"Reviewing Partnerships to Enhance Management of the National Forest System"
Legende
Markierungen im Transkript
- Text Aktuell abgespielter Satz
- Text Suchergebnis
- Text Redebeitrag, auf den der geöffnete Link verweist
Klicken Sie auf einen Satz, um das Video ab dieser Stelle abzuspielen. Markieren Sie Text, um ihn mit Redner, Zeitstempel und Link zu zitieren.
Weitere Optionen
House Subcommittee on Forestry and Horticulture U.S. House of Representatives
Andrea Salinas
Despite the threat wildfires pose to Oregon and much of the West, this administration is taking steps that make us all less safe. Specifically, the reorganization of the Forest Service and the administration's consolidation of wildfire response under the Department of Interior are causing chaos in our communities and are creating more questions than answers about the future of forest management. These changes come at what I consider a very dangerous time, right as wildfire season is taking hold with 2.7 million acres already burned nationwide this year, exceeding the 10-year average for both fires and acres burned to date. On top of the administration's changes to the Forest Service, their work, or lack thereof, to reduce hazardous fuels in our forests is particularly alarming. From 2024 to 2025, the Forest Service treated roughly 25% fewer acres of hazardous fuels.
And in Oregon, treatments were down 47% in that period. Treating hazardous fuels must be the absolute top priority of the agency. A forest that is vulnerable to wildfire cannot deliver the same ecosystem benefits as a treated forest. And I'm talking about benefits like recreation opportunities, timber production, clean water, wildlife habitat, and carbon sequestration. The steep decline in hazardous fuels work since 2025, coupled with our changing climate, will only lead us to one outcome: catastrophic wildfires and decimating communities.
To make things worse, the Trump administration's fiscal year 2017 budget included an approximate 43% cut to the Forest Service budget. And that's if we do not include the loss of funding as part of the proposal to move wildfire operations from Forest Service to the Department of Interior. This budget proposal eliminates state, private, and tribal forestry, eliminates forest and rangeland research, and cuts important programs like the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program that meaningfully improve the health and resilience of our forests. At the same time the Trump administration is calling for states and partners to take on more of the burden in managing our forests, they are cutting all support for this work. The collapse in hazardous fuels acres is just one obvious symptom of this misguided approach.
This is not the time for removing opportunities for collaboration, active forest management, and real progress. We know what effective forest management looks like. What we need is a path to move forward, to work together, and to invest in active forest management. We need prescribed fires, hazardous fuel reduction, targeted thinning and timber harvests, and other practices that reduce wildfire risk to communities and restore balance to our forests after decades of overly aggressive fire suppression.
Partnerships are the backbone of the National Forest System, and they are necessary to complete the work on the ground that keeps our forests productive, healthy, and safe for the public. They are even more important right now, considering these catastrophic changes the Trump administration is making. This subcommittee has a responsibility to ensure the Forest Service can be effective, and we must work alongside one another to expand collaborative forest management, reinforce those partnerships between all who care for our forest, and keep our focus squarely on protecting people, communities, drinking water sources, and ecosystems. I am eager to hear from our witnesses and to work together to chart a path forward that will help us ensure our nation's forests are managed in a way that keeps them productive, resilient, and healthy. Thank you all.
Dan Newhouse
Thank you, Ms. Salinas. Thank you very much. We're delighted today to have the chairman of the full committee, Mr. GT Thompson, from the great state of Pennsylvania. So now I recognize Chairman Thompson for any opening comments he'd like to make.
Glenn Thompson
Thanks, Chairman. Well, good morning, everyone. And I want to thank Chairman Newhouse and Ranking Member Salinas for holding this subcommittee hearing today on the importance of partnerships for the health of our nation's forests. I'd like to add my thoughts to the chairman's, taking a moment to recognize our great friend Doug LaMalfa. Doug certainly would have many thoughts and insights into today's discussion.
He's a great friend, a chairman, and he is missed. With that, I'd also like to acknowledge Chairman Newhouse as the new subcommittee chair and Representative Valadao as a new member of both the full committee and this subcommittee. As for today's hearing, partnerships with the Forest Service greatly benefit Pennsylvania's 15th District by directly supporting forest health, bolstering the forest products industry, expanding recreation opportunities on public lands, and similar impacts are felt in areas near Forest Service in 40 different states. To me, it's common sense that the current forest health crisis and the issues facing our forest products industry share a common solution, and that's increasing active management and sustainable timber harvest levels to benefit both ecological health and rural communities. While this committee has continued to support the Forest Service through partnerships, much more can be done, starting with swift passage of a new farm bill.
I'm proud to say that we have worked diligently over the last few years to ensure the Farm, Food, and National Security Act has a robust forestry title that will broaden and strengthen the Forest Service toolbox for active forest management, including enhancements to authorities that allow them to engage in critical partnerships with organizations like those that we have sitting before us today. These improvements have become increasingly important in recent years as wildfires and forest health crisis in this country has continued. And this is why the time to act is now. I'm proud of the work that the House Committee on Agriculture has done over the last several years, and I'm proud of the bipartisan vote that our farm bill recently received on the floor of the House. With the release of text this week, I strongly encourage the Senate to act on a new farm bill as soon as possible.
It is long overdue, and millions of people around this country depend on its passage for certainty in a wide variety of lines of work. And so, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
Dan Newhouse
Thank you, Mr. Thompson. If Ms. Craig from Minnesota does come, we would be happy to recognize her for any opening comments. And I would request that other members submit their opening statements for the record so the witnesses may begin their testimony and ensure that we have ample time for questions.
So, our first witness today is Mr. Ned Coe. He's the supervisor of Modoc County, California. So welcome, Mr. Coe. Our next witness is Mr. Travis Joseph. He's the president and CEO of the American Forest Resource Council and no stranger to Washington, D.C.
So welcome. Our third witness today is Mr. Tracy Glover, who is the sheriff of Kane County, Utah. So welcome, Mr. Glover. And next I would yield to my ranking member to introduce our next witness, Ms. Salinas.
Redner 9
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Witness intro, thank you. I'm pleased to welcome Molly Whitney, executive director of Cascade Forest Conservancy, who we will hear from today. In that role, she oversees the conservancy's work with local stakeholders to advocate for sustainable land management and participates in two forest collaboratives in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest that directly participate in project planning with the Forest Service as well as other tribes, timber interests, and other stakeholders. Ms. Whitney holds a bachelor's degree in environmental science with a focus in water from Linfield College, which is in my district.
