Service lands. It requires them to 
generate revenue for 18 Oregon counties from sustainable timber 
harvest. However, due to tedious and continued litigation, harvest 
levels are now 90 percent below what they were in the nineties. No one 
is asking to go back to the seventies or eighties, folks. That's not 
the issue despite what you'll hear. These are lands that are meant to 
produce timber in a sustainable way. The Federal law requires it, 
actually, and the legislation we wrote does it in an environmentally 
sound manner.
  Along with a reliable amount of timber and revenue for our counties, 
I would like to remind everyone that title III also designates 90,000 
acres of new wilderness protections and 150 miles of Wild and Scenic 
Rivers. The bill places over 1 million acres of old growth into 
protection and creates a conservation fund to help take care of it. The 
underlying bill also extends a lot of the popular forestry programs 
like stewardship, contracting, and good neighbor authority.
  You're going to hear a lot of misinformation about this bill and 
outright falsehoods. Contrary to what our opponents claim, title III 
guarantees ESA and clean water protections, which have worked for 
decades on Oregon's State and private forestlands. It has extensive 
riparian protections, and it restricts pesticide use. Most importantly, 
it protects our most green and renewable natural resource for 
generations to come, and it puts certainty back into the woods for our 
rural communities and job creators.
  Title III of this bill would create over 15,000 direct and indirect 
jobs by itself. The underlying bill would create over 200,000 jobs 
nationwide. When folks are still struggling to find jobs and to put 
food on the table, we cannot deny them this opportunity to work. The 
families and their communities depend on it.
  I am also very encouraged to know that Senator Wyden, the chairman of 
the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, is also working on a 
parallel plan to help fix our broken rural economies and revive our 
unhealthy forests. We plan to work in a bicameral and a bipartisan 
fashion to come to a final solution that will provide revenue for our 
counties, clean up our unhealthy forests, and get people back to work 
in the woods.

                                                   Columbia County


                                       Board of Commissioners,

                               St. Helens, OR, September 16, 2013.
     Hon. Peter DeFazio.
     Hon. Greg Walden.
     Hon. Earl Blumenauer.
     Hon. Kurt Schrader.
     Hon. Suzanne Bonamici.
       Dear Members of Oregon's House of Representatives: We are 
     writing to request your support for HR 1526, the Restoring 
     Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act, and ask that you 
     vote in favor of this bill when the opportunity arises. HR 
     1526 would renew the commitment to manage federal forests for 
     the benefit of counties impacted by federal forestland, 
     improve forest health and help prevent catastrophic 
     wildfires.
       Oregon continues to lose infrastructure and jobs due to 
     federal policies that have strangled sustainable management 
     of a renewable resource. We are harvesting less than five 
     percent of the annual growth in federal forests, resulting in 
     overstocked stands and conditions ripe for wildfire. HR 1526 
     would permit responsible, limited timber production on Forest 
     Service lands, would allow significant state and local 
     involvement, and would separately address management of the 
     unique O&C Lands by incorporating the bipartisan solution 
     crafted by Representatives DeFazio, Schrader and Walden. The 
     bill also would allow cooperative state and federal fire 
     mitigation projects in areas that cross ownership boundaries.
       The expiration of the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program in 
     2012 has resulted in drastic budget shortfalls in our 
     Counties. HR 1526 provides one year of bridge funding at the 
     SRS 2010 level, allowing transition to more active forest 
     management and a return to shared revenues from forest 
     management. These revenues would provide schools with 
     substantial funding and support public safety, road 
     maintenance, and social service programs. Improved management 
     and restoration of the nation's forests will generate 
     tremendous environmental and social benefits and create 
     desperately needed jobs and revenue for rural economies.
       Thank you for your support of Oregon counties and schools 
     and for your consideration of this request.
     Henry Heimuller,
       Chair.
     Anthony Hyde,
       Commissioner.
     Earl Fisher,
       Commissioner.
     Jeff Dickerson,
       Sheriff.
     Steve Atchinson,
       District Attorney.
                                  ____

                                                       Polk County


                                       Board of Commissioners,

                                   Dallas, OR, September 16, 2013.
     Hon. Peter DeFazio.
     Hon. Greg Walden.
     Hon. Earl Blumenauer.
     Hon. Kurt Schrader.
     Hon. Suzanne Bonamici.
       Dear Members of Oregon's House of Representatives: We are 
     writing to request your support for H.R. 1526, the Restoring 
     Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act, and ask that you 
     vote in favor of this bill when the opportunity arises. H.R. 
     1526 would renew the commitment to manage federal forests for 
     the benefit of counties impacted by federal forestland, 
     improve forest health and help prevent catastrophic 
     wildfires.
       Oregon continues to lose infrastructure and jobs due to 
     federal policies that have strangled sustainable management 
     of a renewable resource. We are harvesting less than five 
     percent of the annual growth in federal forests, resulting in 
     overstocked stands and conditions ripe for wildfire. H.R. 
     1526 would permit responsible, limited timber production on 
     Forest Service lands, would allow significant state and local 
     involvement, and would separately address management of the 
     unique O&C Lands by incorporating the bipartisan solution 
     crafted by Representatives DeFazio, Schrader and Walden. The 
     bill also would allow cooperative state and federal fire 
     mitigation projects in areas that cross ownership boundaries.
       The expiration of the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program in 
     2012 has resulted in drastic budget shortfalls in our 
     Counties. H.R. 1526 provides one year of bridge funding at 
     the SRS 2010 level, allowing transition to more active forest 
     management and a return to shared revenues from forest 
     management. These revenues would provide schools with 
     substantial funding and support public safety, road 
     maintenance, and social service programs. Improved management 
     and restoration of the nation's forests will generate 
     tremendous environmental and social benefits and create 
     desperately needed jobs and revenue for rural economies.
       Thank you for your support of Oregon counties and schools 
     and for your consideration of this request.
           Sincerely,
     Craig Pope,
       Commissioner.
     Aaron Felton,
       District Attorney.
     Robert Wolfe,
       Sheriff.
     Doug Schmidt,
       Assessor.
                                  ____

                                                  Tillamook County


                                       Board of Commissioners,

                                   Tillamook, OR, August 28, 2013.
     Re Support H.R. 1526.

     Congressman Doc Hastings,
     Chairman, Natural Resources Committee,
     Washington, DC.
     Congressman Peter DeFazio,
     Ranking Member, Natural Resources Committee, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Hastings and Ranking Member DeFazio: A phrase 
     such as ``money does not grow on trees'' is quite often 
     overused. However in America's national forests, money and 
     jobs do grow on trees. Unfortunately, a failed Federal Forest 
     management system has led to the loss of thousands of family 
     wage jobs and has left out rural forested counties with a 
     myriad of social and economic problems we do not deserve and 
     that need to be addressed. For most of our counties, that can 
     only be done by returning to a sustainable harvest level that 
     absolutely will provide family wage jobs and allow for a 
     solid tax base to support badly needed services.
       From our perspective there are at least three reoccurring 
     themes hindering sustainable forest management; first is 
     funding to prepare sales, second is the environmental 
     analysis and review time for management activities, and third 
     is litigation that stalls or totally stops much of the 
     harvest that badly needs to be done.
       An increase in sustainable forest management is essential 
     if we are to ever provide the healthy forests envisioned by 
     President Theodore Roosevelt. The forest mortality we

[[Page 14013]]

     are facing now is destroying habitat for wildlife, creating 
     catastrophic wildfires that destroy everything in their path 
     and leaving millions of acres of forests susceptible to 
     massive bug and insect infestation.
       H.R. 1526 addresses all of these issues. It provides a 
     common sense approach for returning to sustainable forest 
     management where the planned harvest can occur in a 
     reasonable amount of time. We do appreciate that the 
     legislation allows for a temporary extension of the Secure 
     Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act.
       However, for long term social and financial health of rural 
     forested communities we must have the family wage jobs that 
     are provided by a healthy forest products industry.
       We know you are fully supporting H.R. 1526 and do 
     appreciate your work and vote on this bill.
           Sincerely,
     Mark Labhart,
       Chairperson.
     Bill Baertlein,
       Vice Chairperson.
     Tim Josi,
       Commissioner.
                                  ____

                                                  Clackamas County


                                Board of County Commissioners,

                                 Oregon City, OR, August 27, 2013.
     Hon. Doc Hastings,
     Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources, House of 
         Representatives.
     Hon. Peter DeFazio,
     Ranking Member, Committee on Natural Resources, House of 
         Representatives.
       Dear Representatives Hastings and DeFazio: The Clackamas 
     County Board of Commissioners wishes to express our support 
     for the Secure Rural Schools and the Oregon and California 
     (O&C) Lands provisions contained within H.R. 1526, the 
     Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act. We 
     believe these provisions are a common sense and balanced 
     approach to federal forest management that will support 
     family wage jobs and provide counties with certain and 
     predictable revenue streams for critical county services.
       Clackamas County is a western Oregon county with 
     considerable urban and rural populations spread across a 
     diverse landscape of more than 1.2 million acres. 
     Approximately 52% of this land is federally owned and managed 
     by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, 
     with roughly 75,000 acres designated as O&C Lands. The 
     responsible management of these federal forestlands is 
     critical to providing predictable, long-term revenue for the 
     county road and general funds that enhances the quality of 
     life of county residents. Responsible federal management also 
     would greatly enhance the economic wellbeing of our local 
     wood products industry.
       Regrettably, the impasse to meet federal forest management 
     and timber sale volume goals, as prescribed by the Northwest 
     Forest Plan and the O&C Act of 1937, has substantially 
     reduced timber revenue and forced the County to reduce vital 
     services for public safety, education, health, and other 
     programs. At the same time, we have seen devastating economic 
     losses in our rural communities and wood products industry--
     going from 12 operating mills in the County to just two. In 
     light of this fiscal crisis, we urgently require a new 
     approach to federal forest management that creates jobs, 
     stabilizes Oregon's rural communities, and restores forest 
     function and health. Absent a long-term solution, vital 
     county services and our vast natural resource systems will be 
     severely impacted or disappear altogether.
       From our perspective, three major themes hinder sustainable 
     forest management--funding to prepare timber sales, 
     environmental analysis and review time for management 
     activities, and litigation that stalls or completely stops 
     harvest. H.R. 1526 correctly addresses these issues by 
     allowing planned harvests to occur on forestlands prescribed 
     for timber production, with reasonable time for environmental 
     review and protection from unreasonable litigation. The bill 
     also temporarily extends the Secure Rural Schools Act, which 
     will help to sustain vital county services until the law 
     begins to generate new revenues.
       Thank you for your work on this critical issue. We support 
     your continued efforts to bring this important legislation to 
     the House floor for a vote.
           Sincerely,
     John Ludlow,
       Chair.
     Jim Bernard,
       Commissioner.
     Paul Savas,
       Commissioner.
     Martha Schrader,
       Commissioner.
     Tootie Smith,
       Commissioner.
                                  ____

                                                     Marion County


                                       Board of Commissioners,

                                               September 16, 2013.
     Hon. Peter DeFazio.
     Hon. Greg Walden.
     Hon. Earl Blumenauer.
     Hon. Kurt Schrader.
     Hon. Suzanne Bonamici.
       Dear Members of Oregon's House of Representatives: We are 
     writing to request your support for HR 1526, the Restoring 
     Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act, and ask that you 
     vote in favor of this bill when the opportunity arises. HR 
     1526 would renew the commitment to manage federal forests for 
     the benefit of counties impacted by federal forestland, 
     improve forest health and help prevent catastrophic 
     wildfires.
       Oregon continues to lose infrastructure and jobs due to 
     federal policies that have strangled sustainable management 
     of a renewable resource. We are harvesting less than five 
     percent of the annual growth in federal forests, resulting in 
     overstocked stands and conditions ripe for wildfire. HR 1526 
     would permit responsible, limited timber production on Forest 
     Service lands, would allow significant state and local 
     involvement, and would separately address management of the 
     unique O&C Lands by incorporating the bipartisan solution 
     crafted by Representatives DeFazio, Schrader and Walden. The 
     bill also would allow cooperative state and federal fire 
     mitigation projects in areas that cross ownership boundaries.
       The expiration of the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program in 
     2012 has resulted in drastic budget shortfalls in our 
     Counties. HR 1526 provides one year of bridge funding at the 
     SRS 2010 level, allowing transition to more active forest 
     management and a return to shared revenues from forest 
     management. These revenues would provide schools with 
     substantial funding and support public safety, road 
     maintenance, and social service programs. Improved management 
     and restoration of the nation's forests will generate 
     tremendous environmental and social benefits and create 
     desperately needed jobs and revenue for rural economies.
       Thank you for your support of Oregon counties and schools 
     and for your consideration of this request.
           Sincerely,
     Janet Carlson,
       Chair, Commissioner.
     Samuel A. Brentano,
       Vice Chair, Commissioner.
     Patricia Milne,
       Commissioner.
     Jason Myers,
       Sheriff.
     Walt Beglau,
       District Attorney.
     Tom Rohlfing,
       Assessor.

  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar), a member of the Natural Resources 
Committee.
  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I thank Chairman Hastings for the time, for 
his leadership on our committee, and for including my bipartisan 
wildfire legislation--the Catastrophic Wildfire Prevention Act--in this 
forest health package.
  Mr. Chairman, we have a forest health crisis in this country, and 
this bill will go a long way toward restoring the environment, 
improving public safety, and putting thousands of people back to work.
  Due to redistricting, I have represented nearly all of rural Arizona 
in Congress--nearly 48,000 square miles of U.S. Forest Service land. 
These areas have been some of the communities most devastated by recent 
wildfire. In my first year, the Wallow Fire, now the largest fire in 
Arizona's State history, ravaged half a million acres of our treasured 
Ponderosa Pine Country in just a few weeks; and this year, our State 
was struck by the recent loss of 19 firefighters in the Yarnell Hill 
Fire. That fire was one of many to burn over 103,000 acres this year.
  We must come together, change the status quo, and facilitate 
conditions that minimize the chance that fires start, and we must 
reduce their size and intensity once they burn. The bill before us 
today does a few important things to achieve that goal:
  First, it prioritizes responsible timber production, and it ensures a 
reliable revenue stream for local governments. The Feds made a promise 
to our forest communities, and it must uphold that promise. Secure 
Rural School dollars ensure our counties can provide essential 
services, such as public safety and education to our constituents. H.R. 
1526 would not only provide certainty in the program, but it would 
increase timber revenues threefold;
  Secondly, it implements my bill, the Catastrophic Wildfire Prevention 
Act. These provisions, parts of title II and title V of the act, reduce 
red tape and provide the land management agencies a variety of tools, 
specifically stewardship contracting and good neighbor authority, to 
conduct smaller projects in

[[Page 14014]]

high-risk areas that need immediate attention.
  While long-term, active forest management will protect our 
communities in the long run, we have to protect our people and our 
assets today. These provide an expedited arrangement to streamline 
thinning and grazing projects needed in immediate, at-risk areas like 
our forest communities, critical water delivery and electrical 
infrastructures, and our schools.
  The solutions in our bill are supported by nearly every county in my 
rural district, in particular Yavapai and Gila Counties, and many 
affected stakeholders, including the Cattlemen, the Natural Resources 
Conservation Districts, and the Farm Bureau. This bill has commonsense 
solutions to our forest health crisis that should garner the entire 
support of this body.
  You may look at this bill and think it's not perfect, but it will do 
a lot to prevent the suffering that communities like the ones I 
represent have been experiencing. I would welcome any Member of this 
body to come down to my district and meet with the families who have 
lost their homes, their fathers, their mothers, their husbands and 
wives, their kids, and their livelihoods. I think you will see why we 
have to act.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I inquire of the gentleman how many speakers he has 
remaining.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. More than the gentleman, apparently. I do 
have several speakers remaining.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tipton), another member of the Natural 
Resources Committee.
  Mr. TIPTON. Thank you, Chairman Hastings. I appreciate the 
opportunity to address emergencies in our forests in the West.
  Mr. Chairman, over the past decade, we've seen an increase in the 
number of catastrophic wildfires burning in the western U.S., resulting 
in a tragic loss of life, significant property damage, the loss of 
critical habitats, and the pollution of vital watersheds.
  According to the National Interagency Fire Center, there have been 
over 38,119 different fires in the United States in 2013 alone. The 
Black Forest fire, which ravaged Colorado in June of this year, is 
believed to be the most destructive fire in Colorado's history, 
destroying more than 486 homes and with an estimated cost in excess of 
$85 million. The West Fork Complex fire burned approximately 110,000 
acres in southwest Colorado this summer, and the incident commanders in 
charge of the suppression efforts on the fire told me that the behavior 
of the fire was unprecedented. Because of all the beetle-killed timber, 
unnaturally dense forest, and dry conditions, the fire has acted in a 
way that defied computer models.

                              {time}  1845

  Unfortunately this news was made worse last week in my home State, as 
Colorado was struck with another natural disaster in what many believe 
was the worst flood in Colorado history. Parts of at least 18 different 
cities and towns in my home State were severely flooded, and damage to 
roads, bridges, homes, and other infrastructure is already estimated to 
exceed a billion dollars. While little could be done to prepare for the 
staggering rainfall the State received over such a widespread area, in 
parts of Colorado where fires in recent years stripped the landscape of 
vegetation, the severity of the flood damage was worsened by intense 
runoff, erosion, and mud slides.
  Threats to wildlife and property resulting from the wildfires are 
becoming increasingly costly, and by 2030 the number of acres of forest 
in Colorado that contain residential housing and commercial development 
is expected to exceed 2 million acres, representing an enormous 
potential hazard if fuel reduction projects and other proactive 
managements are not initiated.
  Instead of ramping up forest management efforts and addressing 
hazardous conditions of the Western forests, the Interior Department 
has proposed a 48 percent cut agency-wide for hazardous fuels reduction 
for 2014, and the Forest Service has proposed reducing this proactive 
management by 24 percent. In 2012, the Forest Service spent only $296 
million on hazardous fuels treatment nationwide, while spending close 
to $2 billion on wildfire suppression during that same time.
  It is far more efficient and cost effective to proactively manage our 
forests. I've said it before, but the old adage of ``an ounce of 
prevention is worth a pound of cure'' rings especially true when we're 
talking about reducing the occurrence and severity of wildfires in our 
forests. Despite this, we've seen a decrease in timber harvesting of 80 
percent over the past three decades. It is no coincidence that during 
this time the severity of fires and the number of acres burned has 
increased steadily. From 2000 to 2012, over 90 million acres burned in 
the U.S., nearly as many as the previous three decades combined.
  Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the time and your support for this, and I 
urge passage of this legislation.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock), another member of the 
Natural Resources Committee.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the communities of the 
Sierra Nevada, I want to thank Chairman Hastings for this long overdue 
legislation. If anyone doubts the necessity of this bill, let them come 
to my district where the Yosemite Rim fire has just incinerated 400 
square miles of our precious forests.
  For years, foresters have been screaming this warning at us, that the 
excess timber is going to come out of the forest one way or another. It 
will either be carried out or it will be burned out, but it will come 
out. In the days when we carried it out, we had healthier forests and a 
thriving economy.
  But Federal regulations have driven our timber harvests down 80 
percent nationally--more like 90 percent in the Sierras--and now the 
timber that we once carried out is being burned out, and there's 
nothing subtle about the numbers. As the board feet harvested out of 
these forests has declined, the acreage incinerated by forest fires has 
increased proportionately and contemporaneously. The human cost has 
been devastating: dozens of mills closed, thousands of families out of 
work, local tax bases eviscerated.
  Some of the mountain communities in my district now suffer Detroit-
levels of unemployment, and the environmental cost has been just as 
devastating: overcrowded forests, overdrawn watersheds, and now 
catastrophic fires. There is nothing more environmentally devastating 
to a forest than a forest fire.
  This measure restores the sound forest management practices that we 
foolishly abandoned to the detriment of our environment and our 
economy. This bill marks, at long last, a return to common sense for 
the management of our national forests.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I'd like to spend a little bit of time directly 
addressing the concerns and questions of some constituents back in 
Oregon regarding the O&C plan in this bill. As Representative Schrader 
said, there is an extraordinary amount of disinformation and 
obfuscation out there.
  This is the bottom plan. It provides everyone at the table with 
something that they don't currently have. For failing counties in 
western Oregon--and Representative Schrader did a great job talking 
about that, as did Representative Walden--it means $1 billion over 10 
years to help pay for basic government services like law enforcement, 
public health, and education. It means putting sheriffs back on the 
roads, keeping violent criminals behind bars, having better public 
health, and rebuilding our infrastructure. All of those things are good 
jobs, necessary jobs, and things that enhance the quality of life for 
Oregonians and all Americans.
  For forested communities and local economies, this plan means 
sustaining or creating thousands of good-paying jobs. I have counties 
that have chronic

[[Page 14015]]

unemployment in the double digits. I've taken to telling some people I 
represent the new Appalachia. When you go and visit these depressed 
communities, when the last mill closes in one of my counties, I talk to 
the owners of the mill and they said, If your bill had passed, we'd be 
hiring 100 people, instead of firing 100 people, in a community where 
100 would be the largest employer. This means keeping those mills open, 
or maybe adding shifts. This plan will keep the raw logs here at home, 
rather than exporting our timber to places like China.
  For the environmental community, many of whom have totally 
disregarded or created propaganda about this bill, it means the first-
ever legislative protection for mature and old growth forests in 
western Oregon. They are not legislatively protected now. In fact, if 
the Clinton forest plan, the Northwest forest plan, is ordered fully 
implemented, in pending litigation in a court here in D.C., that old 
growth will be some of the first to be harvested. Since I've come to 
Congress, I've been attempting to preserve the old growth. This would 
do it. There would be 1.2 million acres of old growth preserved, 
habitat that is fabulous. It is a carbon sink. It has the best areas to 
recreate.
  The bill also increases wilderness protection on the O&C lands by 250 
percent, doubling the size of the Rouge Wilderness, adding Devil's 
Staircase, and it also will add 130 miles of wild and scenic 
designation. There will be more river protection on the O&C lands in 
one plan than in the previous 50 years combined, and we will quadruple 
the watershed protection compared with Oregon State standards. They 
keep saying this is just the way Oregon private forestry is done. No. 
We're going to have four times the riparian protection, and in terms of 
herbicides and pesticides, we're going to require the development of an 
integrated pest-management plan through a public process for these 
lands. This is not Oregon forest practices as we know it, and as they 
are picturing in ads. If they have concerns about Oregon forest 
practices, they ought to go to their Governor and State legislature, 
because this bill is not that.
  Of the 2.8 million acres, 1.2 million acres of old growth will be 
preserved. That is 300,000 acres of additional riparian reserve to 
protect our water quality for consumption and for fisheries and other 
values. There will be 1.3 million--less than half--that will be 
managed. Areas that have been previously managed, many of which need 
thinning and they need restoration work, half of those 1.3 million 
managed will be managed on a rotation of over 100 years, providing, 
again, tremendous environmental benefits.
  Here's what the plan doesn't do. It doesn't privatize or sell any 
Federal lands. In fact, these lands will remain in Federal ownership, 
and we will pay the Federal Government $10 million a year to manage 
these lands, and the Federal Government will save tens of millions of 
dollars every year because of the management being done by a board, 
which would be appointed by our Governor and would actually govern 
these forests and manage these forests through an open public process 
under the Oregon open-meetings law.
  It will not return to the unsustainable levels that occurred during 
the watch of my predecessor. There were 1.6 million board feet the year 
I ran for Congress on these lands. That was not sustainable, and they 
would tell people we're going back to that. No, we're not. I ran 
against that, and we're not going back there. It looks like the best 
estimates are we would probably get to about one-third of that level on 
these lands with a environmentally responsible plan. It does not 
eliminate national environmental laws. They would still apply.
  This plan is about trying to restore balance and predictability to 
western Oregon. I was pretty surprised at the statement, better known 
as a SAP, that claimed this proposal would create more legal 
uncertainty. I don't know how it's possible to create more legal 
uncertainty on the O&C lands. The BLM is in the current of a multiyear, 
multimillion dollar process to rewrite the management plan for these 
lands. The new plan is intended to replace the old plan, which resulted 
from a lawsuit. The old plan was litigated and withdrawn. Their new 
plan was withdrawn by this administration because they said they 
couldn't defend it in a lawsuit. Now they're developing yet another new 
plan at the cost of tens of millions of dollars, which will certainly 
be litigated. And just recently, a decision in Federal court has 
confirmed that the O&C Act means what it says, ``permanent, sustainable 
timber production.'' This decision throws the status quo further into 
an uncertain area.
  Now the BLM is required to offer for sale the allowable sale quantity 
every year. It hasn't been doing that. There's another lawsuit that 
would make this decision retroactive. That would be over a billion 
board feet of timber. Yet, another lawsuit pending seeks to return the 
O&C logging levels back to the 1970s and 1980s. This says nothing of 
the pending lawsuits on individual timber sales. That's not certainty; 
that's chaos. I'm pushing a balanced O&C plan that does three things: 
provides predictable payments to failing counties; creates jobs and 
sustains the existing infrastructure; and legislatively protects the 
environment and public health.
  This is the first beginning, on either side of Capitol Hill, of a 
long legislative process, the first step toward getting a bipartisan 
bill finally negotiated and sent to the President hopefully not too 
distant from now.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Wyoming (Mrs. Lummis), another member of the Natural 
Resources Committee.
  Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the act because it 
will save forests in Wyoming and the West. These are fabulous natural 
resources enjoyed by people and wildlife, but across the West they are 
burning or dying after decades of Federal mismanagement.
  This photograph is from the Black Hills National Forest. Right here, 
you see a very lush green area in the forest. Adjacent to that, you 
have brown areas with dead or dying trees that have been ravaged by the 
mountain pine beetle. Where you find that healthy wildlife habitat, 
that healthy soil that's resistant to erosion, the healthy rivers and 
streams, the safe area to camp and hike and recreate, is because you 
have a healthy forest that was actively managed.
  This green area was logged. It was thinned. The thinning is 
selective, it's measured, and designed to maintain a healthy and strong 
mix of trees. The brown area wasn't thinned. Bureaucratic delays, 
litigation, and endless appeals prevented conservation logging in this 
area. When you don't manage a forest, the entire ecosystem suffers from 
the trees down to the wildlife, the soil, and the streams. It's 
dangerous to camp or hike in the brown area because of the dead or 
falling trees. The dead trees are now fuel for fires, and we've seen 
them all over the West in the last 3 years, including this summer. This 
picture is replicated throughout the West, dead or burning Federal 
forests right next to healthy State or tribal forests, because the 
State and tribal forests are actively managed.
  Our forests don't have to look like this. They can look like this. 
This act will get the Forest Service back to work on conservation 
logging, create jobs in the forest-products industry, create revenue 
for Federal and local governments, and prevent the astronomical costs 
of responding to wildfires and infestations.

                              {time}  1900

  It also gives State and local government a voice in forest management 
within their borders. Through good neighbor authority and community 
forest demonstration areas, we're involving the people who actually 
live near those forests who depend on that beautiful place to live.
  Mr. Chair, this is one of the most commonsense bills I've had the 
privilege of helping with. I urge its passage.


[[Page 14016]]

 BEFORE THE COUNTY COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF 
                               JEFFERSON


                        resolution no. r-015-13

     In The Matter of a Resolution Supporting H.R. 1526, Restoring 
     Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act
       Now, the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners recognize 
     that Oregonians in our forested communities are facing 
     extreme poverty, systemic unemployment, and thousands of 
     children on free and reduced lunch.
       Whereas, Jefferson County currently faces 10.8% 
     unemployment; and
       Whereas, 81.3% of school children in Jefferson County are 
     eligible for Free or Reduced lunch programs; and
       Whereas, Jefferson County's poverty rate is 20.2%; and
       Whereas, these negative economic conditions can be 
     attributed to the reduction in timber harvests in our 
     National Forests (80% reduction over the past 30 years) and 
     corresponding mill closures; and
       Whereas, Jefferson County cannot afford for any more mills 
     to close and desire to recover our lost mill capacity; and
       Whereas, H.R. 1526 is a bipartisan effort that aims to put 
     people back to work in the woods, reduce litigation, provide 
     certainty for counties so that they can provide essential 
     services, lift families out of poverty, and prevent 
     catastrophic wildfires that we have been experiencing; Now 
     therefore be it
       Resolved that the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners 
     hereby support H.R. 1526, Restoring Healthy Forests for 
     Healthy Communities Act, and urge all members of the U.S. 
     House of Representatives to support the passage and 
     implementation of this important legislation.
       Dated this 25th day of September, 2013.
                                           Board of Commissioners:
                                                    Wayne Fording,
                                                            Chair.

                                                    John Hatfield,
                                                     Commissioner.

                                                       Mike Ahern,
     Commissioner.
                                  ____


     THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF UMATILLA COUNTY STATE OF OREGON


                         order no. bcc2013-077

     In the matter of Support for Restoring Forest for Healthy 
     Communities Act (H.R. 1526)
       Whereas, the Umatilla County Board of Commissioners 
     recognize that Oregonians in our forested communities are 
     facing extreme poverty, systemic unemployment, and thousands 
     of children on free and reduced lunch;
       Whereas Umatilla County's poverty rate is 14.8%; and
       Whereas Umatilla County currently faces 8.4% unemployment; 
     and
       Whereas 59.5% of school children in Umatilla County are 
     eligible for Free or Reduced lunch programs; and
       Whereas these negative economic conditions can be 
     attributed in part to the reduction in timber harvests in our 
     National Forests (79% reduction over the past 30 years) and 
     corresponding mill closure; and
       Whereas Umatilla County cannot afford for any more mills to 
     close and desires to recover our lost mill capacity; and
       Whereas H.R. 1526 is a bipartisan effort that aims to put 
     people back to work in the woods, reduce litigation, provide 
     certainty for counties so that they can provide essential 
     services, lift families out of poverty, and prevent 
     catastrophic wildfires that we have been experiencing; Now 
     therefore, the Umatilla County Board of Commissioners adds 
     its support to H.R. 1526, Restoring Healthy Forests For 
     Healthy Communities Act, and urges all members of the U.S. 
     House of Representatives to support the passage and the 
     implementation of this important legislation.
       Dated this 18th day of September, 2013.
                           Umatilla County Board of Commissioners:
                                               W. Lawrence Givens,
                                                            Chair.

