[House Report 118-921]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
118th Congress } { Rept. 118-921
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { Part 1
======================================================================
RESTORING OUR UNOPENED TRAILS FOR ENJOYMENT
AND SAFETY ACT
_______
December 18, 2024.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Westerman, from the Committee on Natural Resources,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 6994]
The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred
the bill (H.R. 6994) to require the reopening of covered
recreation sites closed due to a natural disaster, and for
other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably
thereon with an amendment and recommends that the bill as
amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Restoring Our Unopened Trails for
Enjoyment and Safety Act'' or the ``ROUTES Act''.
SEC. 2. REOPENING OF COVERED RECREATION SITES CLOSED DUE TO NATURAL
DISASTERS.
(a) Reopening Required.--In the case of a covered recreation site
that is fully or partially closed due to personal injury or damage
caused by a natural disaster, the Secretary concerned shall--
(1) reopen such covered recreation site not later than 3
years after the date on which such natural disaster ends, as
determined by the Secretary concerned; and
(2) if the covered recreation site is not reopened on or
before the date described in paragraph (1), not later than 30
days after such date and every 90 days thereafter during which
such site remains closed, submit to Congress a report
identifying the barriers to reopening such site.
(b) Categorical Exclusion for Covered Recreation Site Restoration.--
(1) Categorical exclusion established.--Activities described
in paragraph (2) are a category of actions hereby designated as
being categorically excluded from the preparation of an
environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement
under section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332).
(2) Activities designated for categorical exclusion.--The
activities designated under this section for a categorical
exclusion are activities carried out by the Secretary concerned
on Interior recreational lands or National Forest System lands
where the primary purpose of such activity is, consistent with
the land use plan applicable to such lands, to--
(A) repair and restore covered recreation sites
damaged by a natural disaster;
(B) remove or mitigate hazard trees for the purpose
of public safety, protection of property, or improving
access to a covered recreation site;
(C) mitigate and reduce soil erosion impacting a
covered recreation site;
(D) restore drainage patterns to support a covered
recreation site; or
(E) any combination of the purposes specified in
subparagraphs (A) through (D).
(3) Availability of categorical exclusion.--On and after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary concerned may
use the categorical exclusion established under paragraph (1)
in accordance with this subsection.
(4) Extraordinary circumstances.--The activities
categorically excluded under paragraph (1) shall be subject to
the extraordinary circumstances procedures established pursuant
to section 1501.4 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (or
any successor regulation).
(c) Emergency Hazard Tree Removal.--
(1) National forest system lands.--With respect to the
removal or mitigation of hazard trees located on a parcel of
National Forest System land, during the 3-year period after a
natural disaster on such parcel ends, as determined by the
Secretary of Agriculture, section 220.4(b) of title 36, Code of
Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of the enactment
of this Act) shall have the force and effect of law with
respect to such parcel.
(2) Interior recreational lands.--With respect to the removal
and mitigation of hazard trees located on Interior recreational
lands, during the 3-year period after a natural disaster on
such parcel ends, as determined by the Secretary of the
Interior, section 46.150 of title 43, Code of Federal
Regulations (as in effect on the date of the enactment of this
Act) shall have the force and effect of law with respect to
such parcel.
(d) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment
of this Act, the Secretary concerned shall submit to Congress, and make
publicly available on the website of the Department of the Interior and
the Department of Agriculture, a report that includes the number of
covered recreation sites--
(1) that have been reopened pursuant to subsection (a)(1);
and
(2) that, as of the date of such report, are closed due to
damage caused by a natural disaster and the date such natural
disaster ended, as determined by the Secretary concerned.
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Covered recreation site.--The term ``covered recreation
site'' means--
(A) a campground or developed day-use recreation site
that--
(i) is operated by the Secretary concerned;
and
(ii) is located on Interior recreational
lands or National Forest System lands; or
(B) a road or trail that--
(i) is under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary concerned;
(ii) used to access or serve a campground or
developed day-use recreation site described in
subparagraph (A); and
(iii) is located on Interior recreational
lands or National Forest System lands.
(2) Hazard tree.--The term ``hazard tree'' means a standing
tree that presents a visible hazard to people or property due
to conditions such as the deterioration of, or damage to--
(A) the root system, trunk, stem, or limbs of the
tree; or
(B) the direction or lean of the tree.