She brings a diverse background in conservation stemming from her deep appreciation for the Pacific Northwest landscape and her desire to protect, sustain, and restore its important ecosystems. Prior to her current role with Cascade Forest Conservancy, oh thank you, Ms. Whitney served as development director at WaterWatch of Oregon. Previously, she was program manager of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation's Columbia Basin Water Transaction Program. She also served on the board of the Tualatin Riverkeepers and currently serves on the board of Mount St. Helens Institute. As a native Oregonian, Ms. Whitney has a lifelong relationship with the Cascades and brings a real enthusiasm for its protection and restoration.
I am eager to hear from her today to understand the perspective she will bring to this subcommittee. Ms. Whitney, thank you for joining us today. I yield back.
Dan Newhouse
Thank you, and I just want to again express my thanks to all of the witnesses for joining us today. So we'll now proceed to the most important part of the hearing, your testimony. You'll each get five minutes. The timer is right there in front of you. It will count down to zero, at which point your time has expired.
So, Mr. Coe, please begin.
Ned Coe
Thank you, Chair Newhouse, and thank you for the kind comments in regards to the passing of my previous congressman, Congressman LaMalfa, and close friend of over three decades. Good morning, Chair Newhouse and Ranking Member Salinas and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on behalf of the National Association of Counties, or NACo. My name is Ned Coe. I serve on the Modoc County Board of Supervisors and I am second vice president of the NACo's Western Interstate Region.
Modoc County is the third least populated county in California with 70 plus percent being federally owned. National forest management is not an abstract issue for us. It directly affects our roads, schools, emergency services, and our local economy. I'm here today to share what genuine federal-county partnership looks like in practice. That partnership operates on three levels: counties as fiscal partners, as operational partners, and as intergovernmental partners.
In counties like mine, where so much of the land is federally owned and therefore not taxable, programs like Secure Rural Schools are not optional. They are essential. Secure Rural Schools help support county roads, schools, and local capacity that makes partnership with the Federal Forest Service possible in the first place. Title II of SRS is especially important because it supports Resource Advisory Committees, or RACs. In Modoc County, our RAC brings together county government, Forest Service, ranchers, environmental interests, and other local stakeholders to identify and recommend projects that improve forest health and meet local needs.
Through that process, we have supported projects like stock water wells, fuels reduction, habitat restoration. These projects benefit livestock operations, improve emergency fire suppression capacity, and strengthen the long-term resilience of the forest. But none of this happens without stable funding. Counties cannot plan, hire, or build durable partnerships one year at a time. NACO urges Congress to enact a long-term or permanent reauthorization of Secure Rural Schools before the program lapses again.
Stable funding ensures counties as operational partners. An example of what this looks like in Modoc County is the Devil's Horse Colt Challenge, and I ask you to refer to my written comments on more details on this. But most importantly, Modoc's Shared Stewardship Program. Federal staffing vacancies are one of the biggest barriers of effective forest management in the West, and we built a solution to this. Through this program, University of California Cooperative Extension recruits, trains short-term employees.
The Modoc County Farm Bureau serves as the employer of record. The Forest Service then gains qualified workers who are immediately able to help get work done on the ground. This program has been operational in the county for over five years now. In the most recent field season, 43 workers logged more than 1,800 hours. They performed more than 700 miles of trail road maintenance, completing grazing allotment surveys, supported fuels and vegetation work, helped with timber sale production preparation, conducted hydrologic, archaeological, and botany wildlife surveys, supported NEPA work, maintained campgrounds, and assisted in public education programs.
The third level is partnership with formal standing in federal planning and decision-making. Modoc County, we have a standing coordination committee with the Modoc National Forest. Each month, two members of the Board of Supervisors, our natural resources advisor, and our farm advisor meet directly with forest leadership. These meetings help ensure local input shapes federal decisions on forest health, wildfire reduction, grazing, roads, and water infrastructure. NACO urges Congress three things: reauthorize Secure Rural Schools, support Shared Stewardship Programs, and encourage Forest Service to establish regular coordination structures with county governments.
Please refer to my written testimony for additional comments, and I would entertain questions at the appropriate time.
Thank you.
Redner 3
Thank you, Mr. Cole. Appreciate that very much. Next, I would recognize Mr. Glover. You may begin when you're ready. Thank you.
Tracy Glover
Thank you, Chairman Newhouse, Ranking Member Salinas, and members of the committee. My name is Tracy Glover. I'm the sheriff in Kane County, Utah, the president of the Utah Sheriffs' Association, as well as the president of the Western States Sheriffs' Association, who I represent here today. Our Association of Western States covers 19 western states and over 1,100 sheriffs. As you know, the US Forest Service manages about 200 million acres of land in national forests that are truly a national treasure.
These lands deserve resource protection and sound management. America's sheriffs invest time and treasure every day to support that national forest management. There is ample evidence that sheriffs are all in as viable partners in this important work. We have great respect for the US Forest Service law enforcement officers that we work alongside every single day in the field, and we commend them for their work. At the management level, however, our relationship is fracturing.
I'm here today to ask Congress, through this committee, to help sheriffs move forward and recover these relationships, returning to a level of mutual respect. I want to touch on three quick things to that point. First, criminal jurisdiction and police power. In our country, states and therefore local subdivisions hold the authority to police the people. While sometimes confusing, criminal legislative jurisdiction is reserved to state and local governments.
As the only elected law enforcement branch within any form of government, sheriffs are often in the position of holding the line on these matters. While we appreciate the interest of limited federal law enforcement jurisdiction by Congress, agencies within the executive branch have generally pushed back and with some success passed rules and regulations that are sort of a workaround to the principles of limited jurisdiction. We're here today to ask this committee to work with sheriffs to arrive at a solution to one such issue: the criminal prohibitions rule. A little bit of background: in 2011, the Forest Service law enforcement folks reached out to our association with their intent to institute this criminal prohibitions rule. It would dramatically increase the stance of federal law enforcement and their authority on federal national forests.
After some difficult discussions, negotiations, and meetings, we pushed back and the idea was shelved. Fast forward: in 2024, a slightly watered-down version of the rule was put forward on the Federal Register. This time, sheriffs were not given any significant notice. Our association and others participated by providing public comment on the Federal Register. And while the rule disproportionately affects sheriffs, we were not afforded any appropriate level of coordination.
After providing public comment, asking for specific changes to be made, the final rule was adopted and published on December 26th of 2024 with no significant modifications. At that time, we met with the US Forest Service administrators, who appear at least so far to not have any interest in modifying the rule. A CRA was filed by Congresswoman Celeste Maloy, but with the difficult timing of a government shutdown, it ended up timing out without action. Representative Maloy then filed HR 6802 in this Congress, which is active and I believe assigned to this committee, and would simply require that the criminal prohibitions rule would not have any force or effect.