                                              William J. Elfering,
                                                     Commissioner.

                                                George L. Murdock,
                                                     Commissioner.
                    Attest: Office of County Records: Betty Lesko,
     Records Officer.
                                  ____


 BEFORE THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WALLOWA IN 
                       AND OF THE STATE OF OREGON


                          resolution 2013-005

     In the matter of a Resolution Supporting H.R. 1526, Restoring 
     Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act
       Now; The Wallowa County Board of Commissioners recognize 
     that Oregonians in our forested communities are facing 
     extreme poverty, systemic unemployment, and thousands of 
     children on free and reduced lunch programs.
       Whereas; Wallowa County currently faces a seasonal 
     unemployment rate of 14%; and
       Whereas; 54.8% of school children in Wallowa County are 
     eligible for free or reduced lunch programs; and
       Whereas; Wallowa County's youth poverty rate is 26%; and
       Whereas; these negative economic conditions can be 
     attributed to the reduction in timber harvests in our 
     National Forests (80% reduction over the past 30 years) and 
     corresponding mill closures; and
       Whereas: Wallowa County cannot afford for any more 
     businesses to close and desire to recover our lost mill 
     capacity; and.
       Whereas; H.R. 1526 is a bipartisan effort that aims to put 
     people back to work in the woods, reduce litigation, provide 
     certainty for counties so that they can provide essential 
     services, lift families out of poverty, and prevent 
     catastrophic wildfires that we have been experiencing; Now 
     Therefore; the Wallowa County Board of Commissioners hereby
       Resolve to support H.R. 1526, Restoring Healthy Forests for 
     Healthy Communities Act, and urge our representatives in 
     Washington D.C. to support its passage and implementation.
       Dated this 16th day of September, 2013.
                            Wallowa County Board of Commissioners:
                                            Chairman Mike Hayward.
                                     Commissioner Paul Castilleja.
                                       Commissioner Susan Roberts.
                                                           Attest:
                                                    Sandy Lathrop,
     Exec. Assistant.
                                  ____

       In Said County and State, when were present: The Honorable 
     Mark D. Davidson, Chairman; Steve McClure, Commissioner; 
     William D. Rosholt, Commissioner.
       When, on Wednesday the 18th day of September 2013, among 
     others the following proceedings were had to wit:


                           resolution 2013-11

     In The Matter of a Resolution Supporting H.R. 1526, Restoring 
     Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act
       Now, the Union County Board of Commissioners recognize that 
     Oregonians in our forested communities are facing extreme 
     poverty, systemic unemployment, and thousands of children on 
     free and reduced lunch.
       Whereas, Union County currently faces 8.3% unemployment; 
     and
       Whereas, 53% of school children in Union County are 
     eligible for Free or Reduced lunch programs; and
       Whereas, Union County's poverty rate is 16.6%; and
       Whereas, these negative economic conditions can be 
     attributed to the reduction in timber harvests in our 
     National Forests (80% reduction over the past 30 years) and 
     corresponding mill closures; and
       Whereas, Union County cannot afford for any more mills to 
     close and desire to recover our lost mill capacity; and
       Whereas H.R. 1526 is a bipartisan effort that aims to put 
     people back to work in the woods, reduce litigation, provide 
     certainty for counties so that they can provide essential 
     services, lift families out of poverty, and prevent 
     catastrophic wildfires that we have been experiencing, Now 
     therefore the Union County Board of Commissioners Hereby 
     Resolve to support H.R. 1526, Restoring Healthy Forests For 
     Healthy Communities Act, and urge all members of the U.S. 
     House of Representatives to support the passage and 
     implementation of this important legislation.
       Dated this 18th day of September, 2013.
                                                 Mark D. Davidson,
                                                         Chairman.
                                                    Steve McClure,
                                                     Commissioner.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Labrador), another member of the Natural 
Resources Committee.
  Mr. LABRADOR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 1526. I 
want to thank Chairman Hastings and the ranking member for all of the 
work that they have done on this bill. And today I specifically rise in 
support of title IV of H.R. 1526, which I originally introduced as H.R. 
1294, the Self-Sufficient Community Lands Act. I thank Chairman 
Hastings for recognizing the importance of this issue and including it 
in the bill.
  In Idaho and much of the West, the economies of rural communities 
once relied upon the timber industry for job creation and tax revenues. 
Over the last several decades, extreme environmentalists have hindered 
the ability to develop timber from our public lands through litigation. 
In fact, timber harvests have declined more than 80 percent over the 
last 30 years. Counties that were once dependent on timber receipts to 
fund schools, roads, and daily operations find themselves desolate and 
broke.
  In 2000, when the Federal Government operated with a budget surplus, 
and in order to compensate for the decline in timber receipts, as 
everybody knows, Congress passed the Secure Rural Schools and 
Communities Self-Determination Act. These payments were supposed to be 
phased out over time to allow counties to diversify their local 
economies. However, last

[[Page 14017]]

year alone, 35 of Idaho's 44 counties received SRS payments totaling 
over $26 million. While Congress has continually reauthorized this 
funding, we are still fighting the same issues about multiple use on 
public land while leaving our counties in limbo.
  To solve this problem, I introduced H.R. 1294. This legislation 
empowers counties to generate much needed revenue by turning over 
management of Federal forests to local and State officials who are best 
equipped to make these important management decisions rather than 
bureaucrats in Washington.
  It is time to permanently provide our counties with a solution which 
would create jobs, generate tax receipts for the counties, and improve 
forest health. In a time of record deficits, it is time that we stopped 
kicking the can down the road and started working toward a solution.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Collins of Georgia). The time of the gentleman 
has expired.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 
seconds.
  Mr. LABRADOR. Mr. Chairman, our country continues to spend billions 
of dollars on this program instead of fixing the program.
  Traditional rural timber communities have been operating in an 
environment of uncertainty for decades, and many public lands in 
Western States have been inaccessible due to Federal policies and 
litigation. It is time we find a long-term solution to help our 
counties. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1526.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce), a valued former member of the 
Natural Resources Committee.
  Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to speak on 
this bipartisan bill that brings commonsense management back to our 
forests.
  Since Tom Tidwell took over the Forest Service, he said that he would 
like to reintroduce fire into the wild. Well, he's done that. This 
year, almost 10 million acres, more than twice the size of New Jersey. 
In the years since 2009 when he took over, larger than Ohio, 27 million 
acres have burned in our national forests.
  Instead, this bill creates jobs--jobs in places like Cibola County in 
New Mexico where Matt Allen used to have a thriving mill but now 
survives on cutting one-by-four timber, one-by-four boards out of the 
logs he is able to take out of the forest.
  Our streams are choked with mud. Habitat is devastated. A 75-foot 
deep lake near Ruidoso, New Mexico, that provides drinking water to the 
city of Alamogordo has 50 feet of fill in that 70-foot lake. Our fish 
are dead. Our streams are dead, choked with mud because the head of the 
U.S. Forest Service says, Let it burn instead of cut it. Common sense 
says cut it. This bill ensures that.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I will advise my friend 
that I have no further requests for time, and I am prepared to close if 
the gentleman is prepared to close.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  As I stated earlier, this is an imperfect vehicle. I have major 
concerns about three of the titles in this bill, but this is the 
beginning of a legislative process. It's almost become pretty rare here 
in Washington, D.C. We put something forward. We send it to the Senate. 
The Senate takes up that or a similar legislation. We go to a 
conference committee. We work things out. And we solve problems. It was 
that for most of the first 25 years I was here. That's a rare thing 
these days.
  This holds promise to enter into the real legislative process, a real 
beginning. Now, if we fail to act, we just reinforce the status quo; 
and I've got to tell you, the status quo is totally unacceptable. There 
are some who would prefer that. They think they win with the current 
paralysis. Well, if you want permanent protection of our old growth, if 
you want additional wilderness on the Rogue River, if you want the 
Devil's Staircase wilderness, and if you want better forest health, the 
status quo won't get you there. If that's what you really care about, 
it won't get you there.
  Now, my counties can't wait. The status quo, I have two counties who 
are experimenting, essentially, with how does a county go bankrupt. 
It's something that's never happened before and isn't provided for in 
Oregon statute. And I have others who are not too far behind.
  My rural communities are in desperate need of real jobs. They can't 
wait either. So we cannot fail to act. We move forward tonight or 
tomorrow with a vote, and then it will be time for the Senate to come 
up with its version. Then we can go to a conference committee. We can 
work out final legislation and take it to the President.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. How much time do I have, Mr. Chairman?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 5\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield myself the balance of my time.
  First of all, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Lucas of the 
Agriculture Committee for his cooperation in expediting this bill to 
the floor. We have immortalized our agreement in an exchange of 
letters.
  And I want to thank the ranking member because I think in his closing 
remarks, he made exactly the right statement, and that is that we in 
the House will have our position. The Senate is obligated to do the 
same, and it may be entirely different, and that's fine. But we work 
out the differences. And I also want to thank the ranking member and 
his two colleagues from Oregon because I understand the uniqueness of 
what they are looking for and, frankly, their approach to their 
unique--this was very similar to what I and others were thinking should 
be applied elsewhere. So that's what is embodied in this bill.
  But I want to just make one point here because sometimes we lose 
sight of this fact. What is multiple use in timber, when we talk about 
timber? Multiple use means, from a commercial standpoint, of thinning 
and harvesting the timber. Where we get caught up in the differences, 
we look at timber entirely different from any other crop.
  I represent a very diversified agricultural area in central 
Washington, and the crops are on a yearly basis. It's as diverse as 
apples to wheat. But when farmers plant these crops, then they use 
various chemicals at various times of year in order to manage whatever 
may happen so that they can harvest a good crop at the end of the year.
  Well, timber is exactly the same, except depending on the type of 
timber, the harvest period is from 30 to 40 years. But if you have a 
problem with pine beetles, as we've had throughout the West, and this 
is a crop in a multiple-use area, you ought to manage that. You manage 
that by using the chemicals that are available.
  So the only difference when we talk about managing timber from a 1-
year management of yearly crops is the time span. But it should be 
managed in a responsible way in that regard, and that's what we provide 
for in this bill, to set targets and properly manage.
  So I think this is a good bill. I certainly hope that my colleagues 
will support this when we have the vote tomorrow so that we can 
continue the process of negotiating with the Senate when they, 
hopefully, pass a bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

                                     Board of County Commissioner,


                                     Washington County Oregon,

                                                    Hillsboro, OR.
     Senator Ron Wyden,
     Senator Jeff Merkley,
     U.S. Senate.
     Congressman Peter DeFazio,
     Congressman Earl Blumenauer,
     Congressman Greg Walden,
     Congressman Kurt Schrader,
     Congresswoman Suzanne Bonamici,
     House of Representatives.
       Dear Oregon Congressional Delegation: As Chair of 
     Washington County Board of County Commissioners I am writing 
     to offer my support for H.R. 1526. This legislation provides 
     a real solution to timber dependent counties in Oregon that 
     have suffered from a history of lost opportunities.
       H.R. 1526 creates an important template for restoring a 
     promise made over a century

[[Page 14018]]

     ago to actively manage federal forests. I believe had federal 
     agencies actively managed public lands over the last twenty 
     years we would not be seeing the loss of resources and lives 
     from a horrible summer of wildfires throughout the western 
     U.S.
       Washington County has been fortunate to see economic growth 
     throughout the recession. That growth however, did not occur 
     by luck, but was instead the result of decisions made by 
     local governments, communities and business over the last 
     fifty years. My colleagues in more rural Oregon counties 
     don't have the same ability to make decisions because of the 
     federal government dominance in landownership. H.R. 1526 
     provides an important role for local decision making.
       It is important to maintain a proper balance of resource 
     protection so water quality, critical habitat, and 
     recreational opportunities are addressed in a future forest 
     plan. I believe H.R. 1526 creates a pathway to achieve this 
     balance.
       H.R 1526 provides a common sense approach for returning to 
     sustainable forest management where the planned harvest is 
     stable, resources are protected and communities start the 
     rebuilding process. For long term social and financial health 
     of rural communities it is important to re-establish a 
     healthy forest products industry and create a healthy forest 
     environment.
           Sincerely,

                                                   Andy Duyck,

                                                            Chair,
     Washington County Board of Commissioners.
                                  ____


  IN THE COUNTY COURT FOR THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF HARNEY


                           RESOLUTION 2013-24

       In the Matter of a Resolution Supporting H.R. 1526, 
     Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act
       Now, the Harney County Court recognizes that Oregonians in 
     our forested communities are facing extreme poverty, systemic 
     unemployment, and thousands of children on free and reduced 
     lunch; and,
       Whereas, Harney County currently faces 12.9% unemployment; 
     and
       Whereas, 66% of school children in Harney County are 
     eligible for Free or Reduced lunch programs; and
       Whereas, these negative economic conditions can be 
     attributed to the reduction in timber harvests in our 
     National Forests (80% reduction over the past 30 years) and 
     corresponding mill closures; and
       Whereas, Harney County cannot afford for any more mills to 
     close and desire to recover our lost mill capacity; and
       Whereas H.R. 1526 is a bipartisan effort that aims to put 
     people back to work in the woods, reduce litigation, provide 
     certainty for counties so that they can provide essential 
     services, lift families out of poverty, and prevent 
     catastrophic wildfires that we have been experiencing.
       Now therefore, the Harney County Court hereby
       Resolves to support H.R. 1526, Restoring Healthy Forests 
     For Healthy Communities Act, and urge all members of the U.S. 
     House of Representatives to support the passage and 
     implementation of this important legislation.
       Dated this 18th day of September, 2013.
                                              Harney County Court:
                                                 Steven E. Grasty,
                                                            Judge.

                                                      Dan Nichols,
                                                     Commissioner.

                                                     Pete Runnels,
     Commissioner.
                                  ____


  IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON IN AND FOR WHEELER COUNTY


                           Resolution 2013-19

     In the Matter of a Resolution Supporting H.R. 1526, Restoring 
     Healthy Forests For Healthy Communities Act
       Now, the Wheeler County Court recognizes that Oregonians in 
     our forested communities are facing extreme poverty, systemic 
     unemployment, and thousands of children on free and reduced 
     lunch.
       Whereas, Wheeler County faces 6.4% unemployment; and
       Whereas, 67% of school children in Wheeler County are 
     eligible for Free or Reduced lunch programs; and
       Whereas, Wheeler County's poverty rate is 12.6%; and
       Whereas, the funding for maintenance of county road 
     infrastructure is imperative to public safety, access for 
     school busses, and to support access to federal forest lands 
     and national monument visitor sites; and
       Whereas, these negative economic conditions can be 
     attributed to the reduction in timber harvests in our 
     National Forests (80% reduction over the past 30 years) and 
     corresponding mill closures; and
       Whereas, H.R. 1526 is a bipartisan effort that aims to put 
     people back to work in the woods, reduce litigation, provide 
     certainty for counties so that they can provide essential 
     services, lift families out of poverty, and prevent 
     catastrophic wildfires that we have been experiencing;
       Now, therefore, the Wheeler County Court hereby
       Resolves to support H.R. 1526, Restoring Healthy Forests 
     For Healthy Communities Act, and urges all members of the 
     U.S. House of Representatives to support the passage and 
     implementation of this important legislation.
       Dated this 18 day of September, 2013.
                                                 Patrick C. Perry,
                                             Wheeler County Judge.

                                                 Robert L. Ordway,
                                              County Commissioner.

                                                 Anne C. Mitchell,
     County Commissioner.
                                  ____

                                           Board of Commissioners,


                                        Jackson County Oregon,

                                  Medford, OR, September 16, 2013.
     Hon. Peter DeFazio,
     Hon. Greg Walden,
     Hon. Earl Blumenauer,
     Hon. Kurt Schrader,
     Hon. Suzanne Bonamici.
       Dear Members of Oregon's House of Representatives: I am 
     writing to request your support for H.R. 1526, the Restoring 
     Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act, and ask that you 
     vote in favor of this bill when the opportunity arises. H.R. 
     1526 would renew the commitment to manage federal forests for 
     the benefit of counties impacted by federal forestland, 
     improve forest health and help prevent catastrophic 
     wildfires.
       Oregon continues to lose infrastructure and jobs due to 
     federal policies that have strangled sustainable management 
     of a renewable resource. We are harvesting less than five 
     percent of the annual growth in federal forests, resulting in 
     overstocked stands and conditions ripe for wildfire. H.R. 
     1526 would permit responsible, limited timber production on 
     Forest Service lands, would allow significant state and local 
     involvement, and would separately address management of the 
     unique O&C Lands by incorporating the bipartisan solution 
     crafted by Representatives DeFazio, Schrader and Walden. The 
     bill also would allow cooperative state and federal fire 
     mitigation projects in areas that cross ownership boundaries.
       The expiration of the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program in 
     2012 has resulted in drastic budget shortfalls in our 
     Counties. H.R. 1526 provides one year of bridge funding at 
     the SRS 2010 level, allowing transition to more active forest 
     management and a return to shared revenues from forest 
     management. These revenues would provide schools with 
     substantial funding and support public safety, road 
     maintenance, and social service programs. Improved management 
     and restoration of the nation's forests will generate 
     tremendous environmental and social benefits and create 
     desperately needed jobs and revenue for rural economies.
       Thank you for your support of Oregon counties and schools 
     and for your consideration of this request.
           Sincerely,
                                                      John Rachor,
     County Commissioner.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                                     Committee on Agriculture,

                               Washington, DC, September 10, 2013.
     Hon. Doc Hastings,
     Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Hastings: Thank you for the opportunity to 
     review the relevant provisions of the text of H.R. 1526, the 
     Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act. As you 
     are aware, the bill was primarily referred to the Committee 
     on Natural Resources, while the Agriculture Committee 
     received an additional referral.
       I recognize and appreciate your desire to bring this 
     legislation before the House in an expeditious manner and, 
     accordingly, I agree to discharge H.R. 1526 from further 
     consideration by the Committee on Agriculture. I do so with 
     the understanding that by discharging the bill, the Committee 
     on Agriculture does not waive any future jurisdictional claim 
     on this or similar matters. Further, the Committee on 
     Agriculture reserves the right to seek the appointment of 
     conferees, if it should become necessary.
       I ask that you insert a copy of our exchange of letters 
     into the Congressional Record during consideration of this 
     measure on the House floor.
       Thank you for your courtesy in this matter and I look 
     forward to continued cooperation between our respective 
     committees.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Frank D. Lucas,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                               Committee on Natural Resources,

                               Washington, DC, September 11, 2013.
     Hon. Frank D. Lucas,
     Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
     1526, the Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities 
     Act. As you know, the Committee on Natural Resources ordered 
     reported the bill, as

[[Page 14019]]

     amended, on July 31, 2013. I appreciate your support in 
     bringing this legislation before the House of 
     Representatives, and accordingly, understand that the 
     Committee on Agriculture will forego action on the bill.
       The Committee on Natural Resources concurs with the mutual 
     understanding that by foregoing consideration of H.R. 1526 at 
     this time, the Committee on Agriculture does not waive any 
     jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or 
     similar legislation. In addition, should a conference on the 
     bill be necessary, I would support your request to have the 
     Committee on Agriculture represented on the conference 
     committee. Finally, I would be pleased to include your letter 
     and this response in the bill report filed by the Committee 
     on Natural Resources, as well as in the Congressional Record 
     during floor consideration, to memorialize our understanding.
       Thank you for your cooperation.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Doc Hastings,
                                                         Chairman.

  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1526. While I 
support efforts to find consistent funding for rural schools, this bill 
goes too far, increasing logging to unsustainable levels and 
undermining the existing environmental laws that protect our public 
lands.
  H.R. 1526 creates ``timber production zones'' in every national 
forest that must meet timber volume targets set at half of what the 
forest grows each year. Ultimately, this would require logging and road 
building in currently protected, roadless areas and would limit public 
input and scientific and judicial review. The bill also creates an 
expedited environmental review process for governor-designated ``high 
risk areas,'' that could open roadless areas to grazing and timber 
harvests. Finally, the bill authorizes ``community forest designation 
areas'' that devolve forest management from the federal government to 
state boards. This would reverse 100 years of forest management 
precedent and limit or eliminate access for recreation, hunting, and 
fishing.
  Our national forests are a public resource and must be sustainably 
managed for generations to come. Today's bill would undermine that 
mission, and I urge a no vote.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, this bill is deeply disappointing. It 
takes an issue on which there are areas of agreement and rather than 
working to fulfill those opportunities, it puts forth legislation that 
is deeply harmful both to the process and the policy. I strongly 
support providing long-term fiscal stability for counties who have 
relied on federal timber revenues. This is an important issue for many 
counties in Oregon. I appreciate that this legislation provides another 
year of funding for these counties through the county payments program.
  The rest of this legislation, however, is concerning enough that I am 
forced to vote against it. It removes valuable protections for our 
forests and watersheds and puts in place artificial logging 
requirements that fail to account for local needs, ecological and 
geographic characteristics, or realistic, long-term timber management 
goals. The bill also places more communities at risk from fire or 
erosion danger by opening up areas for development and logging that put 
people closer to high risk wildfire zones and decrease the ecosystem's 
ability to handle flooding.
  Congress should help provide long term fiscal stability to counties 
that are largely made up of federal lands. That is something we can all 
agree on. However, I would hope that we could do so in a way that 
maintains the basic environmental safeguards we depend on to keep our 
forests and our watersheds healthy, that preserves the investments we 
have made in outdoor recreation opportunities, and that helps our 
communities be safe, healthy, and economically secure.
  Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chair, I rise in reluctant opposition to H.R. 1526, 
the Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act. Counties in 
my district in Oregon and across the state have long faced revenue 
shortfalls because of declining timber receipts, and the extended 
economic downturn of the last few years dealt another blow. 
Sequestration has further reduced the availability of federal funds, 
and for many counties their financial problems are even more acute.
  There is no question that federal policy governing the management of 
the O&C lands must change. Current policy results in consistently low 
revenue from timber receipts, harming already cash-strapped counties. 
The failure to allow for fuel reduction that can prevent wildfires is 
threatening other forestland and the safety of our constituents and 
their families.
  As I have said many times, we need a legislative solution that will 
help our counties put their finances in order, protect vital natural 
resources and wildlife habitat, and mitigate the danger posed by 
wildfire. That solution, however, must be one that can pass both 
chambers and be signed into law; otherwise our efforts here in D.C. 
will not make a difference back at home.
  H.R. 1526 does extend vitally important county payments through the 
Secure Rural Schools program by one year. It would lead to more active 
management of federal forestland in Oregon and it does include some 
vital environmental conservation provisions. But the overall proposal 
does not adequately balance economic and environmental priorities and 
has no chance of becoming law.
  Some of my colleagues from Oregon have already put in long hours 
searching for a solution to this issue that our counties face, and I 
applaud Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Walden, and Mr. Schrader for their efforts to 
resolve this issue.
  I look forward to continuing to work with my House and Senate 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support a bill that will help 
our counties and, importantly, will become law. I hope that we can work 
together with haste to draft and enact broadly-supported legislation 
that will help our local and county officials back home.
  Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong support of 
H.R. 1526, the Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act. 
This bill is the fulfillment of a promise that the federal government 
made to counties and communities, particularly those in the Western 
part of the country, more than a century ago.
  For far too long, our national forests have been managed by a 
strategy that fails to recognize the tremendous resource potential that 
our national forests hold. At the beginning of the 20th century when 
our national forest system was being created, the federal government 
implemented a program to exchange land owned by counties in return for 
a share of the revenue generated off the land. The land was managed for 
resource extraction and forests thrived.
  That is until the forest management strategy shifted. As extraction 
became less popular and increasingly vulnerable to litigation, timber 
revenue decreased and communities became wards of the federal 
government. In fact, timber harvests in our National Forests have 
fallen 80 percent over the last 30 years. Forest health is at an all 
time low. Jobs are scarce and communities are decimated.
  In Eastern Washington, the Colville National Forest has been the 
economic engine for Ferry, Stevens, and Pend Oreille counties--
providing jobs, energy, and recreational opportunities. Yet, mills have 
closed, jobs lost, and of the 1.1 million acres in the Colville 
National Forest, over 300,000 are bug infested. This is unacceptable.
  This past August, I met with forest officials, community leaders in 
the Colville National Forest, and other stakeholders to chart a path 
forward. We need a path that allows states and local governments to 
manage their affairs because they have shown success.
  States have shown that they are able to produce several times more 
harvest and revenue from a smaller land base than the federal 
government. For example, Washington State is able to harvest 7 times as 
much timber, and generate 200 times as much revenue on \1/4\ the land 
area as the Forest Service. We need forest management policies that 
exploit these successes.
  H.R. 1526 does just that. It allows responsible timber production on 
Forest Service commercial timber lands--areas that were specifically 
identified by the forest service for timber harvest. It also allows 
state and local governments to get more involved in preventing 
wildfires on federal lands, and lets counties actively manage portions 
of National Forest land.
  It is a common sense solution that provides a sustainable revenue 
stream for rural schools and counties for years to come. It creates 
jobs, improves forest health, and strengthens our rural communities. It 
is a win-win for everyone. I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 
1526, the Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act.
  Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Speaker, today I am glad to lend my support to 
legislation that will provide for a one-year extension of the Secure 
Rural Schools program. The Secure Rural Schools program provides needed 
funding to counties nationwide, and these payments are critical to 
Oregon's rural timber counties. The funding supports vital public 
services, including emergency personnel, schools, and infrastructure, 
and it represents our commitment that Federal forest policy shouldn't 
drive rural counties into bankruptcy.
  But this is only a one-year extension, and Oregon's rural timber 
counties need long term certainty. Congress must help these counties 
develop a long term solution to their revenue problems, one that 
strikes a balance between increasing timber yields on Federal forest 
land and environmental conservation. This is a difficult process, and 
although we are making

[[Page 14020]]

progress, counties need relief right away. For this reason, I strongly 
support this one-year extension of the Secure Rural Schools program, 
and will continue to work on a lasting solution with my colleagues in 
the House of Representatives.
  I am also pleased to support the main purpose of this legislation, 
which is to allow for the continued functioning of the Federal Helium 
Reserve. This program supports important work across a broad spectrum 
of industries, from chemistry research in our public universities to 
semiconductor manufacturing done by high-tech firms in Oregon's First 
Congressional District. The House and Senate have reached a noble, 
bipartisan solution to guarantee the uninterrupted supply of this 
critical resource. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.
  The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by 
the Committee on Natural Resources, an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 113-21, 
modified by the amendment printed in part B of House Report 113-215, is 
adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as the original bill 
for the purpose of further amendment under the 5-minute rule and shall 
be considered as read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                               H.R. 1526

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Restoring 
     Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:
       Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

    TITLE I--RESTORING THE COMMITMENT TO RURAL COUNTIES AND SCHOOLS

       Sec. 101. Purposes.
       Sec. 102. Definitions.
       Sec. 103. Establishment of Forest Reserve Revenue Areas and 
           annual volume requirements.
       Sec. 104. Management of Forest Reserve Revenue Areas.
       Sec. 105. Distribution of forest reserve revenues.

     TITLE II--HEALTHY FOREST MANAGEMENT AND CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRE 
                               PREVENTION

       Sec. 201. Purposes.
       Sec. 202. Definitions.
       Sec. 203. Hazardous fuel reduction projects and forest 
           health projects in at-risk forests.
       Sec. 204. Environmental analysis.
       Sec. 205. State designation of high-risk areas of National 
           Forest System and public lands.
       Sec. 206. Use of hazardous fuels reduction or forest health 
           projects for high-risk areas.

     TITLE III--OREGON AND CALIFORNIA RAILROAD GRANT LANDS TRUST, 
                         CONSERVATION, AND JOBS

       Sec. 301. Short title.
       Sec. 302. Definitions.

               Subtitle A--Trust, Conservation, and Jobs

               Chapter 1--Creation and Terms of O&C Trust

       Sec. 311. Creation of O&C Trust and designation of O&C 
           Trust lands.
       Sec. 312. Legal effect of O&C Trust and judicial review.
       Sec. 313. Board of Trustees.
       Sec. 314. Management of O&C Trust lands.
       Sec. 315. Distribution of revenues from O&C Trust lands.
       Sec. 316. Land exchange authority.
       Sec. 317. Payments to the United States Treasury.

         Chapter 2--Transfer of Certain Lands to Forest Service

       Sec. 321. Transfer of certain Oregon and California 
           Railroad Grant lands to Forest Service.
       Sec. 322. Management of transferred lands by Forest 
           Service.
       Sec. 323. Management efficiencies and expedited land 
           exchanges.
       Sec. 324. Review panel and old growth protection.
       Sec. 325. Uniqueness of old growth protection on Oregon and 
           California Railroad Grant lands.

                         Chapter 3--Transition

       Sec. 331. Transition period and operations.
       Sec. 332. O&C Trust management capitalization.
       Sec. 333. Existing Bureau of Land Management and Forest 
           Service contracts.
       Sec. 334. Protection of valid existing rights and access to 
           non-Federal land.
       Sec. 335. Repeal of superseded law relating to Oregon and 
           California Railroad Grant lands.