(3) Interior recreational lands.--The term ``Interior
recreational lands'' means lands managed by the National Park
Service, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the
Bureau of Land Management, or the Bureau of Reclamation.
(4) 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)).
(5) Natural disaster.--The term ``natural disaster'' includes
a wildfire, flood, hurricane, windstorm, erosion, and tornado.
(6) Secretary concerned.--The term ``Secretary concerned''
means--
(A) the Secretary of the Interior, with respect to
Interior recreational lands; or
(B) the Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to
National Forest System lands.
PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION
The purpose of H.R. 6994 is to require the reopening of
covered recreation sites closed due to a natural disaster, and
for other purposes.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
Wildfires, hurricanes, and other natural disasters
increasingly threaten the federal lands that Americans rely
upon for multiple uses, including outdoor recreation. As
wildfires have grown in size, severity, and frequency in recent
years, they have disproportionately affected outdoor recreation
activities.\1\ Between 2020 and 2021, 1,029 U.S. Forest Service
(USFS) recreation sites were damaged by wildfires, costing $126
million.\2\ Over the past five years, wildfires negatively
affected 23,750 trail miles; 1,360 climbing sites; and 1,708
miles of whitewater paddling runs.\3\ Additionally, a 2023
report on camping in the United States reported that 18.1
percent of campers, or roughly 1 out of every 5, changed or
cancelled plans due to the disruption caused by natural
disasters.\4\ In fact, the mere threat of wildfires also
consistently leads to closures at national forests, national
parks, and other federal lands.\5\ This is not simply an
inconvenience to Americans looking to recreate outdoors during
summer months. Rather, prolonged closures and reduced
recreation visits put small businesses, and the rural
communities that rely upon them, in serious economic jeopardy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\U.S. Department of Agriculture, ``Wildfires in All Seasons?'',
Deb Schweizer, June 27, 2019, https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2019/06/
27/wildfires-all-seasons.
\2\Outdoor Alliance, ``Wildfire and Outdoor Recreation in the
West,'' July 2023, https://static1.squarespace.com/static/
54aabb14e4b01142027654ee/t/649dcd388c9dbf73648c777d/1688063291777/
WildfireAndRecreation-WhitePaper-OutdoorAlliance-Digital.pdf.
\3\Id.
\4\The Dyrt, ``2023 Camping Report'', https://reports.thedyrt.com/
2023-camping-report/.
\5\Id. Mammoth Times, ``All CA National Forests Close Aug. 31,
Including Inyo'', August 31, 2021, https://www.mammothtimes.com/news/
all-ca-national-forests-close-aug-31-including-inyo/article_2787f8ee-
09f9-11ec-8341-136de779b7fa.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While a wildfire can cause extensive, initial damage to
recreation destinations, subsequent threats such as ``hazard
trees,'' flooding, and erosion often lead to lengthy, and
sometimes indefinite, closures of trails and campgrounds.\6\
These closures persist while land managers struggle to restore
recreation areas for public use.\7\ Local organizations that
support outdoor recreation on federal lands report that federal
land management agencies often ``close mountain roads and
trails for several years as the landscape heals after a fire
rolls through an area.''\8\ For example, the 2018 Holy Fire,
which burned more than 23,000 acres in the Cleveland National
Forest in California, damaged several popular trails and
recreation sites in the forest.\9\ The Holy Fire led to lengthy
closures of recreation areas that were extended twice over a
three year period.\10\ Although USFS reopened more than 10,000
acres of the forest in 2021, several popular trails remain
closed to this day.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\Id.
\7\Id.
\8\Crosscut and Cascade PBS, ``How wildfires are impacting outdoor
recreation in Washington'', Andrew Engelson, August 24, 2023, https://
crosscut.com/environment/2023/08/how-wildfires-are-impacting-outdoor-
recreation-washington.
\9\U.S. Forest Service, ``Holy Fire Burned Area Closure'', https://
www.fs.usda.gov/detail/
cleveland/home/?cid=FSEPRD590615.
\10\Orange County Register, ``3 years after Holy fire, 10000 more
acres reopen in Cleveland National Forest'', Tess Sheets, October 22,
2021, https://www.ocregister.com/2021/10/22/thousands-of-acres-reopen-
in-cleveland-national-forest-after-2018-holy-fire/.