The primary reason I'm here today on behalf of American Sheriffs is to ask this committee to advance HR 6802 as a priority bill. Help sheriffs hold an important baseline of local jurisdiction and find a better path forward. We are committed to working together with the agency to come to a more appropriate solution if we get the chance. Shifting gears, I want to touch just briefly on a different program called the Cooperative Law Enforcement Agreement Program. As many of you know, sheriffs across the country provide law enforcement services on our national forests under cooperative law enforcement agreements.
A little context, in 1985, the program was funded at about 7.5 million nationwide, and in 1993, that amount dropped to 5 million. Today, roughly 41 years later, the funding remains at $5 million. During that time frame, you can imagine sheriffs have dealt with marked cost increases in our operations. For example, I looked at the Social Security cost of living index and cost of living adjustments have increased by 138% in that same time frame. The cost of a Ford F-150 truck in 1985 was about $15,000, today it's about 70,000 to get it fully equipped.
With US Forest Service staffing shortages and special assignments, fire details, etc., sheriffs are being asked to do more and more on national forests, which we embrace to a degree. We respectfully ask that this committee review the program and bring it up to a 2026 funding standard. And with that, I appreciate your time and I look forward to answering any questions.
Thank you, Mr. Sheriff. Mr. Joseph, you may begin when you are ready.
Travis Joseph
My name is Travis Joseph, I'm the president and CEO of the American Forest Resource Council. I thank you for this opportunity. Chairman Newhouse, Ranking Member Salinas, members of the committee, good morning. We have the privilege of representing the forest products sector, many of the mills, the loggers, the truck drivers, the contractors, and the supply chains that actively manage and steward our national forests that belong to all Americans. We are critical partners of the Forest Service, and we have been since the agency's founding 120 years ago.
We want to be partners to help manage national forests for another 120 years. Our members buy federal timber on the most regulated lands on planet Earth, our national forests. We harvest using the best science and the most advanced forest practices in the world. We bring federal timber to local mills, and we make all kinds of wood products that are essential to society, from housing and construction to paper and packaging to medicine and food and renewable energy and fuel. That's just the start.
We do so much more. Our members grow and plant millions of seedlings on private and federal lands. We do wildfire detection and suppression. We do wildfire prevention work. We do fish and wildlife habitat restoration work, trail and construction, road repair and maintenance.
Across this country, the forest products sector employs tens of thousands of certified foresters, engineers, scientists, welders, mechanics, heavy equipment operators, IT professionals, accountants, lawyers, and drone pilots, just to name a few. We care deeply about our health and the resiliency of our national forests. The plight of our communities and our businesses are intertwined with the plight of our federal forests. It's where we hike, it's where we camp, it's where we hunt, it's where we fish, it's where we work. And as those who work in and near our national forests every day, we can tell you that the scale of our federal forest and health crisis is staggering.
It's now estimated that between 80 and 100 million acres of national forest are at high risk of catastrophic wildfire, disease, and insect infestations. We stand at a critical moment. The status quo is not working, and it's putting these public forests and all their invaluable benefits to society at risk.
We're problem solvers. We share common interests: managing our national forests and taking care of our communities. We have two pictures in front of you. The one right now is up on the screen. You have two pictures in your your packets.
This first one here is from the Archie Creek fire in Oregon. This forest stand is dead. And the forest stands as far as you can see from the ridge top are dead. I took this picture myself two weeks ago. That fire occurred six years ago.
It's a shocking sight to see in person. That area will likely never regenerate naturally because the fire burned so hot. And that's what that forest stand will look like in the future for your kids and your grandkids and your great-grandkids. This is not environmentalism. This is not good stewardship.
It's neglect and it's wrong. That's one picture of one fire during one year on one national forest. And I'm sharing it with you because I want you to see where the status quo of federal forest management is taking us. Similar environmental catastrophes like this exist on national forests in all western states. The second picture is a picture of a shaded fuel break in Northern California along a major highway corridor.
And this is what a successful partnership looks like. In this case, a neighboring private forest landowner, Sierra Pacific Industries, SPI, worked with the Forest Service, Cal Fire firefighters and experts and partners on the ground to create defensible space in strategic locations to help prevent the kinds of wildfires that have wiped out entire forests and communities in California. I took this picture last week. This is important work. It's proactive, it's intentional, it can save property and infrastructure, taxpayer dollars, and most importantly, it can help save communities and lives.
That's one picture of one partnership on one at-risk landscape on one national forest. And I'm sharing it because it represents what's possible. One forest products company or other forest products company and members of AFRC, we're doing amazing work like this all over the West. We need to do more and we need to do it faster. If the Forest Service was able to fully leverage the assets and expertise of all its partners, the potential is limitless.
That's the exciting part, and that's also where Congress comes in. Right, we're not oblivious to all of the challenges that are in front of the Forest Service right now. We're asking Congress to zoom out, to look at the current system of how we manage national forests. We need to rethink our approach. We need to ask important questions.
What outcomes do we want from our national forests? Are we achieving those outcomes? If not, why? And how do we align and modernize our approach, our laws and regulations to deal with 21st century challenges to create new opportunities and new partnerships on national forests? Creative powerful relationships and solutions exist.
Good forestry and good forest stewardship is not a partisan issue. Partnerships are essential. In fact, I would argue it's the only way that Congress and the Forest Service are going to be able to deliver better environmental, social and economic outcomes for the American public. Count the forest products industry in. We're here, we're at the table.
Thank you. We want durable bipartisan solutions. We're here to ask how do we help you, Congress, to build and grow partnerships into the future. We want healthy forests and healthy communities.
Thank you, Mr. Josephson. Ms. Whitney, please begin when you're ready.
Molly Whitney
Chairman Newhouse, Ranking Member Salinas and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to join you today. I'm Molly Whitney, the executive director of the Cascade Forest Conservancy.
In the past, that role has often put us at odds with the Forest Service and led to litigation, but today we increasingly engage with the agency as a collaborative partner. We work closely with the Forest Service on forest management, watershed restoration, and economic resilience. My organization is an active and founding member of two forest collaboratives that have improved forest management and community outcomes throughout our region: the South Gifford Pinchot Collaborative and the Pinchot Partners. These forest collaboratives are stakeholder groups that provide feedback throughout the Forest Service project planning to develop well-balanced, publicly supported projects and iron out conflicts without slow, costly litigation. The Cascade Forest Conservancy also partners with the Forest Service to implement restoration projects, including aquatic habitat restoration, beaver relocations, volunteer programs, and we support an initiative that connects local high school students to paid summer partnerships on national forest lands.