                    Subtitle B--Coos Bay Wagon Roads

       Sec. 341. Transfer of management authority over certain 
           Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant lands to Coos County, Oregon.
       Sec. 342. Transfer of certain Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant 
           lands to Forest Service.
       Sec. 343. Land exchange authority.

                      Subtitle C--Oregon Treasures

                      Chapter 1--Wilderness Areas

       Sec. 351. Designation of Devil's Staircase Wilderness.
       Sec. 352. Expansion of Wild Rogue Wilderness Area.

  Chapter 2--Wild and Scenic River Designated and Related Protections

       Sec. 361. Wild and scenic river designations, Molalla 
           River.
       Sec. 362. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act technical corrections 
           related to Chetco River.
       Sec. 363. Wild and scenic river designations, Wasson Creek 
           and Franklin Creek.
       Sec. 364. Wild and scenic river designations, Rogue River 
           area.
       Sec. 365. Additional protections for Rogue River 
           tributaries.

                   Chapter 3--Additional Protections

       Sec. 371. Limitations on land acquisition.
       Sec. 372. Overflights.
       Sec. 373. Buffer zones.
       Sec. 374. Prevention of wildfires.
       Sec. 375. Limitation on designation of certain lands in 
           Oregon.

                       Chapter 4--Effective Date

       Sec. 381. Effective date.

                     Subtitle D--Tribal Trust Lands

                 Part 1--Council Creek Land Conveyance

       Sec. 391. Definitions.
       Sec. 392. Conveyance.
       Sec. 393. Map and legal description.
       Sec. 394. Administration.

                 Part 2--Oregon Coastal Land Conveyance

       Sec. 395. Definitions.
       Sec. 396. Conveyance.
       Sec. 397. Map and legal description.
       Sec. 398. Administration.

          TITLE IV--COMMUNITY FOREST MANAGEMENT DEMONSTRATION

       Sec. 401. Purpose and definitions.
       Sec. 402. Establishment of community forest demonstration 
           areas.
       Sec. 403. Advisory committee.
       Sec. 404. Management of community forest demonstration 
           areas.
       Sec. 405. Distribution of funds from community forest 
           demonstration area.
       Sec. 406. Initial funding authority.
       Sec. 407. Payments to United States Treasury.
       Sec. 408. Termination of community forest demonstration 
           area.

  TITLE V--REAUTHORIZATION AND AMENDMENT OF EXISTING AUTHORITIES AND 
                             OTHER MATTERS

       Sec. 501. Extension of Secure Rural Schools and Community 
           Self-Determination Act of 2000 pending full operation 
           of Forest Reserve Revenue Areas.
       Sec. 502. Restoring original calculation method for 25-
           percent payments.
       Sec. 503. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management 
           good-neighbor cooperation with States to reduce 
           wildfire risks.
       Sec. 504. Stewardship end result contracting project 
           authority.
       Sec. 505. Clarification of National Forest Management Act 
           of 1976 authority.
       Sec. 506. Treatment as supplemental funding.
       Sec. 507. Exception of certain forest projects and 
           activities from Appeals Reform Act and other review.

    TITLE I--RESTORING THE COMMITMENT TO RURAL COUNTIES AND SCHOOLS

       SEC. 101. PURPOSES.
       The purposes of this title are as follows:
       (1) To restore employment and educational opportunities in, 
     and improve the economic stability of, counties containing 
     National Forest System land.
       (2) To ensure that such counties have a dependable source 
     of revenue from National Forest System land.
       (3) To reduce Forest Service management costs while also 
     ensuring the protection of United States forests resources.

     SEC. 102. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) Annual volume requirement.--

[[Page 14021]]

       (A) In general.--The term ``annual volume requirement'', 
     with respect to a Forest Reserve Revenue Area, means a volume 
     of national forest materials no less than 50 percent of the 
     sustained yield of the Forest Reserve Revenue Area.
       (B) Exclusions.--In determining the volume of national 
     forest materials or the sustained yield of a Forest Reserve 
     Revenue Area, the Secretary may not include non-commercial 
     post and pole sales and personal use firewood.
       (2) Beneficiary county.--The term ``beneficiary county'' 
     means a political subdivision of a State that, on account of 
     containing National Forest System land, was eligible to 
     receive payments through the State under title I of the 
     Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 
     2000 (16 U.S.C. 7111 et seq.).
       (3) Catastrophic event.--The term ``catastrophic event'' 
     means an event (including severe fire, insect or disease 
     infestations, windthrow, or other extreme weather or natural 
     disaster) that the Secretary determines will cause or has 
     caused substantial damage to National Forest System land or 
     natural resources on National Forest System land.
       (4) Covered forest reserve project.--The terms ``covered 
     forest reserve project'' and ``covered project'' mean a 
     project involving the management or sale of national forest 
     materials within a Forest Reserve Revenue Area to generate 
     forest reserve revenues and achieve the annual volume 
     requirement for the Forest Reserve Revenue Area.
       (5) Forest reserve revenue area.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``Forest Reserve Revenue Area'' 
     means National Forest System land in a unit of the National 
     Forest System designated for sustainable forest management 
     for the production of national forest materials and forest 
     reserve revenues.
       (B) Inclusions.--Subject to subparagraph (C), but otherwise 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, including 
     executive orders and regulations, the Secretary shall include 
     in Forest Reserve Revenue Areas not less than 50 percent of 
     the National Forest System lands identified as commercial 
     forest land capable of producing twenty cubic feet of timber 
     per acre.
       (C) Exclusions.--A Forest Reserve Revenue Area may not 
     include National Forest System land--
       (i) that is a component of the National Wilderness 
     Preservation System;
       (ii) on which the removal of vegetation is specifically 
     prohibited by Federal statute; or
       (iii) that is within a National Monument as of the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.
       (6) Forest reserve revenues.--The term ``forest reserve 
     revenues'' means revenues derived from the sale of national 
     forest materials in a Forest Reserve Revenue Area.
       (7) National forest materials.--The term ``national forest 
     materials'' has the meaning given that term in section 
     14(e)(1) of the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 
     U.S.C. 472a(e)(1)).
       (8) National forest system.--The term ``National Forest 
     System'' has the meaning given that term in section 11(a) of 
     the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 
     1974 (16 U.S.C. 1609(a)), except that the term does not 
     include the National Grasslands and land utilization projects 
     designated as National Grasslands administered pursuant to 
     the Act of July 22, 1937 (7 U.S.C. 1010-1012).
       (9) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Agriculture.
       (10) Sustained yield.--The term ``sustained yield'' means 
     the maximum annual growth potential of the forest calculated 
     on the basis of the culmination of mean annual increment 
     using cubic measurement.
       (11) State.--The term ``State'' includes the Commonwealth 
     of Puerto Rico.
       (12) 25-percent payment.--The term ``25-percent payment'' 
     means the payment to States required by the sixth paragraph 
     under the heading of ``FOREST SERVICE'' in the Act of May 23, 
     1908 (35 Stat. 260; 16 U.S.C. 500), and section 13 of the Act 
     of March 1, 1911 (36 Stat. 963; 16 U.S.C. 500).

     SEC. 103. ESTABLISHMENT OF FOREST RESERVE REVENUE AREAS AND 
                   ANNUAL VOLUME REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Establishment of Forest Reserve Revenue Areas.--
     Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary 
     shall establish one or more Forest Reserve Revenue Areas 
     within each unit of the National Forest System.
       (b) Deadline for Establishment.--The Secretary shall 
     complete establishment of the Forest Reserve Revenue Areas 
     not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act,
       (c) Purpose.--The purpose of a Forest Reserve Revenue Area 
     is to provide a dependable source of 25-percent payments and 
     economic activity through sustainable forest management for 
     each beneficiary county containing National Forest System 
     land.
       (d) Fiduciary Responsibility.--The Secretary shall have a 
     fiduciary responsibility to beneficiary counties to manage 
     Forest Reserve Revenue Areas to satisfy the annual volume 
     requirement.
       (e) Determination of Annual Volume Requirement.--Not later 
     than 30 days after the date of the establishment of a Forest 
     Reserve Revenue Area, the Secretary shall determine the 
     annual volume requirement for that Forest Reserve Revenue 
     Area.
       (f) Limitation on Reduction of Forest Reserve Revenue 
     Areas.--Once a Forest Reserve Revenue Area is established 
     under subsection (a), the Secretary may not reduce the number 
     of acres of National Forest System land included in that 
     Forest Reserve Revenue Area.
       (g) Map.--The Secretary shall provide a map of all Forest 
     Reserve Revenue Areas established under subsection (a) for 
     each unit of the National Forest System--
       (1) to the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on 
     Natural Resources of the House of Representatives; and
       (2) to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and 
     Forestry and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of 
     the Senate.
       (h) Recognition of Valid and Existing Rights.--Neither the 
     establishment of Forest Reserve Revenue Areas under 
     subsection (a) nor any other provision of this title shall be 
     construed to limit or restrict--
       (1) access to National Forest System land for hunting, 
     fishing, recreation, and other related purposes; or
       (2) valid and existing rights regarding National Forest 
     System land, including rights of any federally recognized 
     Indian tribe.

     SEC. 104. MANAGEMENT OF FOREST RESERVE REVENUE AREAS.

       (a) Requirement To Achieve Annual Volume Requirement.--
     Immediately upon the establishment of a Forest Reserve 
     Revenue Area, the Secretary shall manage the Forest Reserve 
     Revenue Area in the manner necessary to achieve the annual 
     volume requirement for the Forest Reserve Revenue Area. The 
     Secretary is authorized and encouraged to commence covered 
     forest reserve projects as soon as practicable after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act to begin generating forest 
     reserve revenues.
       (b) Standards for Projects Within Forest Reserve Revenue 
     Areas.--The Secretary shall conduct covered forest reserve 
     projects within Forest Reserve Revenue Areas in accordance 
     with this section, which shall serve as the sole means by 
     which the Secretary will comply with the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4331 et seq.) and 
     other laws applicable to the covered projects.
       (c) Environmental Analysis Process for Projects in Forest 
     Reserve Revenue Areas.--
       (1) Environmental assessment.--The Secretary shall give 
     published notice and complete an environmental assessment 
     pursuant to section 102(2) of the National Environmental 
     Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)) for a covered forest 
     reserve project proposed to be conducted within a Forest 
     Reserve Revenue Area, except that the Secretary is not 
     required to study, develop, or describe any alternative to 
     the proposed agency action.
       (2) Cumulative effects.--The Secretary shall consider 
     cumulative effects solely by evaluating the impacts of a 
     proposed covered forest reserve project combined with the 
     impacts of any other projects that were approved with a 
     Decision Notice or Record of Decision before the date on 
     which the Secretary published notice of the proposed covered 
     project. The cumulative effects of past projects may be 
     considered in the environmental assessment by using a 
     description of the current environmental conditions.
       (3) Length.--The environmental assessment prepared for a 
     proposed covered forest reserve project shall not exceed 100 
     pages in length. The Secretary may incorporate in the 
     environmental assessment, by reference, any documents that 
     the Secretary determines, in the sole discretion of the 
     Secretary, are relevant to the assessment of the 
     environmental effects of the covered project.
       (4) Deadline for completion.--The Secretary shall complete 
     the environmental assessment for a covered forest reserve 
     project within 180 days after the date on which the Secretary 
     published notice of the proposed covered project.
       (5) Treatment of decision notice.-- The decision notice for 
     a covered forest reserve project shall be considered a final 
     agency action and no additional analysis under the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4331 et seq.) 
     shall be required to implement any portion of the covered 
     project.
       (6) Categorical exclusion.--A covered forest reserve 
     project that is proposed in response to a catastrophic event, 
     that covers an area of 10,000 acres or less, or an eligible 
     hazardous fuel reduction or forest health project proposed 
     under title II that involves the removal of insect-infected 
     trees, dead or dying trees, trees presenting a threat to 
     public safety, or other hazardous fuels within 500 feet of 
     utility or telephone infrastructure, campgrounds, roadsides, 
     heritage sites, recreation sites, schools, or other 
     infrastructure, shall be categorically excluded from the 
     requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
     (42 U.S.C. 4331 et seq.).
       (d) Application of Land and Resource Management Plan.--The 
     Secretary may modify the standards and guidelines contained 
     in the land and resource management plan for the unit of the 
     National Forest System in which the covered forest reserve 
     project will be carried out as necessary to achieve the 
     requirements of this Act. Section 6(g)(3)(E)(iv) of the 
     Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 
     (16 U.S.C. 1604(g)(3)(E)(iv)) shall not apply to a covered 
     forest reserve project.
       (e) Compliance With Endangered Species Act.--
       (1) Non-jeopardy assessment.--If the Secretary determines 
     that a proposed covered forest reserve project may affect the 
     continued existence of any species listed as endangered or 
     threatened under section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 
     1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533), the Secretary shall issue a 
     determination explaining the view of the Secretary that the 
     proposed covered project is not likely to jeopardize the 
     continued existence of the species.
       (2) Submission, review, and response.--

[[Page 14022]]

       (A) Submission.--The Secretary shall submit a determination 
     issued by the Secretary under paragraph (1) to the Secretary 
     of the Interior or the Secretary of Commerce, as appropriate.
       (B) Review and response.--Within 30 days after receiving a 
     determination under subparagraph (A), the Secretary of the 
     Interior or the Secretary of Commerce, as appropriate, shall 
     provide a written response to the Secretary concurring in or 
     rejecting the Secretary's determination. If the Secretary of 
     the Interior or the Secretary of Commerce rejects the 
     determination, the written response shall include 
     recommendations for measures that--
       (i) will avoid the likelihood of jeopardy to an endangered 
     or threatened species;
       (ii) can be implemented in a manner consistent with the 
     intended purpose of the covered forest reserve project;
       (iii) can be implemented consistent with the scope of the 
     Secretary's legal authority and jurisdiction; and
       (iv) are economically and technologically feasible.
       (3) Formal consultation.--If the Secretary of the Interior 
     or the Secretary of Commerce rejects a determination issued 
     by the Secretary under paragraph (1), the Secretary of the 
     Interior or the Secretary of Commerce also is required to 
     engage in formal consultation with the Secretary. The 
     Secretaries shall complete such consultation pursuant to 
     section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 
     1536) within 90 days after the submission of the written 
     response under paragraph (2).
       (f) Administrative and Judicial Review.--
       (1) Administrative review.--Administrative review of a 
     covered forest reserve project shall occur only in accordance 
     with the special administrative review process established 
     under section 105 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 
     2003 (16 U.S.C. 6515).
       (2) Judicial review.--
       (A) In general.--Judicial review of a covered forest 
     reserve project shall occur in accordance with section 106 of 
     the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6516).
       (B) Bond required.--A plaintiff challenging a covered 
     forest reserve project shall be required to post a bond or 
     other security acceptable to the court for the reasonably 
     estimated costs, expenses, and attorneys fees of the 
     Secretary as defendant. All proceedings in the action shall 
     be stayed until the security is given. If the plaintiff has 
     not complied with the order to post such bond or other 
     security within 90 days after the date of service of the 
     order, then the action shall be dismissed with prejudice.
       (C) Recovery.--If the Secretary prevails in the case, the 
     Secretary shall submit to the court a motion for payment of 
     all litigation expenses.
       (g) Use of All-terrain Vehicles for Management 
     Activities.--The Secretary may allow the use of all-terrain 
     vehicles within the Forest Reserve Revenue Areas for the 
     purpose of activities associated with the sale of national 
     forest materials in a Forest Reserve Revenue Area.

     SEC. 105. DISTRIBUTION OF FOREST RESERVE REVENUES.

       (a) 25-Percent Payments.--The Secretary shall use forest 
     reserve revenues generated by a covered forest reserve 
     project to make 25-percent payments to States for the benefit 
     of beneficiary counties.
       (b) Deposit in Knutson-Vandenberg and Salvage Sale Funds.--
     After compliance with subsection (a), the Secretary shall use 
     forest reserve revenues to make deposits into the fund 
     established under section 3 of the Act of June 9, 1930 (16 
     U.S.C. 576b; commonly known as the Knutson-Vandenberg Fund) 
     and the fund established under section 14(h) of the National 
     Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 472a(h); commonly 
     known as the salvage sale fund) in contributions equal to the 
     monies otherwise collected under those Acts for projects 
     conducted on National Forest System land.
       (c) Deposit in General Fund of the Treasury.--After 
     compliance with subsections (a) and (b), the Secretary shall 
     deposit remaining forest reserve revenues into the general 
     fund of the Treasury.

     TITLE II--HEALTHY FOREST MANAGEMENT AND CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRE 
                               PREVENTION

     SEC. 201. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this title are as follows:
       (1) To provide the Secretary of Agriculture and the 
     Secretary of the Interior with the tools necessary to reduce 
     the potential for wildfires.
       (2) To expedite wildfire prevention projects to reduce the 
     chances of wildfire on certain high-risk Federal lands.
       (3) To protect communities and forest habitat from 
     uncharacteristic wildfires.
       (4) To enhance aquatic conditions and terrestrial wildlife 
     habitat.
       (5) To restore diverse and resilient landscapes through 
     improved forest conditions.

     SEC. 202. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) At-risk community.--The term ``at-risk community'' has 
     the meaning given that term in section 101 of the Healthy 
     Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6511).
       (2) At-risk forest.--The term ``at-risk forest'' means--
       (A) Federal land in condition class II or III, as those 
     classes were developed by the Forest Service Rocky Mountain 
     Research Station in the general technical report titled 
     ``Development of Coarse-Scale Spatial Data for Wildland Fire 
     and Fuel Management'' (RMRS-87) and dated April 2000 or any 
     subsequent revision of the report; or
       (B) Federal land where there exists a high risk of losing 
     an at-risk community, key ecosystem, water supply, wildlife, 
     or wildlife habitat to wildfire, including catastrophic 
     wildfire and post-fire disturbances, as designated by the 
     Secretary concerned.
       (3) Federal land.--
       (A) Covered land.--The term ``Federal land'' means--
       (i) land of the National Forest System (as defined in 
     section 11(a) of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources 
     Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1609(a))); or
       (ii) public lands (as defined in section 103 of the Federal 
     Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1702)).
       (B) Excluded land.--The term does not include land--
       (i) that is a component of the National Wilderness 
     Preservation System;
       (ii) on which the removal of vegetation is specifically 
     prohibited by Federal statute; or
       (iii) that is within a National Monument as of the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.
       (4) High-risk area.--The term ``high-risk area'' means an 
     area of Federal land identified under section 205 as an area 
     suffering from the bark beetle epidemic, drought, or 
     deteriorating forest health conditions, with the resulting 
     imminent risk of devastating wildfires, or otherwise at high 
     risk for bark beetle infestation, drought, or wildfire.
       (5) Secretary concerned.--The term ``Secretary concerned'' 
     means--
       (A) the Secretary of Agriculture, in the case of National 
     Forest System land; and
       (B) the Secretary of the Interior, in the case of public 
     lands.
       (6) Eligible hazardous fuel reduction and forest health 
     projects.--The terms ``hazardous fuel reduction project'' or 
     ``forest health project'' mean the measures and methods 
     developed for a project to be carried out on Federal land--
       (A) in an at-risk forest under section 203 for hazardous 
     fuels reduction, forest health, forest restoration, or 
     watershed restoration, using ecological restoration 
     principles consistent with the forest type where such project 
     will occur; or
       (B) in a high-risk area under section 206.

     SEC. 203. HAZARDOUS FUEL REDUCTION PROJECTS AND FOREST HEALTH 
                   PROJECTS IN AT-RISK FORESTS.

       (a) Implementation.--As soon as practicable after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary concerned is 
     authorized to implement a hazardous fuel reduction project or 
     a forest health project in at-risk forests in a manner that 
     focuses on surface, ladder, and canopy fuels reduction 
     activities using ecological restoration principles consistent 
     with the forest type in the location where such project will 
     occur.
       (b) Authorized Practices.--
       (1) Inclusion of livestock grazing and timber harvesting.--
     A hazardous fuel reduction project or a forest health project 
     may include livestock grazing and timber harvest projects 
     carried out for the purposes of hazardous fuels reduction, 
     forest health, forest restoration, watershed restoration, or 
     threatened and endangered species habitat protection or 
     improvement, if the management action is consistent with 
     achieving long-term ecological restoration of the forest type 
     in the location where such project will occur.
       (2) Grazing.--Domestic livestock grazing may be used in a 
     hazardous fuel reduction project or a forest health project 
     to reduce surface fuel loads and to recover burned areas. 
     Utilization standards shall not apply when domestic livestock 
     grazing is used in such a project.
       (3) Timber harvesting and thinning.--Timber harvesting and 
     thinning, where the ecological restoration principles are 
     consistent with the forest type in the location where such 
     project will occur, may be used in a hazardous fuel reduction 
     project or a forest health project to reduce ladder and 
     canopy fuel loads to prevent unnatural fire.
       (c) Priority.--The Secretary concerned shall give priority 
     to hazardous fuel reduction projects and forest health 
     projects submitted by the Governor of a State as provided in 
     section 206(c) and to projects submitted under the Tribal 
     Forest Protection Act of 2004 (25 U.S.C. 3115a).

     SEC. 204. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

       Subsections (b) through (f) of section 104 shall apply to 
     the implementation of a hazardous fuel reduction project or a 
     forest health project under this title.

     SEC. 205. STATE DESIGNATION OF HIGH-RISK AREAS OF NATIONAL 
                   FOREST SYSTEM AND PUBLIC LANDS.

       (a) Designation Authority.--The Governor of a State may 
     designate high-risk areas of Federal land in the State for 
     the purposes of addressing--
       (1) deteriorating forest health conditions in existence as 
     of the date of the enactment of this Act due to the bark 
     beetle epidemic or drought, with the resulting imminent risk 
     of devastating wildfires; and
       (2) the future risk of insect infestations or disease 
     outbreaks through preventative treatments to improve forest 
     health conditions.
       (b) Consultation.--In designating high-risk areas, the 
     Governor of a State shall consult with county government from 
     affected counties and with affected Indian tribes.
       (c) Exclusion of Certain Areas.--The following Federal land 
     may not be designated as a high-risk area:
       (1) A component of the National Wilderness Preservation 
     System.
       (2) Federal land on which the removal of vegetation is 
     specifically prohibited by Federal statute.

[[Page 14023]]

       (3) Federal land within a National Monument as of the date 
     of the enactment of this Act.
       (d) Standards for Designation.--Designation of high-risk 
     areas shall be consistent with standards and guidelines 
     contained in the land and resource management plan or land 
     use plan for the unit of Federal land for which the 
     designation is being made, except that the Secretary 
     concerned may modify such standards and guidelines to 
     correspond with a specific high-risk area designation.
       (e) Time for Initial Designations.--The first high-risk 
     areas should be designated not later than 60 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, but high-risk areas may be 
     designated at any time consistent with subsection (a).
       (f) Duration of Designation.--The designation of a high-
     risk area in a State shall expire 20 years after the date of 
     the designation, unless earlier terminated by the Governor of 
     the State.
       (g) Redesignation.--The expiration of the 20-year period 
     specified in subsection (f) does not prohibit the Governor 
     from redesignating an area of Federal land as a high-risk 
     area under this section if the Governor determines that the 
     Federal land continues to be subject to the terms of this 
     section.
       (h) Recognition of Valid and Existing Rights.--The 
     designation of a high-risk area shall not be construed to 
     limit or restrict--
       (1) access to Federal land included in the area for 
     hunting, fishing, and other related purposes; or
       (2) valid and existing rights regarding the Federal land.

     SEC. 206. USE OF HAZARDOUS FUELS REDUCTION OR FOREST HEALTH 
                   PROJECTS FOR HIGH-RISK AREAS.

       (a) Project Proposals.--
       (1) Proposals authorized.--Upon designation of a high-risk 
     area in a State, the Governor of the State may provide for 
     the development of proposed hazardous fuel reduction projects 
     or forest health projects for the high-risk area.
       (2) Project criteria.--In preparing a proposed hazardous 
     fuel reduction project or a forest health project, the 
     Governor of a State and the Secretary concerned shall--
       (A) take into account managing for rights of way, 
     protection of watersheds, protection of wildlife and 
     endangered species habitat, safe-guarding water resources, 
     and protecting at-risk communities from wildfires; and
       (B) emphasize activities that thin the forest to provide 
     the greatest health and longevity of the forest.
       (b) Consultation.--In preparing a proposed hazardous fuel 
     reduction project or a forest health project, the Governor of 
     a State shall consult with county government from affected 
     counties, and with affected Indian tribes.
       (c) Submission and Implementation.--The Governor of a State 
     shall submit proposed emergency hazardous fuel reduction 
     projects and forest health projects to the Secretary 
     concerned for implementation as provided in section 203.

     TITLE III--OREGON AND CALIFORNIA RAILROAD GRANT LANDS TRUST, 
                         CONSERVATION, AND JOBS

     SEC. 301. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``O&C Trust, Conservation, 
     and Jobs Act''.

     SEC. 302. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) Affiliates.--The term ``Affiliates'' has the meaning 
     given such term in part 121 of title 13, Code of Federal 
     Regulations.
       (2) Board of trustees.--The term ``Board of Trustees'' 
     means the Board of Trustees for the Oregon and California 
     Railroad Grant Lands Trust appointed under section 313.
       (3) Coos bay wagon road grant lands.--The term ``Coos Bay 
     Wagon Road Grant lands'' means the lands reconveyed to the 
     United States pursuant to the first section of the Act of 
     February 26, 1919 (40 Stat. 1179).
       (4) Fiscal year.--The term ``fiscal year'' means the 
     Federal fiscal year, October 1 through the next September 30.
       (5) Governor.--The term ``Governor'' means the Governor of 
     the State of Oregon.
       (6) O&C region public domain lands.--The term ``O&C Region 
     Public Domain lands'' means all the land managed by the 
     Bureau of Land Management in the Salem District, Eugene 
     District, Roseburg District, Coos Bay District, and Medford 
     District in the State of Oregon, excluding the Oregon and 
     California Railroad Grant lands and the Coos Bay Wagon Road 
     Grant lands.
       (7) O&C trust.--The terms ``Oregon and California Railroad 
     Grant Lands Trust'' and ``O&C Trust'' mean the trust created 
     by section 311, which has fiduciary responsibilities to act 
     for the benefit of the O&C Trust counties in the management 
     of O&C Trust lands.
       (8) O&C trust county.--The term ``O&C Trust county'' means 
     each of the 18 counties in the State of Oregon that contained 
     a portion of the Oregon and California Railroad Grant lands 
     as of January 1, 2013, each of which are beneficiaries of the 
     O&C Trust.
       (9) O&C trust lands.--The term ``O&C Trust lands'' means 
     the surface estate of the lands over which management 
     authority is transferred to the O&C Trust pursuant to section 
     311(c)(1). The term does not include any of the lands 
     excluded from the O&C Trust pursuant to section 311(c)(2), 
     transferred to the Forest Service under section 321, or 
     Tribal lands transferred under subtitle D.
       (10) Oregon and california railroad grant lands.--The term 
     ``Oregon and California Railroad Grant lands'' means the 
     following lands:
       (A) All lands in the State of Oregon revested in the United 
     States under the Act of June 9, 1916 (39 Stat. 218), 
     regardless of whether the lands are--
       (i) administered by the Secretary of the Interior, acting 
     through the Bureau of Land Management, pursuant to the first 
     section of the Act of August 28, 1937 (43 U.S.C. 1181a); or
       (ii) administered by the Secretary of Agriculture as part 
     of the National Forest System pursuant to the first section 
     of the Act of June 24, 1954 (43 U.S.C. 1181g).
       (B) All lands in the State obtained by the Secretary of the 
     Interior pursuant to the land exchanges authorized and 
     directed by section 2 of the Act of June 24, 1954 (43 U.S.C. 
     1181h).
       (C) All lands in the State acquired by the United States at 
     any time and made subject to the provisions of title II of 
     the Act of August 28, 1937 (43 U.S.C. 1181f).
       (11) Reserve fund.--The term ``Reserve Fund'' means the 
     reserve fund created by the Board of Trustees under section 
     315(b).
       (12) Secretary concerned.--The term ``Secretary concerned'' 
     means--
       (A) the Secretary of the Interior, with respect to Oregon 
     and California Railroad Grant lands that are transferred to 
     the management authority of the O&C Trust and, immediately 
     before such transfer, were managed by the Bureau of Land 
     Management; and
       (B) the Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to Oregon 
     and California Railroad Grant lands that--
       (i) are transferred to the management authority of the O&C 
     Trust and, immediately before such transfer, were part of the 
     National Forest System; or
       (ii) are transferred to the Forest Service under section 
     321.
       (13) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of Oregon.
       (14) Transition period.--The term ``transition period'' 
     means the three fiscal-year period specified in section 331 
     following the appointment of the Board of Trustees during 
     which--
       (A) the O&C Trust is created; and
       (B) interim funding of the O&C Trust is secured.
       (15) Tribal lands.--The term ``Tribal lands'' means any of 
     the lands transferred to the Cow Creek Band of the Umpqua 
     Tribe of Indians or the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower 
     Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians under subtitle D.

               Subtitle A--Trust, Conservation, and Jobs

               CHAPTER 1--CREATION AND TERMS OF O&C TRUST

     SEC. 311. CREATION OF O&C TRUST AND DESIGNATION OF O&C TRUST 
                   LANDS.