\11\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beyond wildfires, natural disasters of all varieties can
cause destruction and prevent access and enjoyment of federal
lands. Most recently, extreme winds caused by Hurricane Helene
resulted in catastrophic damage to federal forests in states
like North Carolina, with millions of trees leveled across more
than 200 miles.\12\ In 2022, historic flooding in Yellowstone
National Park severely damaged roads, destroyed homes, and
felled trees, leading National Park Service (NPS) officials to
warn that portions of the park could remain closed for a
``substantial length of time.''\13\ Similarly, in 2019, a
massive derecho, or windstorm, swept through Northern
Wisconsin, leveling hundreds of thousands of trees.\14\ USFS
officials in Wisconsin predicted that full recovery from the
event could take up to 10 years.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\Ducroquet et al., ``Where the trees once stood,'' November 9,
2024, https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/interactive/
2024/hurricane-helene-forest-damage-north-carolina/.
\13\Fox News, ``Parts of Yellowstone could remain closed for
`substantial length' after flooding'', Julia Musto, June 15, 2022,
https://www.foxnews.com/us/yellowstone-closed-substantial-length-
flooding.
\14\Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, ``It could take 10 years for
Wisconsin to recover from the violent July wind storm that wrecked
northern forests'', Larry Parnass, October 23, 2019, https://
www.jsonline.com/story/news/special-reports/2019/10/23/wisconsin-july-
2019-derecho-wind-storm-affect-economy-decade/4047898002/.
\15\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While there are a confluence of factors contributing to
these prolonged delays, the costly and burdensome National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process is the primary factor
driving these delays. For example, in 2020 and 2021, California
experienced ``expansive stretches of fire-killed or damaged
trees adjacent to roads, trails, and facilities'' that posed an
immediate threat to life and safety.\16\ While USFS tried to
take immediate action to address these threats in October 2021,
a combination of ``project planning and Endangered Species Act
(ESA) consultation'' taking longer than expected, and the
length of time needed for public involvement and pre-decisional
administrative reviews threatened to delay action until 2023 at
the earliest.\17\ Notably, funding constraints were not cited
among the litany of reasons why these projects would face
delays. In 2022, Region 5 of USFS (which covers California)
requested emergency authority to abate hazard trees prior to
the completion of the NEPA process.\18\ This allowed the
Lassen, Plumas, Shasta-Trinity, and Sierra National Forests to
immediately address hazard tree threats to approximately 167
miles of roads and 18 developed recreation sites.\19\ Within 5
months, the Region address nearly 80 miles of hazard trees and
reopened ``2.5 recreation sites'' that would have otherwise
remained closed for over a year.\20\ In November 2024, USFS
announced it would again utilize this emergency authority to
address ``hazards to public health and safety, critical
infrastructure, and to mitigate hazards to natural resources
like streams flooded with wood debris or sediments'', downed
vegetation, and other fire hazards.\21\ While these actions
were incredibly successful, they have not been expanded
nationwide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\USFS, Decision Memorandum for the Chief, July 7, 2022, file:///
C:/Users/abutler1/Downloads/DecisionMemorandum.pdf.
\17\Id.
\18\Id.
\19\Id.
\20\USFS, ``R5 Post-disturbance Hazardous Tree Mgmt. Emergency
Response Status of Implementation,'' December 20, 2022, https://usfs-
public.app.box.com/v/PinyonPublic/file/1117031333691.
\21\USFS, ``USDA Forest Service Uses Post-Hurricane Emergency
Authority,'' November 13, 2024, https://www.fs.usda.gov/about-agency/
newsroom/releases/usda-forest-service-uses-post-
hurricane-emergency-authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a clear need to provide additional tools and
direction to the federal land management agencies to increase
restoration activities on federal lands impacted by natural
disasters so that popular recreation destinations can reopen as
soon as possible post-disturbance. H.R. 6994, the ``Restoring
Our Unopened Trails for Enjoyment and Safety (ROUTES) Act,''
would require federal land managers to prioritize reopening
trails, campsites, recreation areas, and roads within three
years of a closure caused by a natural disaster. If a site is
not successfully reopened in this timeframe, the bill requires
regular reporting to Congress to hold the agencies accountable.
To accomplish the reopening of recreation sites, the bill
provides important streamlining tools such as a new categorical
exclusion that would expedite necessary restoration activities.