Today, this partnership is being strained through a multitude of cutbacks. Due to uncertainty, organizational restructuring and staffing cuts that originate at the national level, our Forest Service's ability to plan, collaborate and execute projects effectively is being critically compromised. On the Gifford Pinchot National Forest, there are vacancies in essential positions for project planning and timber sale administration and implementation. The interdisciplinary planning teams, which are vital to advancing projects with expert input, have decreased from three to one across the forest. As a result, the agency's capacity to move projects forward has declined, even as production expectations increase.
At the same time, we are concerned about the agency's growing resilience on categorical exclusions, emergency determinations, and exemptions from environmental review requirements. These tools do have a role, but they are increasingly used as substitutes for comprehensive, transparent planning processes with public buy-in. Environmental assessments and the NEPA process provide meaningful opportunities for collaboration, public involvement, and tribal consultation. This helps project planners identify problems early, strengthens project design, and reduces the likelihood of conflict. In the absence of these processes, litigation becomes the only tool we have to ensure that projects meet legal standards.
Streamlining in specific solutions can be helpful, but shortcuts that sacrifice transparency and public involvement may actually hinder progress and increase our reliance on litigation rather than on collaboration and public input. Sustaining our public lands requires ongoing public input, strong federal agencies and a reliable public investment. Recent shifts, a lack of clarity, and a lack of transparent dialogue among stakeholders and agency staff have diminished public pathways for input. Forest collaboratives have always been useful, but they are now becoming even more essential as other public engagement avenues are limited. By creating a space open to the public for difficult conversations and nontraditional relationships, they promote a shared understanding among diverse stakeholders.
They enhance project planning and they help prevent conflicts before decisions are made. While collaboration does take time, it builds trust, improves project outcomes and often prevents costly disputes, making the process actually more efficient. We encourage Congress to support stable, long-term investment in the Forest Service. This includes rebuilding agency capacity through sustainable consistent funding, supporting collaborative processes, maintaining meaningful environmental review, and addressing long-standing infrastructure challenges such as the Forest Service road maintenance backlog. Attempts have been made to address Forest Service capacities with issues and partnerships like the Good Neighbor Authority.
While GNA can serve as a useful tool, maintaining adequate Forest Service staffing remains a more efficient and accountable approach for carrying out forest management and restoration work on our federal public lands. Even for GNA to function at its intended capacity, the authority still requires Forest Service personnel to lead planning, to provide oversight, and to ensure projects align with broader management goals and public interests. The dedicated staff on our national forests continue to do remarkable work under difficult conditions. By providing them with adequate resources, consistent direction, and the tools needed to engage the public, we can improve forest health, increase wildfire resilience, support local economies, and ensure that our public lands are managed effectively for future generations. Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I look forward to answering your questions.
Dan Newhouse
Thank you, and thank you all for your testimony this morning. At this time, members will be recognized for questions in order of seniority, alternating between the majority-minority members and in order of arrival for those who joined us after the hearing convened. We'll be recognized for five minutes each in order to allow us to get to as many questions as possible. I'd first like to recognize myself for five minutes, and I'll start with Mr. Joseph, if I could. Certainly, I appreciate your comments and your testimony about how forest products industry is needed for the stewardship and the conservation and protection of our forests.
As we know, given that we've lost a significant number of sawmills and logging capacity over the past several decades throughout the Pacific Northwest, my state in particular, what does this reduction in infrastructure mean for forest health and management? And tell me, in your view, are there ways that we can help support new infrastructure?
Travis Joseph
Chairman, thank you for the question. Appreciate it. It's a really important question because I think sometimes we don't quite make the connections that I think you're making, which are, when you lose the infrastructure, when you lose the mills, when you lose the people, when you lose the know-how, when you lose the equipment, you lose your ability to manage forests. And that's what's happening in a huge part of the West, not just the Pacific Northwest, but the West. And we've seen examples of this.
We've seen examples in states, unfortunately, as my colleagues, where they reside in Utah and parts of Southern California and New Mexico and Arizona that have completely lost their forest products industry infrastructure. And when you do that, you see the environmental consequences. So in our part of the world that's dominated by the federal government and the federal government managing national forests in oftentimes more than 50% of the land base in these states, it's critical that we have a consistent, reliable, higher supply of a raw input to support that infrastructure. The Forest Service manages, as was mentioned, 193 million acres. This is context.
I think this is critical context for Congress that sometimes we just lose sight of. The Forest Service manages 193 million acres. Only one-third of that land base is ever eligible for timber harvest of any kind. And in any single year, the Forest Service is managing one-half of 1% of one-third of our national forest. So if you want to help the forest products industry, if you want to help rural communities, manage our forest.
We'll deliver better economic, environmental, and public safety and health benefits for everybody.
Dan Newhouse
Thank you. Thank you. Wow. Sheriff Glover, could you take a few minutes to, or no, a few seconds, I should say, to expand on issues that you're currently seeing on the impacts of top-down regulations and how they're impeding on interagency cooperations between the local law enforcement departments and the Forest Service?
Tracy Glover
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I first want to say our relationships with the US Forest Service law enforcement folks on the ground are solid. We have great respect for each other. We work together every day. We are friends with the folks here in DC at the management level as well.
We spend a lot of time together. The problem is is that we weren't heard on this criminal prohibitions rule. And the issue isn't necessarily all of the details of the rule. We had some parts of the rule that we could support. The problem we had was there are some parts of the rule that are clearly, you know, outside of the typical guardrails of federal jurisdiction on proprietary lands held in proprietary interests.
And our concern there is is it's a bit of a camel's nose in the tent kind of a concept where other agencies, other federal agencies like the National Park Service or the Bureau of Land Management are kind of keeping an eye on that and trying to see how far can we crowd the guardrails as it relates to rulemaking authority in this space. And that's our concern. That's our biggest concern is that it could get out of hand and and it will get out of hand.
Dan Newhouse
Thank you. Mr. Coe, as a district that receives a good deal of funding from the SRS or Secure Rural Schools program, could you talk a little bit about how constant delays in reauthorization efforts affect the counties that rely on this funding?
Ned Coe
Thank you, Chairman. Yes, two examples out of the recent time that the SRS expired. One was a local school district in the county that had been years in the process of getting funding, engineering, and design for a new facility at their junior high campus. They were in the early stages of construction when SRS expired. While it was a small portion of the total budget for that project, it was vital and required them to take from other areas of the budget that was education-related to complete this construction project.
As a county, it's vital for our roads. We had a number of road projects in process when SRS expired. In order to complete those projects, we had to suspend routine maintenance. That's delays in chip seal and repaving, which just further degrades the condition of our roads, which every access point to the national forest in Modoc County is via a county road.