       (a) Creation.--The Oregon and California Railroad Grant 
     Lands Trust is established effective on October 1 of the 
     first fiscal year beginning after the appointment of the 
     Board of Trustees. As management authority over the surface 
     of estate of the O&C Trust lands is transferred to the O&C 
     Trust during the transition period pursuant to section 331, 
     the transferred lands shall be held in trust for the benefit 
     of the O&C Trust counties.
       (b) Trust Purpose.--The purpose of the O&C Trust is to 
     produce annual maximum sustained revenues in perpetuity for 
     O&C Trust counties by managing the timber resources on O&C 
     Trust lands on a sustained-yield basis subject to the 
     management requirements of section 314.
       (c) Designation of O&C Trust Lands.--
       (1) Lands included.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     the O&C Trust lands shall include all of the lands containing 
     the stands of timber described in subsection (d) that are 
     located, as of January 1, 2013, on Oregon and California 
     Railroad Grant lands and O&C Region Public Domain lands.
       (2) Lands excluded.--O&C Trust lands shall not include any 
     of the following Oregon and California Railroad Grant lands 
     and O&C Region Public Domain lands (even if the lands are 
     otherwise described in subsection (d)):
       (A) Federal lands within the National Landscape 
     Conservation System as of January 1, 2013.
       (B) Federal lands designated as Areas of Critical 
     Environmental Concern as of January 1, 2013.
       (C) Federal lands that were in the National Wilderness 
     Preservation System as of January 1, 2013.
       (D) Federal lands included in the National Wild and Scenic 
     Rivers System of January 1, 2013.
       (E) Federal lands within the boundaries of a national 
     monument, park, or other developed recreation area as of 
     January 1, 2013.
       (F) Oregon treasures addressed in subtitle C, any portion 
     of which, as of January 1, 2013, consists of Oregon and 
     California Railroad Grant lands or O&C Region Public Domain 
     lands.
       (G) Tribal lands addressed in subtitle D.
       (d) Covered Stands of Timber.--
       (1) Description.--The O&C Trust lands consist of stands of 
     timber that have previously been managed for timber 
     production or that have been materially altered by natural 
     disturbances since 1886. Most of these stands of timber are 
     80 years old or less, and all of such stands can be 
     classified as having a predominant stand age of 125 years or 
     less.
       (2) Delineation of boundaries by bureau of land 
     management.--The Oregon and California Railroad Grant lands 
     and O&C Region Public Domain lands that, immediately before 
     transfer to the O&C Trust, were managed by the Bureau of Land 
     Management are timber stands that have predominant birth date 
     attributes of 1886 or later, with boundaries that are defined 
     by polygon spatial data layer in and electronic data 
     compilation filed by the Bureau of Land

[[Page 14024]]

     Management pursuant to paragraph (4). Except as provided in 
     paragraph (5), the boundaries of all timber stands 
     constituting the O&C Trust lands are finally and conclusively 
     determined for all purposes by coordinates in or derived by 
     reference to the polygon spatial data layer prepared by the 
     Bureau of Land Management and filed pursuant to paragraph 
     (4), notwithstanding anomalies that might later be discovered 
     on the ground. The boundary coordinates are locatable on the 
     ground by use of global positioning system signals. In cases 
     where the location of the stand boundary is disputed or is 
     inconsistent with paragraph (1), the location of boundary 
     coordinates on the ground shall be, except as otherwise 
     provided in paragraph (5), finally and conclusively 
     determined for all purposes by the direct or indirect use of 
     global positioning system equipment with accuracy 
     specification of one meter or less.
       (3) Delineation of boundaries by forest service.--The O&C 
     Trust lands that, immediately before transfer to the O&C 
     Trust, were managed by the Forest Service are timber stands 
     that can be classified as having predominant stand ages of 
     125 years old or less. Within 30 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     commence identification of the boundaries of such stands, and 
     the boundaries of all such stands shall be identified and 
     made available to the Board of Trustees not later than 180 
     days following the creation of the O&C Trust pursuant to 
     subsection (a). In identifying the stand boundaries, the 
     Secretary may use geographic information system data, 
     satellite imagery, cadastral survey coordinates, or any other 
     means available within the time allowed. The boundaries shall 
     be provided to the Board of Trustees within the time allowed 
     in the form of a spatial data layer from which coordinates 
     can be derived that are locatable on the ground by use of 
     global positioning system signals. Except as provided in 
     paragraph (5), the boundaries of all timber stands 
     constituting the O&C Trust lands are finally and conclusively 
     determined for all purposes by coordinates in or derived by 
     reference to the data provided by the Secretary within the 
     time provided by this paragraph, notwithstanding anomalies 
     that might later be discovered on the ground. In cases where 
     the location of the stand boundary is disputed or 
     inconsistent with paragraph (1), the location of boundary 
     coordinates on the ground shall be, except as otherwise 
     provided in paragraph (5), finally and conclusively 
     determined for all purposes by the boundary coordinates 
     provided by the Secretary as they are located on the ground 
     by the direct or indirect use of global positioning system 
     equipment with accuracy specifications of one meter or less. 
     All actions taken by the Secretary under this paragraph shall 
     be deemed to not involve Federal agency action or Federal 
     discretionary involvement or control.
       (4) Data and maps.--Copies of the data containing boundary 
     coordinates for the stands included in the O&C Trust lands, 
     or from which such coordinates are derived, and maps 
     generally depicting the stand locations shall be filed with 
     the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate, 
     the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of 
     Representatives, and the office of the Secretary concerned. 
     The maps and data shall be filed--
       (A) not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, in the case of the lands identified pursuant to 
     paragraph (2); and
       (B) not later than 180 days following the creation of the 
     O&C Trust pursuant to subsection (a), in the case of lands 
     identified pursuant to paragraph (3).
       (5) Adjustment authority and limitations.--
       (A) No impact on determining title or property ownership 
     boundaries.--Stand boundaries identified under paragraph (2) 
     or (3) shall not be relied upon for purposes of determining 
     title or property ownership boundaries. If the boundary of a 
     stand identified under paragraph (2) or (3) extends beyond 
     the property ownership boundaries of Oregon and California 
     Railroad Grant lands or O&C Region Public Domain lands, as 
     such property boundaries exist on the date of enactment of 
     this Act, then that stand boundary is deemed adjusted by this 
     subparagraph to coincide with the property ownership 
     boundary.
       (B) Effect of data errors or inconsistencies.--Data errors 
     or inconsistencies may result in parcels of land along 
     property ownership boundaries that are unintentionally 
     omitted from the O&C Trust lands that are identified under 
     paragraph (2) or (3). In order to correct such errors, any 
     parcel of land that satisfies all of the following criteria 
     is hereby deemed to be O&C Trust land:
       (i) The parcel is within the ownership boundaries of Oregon 
     and California Railroad Grant lands or O&C Region Public 
     Domain lands on the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (ii) The parcel satisfies the description in paragraph (1) 
     on the date of enactment of this Act.
       (iii) The parcel is not excluded from the O&C Trust lands 
     pursuant to subsection (c)(2).
       (C) No impact on land exchange authority.--Nothing in this 
     subsection is intended to limit the authority of the Trust 
     and the Forest Service to engage in land exchanges between 
     themselves or with owners of non-Federal land as provided 
     elsewhere in this title.

     SEC. 312. LEGAL EFFECT OF O&C TRUST AND JUDICIAL REVIEW.

       (a) Legal Status of Trust Lands.--Subject to the other 
     provisions of this section, all right, title, and interest in 
     and to the O&C Trust lands remain in the United States, 
     except that--
       (1) the Board of Trustees shall have all authority to 
     manage the surface estate of the O&C Trust lands and the 
     resources found thereon;
       (2) actions on the O&C Trust lands shall be deemed to 
     involve no Federal agency action or Federal discretionary 
     involvement or control and the laws of the State shall apply 
     to the surface estate of the O&C Trust lands in the manner 
     applicable to privately owned timberlands in the State; and
       (3) the O&C Trust shall be treated as the beneficial owner 
     of the surface estate of the O&C Trust lands for purposes of 
     all legal proceedings involving the O&C Trust lands.
       (b) Minerals.--
       (1) In general.--Mineral and other subsurface rights in the 
     O&C Trust lands are retained by the United States or other 
     owner of such rights as of the date on which management 
     authority over the surface estate of the lands are 
     transferred to the O&C Trust.
       (2) Rock and gravel.--
       (A) Use authorized; purpose.--For maintenance or 
     construction on the road system under the control of the O&C 
     Trust or for non-Federal lands intermingled with O&C Trust 
     lands, the Board of Trustees may--
       (i) utilize rock or gravel found within quarries in 
     existence immediately before the date of the enactment of 
     this Act on any Oregon and California Railroad Grant lands 
     and O&C Region Public Domain lands, excluding those lands 
     designated under subtitle C or transferred under subtitle D; 
     and
       (ii) construct new quarries on O&C Trust lands, except that 
     any quarry so constructed may not exceed 5 acres.
       (B) Exception.--The Board of Trustees shall not construct 
     new quarries on any of the lands transferred to the Forest 
     Service under section 321 or lands designated under subtitle 
     D.
       (c) Roads.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in subsection (b), the 
     Board of Trustees shall assume authority and responsibility 
     over, and have authority to use, all roads and the road 
     system specified in the following subparagraphs:
       (A) All roads and road systems on the Oregon and California 
     Railroad and Grant lands and O&C Region Public Domain lands 
     owned or administered by the Bureau of Land Management 
     immediately before the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     except that the Secretary of Agriculture shall assume the 
     Secretary of Interior's obligations for pro-rata maintenance 
     expense and road use fees under reciprocal right-of-way 
     agreements for those lands transferred to the Forest Service 
     under section 321. All of the lands transferred to the Forest 
     Service under section 321 shall be considered as part of the 
     tributary area used to calculate pro-rata maintenance expense 
     and road use fees.
       (B) All roads and road systems owned or administered by the 
     Forest Service immediately before the date of the enactment 
     of this Act and subsequently included within the boundaries 
     of the O&C Trust lands.
       (C) All roads later added to the road system for management 
     of the O&C Trust lands.
       (2) Lands transferred to forest service.--The Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall assume the obligations of the Secretary of 
     Interior for pro-rata maintenance expense and road use fees 
     under reciprocal rights-of-way agreements for those Oregon 
     and California Railroad Grant lands or O&C Region Public 
     Domain lands transferred to the Forest Service under section 
     321.
       (3) Compliance with clean water act.--All roads used, 
     constructed, or reconstructed under the jurisdiction of the 
     O&C Trust must comply with requirements of the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) applicable to 
     private lands through the use of Best Management Practices 
     under the Oregon Forest Practices Act.
       (d) Public Access.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), public access to 
     O&C Trust lands shall be preserved consistent with the 
     policies of the Secretary concerned applicable to the O&C 
     Trust lands as of the date on which management authority over 
     the surface estate of the lands is transferred to the O&C 
     Trust.
       (2) Restrictions.--The Board of Trustees may limit or 
     control public access for reasons of public safety or to 
     protect the resources on the O&C Trust lands.
       (e) Limitations.--The assets of the O&C Trust shall not be 
     subject to the creditors of an O&C Trust county, or otherwise 
     be distributed in an unprotected manner or be subject to 
     anticipation, encumbrance, or expenditure other than for a 
     purpose for which the O&C Trust was created.
       (f) Remedy.--An O&C Trust county shall have all of the 
     rights and remedies that would normally accrue to a 
     beneficiary of a trust. An O&C Trust county shall provide the 
     Board of Trustees, the Secretary concerned, and the Attorney 
     General with not less than 60 days notice of an intent to sue 
     to enforce the O&C Trust county's rights under the O&C Trust.
       (g) Judicial Review.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     judicial review of any provision of this title shall be 
     sought in the United States Court of Appeals for the District 
     of Columbia Circuit. Parties seeking judicial review of the 
     validity of any provision of this title must file suit within 
     90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and no 
     preliminary injunctive relief or stays pending appeal will be 
     permitted. If multiple cases are filed under this paragraph, 
     the Court shall consolidate the cases. The Court must rule on 
     any action brought under this paragraph within 180 days.

[[Page 14025]]

       (2) Decisions of board of trustees.--Decisions made by the 
     Board of Trustees shall be subject to judicial review only in 
     an action brought by an O&C County, except that nothing in 
     this title precludes bringing a legal claim against the Board 
     of Trustees that could be brought against a private landowner 
     for the same action.

     SEC. 313. BOARD OF TRUSTEES.

       (a) Appointment Authorization.--Subject to the conditions 
     on appointment imposed by this section, the Governor is 
     authorized to appoint the Board of Trustees to administer the 
     O&C Trust and O&C Trust lands. Appointments by the Governor 
     shall be made within 60 days after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.
       (b) Members and Eligibility.--
       (1) Number.--Subject to subsection (c), the Board of 
     Trustees shall consist of seven members.
       (2) Residency requirement.--Members of the Board of 
     Trustees must reside within an O&C Trust county.
       (3) Geographical representation.--To the extent 
     practicable, the Governor shall ensure broad geographic 
     representation among the O&C Trust counties in appointing 
     members to the Board of Trustees.
       (c) Composition.--The Board of Trustees shall include the 
     following members:
       (1)(A) Two forestry and wood products representatives, 
     consisting of--
       (i) one member who represents the commercial timber, wood 
     products, or milling industries and who represents an Oregon-
     based company with more than 500 employees, taking into 
     account its affiliates, that has submitted a bid for a timber 
     sale on the Oregon and California Railroad Grant lands, O&C 
     Region Public Domain lands, Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant lands, 
     or O&C Trust lands in the preceding five years; and
       (ii) one member who represents the commercial wood products 
     or milling industries and who represents an Oregon-based 
     company with 500 or fewer employees, taking into account its 
     affiliates, that has submitted a bid for a timber sale on the 
     Oregon and California Railroad Grant lands, O&C Region Public 
     Domain lands, Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant lands, or O&C Trust 
     lands in the preceding five years.
       (B) At least one of the two representatives selected in 
     this paragraph must own commercial forest land that is 
     adjacent to the O&C Trust lands and from which the 
     representative has not exported unprocessed timber in the 
     preceding five years.
       (2) One representative of the general public who has 
     professional experience in one or more of the following 
     fields:
       (A) Business management.
       (B) Law.
       (C) Accounting.
       (D) Banking.
       (E) Labor management.
       (F) Transportation.
       (G) Engineering.
       (H) Public policy.
       (3) One representative of the science community who, at a 
     minimum, holds a Doctor of Philosophy degree in wildlife 
     biology, forestry, ecology, or related field and has 
     published peer-reviewed academic articles in the 
     representative's field of expertise.
       (4) Three governmental representatives, consisting of--
       (A) two members who are serving county commissioners of an 
     O&C Trust county and who are nominated by the governing 
     bodies of a majority of the O&C Trust counties and approved 
     by the Governor, except that the two representatives may not 
     be from the same county; and
       (B) one member who holds State-wide elected office (or is a 
     designee of such a person) or who represents a federally 
     recognized Indian tribe or tribes within one or more O&C 
     Trust counties.
       (d) Term, Initial Appointment, Vacancies.--
       (1) Term.--Except in the case of initial appointments, 
     members of the Board of Trustees shall serve for five-year 
     terms and may be reappointed for one consecutive term.
       (2) Initial appointments.--In making the first appointments 
     to the Board of Trustees, the Governor shall stagger initial 
     appointment lengths so that two members have three-year 
     terms, two members have four-year terms, and three members 
     have a full five-year term.
       (3) Vacancies.--Any vacancy on the Board of Trustees shall 
     be filled within 45 days by the Governor for the unexpired 
     term of the departing member.
       (4) Board of trustees management costs.--Members of the 
     Board of Trustees may receive annual compensation from the 
     O&C Trust at a rate not to exceed 50 percent of the average 
     annual salary for commissioners of the O&C Trust counties for 
     that year.
       (e) Chairperson and Operations.--
       (1) Chairperson.--A majority of the Board of Trustees shall 
     select the chairperson for the Board of Trustees each year.
       (2) Meetings.--The Board of Trustees shall establish 
     proceedings to carry out its duties. The Board shall meet at 
     least quarterly. Except for meetings substantially involving 
     personnel and contractual decisions, all meetings of the 
     Board shall comply with the public meetings law of the State.
       (f) Quorum and Decision-making.--
       (1) Quorum.--A quorum shall consist of five members of the 
     Board of Trustees. The presence of a quorum is required to 
     constitute an official meeting of the board of trustees to 
     satisfy the meeting requirement under subsection (e)(2).
       (2) Decisions.--All actions and decisions by the Board of 
     Trustees shall require approval by a majority of members.
       (g) Annual Audit.--Financial statements regarding operation 
     of the O&C Trust shall be independently prepared and audited 
     annually for review by the O&C Trust counties, Congress, and 
     the State.

     SEC. 314. MANAGEMENT OF O&C TRUST LANDS.

       (a) In General.--Except as otherwise provided in this 
     title, the O&C Trust lands will be managed by the Board of 
     Trustees in compliance with all Federal and State laws in the 
     same manner as such laws apply to private forest lands.
       (b) Timber Sale Plans.--The Board of Trustees shall approve 
     and periodically update management and sale plans for the O&C 
     Trust lands consistent with the purpose specified in section 
     311(b). The Board of Trustees may defer sale plans during 
     periods of depressed timber markets if the Board of Trustees, 
     in its discretion, determines that such delay until markets 
     improve is financially prudent and in keeping with its 
     fiduciary obligation to the O&C Trust counties.
       (c) Stand Rotation.--
       (1) 100-120 year rotation.--The Board of Trustees shall 
     manage not less than 50 percent of the harvestable acres of 
     the O&C Trust lands on a 100-120 year rotation. The acreage 
     subject to 100-120 year management shall be geographically 
     dispersed across the O&C Trust lands in a manner that the 
     Board of Trustees, in its discretion, determines will 
     contribute to aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem values.
       (2) Balance.--The balance of the harvestable acreage of the 
     O&C Trust lands shall be managed on any rotation age the 
     Board of Trustees, in its discretion and in compliance with 
     applicable State law, determines will best satisfy its 
     fiduciary obligation to provide revenue to the O&C Trust 
     counties.
       (3) Thinning.--Nothing in this subsection is intended to 
     limit the ability of the Board of Trustees to decide, in its 
     discretion, to thin stands of timber on O&C Trust lands.
       (d) Sale Terms.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), the 
     Board of Trustees is authorized to establish the terms for 
     sale contracts of timber or other forest products from O&C 
     Trust lands.
       (2) Set aside.--The Board of Trustees shall establish a 
     program consistent with the program of the Bureau of Land 
     Management under a March 10, 1959 Memorandum of 
     Understanding, as amended, regarding calculation of shares 
     and sale of timber set aside for purchase by business 
     entities with 500 or fewer employees and consistent with the 
     regulations in part 121 of title 13, Code of Federal 
     Regulations applicable to timber sale set asides, except that 
     existing shares in effect on the date of enactment of this 
     Act shall apply until the next scheduled recomputation of 
     shares. In implementing its program that is consistent with 
     such Memorandum of Understanding, the Board of Trustees shall 
     utilize the Timber Sale Procedure Handbook and other 
     applicable procedures of the Bureau of Land Management, 
     including the Operating Procedures for Conducting the Five-
     Year Recomputation of Small Business Share Percentages in 
     effect on January 1, 2013.
       (3) Competitive bidding.--The Board of Trustees must sell 
     timber on a competitive bid basis. No less than 50 percent of 
     the total volume of timber sold by the Board of Trustees each 
     year shall be sold by oral bidding consistent with practices 
     of the Bureau of Land Management as of January 1, 2013.
       (e) Prohibition on Export.--
       (1) In general.--As a condition on the sale of timber or 
     other forest products from O&C Trust lands, unprocessed 
     timber harvested from O&C Trust lands may not be exported.
       (2) Violations.--Any person who knowingly exports 
     unprocessed timber harvested from O&C Trust lands, who 
     knowingly provides such unprocessed timber for export by 
     another person, or knowingly sells timber harvested from O&C 
     Trust lands to a person who is disqualified from purchasing 
     timber from such lands pursuant to this section shall be 
     disqualified from purchasing timber or other forest products 
     from O&C Trust lands or from Federal lands administered under 
     this subtitle. Any person who uses unprocessed timber 
     harvested from O&C Trust lands in substitution for exported 
     unprocessed timber originating from private lands shall be 
     disqualified from purchasing timber or other forest products 
     from O&C Trust lands or from Federal lands administered under 
     this subtitle.
       (3) Unprocessed timber defined.--In this subsection, the 
     term ``unprocessed timber'' has the meaning given such term 
     in section 493(9) of the Forest Resources Conservation and 
     Shortage Relief Act of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 620e(9)).
       (f) Integrated Pest, Disease, and Weed Management Plan.--
     The Board of Trustees shall develop an integrated pest and 
     vegetation management plan to assist forest managers in 
     prioritizing and minimizing the use of pesticides and 
     herbicides approved by the Environmental Protection Agency 
     and used in compliance with the Oregon Forest Practices Act. 
     The plan shall optimize the ability of the O&C Trust to re-
     establish forest stands after harvest in compliance with the 
     Oregon Forest Practices Act and to create diverse early seral 
     stage forests. The plan shall allow for the eradication, 
     containment and suppression of disease, pests, weeds and 
     noxious plants, and invasive species as found on the State 
     Noxious Weed List and prioritize ground application of 
     herbicides and pesticides to the greatest extent practicable. 
     The plan shall be completed before the start of the second 
     year of the transition period. The planning process shall be 
     open to the public and the Board of Trustees shall hold not 
     less than two public

[[Page 14026]]

     hearings on the proposed plan before final adoption.
       (g) Access to Lands Transferred to Forest Service.--Persons 
     acting on behalf of the O&C Trust shall have a right of 
     timely access over lands transferred to the Forest Service 
     under section 321 and Tribal lands transferred under subtitle 
     D as is reasonably necessary for the Board of Trustees to 
     carry out its management activities with regard to the O&C 
     Trust lands and the O&C Trust to satisfy its fiduciary duties 
     to O&C counties.
       (h) Harvest Area Tree and Retention Requirements.--
       (1) In general.--The O&C Trust lands shall include harvest 
     area tree and retention requirements consistent with State 
     law.
       (2) Use of old growth definition.--To the greatest extent 
     practicable, and at the discretion of the Board of Trustees, 
     old growth, as defined by the Old Growth Review Panel created 
     by section 324, shall be used to meet the retention 
     requirements applicable under paragraph (1).
       (i) Riparian Area Management.--
       (1) In general.--The O&C Trust lands shall be managed with 
     timber harvesting limited in riparian areas as follows:
       (A) Streams.--For all fish bearing streams and all 
     perennial non-fish-bearing streams, there shall be no removal 
     of timber within a distance equal to the height of one site 
     potential tree on both sides of the stream channel. For 
     intermittent, non-fish-bearing streams, there shall be no 
     removal of timber within a distance equal to one-half the 
     height of a site potential tree on both sides of the stream 
     channel. For purposes of this subparagraph, the stream 
     channel boundaries are the lines of ordinary high water.
       (B) Larger lakes, ponds and reservoirs.--For all lakes, 
     ponds, and reservoirs with surface area larger than one 
     quarter of one acre, there shall be no removal of timber 
     within a distance equal to the height of one site potential 
     tree from the line of ordinary high water of the water body.
       (C) Small ponds and natural wetlands, springs and seeps.--
     For all ponds with surface area one quarter acre or less, and 
     for all natural wetlands, springs and seeps, there shall be 
     no removal of timber within the area dominated by riparian 
     vegetation.
       (2) Measurements.--For purposes of paragraph (1), all 
     distances shall be measured along slopes, and all site 
     potential tree heights shall be average height at maturity of 
     the dominant species of conifer determined at a scale no 
     finer than the applicable fifth field watershed.
       (3) Rules of construction.--Nothing in paragraph (1) shall 
     be construed--
       (A) to prohibit the falling or placement of timber into 
     streams to create large woody debris for the benefit of 
     aquatic ecosystems; or
       (B) to prohibit the falling of trees within riparian areas 
     as may be reasonably necessary for safety or operational 
     reasons in areas adjacent to the riparian areas, or for road 
     construction or maintenance pursuant to section 312(c)(3).
       (j) Fire Protection and Emergency Response.--
       (1) Reciprocal fire protection agreements.--
       (A) Continuation of agreements.--Subject to subparagraphs 
     (B), (C), and (D), any reciprocal fire protection agreement 
     between the State or any other entity and the Secretary 
     concerned with regard to Oregon and California Railroad Grant 
     lands and O&C Region Public Domain lands in effect on the 
     date of the enactment of this Act shall remain in place for a 
     period of ten years after such date unless earlier terminated 
     by the State or other entity.
       (B) Assumption of blm rights and duties.--The Board of 
     Trustees shall exercise the rights and duties of the Bureau 
     of Land Management under the agreements described in 
     subparagraph (A), except as such rights and duties might 
     apply to Tribal lands under subtitle D.
       (C) Effect of expiration of period.--Following the 
     expiration of the ten-year period under subparagraph (A), the 
     Board of Trustees shall continue to provide for fire 
     protection of the Oregon and California Railroad Grant lands 
     and O&C Region Public Domain lands, including those 
     transferred to the Forest Service under section 331, through 
     continuation of the reciprocal fire protection agreements, 
     new cooperative agreements, or by any means otherwise 
     permitted by law. The means selected shall be based on the 
     review by the Board of Trustees of whether the reciprocal 
     fire protection agreements were effective in protecting the 
     lands from fire.
       (D) Emergency response.--Nothing in this paragraph shall 
     prevent the Secretary of Agriculture from an emergency 
     response to a fire on the O&C Trust lands or lands 
     transferred to the Forest Service under section 321.
       (2) Emergency response to fire.--Subject to paragraph (1), 
     if the Secretary of Agriculture determines that fire on any 
     of the lands transferred under section 321 is burning 
     uncontrolled or the Secretary, the Board of Trustees, or 
     contracted party does not have readily and immediately 
     available personnel and equipment to control or extinguish 
     the fire, the Secretary, or any forest protective association 
     or agency under contract or agreement with the Secretary or 
     the Board of Trustees for the protection of forestland 
     against fire, shall summarily and aggressively abate the 
     nuisance thus controlling and extinguishing the fire.
       (k) Northern Spotted Owl.--So long as the O&C Trust 
     maintains the 100-120 year rotation on 50 percent of the 
     harvestable acres required in subsection (c), the section 321 
     lands representing the best quality habitat for the owl are 
     transferred to the Forest Service, and the O&C Trust protects 
     currently occupied northern spotted owl nest sites consistent 
     with the forest practices in the Oregon Forest Practices Act, 
     management of the O&C Trust land by the Board of Trustees 
     shall be considered to comply with section 9 of Public Law 
     93-205 (16 U.S.C. 1538) for the northern spotted owl. A 
     currently occupied northern spotted owl nest site shall be 
     considered abandoned if there are no northern spotted owl 
     responses following three consecutive years of surveys using 
     the Protocol for Surveying Management Activities that May 
     Impact Northern Spotted Owls dated February 2, 2013.

     SEC. 315. DISTRIBUTION OF REVENUES FROM O&C TRUST LANDS.

       (a) Annual Distribution of Revenues.--
       (1) Time for distribution; use.--Payments to each O&C Trust 
     county shall be made available to the general fund of the O&C 
     Trust county as soon as practicable following the end of each 
     fiscal year, to be used as are other unrestricted county 
     funds.
       (2) Amount.--The amount paid to an O&C Trust county in 
     relation to the total distributed to all O&C Trust counties 
     for a fiscal year shall be based on the proportion that the 
     total assessed value of the Oregon and California Railroad 
     Grant lands in each of the O&C Trust counties for fiscal year 
     1915 bears to the total assessed value of all of the Oregon 
     and California Railroad Grant lands in the State for that 
     same fiscal year. However, for the purposes of this 
     subsection the portion of the revested Oregon and California 
     Railroad Grant lands in each of the O&C Trust counties that 
     was not assessed for fiscal year 1915 shall be deemed to have 
     been assessed at the average assessed value of the Oregon and 
     California Railroad Grant lands in the county.
       (3) Limitation.--After the fifth payment made under this 
     subsection, the payment to an O&C Trust county for a fiscal 
     year shall not exceed 110 percent of the previous year's 
     payment to the O&C Trust county, adjusted for inflation based 
     on the consumer price index applicable to the geographic area 
     in which the O&C Trust counties are located.
       (b) Reserve Fund.--
       (1) Establishment of reserve fund.--The Board of Trustees 
     shall generate and maintain a reserve fund.
       (2) Deposits to reserve fund.--Within 10 years after 
     creation of the O&C Trust or as soon thereafter as is 
     practicable, the Board of Trustees shall establish and seek 
     to maintain an annual balance of $125,000,000 in the Reserve 
     Fund, to be derived from revenues generated from management 
     activities involving O&C Trust lands. All annual revenues 
     generated in excess of operating costs and payments to O&C 
     Trust counties required by subsection (a) and payments into 
     the Conservation Fund as provided in subsection (c) shall be 
     deposited in the Reserve Fund.
       (3) Expenditures from reserve fund.--The Board of Trustees 
     shall use amounts in the Reserve Fund only--
       (A) to pay management and administrative expenses or 
     capital improvement costs on O&C Trust lands; and
       (B) to make payments to O&C Trust counties when payments to 
     the counties under subsection (a) are projected to be 90 
     percent or less of the previous year's payments.
       (c) O&C Trust Conservation Fund.--
       (1) Establishment of conservation fund.--The Board of 
     Trustees shall use a portion of revenues generated from 
     activity on the O&C Trust lands, consistent with paragraph 
     (2), to establish and maintain a O&C Trust Conservation Fund. 
     The O&C Trust Conservation Fund shall include no Federal 
     appropriations.
       (2) Revenues.--Following the transition period, five 
     percent of the O&C Trust's annual net operating revenue, 
     after deduction of all management costs and expenses, 
     including the payment required under section 317, shall be 
     deposited to the O&C Trust Conservation Fund.
       (3) Expenditures from conservation fund.--The Board of 
     Trustees shall use amounts from the O&C Trust Conservation 
     Fund only--
       (A) to fund the voluntary acquisition of conservation 
     easements from willing private landowners in the State;
       (B) to fund watershed restoration, remediation and 
     enhancement projects within the State; or
       (C) to contribute to balancing values in a land exchange 
     with willing private landowners proposed under section 
     323(b), if the land exchange will result in a net increase in 
     ecosystem benefits for fish, wildlife, or rare native plants.