These restoration activities include repairing damaged sites,
removing hazard trees, mitigating soil erosion, and restoring
drainage patterns. This bill would also codify existing
emergency authorities being used to remove hazard trees in
California and the Southeast to implement this successful tool
nationwide. By providing new tools on a broad scale, the ROUTES
Act will ensure federal land managers prioritize efforts to
reopen popular recreation areas safely and on time.
COMMITTEE ACTION
H.R. 6994 was introduced on January 16, 2024 by Rep. Young
Kim (R-CA). The bill was referred to the Committee on Natural
Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on
Federal Lands. The bill was also referred to the Committee on
Agriculture. On January 31, 2024, the Subcommittee on Federal
Lands held a hearing on the bill. On November 20, 2024, the
Committee on Natural Resources met to consider the bill. The
Subcommittee on Federal Lands was discharged from further
consideration of H.R. 6994 by unanimous consent. Chairman Bruce
Westerman (R-AR) offered an Amendment in the Nature of a
Substitute designated Westerman ANS. The amendment in the
nature of a substitute was agreed to by voice vote. The bill,
as amended, was ordered favorably reported to the House of
Representatives by voice vote.
HEARINGS
For the purposes of clause 3(c)(6) of House rule XIII, the
following hearing was used to develop or consider this measure:
hearing by the Subcommittee on Federal Lands held on January
31, 2024.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1. Short title
Section 1 names the bill the ``Restoring Our Unopened
Trails for Enjoyment and Safety Act'' or the ``ROUTES Act''.
Section 2. Reopening of covered recreation sites closed due to natural
disasters
Section 2 requires the Department of the Interior (DOI) and
the U.S. Forest Service to reopen federally owned and operated
trails, campgrounds, developed day use recreation sites, and
roads that serve a recreation site, within three years of a
closure caused by a natural disaster. If a site is not reopened
within three years after the natural disaster ends, Section 2
requires a quarterly report to be submitted to Congress
identifying barriers to reopening such site.
Section 2 creates a new categorical exclusion under the
National Environmental Policy Act for repairing and restoring
recreation sites damaged by a natural disaster; removing or
mitigating hazard trees for the purpose of protecting public
safety and property or improving access; mitigating and
reducing soil erosion; and restoring drainage patterns to
support recreation sites. The Secretaries of Interior and
Agriculture may use the categorical exclusion starting on the
date of enactment of the bill and must comply with
extraordinary circumstances procedures.
Furthermore, Section 2 codifies emergency regulations to
remove or mitigate hazard trees on National Forest System or
DOI recreational lands within three years after the end of a
natural disaster.
Lastly, Section 2 requires the DOI and the USFS to provide
a report to Congress on recreation sites reopened under the
legislation and sites that remain closed.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Natural Resources' oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.
COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII AND
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT
1. Cost of Legislation and the Congressional Budget Act.
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of House rule XIII and section
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, and pursuant to
clause 3(c)(3) of House rule XIII and section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has requested
but not received from the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office a budgetary analysis and a cost estimate of this bill.
2. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or
objective of this bill is to require the reopening of covered
recreation sites closed due to a natural disaster, and for
other purposes.
EARMARK STATEMENT
This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined
under clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of
the House of Representatives.
UNFUNDED MANDATES REFORM ACT STATEMENT
An estimate of federal mandates prepared by the Director of
the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 423 of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act was not made available to the
Committee in time for the filing of this report. The Chair of
the Committee shall cause such estimate to be printed in the
Congressional Record upon its receipt by the Committee, if such
estimate is not publicly available on the Congressional Budget
Office website.
EXISTING PROGRAMS
Directed Rule Making. This bill does not contain any
directed rule makings.
Duplication of Existing Programs. This bill does not
establish or reauthorize a program of the federal government
known to be duplicative of another program. Such program was
not included in any report from the Government Accountability
Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139
or identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance published pursuant to the Federal Program
Information Act (Public Law 95-220, as amended by Public Law
98-169) as relating to other programs.
APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public
services or accommodations within the meaning of section
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.
PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW
Any preemptive effect of this bill over state, local, or
tribal law is intended to be consistent with the bill's
purposes and text and the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the
U.S. Constitution.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
As ordered reported by the Committee on Natural Resources,
H.R. 6994 would make no changes in existing law.