Andrea Salinas
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And again, welcome, Ms. Whitney and Mr. Joseph, both Oregonians. To start, could you please, this is to Ms. Whitney, to start, could you please share some of what you are seeing on the ground regarding partnerships for management of the National Forest System? And this is in light of the remarkable loss of staff at the Forest Service over the past year alongside that 25% decrease in hazardous fuels reduction on the ground.
Molly Whitney
Yeah, we are definitely seeing some changes on the ground, definitely delays and things slowing. For example, our team has been working to move forward a project where CFC actually secured outside funding outside the Forest Service or the federal government. And this project focused on aquatic habitat restoration that would be beneficial to the national forest and create employment for local contractors. But due to severe and unexpected staffing shortages and a lack of clarity on current internal processes within the Forest Service, this work has just been delayed. And that is good work that could have happened with extra partnership funding.
projects to adapt during development resulting in delays. In a recent example of this is the North Packwood project, which I wrote up a case study in my written testimony if you'd like to know more. But it shows how shifting direction from the USDA in the current administration complicates and delays forest management efforts on the ground. There were repeated changes in policy guidance, such as environmental review requirements and legal interpretations of CEs, like CE6, that was illegally overturned, that led the Forest Service to redesign the project multiple times. This reduced its scale, delayed implementation, and caused redundant planning efforts, ultimately resulting in a much smaller treatment area than initially planned.
And this uncertainty really hampers the Forest Service's ability to efficiently carry out large landscape-scale restoration and wildfire resilience.
Andrea Salinas
Thank you. And then to just pivot a bit to reorganization, what do you see, do you see any downside from moving firefighters from the Forest Service to the Department of Interior's Wildland Fire Service when it comes to delivering more acres of hazardous fuels reduction?
Molly Whitney
I definitely think that there are reasons to be concerned that a reorganization like that could make fuel reduction efforts more difficult. Hazardous fuels reduction is tied to landscape management through coordination among fire personnel, land managers, scientists, tribes, and local communities and collaborative partners. And this work includes project planning, prescribed fire, if it's allowed and able to occur, ecosystem restoration, and community engagement. And the proposed US Wildfire Service appears to focus on suppression and thereby discounting fire management within land management agencies responsible for long-term stewardship and fuels planning. And this risks creating a disconnect between wildfire response and the proactive work needed to reduce wildfire risk before it occurs.
And because the vast majority of Forest Service personnel are funded in part by dollars associated with wildland fire, transferring that funding, approximately 60%, to the Wildland Fire Service would effectively decimate the Forest Service and compromise multiple-use land management mandates. Granted, the current system isn't ideal as Forest Service specialists have to leave their primary role sometimes for several months to serve on fire duty in another district. It would greatly benefit productivity if the continuation of the workflow of specialists would continue their important work without such yearly interruptions. And a preferred alternative would be to invest in the agency capacity, workforce ability, and prescribed fire on the landscape. This would be a better alternative and would lead to increased hazardous fuels treatments rather than the declines we've been seeing and large-scale organization transfer and benefits that still remain unclear.
Andrea Salinas
So if I could just recap for the folks back home in maybe some less technical wording, what I'm hearing from you is perhaps some continuity, some additional collaboration to really emphasize the fuels reduction pieces of this and to balance out so we're not always thinking about suppression. Is that correct?
Correct.
Andrea Salinas
Okay. One last question, hopefully quickly. When it comes to forest management, we often hear that project planning through the National Environmental Protection Act, NEPA, it's time-consuming. What is your perspective on the value of the NEPA process and public engagement for responsible forest management, and have you seen any benefits for public trust and reduced litigation from a robust public process? You have 30 seconds.
Molly Whitney
I think the bottom line is public lands deserve public input. And NEPA hasn't always been a hindrance. In fact, I think that the NEPA process actually provides public input, public process, a clear line of process that allows for transparency, public buy-in, and that's beneficial for our lands. And NEPA isn't the process blockage. In my written testimony, I cite some findings that show that NEPA actually is a quicker pathway than being caught in litigation.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Barry Moore
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's a pleasure to see all the witnesses here today. Certainly Doug LaMalfa was a good friend and Heather and I grieve for his family. We miss Doug. He had a big body and a big heart and so he's a great man.
Alabama forests support rural communities, forest product jobs, hunting, recreation, wildlife habitat, public access. The national forests in Alabama is about 667,000 acres. We have Bankhead, Conecuh, Talladega, Tuskegee, all those national forests. And so it requires a Forest Service obviously to work with the states, counties, local law enforcement, private businesses, and people who know these forests best. And I'm thankful for President Trump's focus on expanding domestic timber production, improving forest health, reducing wildfire risk, and cutting unnecessary delays.
The goal should be healthier forests, more work completed on the ground, stronger rural economies, and measurable results for taxpayers. Mr. Joseph, your testimony explains that active forest management can include commercial timber harvest, thinning, prescribed burning, selective harvesting, and mechanical vegetation treatment. You also endorsed President Trump administration's national active forest management strategy, which focuses on building capacity, streamlined implementation, environmental compliance, partnerships, and markets, as well as salvage and reforestation. Alabama already has a good neighbor agreement between the Forest Service and the Alabama Forestry Commission. Under that agreement, the state can help carry out timber harvesting, hazardous fuel reduction, road work, wildlife surveys, and forest restoration projects on federal land.
What are the biggest barriers keeping partnerships like Alabama's from producing more completed projects, healthier forests, and timber that is actually delivered to American mills? What do you think is the biggest barrier, Mr. Joseph?
Yes, sir.
Travis Joseph
The laws and regulations and the system, the current approach that we have to managing federal lands. Again, I think context is really important. In the Pacific Northwest, a vast majority of the national forests that are at risk of fire, disease, insects, they're not available for management. So even if a collaborative decided, hey, we need to go in there and we need to do active management, the regulatory regime that overlays those national forests oftentimes restricts the ability to actually go in and do the right treatment at the right time at the right place. That needs to be fixed and that's up to Congress.
Redner 11
So I remember Ronald Reagan said, it's one of my favorite quotes, he said the government's view on the economy is when it's moving you tax it, if it keeps moving you regulate it, if it fails you subsidize it. But very often it seems like the regulatory environment is the biggest inhibition to getting the work done and getting the timber to the mills. Is that kind of what you're telling me?
Travis Joseph
And it impacts partners. It's not just the timber industry, it's states, counties, tribes, other organizations. The regulatory environment is not an incentive right now in national forests to do business with the federal government. It's incredibly complex and it's risky.
Redner 14
It makes it almost impossible at times, doesn't it, to do it in certain areas, I would assume?