     SEC. 316. LAND EXCHANGE AUTHORITY.

       (a) Authority.--Subject to approval by the Secretary 
     concerned, the Board of Trustees may negotiate proposals for 
     land exchanges with owners of lands adjacent to O&C Trust 
     lands in order to create larger contiguous blocks of land 
     under management by the O&C Trust to facilitate resource 
     management, to improve conservation value of such lands, or 
     to improve the efficiency of management of such lands.
       (b) Approval Required; Criteria.--The Secretary concerned 
     may approve a land exchange proposed by the Board of Trustees 
     administratively if the exchange meets the following 
     criteria:
       (1) The non-Federal lands are completely within the State.
       (2) The non-Federal lands have high timber production 
     value, or are necessary for more efficient or effective 
     management of adjacent or nearby O&C Trust lands.
       (3) The non-Federal lands have equal or greater value to 
     the O&C Trust lands proposed for exchange.

[[Page 14027]]

       (4) The proposed exchange is reasonably likely to increase 
     the net income to the O&C Trust counties over the next 20 
     years and not decrease the net income to the O&C Trust 
     counties over the next 10 years.
       (c) Acreage Limitation.--The Secretary concerned shall not 
     approve land exchanges under this section that, taken 
     together with all previous exchanges involving the O&C Trust 
     lands, have the effect of reducing the total acreage of the 
     O&C Trust lands by more than five percent from the total 
     acreage to be designated as O&C Trust land under section 
     311(c)(1).
       (d) Inapplicability of Certain Laws.--Section 3 of the 
     Oregon Public Lands Transfer and Protection Act of 1998 
     (Public Law 105-321; 112 Stat. 3022), the Federal Land Policy 
     and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et. seq.), 
     including the amendments made by the Federal Land Exchange 
     Facilitation Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-409; 102 Stat. 
     1086), the Act of March 20, 1922 (16 U.S.C. 485, 486), and 
     the Act of March 1, 1911 (commonly known as the Weeks Act; 16 
     U.S.C. 480 et seq.) shall not apply to the land exchange 
     authority provided by this section.
       (e) Exchanges With Forest Service.--
       (1) Exchanges authorized.--The Board of Trustees is 
     authorized to engage in land exchanges with the Forest 
     Service if approved by the Secretary pursuant to section 
     323(c).
       (2) Management of exchanged lands.--Following completion of 
     a land exchange under paragraph (1), the management 
     requirements applicable to the newly acquired lands by the 
     O&C Trust or the Forest Service shall be the same 
     requirements under this subtitle applicable to the other 
     lands that are managed by the O&C Board or the Forest 
     Service.

     SEC. 317. PAYMENTS TO THE UNITED STATES TREASURY.

       As soon as practicable after the end of the third fiscal 
     year of the transition period and in each of the subsequent 
     seven fiscal years, the O&C Trust shall submit a payment of 
     $10,000,000 to the United States Treasury.

         CHAPTER 2--TRANSFER OF CERTAIN LANDS TO FOREST SERVICE

     SEC. 321. TRANSFER OF CERTAIN OREGON AND CALIFORNIA RAILROAD 
                   GRANT LANDS TO FOREST SERVICE.

       (a) Transfer Required.--The Secretary of the Interior shall 
     transfer administrative jurisdiction over all Oregon and 
     California Railroad Grant lands and O&C Region Public Domain 
     lands not designated as O&C Trust lands by subparagraphs (A) 
     through (F) of section 311(c)(1), including those lands 
     excluded by section 311(c)(2), to the Secretary of 
     Agriculture for inclusion in the National Forest System and 
     administration by the Forest Service as provided in section 
     322.
       (b) Exception.--This section does not apply to Tribal lands 
     transferred under subtitle D.

     SEC. 322. MANAGEMENT OF TRANSFERRED LANDS BY FOREST SERVICE.

       (a) Assignment to Existing National Forests.--To the 
     greatest extent practicable, management responsibilities for 
     the lands transferred under section 321 shall be assigned to 
     the unit of the National Forest System geographically closest 
     to the transferred lands. The Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     have ultimate decision-making authority, but shall assign the 
     transferred lands to a unit not later than the applicable 
     transfer date provided in the transition period.
       (b) Application of Northwest Forest Plan.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     lands transferred under section 321 shall be managed under 
     the Northwest Forest Plan and shall retain Northwest Forest 
     Plan land use designations until or unless changed in the 
     manner provided by Federal laws applicable to the 
     administration and management of the National Forest System.
       (2) Exception for certain designated lands.--The lands 
     excluded from the O&C Trust by subparagraphs (A) through (F) 
     of section 311(c)(2) and transferred to the Forest Service 
     under section 321 shall be managed as provided by Federal 
     laws applicable to the lands.
       (c) Protection of Old Growth.--Old growth, as defined by 
     the Old Growth Review Panel pursuant to rulemaking conducted 
     in accordance with section 553 of title 5, United States 
     Code, shall not be harvested by the Forest Service on lands 
     transferred under section 321.
       (d) Emergency Response to Fire.--Subject to section 314(i), 
     if the Secretary of Agriculture determines that fire on any 
     of the lands transferred under section 321 is burning 
     uncontrolled or the Secretary or contracted party does not 
     have readily and immediately available personnel and 
     equipment to control or extinguish the fire, the Secretary, 
     or any forest protective association or agency under contract 
     or agreement with the Secretary for the protection of 
     forestland against fire, and within whose protection area the 
     fire exists, shall summarily and aggressively abate the 
     nuisance thus controlling and extinguishing the fire.

     SEC. 323. MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCIES AND EXPEDITED LAND 
                   EXCHANGES.

       (a) Land Exchange Authority.--The Secretary of Agriculture 
     may conduct land exchanges involving lands transferred under 
     section 321, other than the lands excluded from the O&C Trust 
     by subparagraphs (A) through (F) of section 311(c)(2), in 
     order create larger contiguous blocks of land under 
     management of the Secretary to facilitate resource 
     management, to improve conservation value of such lands, or 
     to improve the efficiency of management of such lands.
       (b) Criteria for Exchanges With Non-Federal Owners.--The 
     Secretary of Agriculture may conduct a land exchange 
     administratively under this section with a non-Federal owner 
     (other than the O&C Trust) if the land exchange meets the 
     following criteria:
       (1) The non-Federal lands are completely within the State.
       (2) The non-Federal lands have high wildlife conservation 
     or recreation value or the exchange is necessary to increase 
     management efficiencies of lands administered by the Forest 
     Service for the purposes of the National Forest System.
       (3) The non-Federal lands have equal or greater value to 
     the Federal lands purposed for exchange or a balance of 
     values can be achieved--
       (A) with a grant of funds provided by the O&C Trust 
     pursuant to section 315(c); or
       (B) from other sources.
       (c) Criteria for Exchanges With O&C Trust.--The Secretary 
     of Agriculture may conduct land exchanges with the Board of 
     Trustees administratively under this subsection, and such an 
     exchange shall be deemed to not involve any Federal action or 
     Federal discretionary involvement or control if the land 
     exchange with the O&C Trust meets the following criteria:
       (1) The O&C Trust lands to be exchanged have high wildlife 
     value or ecological value or the exchange would facilitate 
     resource management or otherwise contribute to the management 
     efficiency of the lands administered by the Forest Service.
       (2) The exchange is requested or approved by the Board of 
     Trustees for the O&C Trust and will not impair the ability of 
     the Board of Trustees to meet its fiduciary responsibilities.
       (3) The lands to be exchanged by the Forest Service do not 
     contain stands of timber meeting the definition of old growth 
     established by the Old Growth Review Panel pursuant to 
     section 324.
       (4) The lands to be exchanged are equal in acreage.
       (d) Acreage Limitation.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     not approve land exchanges under this section that, taken 
     together with all previous exchanges involving the lands 
     described in subsection (a), have the effect of reducing the 
     total acreage of such lands by more than five percent from 
     the total acreage originally transferred to the Secretary.
       (e) Inapplicability of Certain Laws.--Section 3 of the 
     Oregon Public Lands Transfer and Protection Act of 1998 
     (Public Law 105-321; 112 Stat. 3022), the Federal Land Policy 
     and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et. seq.), 
     including the amendments made by the Federal Land Exchange 
     Facilitation Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-409; 102 Stat. 
     1086), the Act of March 20, 1922 (16 U.S.C. 485, 486), and 
     the Act of March 1, 1911 (commonly known as the Weeks Act; 16 
     U.S.C. 480 et seq.) shall not apply to the land exchange 
     authority provided by this section.

     SEC. 324. REVIEW PANEL AND OLD GROWTH PROTECTION.

       (a) Appointment; Members.--Within 60 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act the Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     appoint an Old Growth Review Panel consisting of five 
     members. At a minimum, the members must hold a Doctor of 
     Philosophy degree in wildlife biology, forestry, ecology, or 
     related field and published peer-reviewed academic articles 
     in their field of expertise.
       (b) Purpose of Review.--Members of the Old Growth Review 
     Panel shall review existing, published, peer-reviewed 
     articles in relevant academic journals and establish a 
     definition or definitions of old growth as it applies to the 
     ecologically, geographically and climatologically unique 
     Oregon and California Railroad Grant lands and O&C Region 
     Public Domain lands managed by the O&C Trust or the Forest 
     Service only. The definition or definitions shall bear no 
     legal force, shall not be used as a precedent for, and shall 
     not apply to any lands other than the Oregon and California 
     Railroad Grant lands and O&C Region Public Domain lands 
     managed by the O&C Trust or the Forest Service in western 
     Oregon. The definition or definitions shall not apply to 
     Tribal lands.
       (c) Submission of Results.--The definition or definitions 
     for old growth in western Oregon established under subsection 
     (b), if approved by at least four members of the Old Growth 
     Review Panel, shall be submitted to the Secretary of 
     Agriculture within six months after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.

     SEC. 325. UNIQUENESS OF OLD GROWTH PROTECTION ON OREGON AND 
                   CALIFORNIA RAILROAD GRANT LANDS.

       All sections of this subtitle referring to the term ``old 
     growth'' are uniquely suited to resolve management issues for 
     the lands covered by this subtitle only, and shall not be 
     construed as precedent for any other situation involving 
     management of other Federal, State, Tribal, or private lands.

                         CHAPTER 3--TRANSITION

     SEC. 331. TRANSITION PERIOD AND OPERATIONS.

       (a) Transition Period.--
       (1) Commencement; duration.--Effective on October 1 of the 
     first fiscal year beginning after the appointment of the 
     Board of Trustees under section 313, a transition period of 
     three fiscal years shall commence.
       (2) Exceptions.--Unless specifically stated in the 
     following subsections, any action under this section shall be 
     deemed not to involve Federal agency action or Federal 
     discretionary involvement or control.
       (b) Year One.--

[[Page 14028]]

       (1) Applicability.--During the first fiscal year of the 
     transition period, the activities described in this 
     subsection shall occur.
       (2) Board of trustees activities.--The Board of Trustees 
     shall employ sufficient staff or contractors to prepare for 
     beginning management of O&C Trust lands and O&C Region Public 
     Domain lands in the second fiscal year of the transition 
     period, including preparation of management plans and a 
     harvest schedule for the lands over which management 
     authority is transferred to the O&C Trust in the second 
     fiscal year.
       (3) Forest service activities.--The Forest Service shall 
     begin preparing to assume management authority of all Oregon 
     and California Railroad Grant lands and O&C Region Public 
     Domain lands transferred under section 321 in the second 
     fiscal year.
       (4) Secretary concerned activities.--The Secretary 
     concerned shall continue to exercise management authority 
     over all Oregon and California Railroad Grant lands and O&C 
     Region Public Domain lands under all existing Federal laws.
       (5) Information sharing.--Upon written request from the 
     Board of Trustees, the Secretary of the Interior shall 
     provide copies of any documents or data, however stored or 
     maintained, that includes the requested information 
     concerning O&C Trust lands. The copies shall be provided as 
     soon as practicable and to the greatest extent possible, but 
     in no event later than 30 days following the date of the 
     request.
       (6) Exception.--This subsection does not apply to Tribal 
     lands transferred under subtitle D.
       (c) Year Two.--
       (1) Applicability.--During the second fiscal year of the 
     transition period, the activities described in this 
     subsection shall occur.
       (2) Transfer of o&c trust lands.--Effective on October 1 of 
     the second fiscal year of the transition period, management 
     authority over the O&C Trust lands shall be transferred to 
     the O&C Trust.
       (3) Transfer of lands to forest service.--The transfers 
     required by section 321 shall occur.
       (4) Information sharing.--The Secretary of Agriculture 
     shall obtain and manage, as soon as practicable, all 
     documents and data relating to the Oregon and California 
     Railroad Grant lands, O&C Region Public Domain lands, and 
     Coos Bay Wagon Road lands previously managed by the Bureau of 
     Land Management. Upon written request from the Board of 
     Trustees, the Secretary of Agriculture shall provide copies 
     of any documents or data, however stored or maintained, that 
     includes the requested information concerning O&C Trust 
     lands. The copies shall be provided as soon as practicable 
     and to the greatest extent possible, but in no event later 
     than 30 days following the date of the request.
       (5) Implementation of management plan.--The Board of 
     Trustees shall begin implementing its management plan for the 
     O&C Trust lands and revise the plan as necessary. 
     Distribution of revenues generated from all activities on the 
     O&C Trust lands shall be subject to section 315.
       (d) Year Three and Subsequent Years.--
       (1) Applicability.--During the third fiscal year of the 
     transition period and all subsequent fiscal years, the 
     activities described in this subsection shall occur.
       (2) Board of trustees management.--The Board of Trustees 
     shall manage the O&C Trust lands pursuant to subtitle A.

     SEC. 332. O&C TRUST MANAGEMENT CAPITALIZATION.

       (a) Borrowing Authority.--The Board of Trustees is 
     authorized to borrow from any available private sources and 
     non-Federal, public sources in order to provide for the costs 
     of organization, administration, and management of the O&C 
     Trust during the three-year transition period provided in 
     section 331.
       (b) Support.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     O&C Trust counties are authorized to loan to the O&C Trust, 
     and the Board of Trustees is authorized to borrow from 
     willing O&C Trust counties, amounts held on account by such 
     counties that are required to be expended in accordance with 
     the Act of May 23,1908 (35. Stat. 260; 16 U.S.C. 500) and 
     section 13 of the Act of March 1, 1911 (36 Stat.963; 16 
     U.S.C. 500), except that, upon repayment by the O&C Trust, 
     the obligation of such counties to expend the funds in 
     accordance with such Acts shall continue to apply.

     SEC. 333. EXISTING BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT AND FOREST 
                   SERVICE CONTRACTS.

       (a) Treatment of Existing Contracts.--Any work or timber 
     contracts sold or awarded by the Bureau of Land Management or 
     Forest Service on or with respect to Oregon and California 
     Railroad Grant lands or O&C Region Public Domain lands before 
     the transfer of the lands to the O&C Trust or the Forest 
     Service, or Tribal lands transferred under subtitle D, shall 
     remain binding and effective according to the terms of the 
     contracts after the transfer of the lands. The Board of 
     Trustees and Secretary concerned shall make such 
     accommodations as are necessary to avoid interfering in any 
     way with the performance of the contracts.
       (b) Treatment of Payments Under Contracts.--Payments made 
     pursuant to the contracts described in subsection (a), if 
     any, shall be made as provided in those contracts and not 
     made to the O&C Trust.

     SEC. 334. PROTECTION OF VALID EXISTING RIGHTS AND ACCESS TO 
                   NON-FEDERAL LAND.

       (a) Valid Rights.--Nothing in this title, or any amendment 
     made by this title, shall be construed as terminating any 
     valid lease, permit, patent, right-of-way, agreement, or 
     other right of authorization existing on the date of the 
     enactment of this Act with regard to Oregon and California 
     Railroad Grant lands or O&C Region Public Domain lands, 
     including O&C Trust lands over which management authority is 
     transferred to the O&C Trust pursuant to section 311(c)(1), 
     lands transferred to the Forest Service under section 321, 
     and Tribal lands transferred under subtitle D.
       (b) Access to Lands.--
       (1) Existing access rights.--The Secretary concerned shall 
     preserve all rights of access and use, including (but not 
     limited to) reciprocal right-of-way agreements, tail hold 
     agreements, or other right-of-way or easement obligations 
     existing on the date of the enactment of this Act, and such 
     rights shall remain applicable to lands covered by this 
     subtitle in the same manner and to the same extent as such 
     rights applied before the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (2) New access rights.--If a current or future landowner of 
     land intermingled with Oregon and California Railroad Grant 
     lands or O&C Region Public Domain lands does not have an 
     existing access agreement related to the lands covered by 
     this subtitle, the Secretary concerned shall enter into an 
     access agreement, including appurtenant lands, to secure the 
     landowner the reasonable use and enjoyment of the landowner's 
     land, including the harvest and hauling of timber.
       (c) Management Cooperation.--The Board of Trustees and the 
     Secretary concerned shall provide current and future 
     landowners of land intermingled with Oregon and California 
     Railroad Grant lands or O&C Region Public Domain lands the 
     permission needed to manage their lands, including to locate 
     tail holds, tramways, and logging wedges, to purchase 
     guylines, and to cost-share property lines surveys to the 
     lands covered by this subtitle, within 30 days after 
     receiving notification of the landowner's plan of operation.
       (d) Judicial Review.--Notwithstanding section 312(g)(2), a 
     private landowner may obtain judicial review of a decision of 
     the Board of Trustees to deny--
       (1) the landowner the rights provided by subsection (b) 
     regarding access to the landowner's land; or
       (2) the landowner the reasonable use and enjoyment of the 
     landowner's land.

     SEC. 335. REPEAL OF SUPERSEDED LAW RELATING TO OREGON AND 
                   CALIFORNIA RAILROAD GRANT LANDS.

       (a) Repeal.--Except as provided in subsection (b), the Act 
     of August 28, 1937 (43 U.S.C. 1181a et seq.) is repealed 
     effective on October 1 of the first fiscal year beginning 
     after the appointment of the Board of Trustees.
       (b) Effect of Certain Court Rulings.--If, as a result of 
     judicial review authorized by section 312, any provision of 
     this subtitle is held to be invalid and implementation of the 
     provision or any activity conducted under the provision is 
     then enjoined, the Act of August 28, 1937 (43 U.S.C. 1181a et 
     seq.), as in effect immediately before its repeal by 
     subsection (a), shall be restored to full legal force and 
     effect as if the repeal had not taken effect.

                    Subtitle B--Coos Bay Wagon Roads

     SEC. 341. TRANSFER OF MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY OVER CERTAIN COOS 
                   BAY WAGON ROAD GRANT LANDS TO COOS COUNTY, 
                   OREGON.

       (a) Transfer Required.--Except in the case of the lands 
     described in subsection (b), the Secretary of the Interior 
     shall transfer management authority over the Coos Bay Wagon 
     Road Grant lands reconveyed to the United States pursuant to 
     the first section of the Act of February 26, 1919 (40 Stat. 
     1179), and the surface resources thereon, to the Coos County 
     government. The transfer shall be completed not later than 
     one year after the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (b) Lands Excluded.--The transfer under subsection (a) 
     shall not include any of the following Coos Bay Wagon Road 
     Grant lands:
       (1) Federal lands within the National Landscape 
     Conservation System as of January 1, 2013.
       (2) Federal lands designated as Areas of Critical 
     Environmental Concern as of January 1, 2013.
       (3) Federal lands that were in the National Wilderness 
     Preservation System as of January 1, 2013.
       (4) Federal lands included in the National Wild and Scenic 
     Rivers System of January 1, 2013.
       (5) Federal lands within the boundaries of a national 
     monument, park, or other developed recreation area as of 
     January 1, 2013.
       (6) All stands of timber generally older than 125 years 
     old, as of January 1, 2011, which shall be conclusively 
     determined by reference to the polygon spatial data layer in 
     the electronic data compilation filed by the Bureau of Land 
     Management based on the predominant birth-date attribute, and 
     the boundaries of such stands shall be conclusively 
     determined for all purposes by the global positioning system 
     coordinates for such stands.
       (7) Tribal lands addressed in subtitle D.
       (c) Management.--
       (1) In general.--Coos County shall manage the Coos Bay 
     Wagon Road Grant lands over which management authority is 
     transferred under subsection (a) consistent with section 314, 
     and for purposes of applying such section, ``Board of 
     Trustees'' shall be deemed to mean ``Coos County'' and ``O&C 
     Trust lands'' shall be deemed to mean the transferred lands.

[[Page 14029]]

       (2) Responsibility for management costs.--Coos County shall 
     be responsible for all management and administrative costs of 
     the Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant lands over which management 
     authority is transferred under subsection (a).
       (3) Management contracts.--Coos County may contract, if 
     competitively bid, with one or more public, private, or 
     tribal entities, including (but not limited to) the Coquille 
     Indian Tribe, if such entities are substantially based in 
     Coos or Douglas Counties, Oregon, to manage and administer 
     the lands.
       (d) Treatment of Revenues.--
       (1) In general.--All revenues generated from the Coos Bay 
     Wagon Road Grant lands over which management authority is 
     transferred under subsection (a) shall be deposited in the 
     general fund of the Coos County treasury to be used as are 
     other unrestricted county funds.
       (2) Treasury.--As soon as practicable after the end of the 
     third fiscal year of the transition period and in each of the 
     subsequent seven fiscal years, Coos County shall submit a 
     payment of $400,000 to the United States Treasury.
       (3) Douglas county.--Beginning with the first fiscal year 
     for which management of the Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant lands 
     over which management authority is transferred under 
     subsection (a) generates net positive revenues, and for all 
     subsequent fiscal years, Coos County shall transmit a payment 
     to the general fund of the Douglas County treasury from the 
     net revenues generated from the lands. The payment shall be 
     made as soon as practicable following the end of each fiscal 
     year and the amount of the payment shall bear the same 
     proportion to total net revenues for the fiscal year as the 
     proportion of the Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant lands in Douglas 
     County in relation to all Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant lands in 
     Coos and Douglas Counties as of January 1, 2013.

     SEC. 342. TRANSFER OF CERTAIN COOS BAY WAGON ROAD GRANT LANDS 
                   TO FOREST SERVICE.

       The Secretary of the Interior shall transfer administrative 
     jurisdiction over the Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant lands 
     excluded by paragraphs (1) through (6)of section 341(b) to 
     the Secretary of Agriculture for inclusion in the National 
     Forest System and administration by the Forest Service as 
     provided in section 322.

     SEC. 343. LAND EXCHANGE AUTHORITY.

       Coos County may recommend land exchanges to the Secretary 
     of Agriculture and carry out such land exchanges in the 
     manner provided in section 316.

                      Subtitle C--Oregon Treasures

                      CHAPTER 1--WILDERNESS AREAS

     SEC. 351. DESIGNATION OF DEVIL'S STAIRCASE WILDERNESS.

       (a) Designation.--In furtherance of the purposes of the 
     Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.), the Federal land in 
     the State of Oregon administered by the Forest Service and 
     the Bureau of Land Management, comprising approximately 
     30,520 acres, as generally depicted on the map titled 
     ``Devil's Staircase Wilderness Proposal'', dated October 26, 
     2009, are designated as a wilderness area for inclusion in 
     the National Wilderness Preservation System and to be known 
     as the ``Devil's Staircase Wilderness''.
       (b) Map and Legal Description.--As soon as practicable 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
     shall file with the Committee on Natural Resources of the 
     House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and 
     Natural Resources of the Senate a map and legal description 
     of wilderness area designated by subsection (a). The map and 
     legal description shall have the same force and effect as if 
     included in this Act, except that the Secretary may correct 
     clerical and typographical errors in the map and description. 
     In the case of any discrepancy between the acreage specified 
     in subsection (a) and the map, the map shall control. The map 
     and legal description shall be on file and available for 
     public inspection in the Office of the Chief of the Forest 
     Service.
       (c) Administration.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to valid existing rights, the 
     Devil's Staircase Wilderness Area shall be administered by 
     the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior, in 
     accordance with the Wilderness Act and the Oregon Wilderness 
     Act of 1984, except that, with respect to the wilderness 
     area, any reference in the Wilderness Act to the effective 
     date of that Act shall be deemed to be a reference to the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.
       (2) Forest service roads.--As provided in section 4(d)(1) 
     of the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1133(d)(1)), the Secretary 
     of Agriculture shall--
       (A) decommission any National Forest System road within the 
     wilderness boundaries; and
       (B) convert Forest Service Road 4100 within the wilderness 
     boundary to a trail for primitive recreational use.
       (d) Incorporation of Acquired Land and Interests.--Any land 
     within the boundary of the wilderness area designated by this 
     section that is acquired by the United States shall--
       (1) become part of the Devil's Staircase Wilderness Area; 
     and
       (2) be managed in accordance with this section and any 
     other applicable law.
       (e) Fish and Wildlife.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed as affecting the jurisdiction or responsibilities 
     of the State of Oregon with respect to wildlife and fish in 
     the national forests.
       (f) Withdrawal.--Subject to valid rights in existence on 
     the date of enactment of this Act, the Federal land 
     designated as wilderness area by this section is withdrawn 
     from all forms of--
       (1) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land 
     laws;
       (2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
       (3) disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral and 
     geothermal leasing or mineral materials.
       (g) Protection of Tribal Rights.--Nothing in this section 
     shall be construed to diminish--
       (1) the existing rights of any Indian tribe; or
       (2) tribal rights regarding access to Federal lands for 
     tribal activities, including spiritual, cultural, and 
     traditional food gathering activities.

     SEC. 352. EXPANSION OF WILD ROGUE WILDERNESS AREA.

       (a) Expansion.--In accordance with the Wilderness Act (16 
     U.S.C. 1131 et seq.), certain Federal land managed by the 
     Bureau of Land Management, comprising approximately 58,100 
     acres, as generally depicted on the map entitled ``Wild 
     Rogue'', dated September 16, 2010, are hereby included in the 
     Wild Rogue Wilderness, a component of the National Wilderness 
     Preservation System.
       (b) Maps and Legal Descriptions.--
       (1) In general.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall 
     file a map and a legal description of the wilderness area 
     designated by this section, with--
       (A) the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the 
     Senate; and
       (B) the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (2) Force of law.--The maps and legal descriptions filed 
     under paragraph (1) shall have the same force and effect as 
     if included in this subtitle, except that the Secretary may 
     correct typographical errors in the maps and legal 
     descriptions.
       (3) Public availability.--Each map and legal description 
     filed under paragraph (1) shall be on file and available for 
     public inspection in the appropriate offices of the Forest 
     Service.
       (c) Administration.--Subject to valid existing rights, the 
     area designated as wilderness by this section shall be 
     administered by the Secretary of Agriculture in accordance 
     with the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.).
       (d) Withdrawal.--Subject to valid rights in existence on 
     the date of enactment of this Act, the Federal land 
     designated as wilderness by this section is withdrawn from 
     all forms of--
       (1) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land 
     laws;
       (2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
       (3) disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral and 
     geothermal leasing or mineral materials.

  CHAPTER 2--WILD AND SCENIC RIVER DESIGNATED AND RELATED PROTECTIONS

     SEC. 361. WILD AND SCENIC RIVER DESIGNATIONS, MOLALLA RIVER.

       (a) Designations.--Section 3(a) of the Wild and Scenic 
     Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1274(a)) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(__) Molalla river, oregon.--The following segments in 
     the State of Oregon, to be administered by the Secretary of 
     the Interior as a recreational river:
       ``(A) The approximately 15.1-mile segment from the southern 
     boundary line of T. 7 S., R. 4 E., sec. 19, downstream to the 
     edge of the Bureau of Land Management boundary in T. 6 S., R. 
     3 E., sec. 7.
       ``(B) The approximately 6.2-mile segment from the 
     easternmost Bureau of Land Management boundary line in the 
     NE\1/4\ sec. 4, T. 7 S., R. 4 E., downstream to the 
     confluence with the Molalla River.''.
       (b) Technical Corrections.--Section 3(a)(102) of the Wild 
     and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1274(a)(102)) is amended--
       (1) in the heading, by striking ``Squaw Creek'' and 
     inserting ``Whychus Creek'';
       (2) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``McAllister Ditch, including the Soap Fork Squaw Creek, the 
     North Fork, the South Fork, the East and West Forks of Park 
     Creek, and Park Creek Fork'' and inserting ``Plainview Ditch, 
     including the Soap Creek, the North and South Forks of 
     Whychus Creek, the East and West Forks of Park Creek, and 
     Park Creek''; and
       (3) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``McAllister Ditch'' 
     and inserting ``Plainview Ditch''.

     SEC. 362. WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACT TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS 
                   RELATED TO CHETCO RIVER.