DISSENTING VIEWS
H.R. 6994 would require the Secretaries of the Interior and
Agriculture to reopen recreation sites (trails, campgrounds,
developed day-use sites or roads) that have been closed or
partially closed due to damage caused by natural disasters
(including hazard trees) within two years after the date of the
disaster. Apparently as an attempt to facilitate this process,
the bill would establish a broad categorical exclusion (CE)
under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for projects
that seek to restore a covered recreation site or access to a
covered recreation site. H.R. 6994 would also designate
hazardous tree removal activities within the two-year period
after a natural disaster located on covered parcels of Forest
System or Interior lands as ``emergency responses,'' which can
be undertaken prior to the completion of a NEPA analysis.
The use of broad CE authority established by this
legislation would be the wrong approach for reopening damaged
recreation sites. Existing law and regulations already allow
for the administrative use and establishment of CEs if a
project does not have a significant effect on the human
environment. NEPA already includes guidance and regulations
that allow for quick or emergency response when deemed acutely
necessary. In fact, the U.S. Forest Service testimony on the
bill emphasized that they already have the legal authorities
needed to conduct this work, including CEs to open trails,
roads, and campgrounds.\1\ Land management agencies have also
demonstrated that they are willing and able to use existing
authorities if doing so is safe and necessary to open
recreation sites.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\United States Forest Service, Statement of Greg Smith, Associate
Deputy Chief of the National Forest System, Before the House Natural
Resources Committee on H.R. 6994, (Jan. 2024). Available online at:
https://naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/testimony_smith.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, the NEPA-related provisions in this legislation are
inapt to the stated purposes for such provisions. If a site is
closed for an extended period, it is typically due to
outstanding safety concerns, ecological or landscape resilience
concerns, or a lack of resources and staff capacity--not a lack
of available permitting or environmental review options.
H.R. 6994 does not include any language that requires the
recreation site to be safe before reopening or that the
landscape be sufficiently recovered after a natural disaster.
This is a dangerous precedent. The Forest Service called the
deadline for reopening sites ``arbitrary'' and suggested that
such a requirement would create additional risk to federal
employees and to the public--the very recreators we should be
protecting.\2\ The bill would remove any flexibility that
federal land managers might need in order to account for
complex repairs, patron safety, or landscape health in exchange
for unnecessary streamlined permitting--metrics that could
normally be identified through proper environmental review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the markup, Chair Westerman offered an Amendment in
the Nature of a Substitute (ANS), which extended the deadline
from the original two-year period to a three-year deadline.
While it is significant that the majority is listening to the
warnings that we have been raising since this bill was
introduced, the ANS does not address the underlying issues with
H.R. 6994. The deadline is still arbitrary and requiring such
processes from federal land management agencies poses a serious
threat.
This bill will put the agency in the position either of
prematurely opening a site that isn't restored and/or poses
serious danger or of violating the law by keeping the site
closed.
Strangely, the majority seems aware of this serious
deficiency in the bill, because the Chair's ANS itself adds a
reporting scheme for land managers to explain to congress the
reasons for keeping a site closed beyond this bill's mandatory
three-year reopening deadline. It's a bit of a red flag when a
bill promises improvements but then includes last-minute
language that anticipates that the bill's own deadlines will
prove to be wishful thinking.
Further, H.R. 6994 would codify the use of NEPA's emergency
alternative arrangements to address hazard trees located
anywhere within a parcel of public land affected by a natural
disaster. As written, this authority is not limited to covered
recreation sites, nor is it required to be near a publicly
accessible trail or road. The lack of basic limitations on this
authority is concerning. There is no requirement that the
Secretary identify if the tree is likely to fall and if so,
cause injury or damage. There is no requirement for the tree to
be within a certain number of feet from a road or trail. Under
such broad authority, the hazard tree section of H.R. 6994
could result in an unchecked use of ``emergency authority'' for
the purpose of salvage logging. Such broad authority is not
necessary to address hazard trees, nor is it an appropriate use
of NEPA's emergency process.
Agencies like the Forest Service are chronically
underfunded and facing extreme staffing shortages. Uncertainty
in relation to the yearly budget is directly tied to project
delays and management challenges. Such challenges are often
mistakenly attributed--or perhaps sometimes intentionally
misattributed--to the process of environmental review.
H.R. 6994 would ignore the ongoing problem of these budget
challenges--the real cause of delayed reopenings--and would
instead place arbitrary deadlines and mandates on land managers
without providing any additional resources to safely reopen
recreation sites, and indeed even without a basic requirement
to ensure safety at all.
Raul M. Grijalva,
Ranking Member.
[all]