Travis Joseph
It also makes it really challenging, or if you can imagine a private interest that's thinking about building a mill in the West. Why would you come in and make, you know, build a quarter-billion-dollar mill if your partner is the Forest Service and based on the policies or politics of varying administrations, that timber flow is going to change? That's not certainty, that's not predictability. You can't make a business decision off of that uncertainty.
Redner 11
The uncertainty. And so the photos you showed a while ago, and it was pretty impactful, I thought. The one forest had a fire six years ago. And what's the hold up? Why is there such a drastic difference between the one where we saw the green trees coming out of the ground, they're getting up on, I don't know how big they were from the photo, but then you see these others that are dead for years and been standing.
What's the hold up?
Travis Joseph
Yeah, that's it. Again, the regulatory environment. So where I took that picture was from a road that bisects a roadless area near Glide in, you know, Roseburg and Douglas County, Oregon. 130,000 acres were burned in that fire.
Because of the overlying regulations of that land base, you cannot go in there and remove those dead and dying trees, even off the roadsides, bring them to a mill and reinvest the revenue back into the land. That's not allowed.
Redner 11
So how long do you think that timberland is out of production? Is it forever or for generations?
Redner 18
So the second photo, I saw like green trees growing. What, how long ago has that been, that fire occurred?
Travis Joseph
That fuel break on the second picture is an ongoing project. So that's anticipation of and a proactive strategy to try to address fire if and when it comes through that area. So that project is happening right now and ongoing as they work to complete hundreds of miles of fuel breaks across multiple jurisdictions. And that's exactly what we need to be thinking about doing is not just about Forest Service land, although that's the focus, but in the West when you have multiple ownerships, you've got to work with all of the managers to create a more holistic approach to forest management.
Got you. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I'll yield back.
Dan Newhouse
Thank you, Mr. Moore. The gentleman from California, Mr. Costa, is recognized.
Jim Costa
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and the ranking member, at an important effort I think that many of us who come from Western states especially share the challenges of trying to maintain our forests. I represent the San Joaquin Valley along with my colleague Congressman Valadao, but our beautiful Sierra Nevadas are in our backyard. And included in those are the giant sequoia groves, trees that are increasingly threatened by more extreme droughts and hotter and more intense wildfires. And I think we all share the notion that we no longer have a fire season, but a fire year, I think out in the West, certainly that's become the, sadly, the rule. I co-sponsored the Fix Our Forests Act and the Headwaters Protection Act, spent years working on these partnerships between the federal and state efforts and local.
Supervisor Cole, it's good to have a fellow Californian testify and a farmer, rancher, and common sharing a lot of these issues. And of course, both of us mourn the loss of our friend Representative LaMalfa. But I'd like to ask you about the impact you see, I've seen in the Central Sierra in the closing of regional and station offices, including the capacity for research and the permitting and the other kinds of things that the Forest Service does as a partner locally. As a supervisor and a person who's involved in many areas, what does that mean to you in Modoc County for wildfire and mitigation work on the ground in rural California?
Ned Coe
Thank you, Congressman Costa, and good to see you again. So I will go back to the approach that we have in Modoc County where the county works proactively with the Modoc National Forest. Through our coordination, we are able to on a monthly basis go over issues similar to what you just discussed and find solutions to those problems.
Jim Costa
Have you found a reduction of staff and has that impacted your ability to do the necessary work in that partnership?
Ned Coe
The reduction of staff definitely has impacted the forest, even on the Modoc Forest. And that is where our shared stewardship retired worker program first got started. The forest didn't have an engineer and they had a timber sale that was sold and ready to be harvested, but they needed an engineer to certify the road.
We hired an engineer through the Farm Bureau that was a retired forest engineer and were able to complete that project. That's just one example of that program.
Jim Costa
Okay, I need to move on, my time's limited. Ms. Whitney, your work on the ground, as you stated in your testimony, makes a strong case for public engagement and collaboration that make projects more durable and less likely to end up in court. As the agency loses staff and leans on faster and more streamlined reviews, does that mean for public trust for getting forest health and fuel projects done right the first time?
Molly Whitney
I think the question is about eroding public trust. Yes. Yes, and we're definitely seeing that on the land. When you move into projects that don't have avenues for public input and bypass processes that allow for public to have scoping periods, commenting periods, and objection periods, you only the only avenue to hold the people accountable, the agency accountable, is litigation. And if you are litigating smaller projects that didn't have public input, that are CEs, that are moved along quickly on a smaller scope, that isn't nearly as time-consuming and productive as it is to work on larger-scale projects that have buy-in through collaboratives, that are going to have larger impacts on the land and less conflict at the end.
Jim Costa
Yeah, my time's almost expired, but I'm very concerned about this whole organizational plan and the cuts that have been made within the Forest Service. Mr. Joseph, in your testimony, you highlighted the need to get back to active management and for Congress to evaluate the roadblocks that are getting in the way. I think we always find ourselves in this spine between forest management and the funding for that and the funding we put for fire suppression. And when we borrow from Peter to pay Paul, we don't do a good job on the forest management areas because we're trying to triage putting out the fires, and in the meantime, we get further behind. That's my assessment of this over the years that we've worked on that.
Do you concur?
Travis Joseph
Congressman, you're right, and every dollar that Congress invests in proactive management saves the taxpayer four dollars in wildfire damage.
Jim Costa
Well, my time's expired, but not only that, but what we have found, Mr. Chairman and the ranking member, in conjunction with our universities, that when we are better able to manage our forest, we retain more the moisture and the snowpack and the water that otherwise gets soaked up, literally and figuratively, by the vegetation that's growing, which creates more fuel for fire. And so it becomes a very difficult vicious cycle. I think we need to reexamine the efforts between monies for fire suppression and fire and forest management to try to figure out how we can better complement the two efforts.
Dan Newhouse
Yeah, appreciate it very much, Mr. Costa. Thank you. Gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Baird is recognized.
James Baird
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and ranking member, and you know, I appreciate the interest in the forest products. I've always been interested in agriculture, and I got a brother that that owns a mill on the home farm, but so forestry is an important part of agriculture in my opinion. So, Mr. Joseph, I would like to back up a moment. I thought I heard you say that in in you cannot go in and and harvest or remove trees after fire or those down trees. And the reason I want to do that, my question focuses on on those hazardous fuels, and I'm interested in biochar, I am interested in biomass utilization and other value-added products.
So, but but go back and and repeat if you will, unless I misunderstood that, what you said about some places you can, some places you can't.