       Section 3(a)(69) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 
     U.S.C. 1274(a)(69)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting before the ``The 44.5-mile'' the 
     following:
       ``(A) Designations.--'';
       (2) by redesignating subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) as 
     clauses (i), (ii), and (iii), respectively (and by moving the 
     margins 2 ems to the right);
       (3) in clause (i), as redesignated--
       (A) by striking ``25.5-mile'' and inserting ``27.5-mile''; 
     and
       (B) by striking ``Boulder Creek at the Kalmiopsis 
     Wilderness boundary'' and inserting ``Mislatnah Creek'';
       (4) in clause (ii), as redesignated--
       (A) by striking ``8'' and inserting ``7.5'';
       (B) by striking ``Boulder Creek'' and inserting ``Mislatnah 
     Creek''; and
       (C) by striking ``Steel Bridge'' and inserting ``Eagle 
     Creek'';
       (5) in clause (iii), as redesignated--
       (A) by striking ``11'' and inserting ``9.5''; and
       (B) by striking ``Steel Bridge'' and inserting ``Eagle 
     Creek''; and

[[Page 14030]]

       (6) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(B) Withdrawal.--Subject to valid rights, the Federal 
     land within the boundaries of the river segments designated 
     by subparagraph (A), is withdrawn from all forms of--
       ``(i) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public 
     land laws;
       ``(ii) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; 
     and
       ``(iii) disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral 
     and geothermal leasing or mineral materials.''.

     SEC. 363. WILD AND SCENIC RIVER DESIGNATIONS, WASSON CREEK 
                   AND FRANKLIN CREEK.

       Section 3(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 
     1274(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(__) Franklin creek, oregon.--The 4.5-mile segment from 
     the headwaters to the private land boundary in section 8 to 
     be administered by the Secretary of Agriculture as a wild 
     river.
       ``(__) Wasson creek, oregon.--
       ``(A) The 4.2-mile segment from the eastern edge of section 
     17 downstream to the boundary of sections 11 and 12 to be 
     administered by the Secretary of Interior as a wild river.
       ``(B) The 5.9-mile segment downstream from the boundary of 
     sections 11 and 12 to the private land boundary in section 22 
     to be administered by the Secretary of Agriculture as a wild 
     river.''.

     SEC. 364. WILD AND SCENIC RIVER DESIGNATIONS, ROGUE RIVER 
                   AREA.

       (a) Designations.--Section 3(a)(5) of the Wild and Scenic 
     Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1274(a)(5)) (relating to the Rogue 
     River, Oregon) is amended by adding at the end the following: 
     ``In addition to the segment described in the previous 
     sentence, the following segments in the Rogue River area are 
     designated:
       ``(A) Kelsey creek.--The approximately 4.8 miles of Kelsey 
     Creek from east section line of T32S, R9W, sec. 34, W.M. to 
     the confluence with the Rogue River as a wild river.
       ``(B) East fork kelsey creek.--The approximately 4.6 miles 
     of East Fork Kelsey Creek from the Wild Rogue Wilderness 
     boundary in T33S, R8W, sec. 5, W.M. to the confluence with 
     Kelsey Creek as a wild river.
       ``(C) Whisky creek.--
       ``(i) The approximately 0.6 miles of Whisky Creek from the 
     confluence of the East Fork and West Fork to 0.1 miles 
     downstream from road 33-8-23 as a recreational river.
       ``(ii) The approximately 1.9 miles of Whisky Creek from 0.1 
     miles downstream from road 33-8-23 to the confluence with the 
     Rogue River as a wild river.
       ``(D) East fork whisky creek.--
       ``(i) The approximately 2.8 miles of East Fork Whisky Creek 
     from the Wild Rogue Wilderness boundary in T33S, R8W, sec. 
     11, W.M. to 0.1 miles downstream of road 33-8-26 crossing as 
     a wild river.
       ``(ii) The approximately .3 miles of East Fork Whisky Creek 
     from 0.1 miles downstream of road 33-8-26 to the confluence 
     with Whisky Creek as a recreational river.
       ``(E) West fork whisky creek.--The approximately 4.8 miles 
     of West Fork Whisky Creek from its headwaters to the 
     confluence with Whisky Creek as a wild river.
       ``(F) Big windy creek.--
       ``(i) The approximately 1.5 miles of Big Windy Creek from 
     its headwaters to 0.1 miles downstream from road 34-9-17.1 as 
     a scenic river.
       ``(ii) The approximately 5.8 miles of Big Windy Creek from 
     0.1 miles downstream from road 34-9-17.1 to the confluence 
     with the Rogue River as a wild river.
       ``(G) East fork big windy creek.--
       ``(i) The approximately 0.2 miles of East Fork Big Windy 
     Creek from its headwaters to 0.1 miles downstream from road 
     34-8-36 as a scenic river.
       ``(ii) The approximately 3.7 miles of East Fork Big Windy 
     Creek from 0.1 miles downstream from road 34-8-36 to the 
     confluence with Big Windy Creek as a wild river.
       ``(H) Little windy creek.--The approximately 1.9 miles of 
     Little Windy Creek from 0.1 miles downstream of road 34-8-36 
     to the confluence with the Rogue River as a wild river.
       ``(I) Howard creek.--
       ``(i) The approximately 0.3 miles of Howard Creek from its 
     headwaters to 0.1 miles downstream of road 34-9-34 as a 
     scenic river.
       ``(ii) The approximately 6.9 miles of Howard Creek from 0.1 
     miles downstream of road 34-9-34 to the confluence with the 
     Rogue River as a wild river.
       ``(J) Mule creek.--The approximately 6.3 miles of Mule 
     Creek from east section line of T32S, R10W, sec. 25, W.M to 
     the confluence with the Rogue River as a wild river.
       ``(K) Anna creek.--The approximately 3.5-mile section of 
     Anna Creek from its headwaters to the confluence with Howard 
     Creek as a wild river.
       ``(L) Missouri creek.--The approximately 1.6 miles of 
     Missouri Creek from the Wild Rogue Wilderness boundary in 
     T33S, R10W, sec. 24, W.M. to the confluence with the Rogue 
     River as a wild river.
       ``(M) Jenny creek.--The approximately 1.8 miles of Jenny 
     Creek from the Wild Rogue Wilderness boundary in T33S, R9W, 
     sec.28, W.M. to the confluence with the Rogue River as a wild 
     river.
       ``(N) Rum creek.--The approximately 2.2 miles of Rum Creek 
     from the Wild Rogue Wilderness boundary in T34S, R8W, sec. 9, 
     W.M. to the confluence with the Rogue River as a wild river.
       ``(O) East fork rum creek.--The approximately 1.5 miles of 
     East Rum Creek from the Wild Rogue Wilderness boundary in 
     T34S, R8W, sec. 10, W.M. to the confluence with Rum Creek as 
     a wild river.
       ``(P) Wildcat creek.--The approximately 1.7-mile section of 
     Wildcat Creek from its headwaters downstream to the 
     confluence with the Rogue River as a wild river.
       ``(Q) Montgomery creek.--The approximately 1.8-mile section 
     of Montgomery Creek from its headwaters downstream to the 
     confluence with the Rogue River as a wild river.
       ``(R) Hewitt creek.--The approximately 1.2 miles of Hewitt 
     Creek from the Wild Rogue Wilderness boundary in T33S, R9W, 
     sec. 19, W.M. to the confluence with the Rogue River as a 
     wild river.
       ``(S) Bunker creek.--The approximately 6.6 miles of Bunker 
     Creek from its headwaters to the confluence with the Rogue 
     River as a wild river.
       ``(T) Dulog creek.--
       ``(i) The approximately 0.8 miles of Dulog Creek from its 
     headwaters to 0.1 miles downstream of road 34-8-36 as a 
     scenic river.
       ``(ii) The approximately 1.0 miles of Dulog Creek from 0.1 
     miles downstream of road 34-8-36 to the confluence with the 
     Rogue River as a wild river.
       ``(U) Quail creek.--The approximately 1.7 miles of Quail 
     Creek from the Wild Rogue Wilderness boundary in T33S, R10W, 
     sec. 1, W.M. to the confluence with the Rogue River as a wild 
     river.
       ``(V) Meadow creek.--The approximately 4.1 miles of Meadow 
     Creek from its headwaters to the confluence with the Rogue 
     River as a wild river.
       ``(W) Russian creek.--The approximately 2.5 miles of 
     Russian Creek from the Wild Rogue Wilderness boundary in 
     T33S, R8W, sec. 20, W.M. to the confluence with the Rogue 
     River as a wild river.
       ``(X) Alder creek.--The approximately 1.2 miles of Alder 
     Creek from its headwaters to the confluence with the Rogue 
     River as a wild river.
       ``(Y) Booze creek.--The approximately 1.5 miles of Booze 
     Creek from its headwaters to the confluence with the Rogue 
     River as a wild river.
       ``(Z) Bronco creek.--The approximately 1.8 miles of Bronco 
     Creek from its headwaters to the confluence with the Rogue 
     River as a wild river.
       ``(AA) Copsey creek.--The approximately 1.5 miles of Copsey 
     Creek from its headwaters to the confluence with the Rogue 
     River as a wild river.
       ``(BB) Corral creek.--The approximately 0.5 miles of Corral 
     Creek from its headwaters to the confluence with the Rogue 
     River as a wild river.
       ``(CC) Cowley creek.--The approximately 0.9 miles of Cowley 
     Creek from its headwaters to the confluence with the Rogue 
     River as a wild river.
       ``(DD) Ditch creek.--The approximately 1.8 miles of Ditch 
     Creek from the Wild Rogue Wilderness boundary in T33S, R9W, 
     sec. 5, W.M. to its confluence with the Rogue River as a wild 
     river.
       ``(EE) Francis creek.--The approximately 0.9 miles of 
     Francis Creek from its headwaters to the confluence with the 
     Rogue River as a wild river.
       ``(FF) Long gulch.--The approximately 1.1 miles of Long 
     Gulch from the Wild Rogue Wilderness boundary in T33S, R10W, 
     sec. 23, W.M. to the confluence with the Rogue River as a 
     wild river.
       ``(GG) Bailey creek.--The approximately 1.7 miles of Bailey 
     Creek from the west section line of T34S, R8W, sec.14, W.M. 
     to the confluence of the Rogue River as a wild river.
       ``(HH) Shady creek.--The approximately 0.7 miles of Shady 
     Creek from its headwaters to the confluence with the Rogue 
     River as a wild river.
       ``(II) Slide creek.--
       ``(i) The approximately 0.5-mile section of Slide Creek 
     from its headwaters to 0.1 miles downstream from road 33-9-6 
     as a scenic river.
       ``(ii) The approximately 0.7-mile section of Slide Creek 
     from 0.1 miles downstream of road 33-9-6 to the confluence 
     with the Rogue River as a wild river.''.
       (b) Management.--All wild, scenic, and recreation 
     classified segments designated by the amendment made by 
     subsection (a) shall be managed as part of the Rogue Wild and 
     Scenic River.
       (c) Withdrawal.--Subject to valid rights, the Federal land 
     within the boundaries of the river segments designated by the 
     amendment made by subsection (a) is withdrawn from all forms 
     of--
       (1) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land 
     laws;
       (2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
       (3) disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral and 
     geothermal leasing or mineral materials.

     SEC. 365. ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS FOR ROGUE RIVER TRIBUTARIES.

       (a) Withdrawal.--Subject to valid rights, the Federal land 
     within a quarter-mile on each side of the streams listed in 
     subsection (b) is withdrawn from all forms of--
       (1) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land 
     laws;
       (2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
       (3) disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral and 
     geothermal leasing or mineral materials.
       (b) Stream Segments.--Subsection (a) applies the following 
     tributaries of the Rogue River:
       (1) Kelsey creek.--The approximately 4.5 miles of Kelsey 
     Creek from its headwaters to the east section line of 32S 9W 
     sec. 34.
       (2) East fork kelsey creek.--The approximately .2 miles of 
     East Fork Kelsey Creek from its headwaters to the Wild Rogue 
     Wilderness boundary in 33S 8W sec. 5.

[[Page 14031]]

       (3) East fork whisky creek.--The approximately .7 miles of 
     East Fork Whisky Creek from its headwaters to the Wild Rogue 
     Wilderness boundary in 33S 8W section 11.
       (4) Little windy creek.--The approximately 1.2 miles of 
     Little Windy Creek from its headwaters to west section line 
     of 33S 9W sec. 34.
       (5) Mule creek.--The approximately 5.1 miles of Mule Creek 
     from its headwaters to east section line of 32S 10W sec. 25.
       (6) Missouri creek.--The approximately 3.1 miles of 
     Missouri Creek from its headwaters to the Wild Rogue 
     Wilderness boundary in 33S 10W sec. 24.
       (7) Jenny creek.--The approximately 3.1 miles of Jenny 
     Creek from its headwaters to the Wild Rogue Wilderness 
     boundary in 33S 9W sec. 28.
       (8) Rum creek.--The approximately 2.2 miles of Rum Creek 
     from its headwaters to the Wild Rogue Wilderness boundary in 
     34S 8W sec. 9.
       (9) East fork rum creek.--The approximately .5 miles of 
     East Fork Rum Creek from its headwaters to the Wild Rogue 
     Wilderness boundary in 34S 8W sec. 10.
       (10) Hewitt creek.--The approximately 1.4 miles of Hewitt 
     Creek from its headwaters to the Wild Rogue Wilderness 
     boundary in 33S 9W sec. 19.
       (11) Quail creek.--The approximately .8 miles of Quail 
     Creek from its headwaters to the Wild Rogue Wilderness 
     boundary in 33S 10W sec. 1.
       (12) Russian creek.--The approximately .1 miles of Russian 
     Creek from its headwaters to the Wild Rogue Wilderness 
     boundary in 33S 8W sec. 20.
       (13) Ditch creek.--The approximately .7 miles of Ditch 
     Creek from its headwaters to the Wild Rogue Wilderness 
     boundary in 33S 9W sec. 5.
       (14) Long gulch.--The approximately 1.4 miles of Long Gulch 
     from its headwaters to the Wild Rogue Wilderness boundary in 
     33S 10W sec. 23.
       (15) Bailey creek.--The approximately 1.4 miles of Bailey 
     Creek from its headwaters to west section line of 34S 8W sec. 
     14.
       (16) Quartz creek.--The approximately 3.3 miles of Quartz 
     Creek from its headwaters to its confluence with the North 
     Fork Galice Creek.
       (17) North fork galice creek.--The approximately 5.7 miles 
     of the North Fork Galice Creek from its headwaters to its 
     confluence with Galice Creek.
       (18) Grave creek.--The approximately 10.2 mile section of 
     Grave Creek from the confluence of Wolf Creek downstream to 
     the confluence with the Rogue River.
       (19) Centennial gulch.--The approximately 2.2 miles of 
     Centennial Gulch from its headwaters to its confluence with 
     the Rogue River.

                   CHAPTER 3--ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS

     SEC. 371. LIMITATIONS ON LAND ACQUISITION.

       (a) Prohibition on Use of Condemnation.--The Secretary of 
     the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture may not acquire 
     by condemnation any land or interest within the boundaries of 
     the river segments or wilderness designated by this subtitle.
       (b) Landowner Consent Required.--Private or non-Federal 
     public property shall not be included within the boundaries 
     of the river segments or wilderness designated by this 
     subtitle unless the owner of the property has consented in 
     writing to having that property included in such boundaries.

     SEC. 372. OVERFLIGHTS.

       (a) In General.--Nothing in this subtitle or the Wilderness 
     Act shall preclude low-level overflights and operations of 
     military aircraft, helicopters, missiles, or unmanned aerial 
     vehicles over the wilderness designated by this subtitle, 
     including military overflights and operations that can be 
     seen or heard within the wilderness.
       (b) Special Use Airspace and Training Routes.--Nothing in 
     this subtitle or the Wilderness Act shall preclude the 
     designation of new units of special use airspace, the 
     expansion of existing units of special use airspace, or the 
     use or establishment of military training routes over 
     wilderness designated by this subtitle.

     SEC. 373. BUFFER ZONES.

       Nothing in this subtitle--
       (1) establishes or authorizes the establishment of a 
     protective perimeter or buffer zone around the boundaries of 
     the river segments or wilderness designated by this subtitle; 
     or
       (2) precludes, limits, or restricts an activity from being 
     conducted outside such boundaries, including an activity that 
     can be seen or heard from within such boundaries.

     SEC. 374. PREVENTION OF WILDFIRES.

       The designation of a river segment or wilderness by this 
     subtitle or the withdrawal of the Federal land under this 
     subtitle shall not be construed to interfere with the 
     authority of the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary 
     of Agriculture to authorize mechanical thinning of trees or 
     underbrush to prevent or control the spread of wildfires, or 
     conditions creating the risk of wildfire that threatens areas 
     outside the boundary of the wilderness, or the use of 
     mechanized equipment for wildfire pre-suppression and 
     suppression.

     SEC. 375. LIMITATION ON DESIGNATION OF CERTAIN LANDS IN 
                   OREGON.

       A national monument designation under the Act of June 8, 
     1906 (commonly known as the Antiquities Act; 16 U.S.C. 431 et 
     seq.) within or on any portion of the Oregon and California 
     Railroad Grant Lands or the O&C Region Public Domain lands, 
     regardless of whether management authority over the lands are 
     transferred to the O&C Trust pursuant to section 311(c)(1), 
     the lands are excluded from the O&C Trust pursuant to section 
     311(c)(2), or the lands are transferred to the Forest Service 
     under section 321, shall only be made pursuant to 
     Congressional approval in an Act of Congress.

                       CHAPTER 4--EFFECTIVE DATE

     SEC. 381. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       (a) In General.--This subtitle and the amendments made by 
     this subtitle shall take effect on October 1 of the second 
     fiscal year of the transition period.
       (b) Exception.--If, as a result of judicial review 
     authorized by section 312, any provision of subtitle A is 
     held to be invalid and implementation of the provision or any 
     activity conducted under the provision is enjoined, this 
     subtitle and the amendments made by this subtitle shall not 
     take effect, or if the effective date specified in subsection 
     (a) has already occurred, this subtitle shall have no force 
     and effect and the amendments made by this subtitle are 
     repealed.

                     Subtitle D--Tribal Trust Lands

                 PART 1--COUNCIL CREEK LAND CONVEYANCE

     SEC. 391. DEFINITIONS.

       In this part:
       (1) Council creek land.--The term ``Council Creek land'' 
     means the approximately 17,519 acres of land, as generally 
     depicted on the map entitled ``Canyon Mountain Land 
     Conveyance'' and dated June 27, 2013.
       (2) Tribe.--The term ``Tribe'' means the Cow Creek Band of 
     Umpqua Tribe of Indians.

     SEC. 392. CONVEYANCE.

       (a) In General.--Subject to valid existing rights, 
     including rights-of-way, all right, title, and interest of 
     the United States in and to the Council Creek land, including 
     any improvements located on the land, appurtenances to the 
     land, and minerals on or in the land, including oil and gas, 
     shall be--
       (1) held in trust by the United States for the benefit of 
     the Tribe; and
       (2) part of the reservation of the Tribe.
       (b) Survey.--Not later than one year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall 
     complete a survey of the boundary lines to establish the 
     boundaries of the land taken into trust under subsection (a).

     SEC. 393. MAP AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION.

       (a) In General.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall 
     file a map and legal description of the Council Creek land 
     with--
       (1) the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the 
     Senate; and
       (2) the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (b) Force and Effect.--The map and legal description filed 
     under subsection (a) shall have the same force and effect as 
     if included in this Act, except that the Secretary of the 
     Interior may correct any clerical or typographical errors in 
     the map or legal description.
       (c) Public Availability.--The map and legal description 
     filed under subsection (a) shall be on file and available for 
     public inspection in the Office of the Secretary of the 
     Interior.

     SEC. 394. ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) In General.--Unless expressly provided in this part, 
     nothing in this part affects any right or claim of the Tribe 
     existing on the date of enactment of this Act to any land or 
     interest in land.
       (b) Prohibitions.--
       (1) Exports of unprocessed logs.--Federal law (including 
     regulations) relating to the export of unprocessed logs 
     harvested from Federal land shall apply to any unprocessed 
     logs that are harvested from the Council Creek land.
       (2) Non-permissible use of land.--Any real property taken 
     into trust under section 392 shall not be eligible, or used, 
     for any gaming activity carried out under Public Law 100-497 
     (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.).
       (c) Forest Management.--Any forest management activity that 
     is carried out on the Council Creek land shall be managed in 
     accordance with all applicable Federal laws.

                 PART 2--OREGON COASTAL LAND CONVEYANCE

     SEC. 395. DEFINITIONS.

       In this part:
       (1) Oregon coastal land.--The term ``Oregon Coastal land'' 
     means the approximately 14,804 acres of land, as generally 
     depicted on the map entitled ``Oregon Coastal Land 
     Conveyance'' and dated March 5, 2013.
       (2) Confederated tribes.--The term ``Confederated Tribes'' 
     means the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and 
     Siuslaw Indians.

     SEC. 396. CONVEYANCE.

       (a) In General.--Subject to valid existing rights, 
     including rights-of-way, all right, title, and interest of 
     the United States in and to the Oregon Coastal land, 
     including any improvements located on the land, appurtenances 
     to the land, and minerals on or in the land, including oil 
     and gas, shall be--
       (1) held in trust by the United States for the benefit of 
     the Confederated Tribes; and
       (2) part of the reservation of the Confederated Tribes.
       (b) Survey.--Not later than one year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall 
     complete a survey of the boundary lines to establish the 
     boundaries of the land taken into trust under subsection (a).

     SEC. 397. MAP AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION.

       (a) In General.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall 
     file a map and legal description of the Oregon Coastal land 
     with--
       (1) the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the 
     Senate; and

[[Page 14032]]

       (2) the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (b) Force and Effect.--The map and legal description filed 
     under subsection (a) shall have the same force and effect as 
     if included in this Act, except that the Secretary of the 
     Interior may correct any clerical or typographical errors in 
     the map or legal description.
       (c) Public Availability.--The map and legal description 
     filed under subsection (a) shall be on file and available for 
     public inspection in the Office of the Secretary of the 
     Interior.

     SEC. 398. ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) In General.--Unless expressly provided in this part, 
     nothing in this part affects any right or claim of the 
     Consolidated Tribes existing on the date of enactment of this 
     Act to any land or interest in land.
       (b) Prohibitions.--
       (1) Exports of unprocessed logs.--Federal law (including 
     regulations) relating to the export of unprocessed logs 
     harvested from Federal land shall apply to any unprocessed 
     logs that are harvested from the Oregon Coastal land.
       (2) Non-permissible use of land.--Any real property taken 
     into trust under section 396 shall not be eligible, or used, 
     for any gaming activity carried out under Public Law 100-497 
     (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.).
       (c) Forest Management.--Any forest management activity that 
     is carried out on the Oregon Coastal land shall be managed in 
     accordance with all applicable Federal laws.

          TITLE IV--COMMUNITY FOREST MANAGEMENT DEMONSTRATION

     SEC. 401. PURPOSE AND DEFINITIONS.

       (a) Purpose.--The purpose of this title is to generate 
     dependable economic activity for counties and local 
     governments by establishing a demonstration program for 
     local, sustainable forest management.
       (b) Definitions.--In this title:
       (1) Advisory committee.--The term ``Advisory Committee'' 
     means the Advisory Committee appointed by the Governor of a 
     State for the community forest demonstration area established 
     for the State.
       (2) Community forest demonstration area.--The term 
     ``community forest demonstration area'' means a community 
     forest demonstration area established for a State under 
     section 402.
       (3) National forest system.--The term ``National Forest 
     System'' has the meaning given that term in section 11(a) of 
     the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 
     1974 (16 U.S.C. 1609(a)), except that the term does not 
     include the National Grasslands and land utilization projects 
     designated as National Grasslands administered pursuant to 
     the Act of July 22, 1937 (7 U.S.C. 1010-1012).
       (4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Agriculture or the designee of the Secretary of 
     Agriculture.
       (5) State.--The term ``State'' includes the Commonwealth of 
     Puerto Rico.

     SEC. 402. ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMUNITY FOREST DEMONSTRATION 
                   AREAS.

       (a) Establishment Required; Time for Establishment.--
     Subject to subsection (c) and not later than one year after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall establish a community forest demonstration 
     area at the request of the Advisory Committee appointed to 
     manage community forest demonstration area land in that 
     State.
       (b) Covered Land.--
       (1) Inclusion of national forest system land.--The 
     community forest demonstration areas of a State shall consist 
     of the National Forest System land in the State identified 
     for inclusion by the Advisory Committee of that State.
       (2) Exclusion of certain land.--A community forest 
     demonstration area shall not include National Forest System 
     land--
       (A) that is a component of the National Wilderness 
     Preservation System;
       (B) on which the removal of vegetation is specifically 
     prohibited by Federal statute;
       (C) National Monuments; or
       (D) over which administration jurisdiction was first 
     assumed by the Forest Service under title III.
       (c) Conditions on Establishment.--
       (1) Acreage requirement.--A community forest demonstration 
     area must include at least 200,000 acres of National Forest 
     System land. If the unit of the National Forest System in 
     which a community forest demonstration area is being 
     established contains more than 5,000,000 acres, the community 
     forest demonstration area may include 900,000 or more acres 
     of National Forest System land.
       (2) Management law or best management practices 
     requirement.--A community forest demonstration area may be 
     established in a State only if the State--
       (A) has a forest practices law applicable to State or 
     privately owned forest land in the State; or
       (B) has established silvicultural best management practices 
     or other regulations for forest management practices related 
     to clean water, soil quality, wildlife or forest health.
       (3) Revenue sharing requirement.--As a condition of the 
     inclusion in a community forest demonstration area of 
     National Forest System land located in a particular county in 
     a State, the county must enter into an agreement with the 
     Governor of the State that requires that, in utilizing 
     revenues received by the county under section 406(b), the 
     county shall continue to meet any obligations under 
     applicable State law as provided under title I of the Secure 
     Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 
     (16 U.S.C. 7111 et seq.) or as provided in the sixth 
     paragraph under the heading ``FOREST SERVICE'' in the Act of 
     May 23, 1908 (16 U.S.C. 500) and section 13 of the Act of 
     March 1, 1911 (16 U.S.C. 500).
       (d) Treatment Under Certain Other Laws.--National Forest 
     System land included in a community forest demonstration area 
     shall not be considered Federal land for purposes of--
       (1) making payments to counties under the sixth paragraph 
     under the heading ``FOREST SERVICE'' in the Act of May 23, 
     1908 (16 U.S.C. 500) and section 13 of the Act of March 1, 
     1911 (16 U.S.C. 500); or
       (2) title I.
       (e) Acreage Limitation.--Not more than a total of 4,000,000 
     acres of National Forest System land may be established as 
     community forest demonstration areas.
       (f) Recognition of Valid and Existing Rights.--Nothing in 
     this title shall be construed to limit or restrict--
       (1) access to National Forest System land included in a 
     community forest demonstration area for hunting, fishing, and 
     other related purposes; or
       (2) valid and existing rights regarding such National 
     Forest System land, including rights of any federally 
     recognized Indian tribe.

     SEC. 403. ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

       (a) Appointment.--A community forest demonstration area for 
     a State shall be managed by an Advisory Committee appointed 
     by the Governor of the State.
       (b) Composition.--The Advisory Committee for a community 
     forest demonstration area in a State shall include, but is 
     not limited to, the following members:
       (1) One member who holds county or local elected office, 
     appointed from each county or local governmental unit in the 
     State containing community forest demonstration area land.
       (2) One member who represents the commercial timber, wood 
     products, or milling industry.
       (3) One member who represents persons holding Federal 
     grazing or other land use permits.
       (4) One member who represents recreational users of 
     National Forest System land.
       (c) Terms.--
       (1) In general.--Except in the case of certain initial 
     appointments required by paragraph (2), members of an 
     Advisory Committee shall serve for a term of three years.
       (2) Initial appointments.--In making initial appointments 
     to an Advisory Committee, the Governor making the 
     appointments shall stagger terms so that at least one-third 
     of the members will be replaced every three years.
       (d) Compensation.--Members of a Advisory Committee shall 
     serve without pay, but may be reimbursed from the funds made 
     available for the management of a community forest 
     demonstration area for the actual and necessary travel and 
     subsistence expenses incurred by members in the performance 
     of their duties.

     SEC. 404. MANAGEMENT OF COMMUNITY FOREST DEMONSTRATION AREAS.

       (a) Assumption of Management.--
       (1) Confirmation.--The Advisory Committee appointed for a 
     community forest demonstration area shall assume all 
     management authority with regard to the community forest 
     demonstration area as soon as the Secretary confirms that--
       (A) the National Forest System land to be included in the 
     community forest demonstration area meets the requirements of 
     subsections (b) and (c) of section 402;
       (B) the Advisory Committee has been duly appointed under 
     section 403 and is able to conduct business; and
       (C) provision has been made for essential management 
     services for the community forest demonstration area.
       (2) Scope and time for confirmation.--The determination of 
     the Secretary under paragraph (1) is limited to confirming 
     whether the conditions specified in subparagraphs (A) and (B) 
     of such paragraph have been satisfied. The Secretary shall 
     make the determination not later than 60 days after the date 
     of the appointment of the Advisory Committee.
       (3) Effect of failure to confirm.--If the Secretary 
     determines that either or both conditions specified in 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1) are not satisfied 
     for confirmation of an Advisory Committee, the Secretary 
     shall--
       (A) promptly notify the Governor of the affected State and 
     the Advisory Committee of the reasons preventing 
     confirmation; and
       (B) make a new determination under paragraph (2) within 60 
     days after receiving a new request from the Advisory 
     Committee that addresses the reasons that previously 
     prevented confirmation.
       (b) Management Responsibilities.--Upon assumption of 
     management of a community forest demonstration area, the 
     Advisory Committee for the community forest demonstration 
     area shall manage the land and resources of the community 
     forest demonstration area and the occupancy and use thereof 
     in conformity with this title, and to the extent not in 
     conflict with this title, the laws and regulations applicable 
     to management of State or privately-owned forest lands in the 
     State in which the community forest demonstration area is 
     located.
       (c) Applicability of Other Federal Laws.--
       (1) In general.--The administration and management of a 
     community forest demonstration area, including implementing 
     actions, shall not be considered Federal action and shall be 
     subject to the following only to the extent that such laws 
     apply to the State or private administration and management 
     of forest lands in the State in which the community forest 
     demonstration area is located:

[[Page 14033]]

       (A) The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 
     note).
       (B) The Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.).
       (C) The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 
     seq.).
       (D) Federal laws and regulations governing procurement by 
     Federal agencies.
       (E) Except as provided in paragraph (2), other Federal 
     laws.
       (2) Applicability of native american graves protection and 
     repatriation act.--Notwithstanding the assumption by an 
     Advisory Committee of management of a community forest 
     demonstration area, the Native American Graves Protection and 
     Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.) shall continue to 
     apply to the National Forest System land included in the 
     community forest demonstration area.
       (d) Consultation.--
       (1) With indian tribes.--The Advisory Committee for a 
     community forest demonstration area shall cooperate and 
     consult with Indian tribes on management policies and 
     practices for the community forest demonstration area that 
     may affect the Indian tribes. The Advisory Committee shall 
     take into consideration the use of lands within the community 
     forest demonstration area for religious and cultural uses by 
     Native Americans.
       (2) With collaborative groups.--The Advisory Committee for 
     a community forest demonstration area shall consult with any 
     applicable forest collaborative group.
       (e) Recreation.--Nothing in this section shall affect 
     public use and recreation within a community forest 
     demonstration area.
       (f) Fire Management.--The Secretary shall provide fire 
     presuppression, suppression, and rehabilitation services on 
     and with respect to a community forest demonstration area to 
     the same extent generally authorized in other units of the 
     National Forest System.
       (g) Prohibition on Export.--As a condition on the sale of 
     timber or other forest products from a community forest 
     demonstration area, unprocessed timber harvested from a 
     community forest demonstration area may not be exported in 
     accordance with subpart F of part 223 of title 36, Code of 
     Federal Regulations.

     SEC. 405. DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS FROM COMMUNITY FOREST 
                   DEMONSTRATION AREA.

       (a) Retention of Funds for Management.--The Advisory 
     Committee appointed for a community forest demonstration area 
     may retain such sums as the Advisory Committee considers to 
     be necessary from amounts generated from that community 
     forest demonstration area to fund the management, 
     administration, restoration, operation and maintenance, 
     improvement, repair, and related expenses incurred with 
     respect to the community forest demonstration area.
       (b) Funds to Counties or Local Governmental Units.--Subject 
     to subsection (a) and section 407, the Advisory Committee for 
     a community forest demonstration area in a State shall 
     distribute funds generated from that community forest 
     demonstration area to each county or local governmental unit 
     in the State in an amount proportional to the funds received 
     by the county or local governmental unit under title I of the 
     Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 
     2000 (16 U.S.C. 7111 et seq.).

     SEC. 406. INITIAL FUNDING AUTHORITY.

       (a) Funding Source.--Counties may use such sum as the 
     counties consider to be necessary from the amounts made 
     available to the counties under section 501 to provide 
     initial funding for the management of community forest 
     demonstration areas.
       (b) No Restriction on Use of Non-federal Funds.--Nothing in 
     this title restricts the Advisory Committee of a community 
     forest demonstration area from seeking non-Federal loans or 
     other non-Federal funds for management of the community 
     forest demonstration area.

     SEC. 407. PAYMENTS TO UNITED STATES TREASURY.

       (a) Payment Requirement.--As soon as practicable after the 
     end of the fiscal year in which a community forest 
     demonstration area is established and as soon as practicable 
     after the end of each subsequent fiscal year, the Advisory 
     Committee for a community forest demonstration area shall 
     make a payment to the United States Treasury.
       (b) Payment Amount.--The payment for a fiscal year under 
     subsection (a) with respect to a community forest 
     demonstration area shall be equal to 75 percent of the 
     quotient obtained by dividing--
       (1) the number obtained by multiplying the number of acres 
     of land in the community forest demonstration area by the 
     average annual receipts generated over the preceding 10-
     fiscal year period from the unit or units of the National 
     Forest System containing that community forest demonstration 
     area; by
       (2) the total acres of National Forest System land in that 
     unit or units of the National Forest System.

     SEC. 408. TERMINATION OF COMMUNITY FOREST DEMONSTRATION AREA.

       (a) Termination Authority.--Subject to approval by the 
     Governor of the State, the Advisory Committee for a community 
     forest demonstration area may terminate the community forest 
     demonstration area by a unanimous vote.
       (b) Effect of Termination.--Upon termination of a community 
     forest demonstration area, the Secretary shall immediately 
     resume management of the National Forest System land that had 
     been included in the community forest demonstration area, and 
     the Advisory Committee shall be dissolved.
       (c) Treatment of Undistributed Funds.--Any revenues from 
     the terminated area that remain undistributed under section 
     405 more than 30 days after the date of termination shall be 
     deposited in the general fund of the Treasury for use by the 
     Forest Service in such amounts as may be provided in advance 
     in appropriation Acts.

  TITLE V--REAUTHORIZATION AND AMENDMENT OF EXISTING AUTHORITIES AND 
                             OTHER MATTERS

     SEC. 501. EXTENSION OF SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY 
                   SELF-DETERMINATION ACT OF 2000 PENDING FULL 
                   OPERATION OF FOREST RESERVE REVENUE AREAS.

       (a) Beneficiary Counties.--No later than February 2014, the 
     Secretary of Agriculture shall distribute to each beneficiary 
     county (as defined in section 102(2)) a payment equal to the 
     amount distributed to the beneficiary county for fiscal year 
     2010 under section 102(c)(1) of the Secure Rural Schools and 
     Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (16 U.S.C. 
     7112(c)(1)).
       (b) Counties That Were Eligible for Direct County 
     Payments.--
       (1) Total amount available for payments.--During the month 
     of February 2015, the Secretary of the Inteiror shall 
     distribute to all counties that received a payment for fiscal 
     year 2010 under subsection (a)(2) of section 102 of the 
     Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 
     2000 (16 U.S.C. 7112) payments in a total amount equal to the 
     difference between--
       (A) the total amount distributed to all such counties for 
     fiscal year 2010 under subsection (c)(1) of such section; and
       (B) $27,000,000.
       (2) Couty share.--From the total amount determined under 
     paragraph (1), each county described in such paragraph shall 
     receive, during the month of February 2015, an amount that 
     bears the same proportion to the total amount made available 
     under such paragraph as that county's payment for fiscal year 
     2010 under subsection (c)(1) of section 102 of the Secure 
     Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination act of 2000 
     (16 U.S.C. 7112) bears to the total amount distributed to all 
     such counties for fiscal year 2010 under such subsection.
       (c) Effect on 25-percent and 50-percent payments.--A county 
     that receives a payment made under subsection (a) and (b) may 
     not receive a 25-percent payment or 50-percent payment (as 
     those terms are defined in section 3 of the Secure Rural 
     Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (16 
     U.S.C. 7102)) for fiscal year 2015.

     SEC. 502. RESTORING ORIGINAL CALCULATION METHOD FOR 25-
                   PERCENT PAYMENTS.

       (a) Amendment of Act of May 23, 1908.--The sixth paragraph 
     under the heading ``FOREST SERVICE'' in the Act of May 23, 
     1908 (16 U.S.C. 500) is amended in the first sentence--
       (1) by striking ``the annual average of 25 percent of all 
     amounts received for the applicable fiscal year and each of 
     the preceding 6 fiscal years'' and inserting ``25 percent of 
     all amounts received for the applicable fiscal year'';
       (2) by striking ``said reserve'' both places it appears and 
     inserting ``the national forest''; and
       (3) by striking ``forest reserve'' both places it appears 
     and inserting ``national forest''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment to Weeks Law.--Section 13 of the 
     Act of March 1, 1911 (commonly known as the Weeks Law; 16 
     U.S.C. 500) is amended in the first sentence by striking 
     ``the annual average of 25 percent of all amounts received 
     for the applicable fiscal year and each of the preceding 6 
     fiscal years'' and inserting ``25 percent of all amounts 
     received for the applicable fiscal year''.

     SEC. 503. FOREST SERVICE AND BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT GOOD-
                   NEIGHBOR COOPERATION WITH STATES TO REDUCE 
                   WILDFIRE RISKS.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Eligible state.--The term ``eligible State'' means a 
     State that contains National Forest System land or land under 
     the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management.
       (2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means--
       (A) the Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to National 
     Forest System land; or
       (B) the Secretary of the Interior, with respect to land 
     under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management.
       (3) State forester.--The term ``State forester'' means the 
     head of a State agency with jurisdiction over State forestry 
     programs in an eligible State.
       (b) Cooperative Agreements and Contracts Authorized.--The 
     Secretary may enter into a cooperative agreement or contract 
     (including a sole source contract) with a State forester to 
     authorize the State forester to provide the forest, 
     rangeland, and watershed restoration, management, and 
     protection services described in subsection (c) on National 
     Forest System land or land under the jurisdiction of the 
     Bureau of Land Management, as applicable, in the eligible 
     State.
       (c) Authorized Services.--The forest, rangeland, and 
     watershed restoration, management, and protection services 
     referred to in subsection (b) include the conduct of--
       (1) activities to treat insect infected forests;
       (2) activities to reduce hazardous fuels;
       (3) activities involving commercial harvesting or other 
     mechanical vegetative treatments; or
       (4) any other activities to restore or improve forest, 
     rangeland, and watershed health, including fish and wildlife 
     habitat.

[[Page 14034]]

       (d) State as Agent.--Except as provided in subsection (g), 
     a cooperative agreement or contract entered into under 
     subsection (b) may authorize the State forester to serve as 
     the agent for the Secretary in providing the restoration, 
     management, and protection services authorized under 
     subsection (b).
       (e) Subcontracts.--In accordance with applicable contract 
     procedures for the eligible State, a State forester may enter 
     into subcontracts to provide the restoration, management, and 
     protection services authorized under a cooperative agreement 
     or contract entered into under subsection (b).
       (f) Timber Sales.--Subsections (d) and (g) of section 14 of 
     the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 472a) 
     shall not apply to services performed under a cooperative 
     agreement or contract entered into under subsection (b).
       (g) Retention of NEPA Responsibilities.--Any decision 
     required to be made under the National Environmental Policy 
     Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) with respect to any 
     restoration, management, or protection services to be 
     provided under this section by a State forester on National 
     Forest System land or Bureau of Land Management land, as 
     applicable, shall not be delegated to a State forester or any 
     other officer or employee of the eligible State.
       (h) Applicable Law.--The restoration, management, and 
     protection services to be provided under this section shall 
     be carried out on a project-to-project basis under existing 
     authorities of the Forest Service or Bureau of Land 
     Management, as applicable.

     SEC. 504. STEWARDSHIP END RESULT CONTRACTING PROJECT 
                   AUTHORITY.

       (a) Extension of Authority.--Effective October 1, 2014, 
     section 347(a) of the Department of the Interior and Related 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 (as contained in section 
     101(e) of division A of Public Law 105-277; 16 U.S.C. 2104 
     note) is amended by striking ``2013'' and inserting ``2017''.
       (b) Duration of Contracts.--Section 347(c)(2) of the 
     Department of the Interior and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 1999 (as contained in section 101(e) of 
     division A of Public Law 105-277; 16 U.S.C. 2104 note) is 
     amended by striking ``10 years'' and inserting ``20 years''.
       (c) Cancellation Ceiling.--Section 347(c) of the Department 
     of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 
     (as contained in section 101(e) of division A of Public Law 
     105-277; 16 U.S.C. 2104 note) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs 
     (6) and (7), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new 
     paragraph (4):
       ``(4) Cancellation ceiling.--
       ``(A) Authority.--The Chief of the Forest Service and the 
     Director of the Bureau of Land Management may obligate funds 
     to cover any potential cancellation or termination costs for 
     an agreement or contract under subsection (a) in stages that 
     are economically or programmatically viable.
       ``(B) Notice to congress.--Not later than 30 days before 
     entering into a multiyear agreement or contract under 
     subsection (a) that includes a cancellation ceiling in excess 
     of $25,000,000, but does not include proposed funding for the 
     costs of cancelling the agreement or contract up to the 
     cancellation ceiling established in the agreement or 
     contract, the Chief or the Director, as the case may be, 
     shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
     of the Senate and the Committee on Natural Resources of the 
     House of Representatives a written notice that includes--
       ``(i) the cancellation ceiling amounts proposed for each 
     program year in the agreement or contract and the reasons for 
     such cancellation ceiling amounts;
       ``(ii) the extent to which the costs of contract 
     cancellation are not included in the budget for the agreement 
     or contract; and
       ``(iii) an assessment of the financial risk of not 
     including budgeting for the costs of agreement or contract 
     cancellation.
       ``(C) Notice to omb.--At least 14 days before the date on 
     which the Chief or Director enters into an agreement or 
     contract under subsection (a), the Chief or Director shall 
     transmit to the Director of the Office of Management and 
     Budget a copy of any written notice submitted under 
     subparagraph (B) with regard to such agreement or 
     contract.''.
       (d) Fire Liability.--Section 347(c) of the Department of 
     the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 
     (as contained in section 101(e) of division A of Public Law 
     105-277; 16 U.S.C. 2104 note) is amended by inserting after 
     paragraph (4), as added by subsection (c) of this section, 
     the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) Fire liability provisions.--Not later than 90 days 
     after the date of enactment of this paragraph, the Chief of 
     the Forest Service and the Director of the Bureau of Land 
     Management shall issue, for use in all contracts and 
     agreements under subsection (a), fire liability provisions 
     that are in substantially the same form as the fire liability 
     provisions contained in--
       ``(A) integrated resource timber contracts, as described in 
     the Forest Service contract numbered 2400-13, part H, section 
     H.4; and
       ``(B) timber sale contracts conducted pursuant to section 
     14 of the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 
     472a).''.

     SEC. 505. CLARIFICATION OF NATIONAL FOREST MANAGEMENT ACT OF 
                   1976 AUTHORITY.

       Section 14(g) of the National Forest Management Act of 1976 
     (16 U.S.C. 472a(g)) is amended by striking ``Designation, 
     marking when necessary,'' and inserting ``Designation, 
     including marking when necessary, or designation by 
     description or by prescription,''.

     SEC. 506. TREATMENT AS SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING.

       None of the funds made available to a beneficiary county 
     (as defined in section 102(2)) or other political subdivision 
     of a State under this Act shall be used in lieu of or to 
     otherwise offset State funding sources for local schools, 
     facilities, or educational purposes.

     SEC. 507. EXCEPTION OF CERTAIN FOREST PROJECTS AND ACTIVITIES 
                   FROM APPEALS REFORM ACT AND OTHER REVIEW.

       Section 322 of the Department of the Interior and Related 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 1993 (Public Law 102-381; 16 
     U.S.C. 1612 note) and section 428 of Division E of the 
     Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (Public Law 112-74; 125 
     Stat. 1046; 16 U.S.C. 6515 note) shall not apply to any 
     project or activity implementing a land and resource 
     management plan developed under section 6 of the Forest and 
     Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 
     1604) that is categorically excluded from documentation in an 
     environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement 
     under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 
     U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).

  The Acting CHAIR. No further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall 
be in order except those printed in part C of House Report 113-215. 
Each such further amendment may be offered only in the order printed in 
the report, by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered 
read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally 
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be 
subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division 
of the question.


                 Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Daines

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 
printed in part C of House Report 113-215.
  Mr. DAINES. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 16, line 7, insert before the period the following: 
     ``, except that a court of the United States may not issue a 
     restraining order, preliminary injunction, or injunction 
     pending appeal covering a covered forest reserve project in 
     response to an allegation that the Secretary violated any 
     procedural requirement applicable to how the project was 
     selected, planned, or analyzed''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 351, the gentleman 
from Montana (Mr. Daines) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Montana.
  Mr. DAINES. Mr. Chairman, as a fifth generation Montanan and an avid 
sportsman, I understand how protecting our beautiful landscapes and 
unmatched recreational opportunities are important to our way of life 
in Montana.
  As much a part of Montana as our enjoyment of the great outdoors is 
our timber industry--or at least what used to be one. The timber 
industry has declined by 90 percent since I was a kid. Since then, the 
wildfires and beetle kill have worsened. Our loggers play an important 
role on the front lines of protecting our outdoor heritage, and we must 
never forget that.
  I'm very concerned that many of these special places are being 
destroyed because the Forest Service does not have the tools necessary 
to manage these lands responsibly. H.R. 1526 gives the Forest Service 
the tools to protect and enhance our forests and will allow our timber 
industry to get back to work. It will cut the red tape that has held up 
responsible forest management and timber production. It includes 
comprehensive reforms to discourage and limit the flood of frivolous 
appeals and litigation. It also requires the Forest Service to increase 
timber harvests on nonwilderness lands now that it will have much 
needed latitude to do its work.
  This improved management will protect the health of our forests and 
watersheds, the safety of our communities, jobs in the timber industry, 
and our cherished access to the outdoors. H.R. 1526 would help create 
68,000 jobs and nearly 5,000 jobs in Montana. H.R. 1526 would allow 
access to marketable timber for our mills in Montana and breathe life 
back into this dying industry.

[[Page 14035]]

  This bill keeps the Federal Government's commitment to provide 
crucial revenue to our forest counties. It extends the Secure Rural 
Schools program for 1 year as the new timber program stands up. SRS has 
provided essential stopgap funding for timber counties since 2000, but 
many of our counties are tired of seeing the funds depend on the whims 
of Congress.
  This bill has the support of the National Association of Forested 
Counties. This bill also has the support of the National Education 
Association because they recognize the economic development and revenue 
that will be generated by our bill will strengthen our rural schools in 
States like Montana. Importantly, this bill helps to protect healthy 
forest management from habitual lawsuits brought by fringe groups.
  My amendment would strengthen the bill's protections against court-
ordered obstruction. Unfortunately, obstructionist tactics too often 
stop them from going forward. In region one alone, at least 40 percent 
of timber sales in fiscal '12 and fiscal '13 have been appealed or 
litigated. A top U.S. Forest Service official recently acknowledged 
that the abundance of litigation has played a ``huge role'' in blocking 
responsible timber sales.
  In March of this year, the Friends of the Wild Swan, Alliance for the 
Wild Rockies, and others halted a much needed timber sale called the 
Colt Summit Project near Seeley Lake in Montana due to a minor 
technical error by the Forest Service involving the impact on the 
habitat of a listed species, the Canadian lynx.

                              {time}  1915

  Like the Colt Summit Project, oftentimes timber sales are stopped in 
their tracks by court-issued injunctions that are based solely on 
alleged procedural violations such as mere paperwork errors. My 
amendment would prohibit these injunctions that are based on 
nonsubstantive allegations.
  Injunctions on timber sales often turn into permanent delays, leaving 
dying timber to rot and lose value. My amendment would allow these 
critical projects to move forward while litigation on the merits of the 
case is pending. In doing so, it will help ensure that responsible 
timber sales come to fruition.
  My amendment simply allows projects like the Colt Summit Project to 
move forward while the merits of the case continue to be examined. I 
urge my colleagues to join me in support of making our forests 
healthier.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DAINES. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I want to tell the gentleman I think this 
amendment adds a great deal to this legislation, and I will support 
your amendment.
  Mr. DAINES. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of making our 
forests healthier, and for the adoption of my amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Like many here tonight, I'm frustrated by the seemingly 
endless appeals and litigation on efforts to responsibly manage our 
forests, but not all appeals and litigation are frivolous. We know that 
some zero-cut groups seeking to end all logging in national forests 
have been successful in nitpicking the Forest Service's submission in 
Montana. However, this amendment literally tips the scales of justice.
  The underlying bill already places extraordinary restrictions on 
parties--which I mentioned earlier, over which I have concern--on 
parties seeking to protect public resources. Do we really want to tell 
people they can't protest a government activity if the Federal 
Government violates a procedural requirement?
  Failing to give notice of a major activity is a procedural 
requirement. Shouldn't the community be able to appeal an activity 
that's moving forward if they think it might impact their drinking 
water and they were never notified about the proposal?
  Failing to properly advertise for bids is a procedural requirement. 
Shouldn't a small business be able to stop a project from being awarded 
to an out-of-State company if the Forest Service failed to follow 
proper contracting protocol?
  The underlying bill already has numerous provisions that accelerate 
the approval of the projects and makes litigation much more difficult. 
We don't need to tip the scales further towards the power of Big 
Government and away from the public.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DAINES. Mr. Chairman, I respect the comments made by the 
gentleman from Oregon; but when we look at the State of Montana and see 
a 90 percent reduction in forest timber harvest on national 
forestlands, and when we hear from the Forest Service officials the 
number 1 issue is litigation, it is time that we put in place measures 
and reforms this amendment addresses, that addresses that those kind of 
concerns of procedural nature will not stop an entire forest project.
  This is a very real issue in my home State. I saw it literally 
firsthand when I was visiting the Pyramid sawmill in Seeley Lake, when 
we saw, because of, literally, a small, little procedural error on one 
of 14 counts, that stopped an entire timber harvest.
  This is getting out in front and saying, let's not let the trial 
lawyers and the courts control the forests. Let's let the people have 
control of the forests and restore the jobs that are needed and the 
revenue back to our schools.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I yield myself the balance of the time.
  We did have a hearing on this and similar issues, and I did find 
common ground with folks on the other side of the aisle.
  We had a vigorous debate over fuel reduction 13 years ago, which 
ultimately resulted in a law called HFRA, and I participated in writing 
that law here on the House side, very much a bipartisan law with myself 
and Mr. Miller on the Democratic side and Scott McInnis, John Shadegg, 
and Greg Walden on the other. And we gave this tool to the Forest 
Service, and they pretty much haven't used it. They've used it in very 
minor ways.
  And at the hearing, I asked the Deputy Chief, What about HFRA? Do we 
really need to change the laws further or prevent--do these radical 
things like preventing appeals and litigation?
  And he said, Well, no. We're moving ahead with a major, major 
landscape-scale collaborative process in the Black Hills.
  I said, Well, that's great, Mr. Deputy. I said, How about all the 
rest of the intermountain West? How about central Oregon and other 
places where we need these sort of landscape-scale projects that can't 
be nitpicked, you know, acre by acre, but they are developed 
collaboratively and we move forward? And as I mentioned earlier, we can 
do them under stewardship contracts, which will attract investors who 
will utilize the biomass and lower the cost to the Forest Service.
  There is a way to better do this. We need to push the Forest Service 
on these issues. If there are minor changes that need to be made in 
HFRA, they should let us know.
  I believe one is that it doesn't allow for them to go into areas of 
bug kill, and that is something that should be fixed and was fixed in a 
bipartisan bill in the Senate, which we recommended, in part, in a 
Democratic alternative here which was offered in committee but not 
allowed on the floor because of scoring issues.
  So I believe there is a way to move forward here and solve some of 
these problems, but this is not the proper way.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Montana (Mr. Daines).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.

[[Page 14036]]


  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, on that I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Montana will 
be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Daines

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 
printed in part C of House Report 113-215.
  Mr. DAINES. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title I, page 17, after line 23, add the 
     following new section:

     SEC. 106. ANNUAL REPORT.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than 60 days after the end 
     of each fiscal year, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
     an annual report specifying the annual volume requirement in 
     effect for that fiscal year for each Forest Reserve Revenue 
     Area, the volume of board feet actually harvested for each 
     Forest Reserve Revenue Area, the average cost of preparation 
     for timber sales, the forest reserve revenues generated from 
     such sales, and the amount of receipts distributed to each 
     beneficiary county.
       (b) Form of Report.--The information required by subsection 
     (a) to be provided with respect to a Forest Reserve Revenue 
     Area shall be presented on a single page. In addition to 
     submitting each report to Congress, the Secretary shall also 
     make the report available on the website of the Forest 
     Service.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 351, the gentleman 
from Montana (Mr. Daines) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Montana.
  Mr. DAINES. Mr. Chairman, nationwide, more than 73 million acres of 
Forest Service lands and hundreds of millions of acres of other Federal 
lands are at risk for catastrophic wildfire. As our timber industry has 
declined by 90 percent in recent decades, however, our National Forest 
System has lost much of the labor force to sustain our forested 
ecosystems and to protect our communities.
  The Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act addresses 
both challenges, providing the Forest Service with much-needed latitude 
to reduce the risk of catastrophic fires while revitalizing our 
country's dying timber industry.
  I'm offering an amendment to hold the Forest Service accountable for 
doing the work required in this legislation. My amendment would simply 
require the Secretary of Agriculture to submit to Congress an annual 
report. In fact, the amendment specifies this annual report is one page 
in length. Rarely do we see a report here in Washington that is less 
than about 3 inches thick. This is going to require that it's just a 
one-page summary, simple, focused on the results for each Forest 
Service revenue area.
  On this report, we would report the annual volume requirements in 
effect for that fiscal year: the volume of board feet actually 
harvested, the average cost of preparation of timber sales, the 
revenues generated from such sales, and the amount of receipts 
distributed to each beneficiary county. The amendment would also 
require that the Forest Service place the report on its Web site.
  The American people whose lives are often in the paths of 
catastrophic wildfire, whose jobs rely on access to timber, and whose 
school systems and public works rely on revenues generated from Federal 
land within its borders deserve transparency and accountability in our 
Federal Government's land management, and our country needs results.
  My amendment brings all three principles to the Forest Service as the 
agency implements H.R. 1526.
  I urge the adoption of my amendment.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DAINES. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I thank the gentleman for offering this 
amendment. I think it adds a lot to it because, as we transition to 
targets in the future, I think something like this would be very 
beneficial. And so I congratulate the gentleman and I support his 
amendment.
  Mr. DAINES. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Well, the previous amendment was going to limit public 
access to information. Now we're going to ask the public, the Forest 
Service, to produce more information. Although, actually, we aren't 
asking them to produce more information. We're asking them to produce 
less information than they currently make publicly available.
  It would require an annual report to Congress as a result of 
implementing title I, amendment requiring an annual report, volume of 
timber, cost of preparing timber sales, revenue from the sales, and how 
it's distributed to counties on one page.
  Well, the Forest Service does prepare these reports on a quarterly 
basis--it is available online--but no, it's not one page. I guess we 
could put it on one page. I'm having trouble reading it at this scale, 
which is 18 pages. This is the 18-page report for the Beaverhead-
Deerlodge Forest.
  If we look at the report, they offer 3.4 million board feet of 
timber, the amount of timber delayed, withdrawn from sale, what was 
successfully bid on, what didn't get any bids. There are also quarterly 
cut and sold reports, showing the value of these sales. In the first 
quarter of 2013, the Beaverhead-Deerlodge sold $312,000 worth of 
timber, nearly all of it Lodgepole pine.
  If we limit it to one page, we might lose other things, like the 
report on Christmas trees--$6,050 value for sales of Christmas trees; 
mushrooms, $1,500 in the Bitterroot National Forest.
  So the Forest Service is already producing this information. They are 
posting it online. I know it's kind of de rigueur around here to say 
let's get it all down to one page. Well, we could put it on one page, 
but you're going to need a microscope to read it, unless you want to 
leave out a lot of the stuff we're getting. And that's kind of 
interesting, if you really want to know what's going on in the forest.
  If you want to know valid bids, no bids, delayed bids, withdrawn, 
resold, re-offered, regular sales, cancelled, opted other volume, 
resold, re-offered, previous fiscal year volume, replacement volume, I 
mean, how are you going to fit all this stuff on one page?
  So we're just going to tell them, ``Don't bother anymore to produce 
this data. We don't want it. The public doesn't want it''?
  So under the guise of asking for information, we're actually going to 
tell the Forest Service to produce less, which, you know, they might be 
kind of happy with because they will be less accountable if they 
produce less information.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DAINES. I appreciate the gentleman from Oregon's remarks there.
  Let me say this. I spent 28 years in the private sector having 
managed complex operations. And so what this amendment does, it doesn't 
preclude the Forest Service from generating all the data in the format 
that the gentleman from Oregon referenced. What this is asking for here 
is a one-page summary, a dashboard, if you will, so we can see, kind of 
cut to the bottom line in terms of the numbers that I pointed out here.
  So often in Washington we are drowning in data. We're starving for 
wisdom. This is a simple dashboard that cuts to the bottom line here of 
looking for the volume of board feet actually harvested, the cost of 
the preparation of sales, the revenues generated from the sales, and 
the amount of receipts distributed to the beneficiary counties. That's 
the one-page summary.
  All the other data can be contained in the other reports for the 
perusal of Members and others who want to see it, but this just cuts to 
the chase to give a simple, one-page dashboard of what the bottom-line 
results are as a result of this bill.