Travis Joseph
For example, wilderness areas. You can't go into a wilderness area after the fact and use mechanical treatments and replant that forest in a wilderness area. That's restricted under the 1964 Wilderness Act. The roadless rule has restrictions about what you can and can't do on the land base. The Northwest Forest Plan in the Pacific Northwest that governs 24 million acres tells you where and what you can't do on national forests.
So yes, a vast majority of the landscape, including after a fire, are unavailable for management. And even if they do, you have to go through a process that I would love to talk to you about that needs to be changed if we do want to do active management and replant our forests.
James Baird
Well, in that regard, I agree with my colleague from California. You know, that makes no sense to me when in agriculture, you either, you know, and in Indiana, I know through forest management, we've been able, the net gain in productivity of board feet has increased over the use of forest management. And so, you know, being an agriculturalist, I don't understand why we can't harvest that. But aside from that, I'm really interested in the biochar idea. That, and I realize there's some concern about that, but then other biomass utilization where we could make energy out of or fuel out of those byproducts if we harvested them.
So I'd just be interested in your thoughts in that regard.
Travis Joseph
There's extraordinary opportunity there. And currently the renewable fuel standard and how we treat biomass and woody biomass is really important and critical. And my understanding is there are ongoing conversations to try to come up with a bipartisan solution to make sure that we treat wood equitably in terms of policy and the law and the renewable fuel standard. So there's an extraordinary opportunity for all these other uses of wood and biomass that support society, including, as you said, energy and fuel. Right now, by the way, woody biomass from federal lands does not qualify for renewable fuel standard.
So we're leaving 193 million acres and all the outputs from those lands don't qualify for the RFS. That needs to change.
James Baird
Well, thank you. And then, you know, I'm going to preface my next question, which will be to Mr. Coe, but Mr. Glover, you're the sheriff and I read something or saw something interesting. Back in 1948, they moved in through low-flying planes because it was too difficult a terrain to get them in any other way. They brought beavers into a valley there in Utah. They called it flying beavers.
And they ended, and then the video of all that got misfiled for 60-some years. So those beavers worked in that valley all that time. And then when you had a giant fire, that area was not involved because they built so many dams and worked so effectively. I just bring that up because we're talking about nature and national forests and sometimes if you let nature alone, it'll take care of itself. But I don't ask you to comment on that because anyway, my question, Mr. Coe, goes to the role of the universities and you've worked with University of California Extension Service.
You've also worked with the California Farm Bureau as well as NACO. So I just would appreciate your thoughts, and we've got about 40-some seconds, appreciate your thoughts on the importance of these extension service and some of these other, the cooperation with the counties and so on in that regard to fire prevention, forest management.
Ned Coe
The knowledge that the extension service can put on the ground at the local level is amazing. We have the opportunity in Modoc County to work with a range specialist, natural resources, and the work that she does to assist in fuels management, range management, working with ranchers is incredible.
Gabe Vasquez
Thank you so much, Chairman Newhouse. Thank you to our panel of experts today. I represent New Mexico's second district, home to four national forests. I hunt Coues deer and Mearns' quail in the Coronado, I fish for Gila trout and backpack in the Gila, hunt turkey in the Lincoln, and I hike and camp in the Cibola. I know these areas very well, it's where I prefer to spend my time when I'm back home.
And what I can tell you is that every forest is different, should be managed different, and should operate with a modernized management plan and adequate and stable staffing. Partnerships are necessary and should be expanded, but it also can't replace adequate Forest Service staffing as well as new management plans. But today I want to focus on an issue that's very important to my district, and that is the Secure Rural Schools program. For decades, SRS has helped counties provide the basic services that people count on every day, such as schools and roads. And when that funding is delayed or uncertain, local leaders are forced to make impossible decisions about budgets, staffing, and public safety.
That's why last August I convened a meeting in Catron County, a bedroom community to the Gila National Forest and a very rural part of my district, and spoke with stakeholders, including Republican state representatives, local elected officials, teachers, and others about the importance of reauthorizing SRS. That's why I also introduced the bipartisan Secure Rural Schools Reauthorization Act with the late Congressman LaMalfa just last year, which ultimately passed with bipartisan support, which is a win that was applauded by state lawmakers from both sides of the aisle back home in New Mexico. But that funding is set to lapse again in 2027. I believe our communities deserve certainty, not year-to-year uncertainty over whether they're going to have the resources that they need. So my first question is for Supervisor Coe.
Could you tell me as a supervisor what happens when SRS funding isn't reliable, when it's delayed, and Congress waits until the last minute to act? How does that impact your budget and your operations?
Ned Coe
It creates massive budget uncertainty. Unlike some other entities, a county has to budget with the revenue that they have available. And when that did not come through the past several years with the expiring of SRS, it required us to make hard decisions. As I indicated previously, delay road work, but it goes way beyond just roads and schools in the impact to our budget.
Gabe Vasquez
Thank you, Supervisor Coe. And I can tell you in one of the most rural schools in Quemado, New Mexico, if we didn't get that done in time, they were going to let go about a dozen teachers from the local elementary school. That's the impact in that community. So thank you, I appreciate you sharing that insight. Sheriff Glover, I'd like to ask you the same question from a public safety perspective.
What does stable SRS funding mean for law enforcement and emergency response in particular in counties with large amounts of federal land where tax revenue is limited, and how does that lapse or delay in SRS funding negatively impact public safety?
Tracy Glover
Yeah, many law enforcement agencies, sheriff's offices across the West are dependent on SRS funding. In the Pacific Northwest, I have with me Hood River County Sheriff Matt English, large forest in his county, lots of visitors, four million visitors in his county. I've got a similar, less forest in my county, but I get about five, between five and six million visitors that come through our county. We're small counties of 20, you know, 10,000, 20,000 population. So that SRS funding for search and rescue services is critical.
It has to be on time. Again, you know, I echo Supervisor Coe, when it's unknown whether these programs like PILT or SRS are going to move forward, it creates real budget uncertainty and difficulty during our budget seasons on how are we going to pay for these services that truly do save lives every day.
Gabe Vasquez
Thank you so much, Sheriff. And that's why these bedrock programs like PILT and SRS are so important to the rural West. And I think in this committee and in Congress as a whole, we have to look at solutions for permanent reauthorization and appropriation so that your counties don't have to go through this every year. And that's the same message that I've been hearing from my county commissioners back home. They still have to pass budgets, they still have to hire deputies, keep roads maintained, support their schools, and they can't put those responsibilities on hold while they wait for Washington to get its act together.
So SRS funding truly is about supporting and keeping rural communities safe. This program is set to lapse again next spring, and this committee has to continue to work together in a bipartisan fashion to prevent any more delays or lapses in funding. The health of both our forest and our rural communities and their economies depend on it. Thank you all. Thank you, Chairman.