[[Page 14037]]

  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Well, the Forest Service isn't always responsive, but I believe if 
the committee chairman--in fact, I would be happy to join as the 
ranking member with the committee chairman and the gentleman from 
Montana and any other members of the committee interested in a letter 
to the Forest Service saying, Hey, you produce all this incredible 
amount of data. Some people think it's too much. So how about a one-
page executive summary that covers these points, which would precede 
the other 18 pages online--they don't have to print them, so there's no 
cost to the government--I think that might solve this problem.
  I don't believe we need to pass a law to get an executive summary. I 
mean, most Federal agencies provide executive summaries of all sorts of 
stuff for people who don't have time or interest in knowing things in 
more detail.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DAINES. I just would say that, as I've been back here, moving 
from the private sector to the public sector, sometimes you have got to 
lay out in specificity the need for a one-page summary of what's going 
on so that Members and anybody else that wants to see can see, can take 
the 30,000-foot view here in terms of this program being successful or 
not.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I have the right to close, and I'm prepared to close if 
the gentleman wants to summarize his previous arguments.
  Mr. DAINES. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Montana (Mr. Daines).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  1930


               Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. McClintock

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 
printed in part C of House Report 113-215.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 23, line 10, add after the period the following new 
     sentence: ``In addition, if the primary purpose of a 
     hazardous fuel reduction project or a forest health project 
     under this title is the salvage of dead, damaged, or down 
     timber resulting from wildfire occurring in 2013, the 
     hazardous fuel reduction project or forest health project, 
     and any decision of the Secretary concerned in connection 
     with the project, shall not be subject to judicial review or 
     to any restraining order or injunction issued by a United 
     States court.''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 351, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. McClintock) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  An estimated 1 billion board feet of fire-killed timber can still be 
salvaged out of the forests devastated by the Yosemite Rim fire, but it 
requires immediate action. As time passes, the value of this dead 
timber declines until after a year or so, when it becomes 
unsalvageable.
  It has been the practice of radical environmental groups to file 
lawsuits against such projects, with the objective of delaying salvage 
until the timber is worthless. This amendment waives judicial review of 
the salvage plans for the 2013 fires. This is exactly the same approach 
taken in legislation offered by Tom Daschle a few years ago to allow 
salvage of beetle-killed timber in the Black Hills National Forest.
  Salvaging this timber would throw an economic lifeline to communities 
already devastated by this fire, as local mills can be brought to full 
employment for the first time in many years. It would provide a new 
stream of revenue for the Federal Government as this salvageable timber 
is auctioned.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I thank the gentleman for offering this 
amendment.
  Last year, in my home State of Washington, over 300,000 acres burned. 
And yet the Forest Service has yet to service anything. And I dare say 
now that whatever value there is to that salvage timber, it probably 
has gone away.
  I think this amendment addresses that issue very, very well, and I 
support the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time a I may consume.
  Again, this is an area where we do have some grounds for potential 
agreement. Part of the problem is the Forest Service budget. Not only 
are they spending half their budget on fighting fires, they've had a 
brain drain because of cuts in personnel and staffing, and they really 
don't have the personnel to go out.
  I suggested a number of years ago, the last time we had a salvage 
rider, that a great alternative would be to have the Forest Service 
establish a strike team to go out to major fires--in fact, while 
they're probably still burning--and begin to map out a recovery 
effort--where it might be appropriate to go in and do some salvage, 
where there are critical watersheds at risk and there's going to have 
to be some immediate mitigation with the planting of grass or other 
efforts to mitigate problems that will come with the rainy season in a 
few months in California.
  I believe there is a better way to get there. But there's a new kind 
of current trend online. It's called throw-back Thursday. To me, this 
is really throw-back Thursday to one of the most controversial pieces 
of legislation ever adopted by this body back in the 1990s, which was a 
massive salvage rider.
  I have participated in a much more discrete, individual process when 
I was first here as a sophomore Member of Congress with Senator Mark 
Hatfield from Oregon. We sat down with an area that had been burned and 
we negotiated and legislated a salvage which preserved the areas that 
needed to be preserved.
  There was a potential for 186 million board feet. We ended up 
legislating somewhere around 70 million board feet. The industry was 
disappointed. The environmentalists were appalled. But in the end, we 
got no additional sedimentation, we didn't get any slope slumping, and 
we did get 70 million board feet of timber out of there. We didn't 
build a road into a sensitive, roadless area. We did it with helicopter 
logging. And the Forest Service still made money.
  So there are ways to do this. But this, I don't think, is the best 
way to go forward. The underlying legislation already allows 
significant waivers of NEPA. Any project less than 10,000 acres is not 
required to go through an analysis. But this would allow a project to 
move forward no matter what the size or where it's located, without 
judicial review, if the project is salvaged, dead, damaged, or downed 
timber in an area impacted by fire this year.
  We don't really know yet. I don't think a lot of the areas of Rim 
fire have yet been surveyed. Certainly, the Forest Service doesn't have 
the assets to do and find out what the impacts were--where the spot 
burns are, where the through burns are, what the conditions are, what 
areas would be critical to surviving wildlife, what areas are critical 
to watersheds and how we will deal with those areas, how we're going to 
recover the recreation in that area in the future, what would happen 
with building of roads and logging and salvage logging in those areas.
  So I believe that this is a bridge too far in terms of expediting 
recovery and/or potentially salvage efforts, and I would oppose the 
amendment.

[[Page 14038]]

  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. LaMalfa), my neighbor to the north.
  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague, Mr. McClintock, for 
bringing this measure forward.
  The crazy thing about this is each year you have devastating 
wildfires in California, the West, and other areas of the country. We 
act like we're reinventing the wheel each time when we need to go out 
and do the basic salvage work.
  You have a narrow window of time that you can get value out of it 
before the trees there that have value can be salvaged and turned into 
something useful. You could have participatory people in the industry 
helping bring that value up. If you lose that window of time, then you 
have higher costs maybe as areas don't get recovered because nobody can 
make a living out of this.
  So this is a commonsense measure. It's really a no-brainer. It ought 
to be used to move forward for this 2013 season but to also establish a 
template long term so that we can have a sensible forest management 
policy and get in and do these strike teams. Let's get a template so we 
don't have to reinvent the wheel each time there's a fire, but instead 
move quickly, get the industry to do it, and have our forests start 
their restoration and recovery project as soon as possible with that 
value.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Denham), my neighbor to the south, also a coauthor of the measure.
  Mr. DENHAM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the McClintock-
McCarthy-LaMalfa-Denham amendment. I'm proud to cosponsor this 
amendment to speed up the timber salvage project on the acres burned in 
this catastrophic Yosemite Rim fire.
  I'm never surprised by some of the arguments that are made down here. 
You will hear that we just don't have enough people to go out there and 
survey. But yet by harvesting this very timber that will be rotted or 
infested in several months, it would actually pay not only for the 
Forest Service to go out there and survey and help to pay for the 
Forest Service salaries, but actually, in a community like ours, help 
to pay for our schooling and some of our local costs as well.
  The timber salvage can go a long way to benefit local economies 
throughout the State. This timely amendment limits the amount of 
lawsuits that could be used to slow down and hold up the salvage 
process.
  Under the proposed amendment, wood salvaged from the Yosemite Rim 
fire could be quickly sent to mills across California, fueling 
construction projects and benefiting local economies receiving the 
timber and providing much-needed local jobs and revenues to the 
impacted counties.
  Our communities have suffered untold damage with the historic and 
catastrophic wildfire that burned over 400 square miles.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman an additional 15 
seconds.
  Mr. DENHAM. The air quality is worsened, the fertile range land near 
the fire may have been sterilized by the heat, our water sources will 
experience degradation from runoff, and our beautiful forest land will 
remain blackened and sparse for years to come.
  I ask your assistance in passing this critical amendment to put 
people back to work and start cleaning up this catastrophic situation.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I'm prepared to close.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, in closing, I can't put it any plainer 
than this: without this amendment, 1 billion board feet of timber owned 
by the people of the United States will be lost forever. We do not have 
time for endless years of litigation.
  Within a year, this timber which can now be salvaged for productive 
use and can provide jobs for the people of our region and provide a 
stream of revenues for our ailing U.S. Treasury will be rendered 
utterly worthless. This is precisely the same approach that was used 
when Democrat Tom Daschle faced the same problem in his district over 
beetle-killed timber. We are applying exactly the same policy to 
salvage this timber.
  I would hope that the gentleman from Oregon, in the spirit of 
bipartisanship, will recognize that the same remedy used in a 
Democratic region ought now to be used for this district in California.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, actually, this wouldn't apply just to the 
Rim fire, as I read it. The gentleman can correct me if I'm wrong. I 
believe it applies to any area that burned in 2013 anywhere in the 
United States of America, which would certainly include both Democratic 
and Republican districts. Fires are not very partisan in their 
destruction.
  So that is an incredibly broad brush. That would mean there could be 
no analysis done by the Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife, or anybody 
else, before salvage efforts might begin on forests all across America.
  If you're bidding on a salvage sale, it isn't your job to care about 
whether or not the road you're going to build in or the area you're 
going to access is subject to the slope slumping when the rain starts 
in a couple of months or the snows come in the inner mountain regions 
or up in the Northwest.
  So this is extraordinarily and overly broad. We've already exempted 
things up to 10,000 acres. I believe there's a better way to approach 
this.
  The other gentleman from California talked about getting in there and 
then we would have the money for strike teams. I would say that's just 
a little bit backwards. These are public assets. This fire is a 
disaster not only for the people of your district, the people of 
California, but the people of the Nation, particularly with the 
proximity to one of the Nation's most loved parks.
  If we did have a strike team, we could have areas like that surveyed 
by spring and plans in place by spring to know where it might be 
appropriate to salvage and where it isn't appropriate to salvage, and 
it would still be valuable.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
will be postponed.


            Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Smith of Missouri

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 
printed in part C of House Report 113-215.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title II (page 26, after line 22), add the 
     following new section:

     SEC. 207. MORATORIUM ON USE OF PRESCRIBED FIRE IN MARK TWAIN 
                   NATIONAL FOREST, MISSOURI, PENDING REPORT.

       (a) Moratorium.--Except as provided in subsection (b), the 
     Secretary of Agriculture may not conduct any prescribed fire 
     in Mark Twain National Forest, Missouri, under the 
     Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Project until the 
     report required by subsection (c) is submitted to Congress.
       (b) Exception for Wildfire Suppression.--Subsection (a) 
     does not prohibit the use of prescribed fire as part of 
     wildfire suppression activities.
       (c) Report Required.--Not later than one year after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall submit to Congress a report containing an 
     evaluation of recent and current Forest Service management 
     practices for Mark Twain National Forest, including lands in 
     the National Forest enrolled, or under consideration for 
     enrollment, in the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration 
     Project to

[[Page 14039]]

     convert certain lands into shortleaf pine-oak woodlands, to 
     determine the impact of such management practices on forest 
     health and tree mortality. The report shall specifically 
     address--
       (1) the economic costs associated with the failure to 
     utilize hardwoods cut as part of the Collaborative Forest 
     Landscape Restoration Project and the subsequent loss of 
     hardwood production from the treated lands in the long term;
       (2) the extent of increased tree mortality due to excessive 
     heat generated by prescribed fires;
       (3) the impacts to water quality and rate of water run off 
     due to erosion of the scorched earth left in the aftermath of 
     the prescribed fires; and
       (4) a long-term plan for evaluation of the impacts of 
     prescribed fires on lands previously burned within the Eleven 
     Point Ranger District.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 351, the gentleman 
from Missouri (Mr. Smith) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Let me begin first by saying I fully support increasing the timber 
harvest on Federal lands, and I'm excited for the opportunity to create 
jobs and stimulate the economy in my rural Missouri district.
  The issue that my amendment deals with, prescribed fires within the 
Mark Twain National Forest, is a symptom of the larger problem that 
H.R. 1526 seeks to fix. To put it simply, our national forest system 
could be better managed. Fifty million board feet of timber, with an 
estimated value of $4.75 million, dies every year in the Mark Twain 
National Forest. Only 38 million board feet of timber, with an 
estimated value of $4.37 million, is harvested. There are individuals 
ready, willing, and able to harvest the timber, but they are prevented 
from acting by the Federal Government.
  The Forest Service has made the harvest problem even worse by burning 
whole swaths of harvestable acreage. While prescribed fire has been 
used in the past as an effective technique to manage and prevent forest 
fires, in this instance the fires are being used to change the 
landscape of the area from its current forested state to pine-oak 
woodlands.
  I have personally visited sites where trees that could be harvested 
for timber are being burned. Folks, it just doesn't make sense to be 
burning this timber that could be used to bring new jobs and economic 
prosperity to my district.
  The forest products industry in my district is alive and well, and we 
certainly could make use of these trees that are instead being burned. 
The wood flooring, the barrel industry, and timber and charcoal 
industries are major employers in my district that will put people back 
to work turning these trees into valuable finished products.

                              {time}  1945

  My constituents who have evaluated the impacts of the initial 
prescribed fires are very concerned about the results. The large size 
of the burns and the failure to utilize cut hardwoods has created a 
residual forest condition with scorched trees and bare mineral soil.
  A number of trees the burns intended to promote were exposed to 
excessive heat, which has caused these trees to die unnecessarily. The 
burns have also caused the forest floor to become more susceptible to 
erosion. As a result of this situation, we need to place a moratorium 
on these prescribed fires in the Mark Twain National Forest until such 
time as their effects on the forest can be determined. I wrote a letter 
to the Forest Service in August, along with five of my colleagues from 
Missouri, seeking this information and have yet to receive a response.
  I ask this body to approve my amendment so that we can get more 
information from the Forest Service about this situation and that in 
the meantime more of our valuable Missouri hardwoods will not be 
indiscriminately burned.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
thank him for offering this amendment. I think his amendment takes care 
of a unique problem, although it may be applicable in other parts. But 
I think the gentleman has the right approach, and I support his 
amendment.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I certainly don't know what is best for the Mark Twain 
Forest. And you had five Members sign your letter, so that would leave 
430 who probably don't think they have any clue either about what would 
be appropriate in your forest.
  We do have a committee of jurisdiction. There are times when the 
Forest Service bureaucracy is doing things that I do not approve of. I 
don't believe that the committee has done any oversight on this issue. 
I don't know if the issue was brought to the chairman before it was 
offered as an amendment here on the floor. This amendment wasn't 
offered in committee, nor was--I was there, there was no discussion of 
this in committee.
  It's a very, very localized problem. I would suggest again, as we did 
earlier, that, first off, this bill is not going to become law before 
they're going to burn this winter--which is when they burn in the 
Northwest. I assume they do the same thing in your district, when the 
risk of fire is down because of other vegetation and when the moisture 
levels are higher.
  This isn't going to be law by then--if it ever became law. If you're 
doing it to get their attention, perhaps you will get their attention 
if they're listening. But I would suggest that the gentleman initiate a 
process through the committee. Ask for a meeting with the Forest 
Service under the auspices of the chair and attempt to get answers to 
the questions he has. Doing it through this particular amendment is 
really not going to accomplish those goals in time if indeed there are 
immediate plans to go forward this winter.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith).
  The amendment was agreed to.


               Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. McClintock

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 
printed in part C of House Report 113-215.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill, add the following new section:

     SEC. 508. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN ACTIONS REGARDING FOREST 
                   SERVICE ROADS AND TRAILS.

       The Forest Service shall not remove or otherwise eliminate 
     or obliterate any legally created road or trail unless there 
     has been a specific decision, which included adequate and 
     appropriate public involvement, to decommission the specific 
     road or trail in question. The fact that any road or trail is 
     not a Forest System road or trail, or does not appear on a 
     Motor Vehicle Use Map, shall not constitute a decision.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 351, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. McClintock) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, this amendment guarantees that the 
public has the full opportunity to comment before a forest road is 
closed or destroyed.
  These roads are vital to tourism, and tourism is vital to the economy 
of these communities. Yet the U.S. Forest Service has become very 
aggressive in recent years in shutting down these roads, restricting 
public access to the public lands, and replacing Gifford Pinchot's 
inclusionary vision for the Forest Service, which he once described as

[[Page 14040]]

serving ``the greatest good for the greatest number in the long run,'' 
into an exclusionary vision that can best be described as: look, but 
don't touch.
  The Forest Service has now bypassed Congress and has adopted a rule 
that effectively allows it to close any road that it deems to be 
unnecessary or undesirable without environmental review or public 
consultation or comment. My amendment simply reasserts Congress' 
authority to protect public access to the public lands and requires 
that road or trail closures follow the established process of public 
notification and input.
  Under this provision, the Forest Service can still decommission 
trails or roads that it considers obsolete, but only after ``adequate 
and appropriate public involvement.'' That's it. Before you 
decommission or destroy an existing road or trail, you have to ask the 
public. It codifies one of Pinchot's maxims for what he called ``the 
behavior of foresters in public office.'' He said: It is more trouble 
to consult the public than to ignore them, but that is what you are 
hired for.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I thank the gentleman for offering this 
amendment.
  If I were to categorize this amendment, it would just simply prohibit 
the Forest Service from removing or eliminating roads without public 
involvement.
  In my district, in the Naches Ranger District, there was a case where 
they were in fact using other funds that were used to maintain roads, 
and they were using them to close roads, but all the time there was no 
public involvement. I think your amendment addresses that issue, and I 
support the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. I thank the gentleman.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Again, there are grounds for some agreement here. I 
agree with the gentleman from California that this very sensitive 
issue, access to forest lands, is critically important to people who 
live in, around or near the forest, or people who choose to travel 
there to recreate.
  We recently had a disastrous example in my State. The Proposed Travel 
Management Plan in the Wallowa-Whitman Forest, which is in Mr. Walden's 
district in northeast Oregon, the plan was developed in 2009, little 
public input; would have closed a substantial amount of the road 
network. It became a huge, huge controversy because of the lack of 
public involvement. I had complaints from my constituents and we're 250 
miles away. Although I do recreate sometimes in that forest, but it's 
not on the road. I access the areas by forest roads. So this is 
something that was of major concern.
  A regional forester who was new said, yeah, you're right, they really 
screwed this up; let's do it over again. They started all over again in 
a very collaborative public process.
  But this goes a little bit beyond requiring the public to be notified 
and involved. In fact, it's a little contradictory because major parts 
of this bill do away with NEPA, which does require meaningful public 
involvement and response to comments by the public meaningfully by the 
agency. So I don't know whether we've removed that requirement from the 
existing law for the removal of roads and that's why we have to have 
this amendment or not.
  But this goes a little further. It says these would be legally 
created roads. As you know, I mean, we get people down in Nevada and 
elsewhere arguing with the government or even attempting to take back 
government property by saying these are legally created and are not the 
property of the Forest Service.
  So first you have to decide which roads are legal, which are covered, 
which are illegal, not covered. Who is going to decide that? The Forest 
Service user group who has an informal road that they have established? 
How will that help with this problem?
  It also requires the Forest Service to make a specific decision 
regarding a road or trail closure, including adequate and appropriate 
public involvement. Okay. Well, what are those standards as opposed to, 
say, the NEPA standards which should apply in these cases? So I think 
that this could actually lead to more confusion and litigation.
  I agree with the gentleman that there is a problem. This is a 
sensitive area. In some areas the Forest Service has not dealt well 
with it and believe there are other avenues to a solution.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, perhaps I could assist the gentleman in 
his confusion by simply reading the amendment, which is simple, 
straightforward, and clear:

       The Forest Service shall not remove or otherwise eliminate 
     or obliterate any legally created road or trail unless there 
     has been a specific decision, which included adequate and 
     appropriate public involvement, to decommission the specific 
     road or trail in question. The fact that any road or trail is 
     not a Forest System road or trail, or does not appear on a 
     Motor Vehicle Use Map, shall not constitute a decision.

  That is it. That is the alpha and omega of this amendment in its 
entirety. If you're going to close a public road to the public, you 
need to ask them first.
  I cannot emphasize enough how important this is to the mountain 
communities of the Sierra Nevada that depend on mountain tourism for 
their economies. Tourists don't go where they're not welcomed. Tourists 
don't visit where they can't get to. The public's use of mountain 
trails and roads is absolutely central to mountain tourism, and 
removing or closing these trails or roads is not something that should 
be done behind closed doors by administrative fiat.
  I ask for your ``aye'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Well, that doesn't address the concern about legally 
created road or trail. Again, I'm not aware that there is a definition 
elsewhere in the bill, nor in this amendment, for ``legally created.'' 
And there is tremendous controversy and litigation over the issue of 
``legally created.''
  It does go on to say:

       The fact that any road or trail is not a Forest System road 
     or trail, or does not appear on a Motor Vehicle Use Map, 
     shall not constitute a decision.

  That leaves open the issue of informal-use roads, potentially in 
sensitive areas, that would have to go through a process before they 
could be closed. What if it's a newly developed ORV trail through a 
sensitive meadow? We had someone running doughnuts up in a very 
sensitive meadow in the Three Sisters Wilderness in an area--on the 
edge of the Three Sisters Wilderness. I mean, did that become a road or 
a trail that then would be available to vehicles and we couldn't close 
that area? And they did, they put in big rocks and other things to 
close the area off to motor vehicles. Would that have been precluded 
under this amendment? I don't know.
  This opens too many questions to controversy and interpretation. 
There are times when we do need to act quickly when abuse is taking 
place. There are other times when the Forest Service has to act more 
deliberately. I believe the Forest Service can do a better job. I 
believe in having the public notified, the public fully involved; And 
the best way to do that on these roads is through NEPA.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. LaMalfa

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 
printed in part C of House Report 113-215.

[[Page 14041]]


  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill, add the following new section:

     SEC. 508. LIMITATIONS ON TYPES OF DAMAGES THE FEDERAL 
                   GOVERNMENT MAY SEEK ARISING FROM WILDFIRES.

       The Attorney General, acting on behalf of the United 
     States, may not seek intangible damages from a landowner from 
     whose land wildfire escaped to Federal land when such 
     intangible damages are not permitted by the law of the State 
     in which the landowner's land is located.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 351, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. LaMalfa) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. LaMALFA. I appreciate working with the chairman of the committee, 
Doc Hastings, on the amendments to this legislation.
  This amendment seeks to prevent the Department of Justice from 
seeking excessive, unquantifiable damages from property owners who have 
fires accidentally escape from their property onto public lands.
  We have seen U.S. Attorneys sue landowners for hundreds of millions 
of dollars above the damage to national forests and the costs of 
firefighting based on very speculative claims about the value of 
habitat--claims which appear to be based not on science, not on fact, 
but only on the desire to generate revenue for the government.
  When the Forest Service gains as much revenue from lawsuits as it 
does from timber receipts from an actual working forest, something is 
surely wrong with the system. This language would help to end that 
problem in many Western States. However, I plan to continue working on 
this issue until we develop a 50-State solution to this problem. So it 
is for these reasons that I respectfully ask unanimous consent to 
withdraw this amendment at this time.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.


                 Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. LaMalfa

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 
printed in part C of House Report 113-215.
  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill, add the following new section:

     SEC. 508. DEFINITION OF FIRE SUPPRESSION TO INCLUDE CERTAIN 
                   RELATED ACTIVITIES.

       For purposes of utilizing amounts made available to the 
     Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior for 
     fire suppression activities, including funds made available 
     from the FLAME Fund, the term ``fire suppression'' includes 
     reforestation, site rehabilitation, salvage operations, and 
     replanting occurring following fire damage on lands under the 
     jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned or following fire 
     suppression efforts on such lands by the Secretary concerned.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 351, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. LaMalfa) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.

                              {time}  2000

  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Chairman, disasters like the massive Rim fire that 
impacts my colleague's, Mr. McClintock's, district in Yosemite National 
Park, which many people believe is a national treasure, and I agree, 
not only threaten residents, homes, and other structures, they also 
destroy valuable public property: forests that provide jobs in rural 
communities, revenue for local governments, and recreation for 
Americans.
  Unfortunately, planning and procedural hurdles often prevent the 
Forest Service from salvaging usable timber and returning the land to a 
healthy condition.
  This amendment enables the Forest Service to rapidly undertake 
salvage, rehabilitation, and replanting by allowing those activities to 
be included in fire suppression operational and funding plans.
  When wildfires impact private timberland, owners know that salvage 
and restoration work must be conducted immediately. The window before 
decay and insects eliminates timber's value can be only weeks. Site 
rehabilitation must be done before the rainy season to prevent 
landslides and sediment from clogging waterways. However, the Forest 
Service's ability to conduct these operations on public lands is so 
restricted that timber which could generate jobs and revenue literally 
rots on the ground, even as adjacent private timberland is rapidly 
rehabilitated.
  After the 46,000 Bagley fire in my district last year, private 
landowners sprang into action and, it is my understanding, that salvage 
and rehab operations are already complete on nearly all these private 
lands. These areas have been replanted and rehabilitated and soon will 
once again be healthy, productive forests. The Forest Service lands, 
however, lie nearly untouched as the value of the burned timber 
disappears.
  In Trinity County, in northern California, 13 lightning-sparked fires 
burned over 250,000 acres during the memorable 2008 fire season and 
caused $150 million in suppression costs. However, the Forest Service 
conducted salvage and rehabilitation on just a few hundred acres, 
leaving an area one-third the size of Rhode Island blackened and 
scarred.
  This amendment speeds the salvage and rehabilitation process by 
allowing the Forest Service to plan this work in conjunction with 
suppression plans and removes procedural hurdles by defining these 
activities as part of suppression efforts. The amendment allows, but 
does not mandate, the use of suppression funds for these efforts. 
Again, it does not mandate, but allows, the use of suppression funds 
for these efforts. The CBO has stated this amendment has no impact on 
overall Federal spending.
  Finally, this language will offset firefighting costs by generating 
revenue for local communities and the Federal Government through 
salvage operations. Federal agencies spent over $1.9 billion on 
firefighting in 2012, and every dollar derived from salvaged timber is 
one less dollar diverted from other programs.
  As you may know, I have cosponsored an amendment with Representative 
McClintock streamlining judicial delays that slow salvage operations. 
This amendment complements that language by accelerating the salvage 
and rehabilitation planning progress but functions independently.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LaMALFA. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I thank the gentleman for offering this 
amendment.
  The issue of salvage is a very important part of proper management in 
forests, and I think your amendment adds to that.
  I support your amendment.
  Mr. LaMALFA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  I respectfully request your support, and I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman has made the point that it 
is not mandatory, but the problem would be we already have inadequate 
funds for firefighting. As the gentleman, I'm certain, well knows, the 
Forest Service has devastated the remaining funds for fuel reduction, 
probably restoration activities, and a whole bunch of recreation 
activities and other things that have all been ripped from this year's 
budget because they had to spend $1 billion fighting fires, and I 
believe Congress appropriated less than half that amount.
  This is an annual problem, and it's time to get real around here 
about the problem. One is to adequately invest in fuel reduction and 
not underinvest in firefighting. Until we do a lot more fuel

[[Page 14042]]

reduction across the West, we are going to have big fires. If we have 
big fires, we need to fight them. But we don't need to make the big 
fires more prevalent, more common, by cutting the fuel reduction 
budgets.
  We had this discussion a bit in committee and actually found there 
was some common ground in this discussion. Certainly site 
rehabilitation and other activities, those are very desirable. But, 
again, to categorize them under firefighting I think could create major 
problems.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Chairman, in speaking of inadequate funds, if we 
were actually generating the funds by having actual timber harvest 
receipts, we wouldn't be looking to the government for the money for 
the type of fuel reductions that are needed. We would actually be 
making a living at it by taking adequate marketable timber, as well as 
operations that go along under a timber harvest plan that requires 
cleanup and replanting.
  So we would be generating the receipts at the same time we would be 
doing this if we had this type of thinking involved with more of our 
forest management, not only in the current year where you're gaining 
those receipts, but in the future as you have a regenerated forest.
  I would harken back to Weaverville, in Trinity County, in my area, 
where there was a fire some years ago that nearly burned the town; but 
then with no management, with no restoration, the land laid idle with 
brush, with snags, with all sorts of things growing back and remaining 
behind from that fire. It burned again just 7, 8, 9 years later and 
almost devastated the town once again. Whereas, we see on private 
lands, they're out there. They're salving. They're getting the job 
going again and restoring the forest, which is better for the habitat, 
better for siltation, better for the wildlife, better for the economy, 
better for everybody.
  So let's move in the direction of fuel reductions, as my colleague 
from Oregon was talking about. Let's do the fuel reductions. But we 
don't have to do it with tax dollars. We can do it with the private 
sector having marketable timber being taken off and get the job done.
  I, again, think this amendment will really help in this regard, so I 
respectfully, again, seek your support for this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Fuel reduction and salvage are two infinitely different categories. 
Salvage needs to be carefully planned. We already discussed earlier, 
the Forest Service doesn't have the resources to do that. Yet, if we 
take and add that onto suppression costs, that will take money away 
from fuel reduction and other programs of the agency.
  I know around here we spend a lot of time talking about sequestration 
and a lot of people think it doesn't have much real impact or it's just 
waste coming out of the government. That came out of the fuel 
suppression budget. Then a bunch of the firefighting money came out of 
the fuel suppression budget. And now we are going to act like there was 
enough money in the fuel suppression budget or the firefighting budget 
that we could spend it on other activities. Yes, we want to do 
restoration activity, but at some point we have got to suck it up and 
make the investments we need to make in our resource agencies so they 
can get the job done right.
  We had a discussion of how to properly approach salvage earlier 
tonight. I'm not going to reiterate that issue. This amendment is not 
mandatory, but as an addition to an already inadequate account, which 
is stealing from other accounts, would not be good policy.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee 
do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Bentivolio) having assumed the chair, Mr. Collins of Georgia, Acting 
Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, 
reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill 
(H.R. 1526) to restore employment and educational opportunities in, and 
improve the economic stability of, counties containing National Forest 
System land, while also reducing Forest Service management costs, by 
ensuring that such counties have a dependable source of revenue from 
National Forest System land, to provide a temporary extension of the 
Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000, and 
for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________