I yield back.
David Valadao
Thank you, Mr. Vasquez. Now I recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Valadao.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to all of our witnesses for your time today. While many of my constituents don't live in or near national forests, they still experience the consequences when catastrophic wildfires occur. Mr. Coe, numerous studies have found that active forest management practices such as prescribed burns and fuel reduction projects can reduce wildfire severity and improve forest health. Are there any barriers to allowing those practices from being implemented?
Ned Coe
Yes, as other members of the panel have already indicated, there are barriers every day to active forest management. And I'll refer back to an example that occurred several decades ago. It was part of the Quincy Library Group where they did a shaded fuel break similar that was shown in the photograph today, and the Moon Fire, which was raging out of control, got to that and dropped down and was actually went out on its own because of active fuel management.
David Valadao
All right. Ms. Whitney, farmers in my district depend on water that originates in forested watersheds. Are there current federal policies, permitting requirements, or funding limitations delaying watershed-focused forest management projects from being carried out at a scale needed?
Molly Whitney
I think funding delays and staffing across the national forest is delaying all proposed actions, regardless of water or what have you. And so I would say that, yes, indubitably, that is happening. I don't have any particular instances on the Gifford Pinchot National Forest that I can call out to say that that's actually happening, but I'm sure that it is.
Redner 25
All right. Thank you. Mr. Coe, as Congress appropriates money and reauthorizes forest management programs each year, what metrics should we use to determine whether these investments are making forests and communities safer? Do you believe we are measuring the right outcomes today?
Ned Coe
Looking at the results, I would say the measurements of the outcomes are not being looked at correctly. Our forests are in much poorer condition. As your previous question about water off of the forest, when I left Monday, I watched the last of my irrigation water for this summer coming down the ditch.
When I get home tomorrow, it's going to be dry. And that's because all of my water comes off of national forest land that has anywhere from magnitudes of more trees per acre than it can support. That water is being consumed up there with small stunted trees.
David Valadao
I guess I should have asked you the same question that I asked Ms. Whitney. Are there any current federal policies, permitting requirements, or funding limitations delaying watershed-focused forest management projects from being carried out to the scale needed?
Absolutely.
Ned Coe
One that Congressman LaMalfa worked on for years, the Sites project. This is an off-stream reservoir project that would supply water even to your district that has been entire lifetimes of spent working on the engineering and the study of it. But yet we don't have a drop of water saved from it.
Redner 22
Yeah, from my understanding, Sites has been in the planning stages for 60 years now.
David Valadao
Yes, a little longer than my life, but I'm not sure if it's longer than the chairman's life. Sheriff Klever, in your testimony, you mentioned difficulties in working with US Forest Management, Forest Law Enforcement, especially after the national memorandum of agreement was modified in 2023. How can Congress strengthen the partnership between law enforcement division and county sheriff offices across the country as they work towards their shared goal?
Tracy Glover
Yeah, thank you for your question. We need to get the criminal prohibitions rule off the table, repealed, whether that's through this legislation, HR 6802, or another means, and just get back to the table. I think we can solve this problem in short order, actually. We love these guys. We like working together with them.
We work very well together. But we can't, we can't sustain them usurping our authority and jurisdiction on a state and county level like they did with this rulemaking. So if we can get that rule off the table and get back to the table, I have great confidence that we'll resolve this issue and move forward.
Dan Newhouse
Thank the gentleman, who should understand that the next hearing he'll only get two and a half minutes to ask questions. So, I think that completes the round of questioning from our members on the committee. Before we adjourn, what I'd like to do is give the ranking member, Mr. Vasquez, an opportunity for a closing comment, and then I may have some comments at the end as well.
Gabe Vasquez
Thank you so much, Chairman. Thank you as well, again, to our guests for being here in Washington for this important subcommittee hearing. I'm glad we had the opportunity to discuss the importance of durable and lasting partnerships in forest and rural communities and discuss a regulatory environment that is conducive to improving forest health and conditions, especially during times when we need it most in this heightened wildfire risk season that we face today. And it's also important for us to remember that our forests are the land of many uses, and stakeholders do deserve a voice. However, that shouldn't come at the expense of getting projects on the ground when we need them the most.
I do just want to briefly address wildfire risk because New Mexico faced two of our largest wildfires in our state's history in just the last three years, including right in my district, the Black Fire in the Gila National Forest. And there are many solutions, some of which have been discussed here today, but I want to just continue to throw some of these out there as we continue this conversation. That includes protecting the integrity of our watersheds. That includes maintaining trails to cut fire lines, which requires volunteer and staff and conservation corps and other folks to do that work.
It requires funding and support for volunteer fire departments. That's one of the biggest issues that we face in my district, often times as the first responders. Improving the communication infrastructure for the network of first responders in rural communities is also incredibly important. When that fire lookout first spots the fire, we've got to take action, and those lines of communication are often broken in rural counties like those in my district. I mentioned the full funding and reauthorization of SRS, properly staffed regions and individual units, adequate staffing for the development and implementation of new forest plans under the 2012 rule, modernized prescriptive burn practices.
I can't emphasize that enough. That was the cause of the Hermits Peak Calf Canyon fire in northern New Mexico, which was completely preventable and has devastated that community. Easing regulations on fuel thinning and timber harvesting where it's appropriate in different forest units. And of course, the Fix Our Forests Act, which I also supported, that provides some of those common sense solutions. We've got to tackle these issues sooner than later, and certainly those partnerships that we build with local governments, tribes, and stakeholders have to be there, have to be solid, and we've got to have adequate staffing to ensure that we can execute on those partnerships.
Thank you, Chairman.
Dan Newhouse
Thank you, Mr. Vasquez. First of all, I'd just like to thank everyone for joining us today to take part in this important discussion on a very important topic. And particularly, I want to thank the witnesses. I believe I can speak on behalf of the entire subcommittee when I say that we do deeply appreciate you traveling across the entire country to share your wisdom with us here in Congress. Just as the Forest Service depends on their partners to steward our public lands, we in Congress greatly benefit from people like you coming all the way to Washington, D.C. to provide us with such thoughtful answers to our maybe not-so-thoughtful questions.
So thank you very much for that. Your experiences shape the policies that we champion, and 193 million acres of cherished public land are better off because the four of you are here today. So thank you, thank you very much for that. Under the rules of the committee, the record of today's hearing will remain open for 10 calendar days to receive additional materials and supplementary written responses from the witnesses to any question posed by a member. So take note of that.
And with that, this hearing of the Subcommittee on Forestry and Agriculture is adjourned. Thank you very much.