4 min read

Legislators Ramp Up Efforts to Address the Health of the Nation’s Forests

Legislators Ramp Up Efforts to Address the Health of the Nation’s Forests

Lawmakers in both the House and Senate focused their attention on the state of the nation’s forests this past month. As rural communities with economies largely dependent upon timberland felt the effects of the sequester, legislators called out the Forest Service for failing to uphold its commitment to manage forests in a way that provides a stable revenue stream for counties that are home to national forest land.  The upcoming wildfire season has also been a heated topic of debate.

House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA) introduced the Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act (H.R. 1526) to encourage active forest management projects in areas the Forest Service has acknowledged can produce timber. Notably, the act would require the Forest Service to harvest at least half of the sustainable yield of timber from its commercial timberlands each year. The legislation is the indirect result of sequestration cuts.

As part of sequestration-required budget cuts, the Forest Service asked states receiving funds from the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (SRS) to return a portion of those payments. In effect, these states must now repay thousands of dollars typically used to support programs such as public education and emergency services at the county level. A press release announcing the draft legislation noted SRS payments to counties will also decline by 80% next year unless Congress takes action to extend this program.

States have experienced issues with SRS payments in the past. Suz-Anne Kinney shared his unique perspective on the effects reduced timber harvests and declining payments had on communities in Oregon. Unfortunately, it appears not much has changed.

Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) also criticized the Forest Service for its decision. During a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing to review the Forest Service’s $4.9 billion 2014 fiscal year budget, Chairman Wyden accused the Forest Service of placing counties in a no-win situation with low SRS payments that do not serve as adequate compensation for reduced timber harvests. In its 2012 report Increasing the Pace of Restoration and Job Creation on Our National Forests, the Forest Service committed to increase “annual forest products sales to 3 billion board feet.” Yet, the Forest Service plans to harvest only 2.38 billion board feet in the coming fiscal year.

USDA Forest Service FY 2014 Budget Justification

Murkowski agreed, likening the current management of national forests to that of national parks where timber harvesting is prohibited. “Many of our rural communities are dependent on these payments only because the Forest Service has failed to actively manage our forests. We are going to have to either utilize our federal lands to support our rural communities or we should divest the federal government of those lands and let the states, or the counties, manage those lands.”

Advocates for increased timber harvesting in national forests cite not only the economic advantages to communities, but also the benefits to preventing or reducing the severity of wildfires.

In his Senate testimony, Forest Service Chief Tom Tidwell noted, “More than a thousand post fire assessments show that fuels and forest health treatments are effective in reducing wildfire severity.” During the hearing, Tidwell also shared the following statistics:

  • Since 2000, 10 states have recorded their largest fires in history.
  • In 2012, more than nine million acres burned nationwide.
  • Today, 65 to 82 million acres – up to 42 percent of national forest land – require fuels and forest health treatments.

Forty-two percent is also the portion of its budget that the Forest Service has set aside for firefighting activities. This is a significant increase compared to the budget for fiscal year 1991, when just 13 percent went towards fighting wildfires. Representative Hastings cited 44 times as many acres of forest land burned in wildfires than were responsibly harvested last year, attributing the discrepancy to a lack of healthy forest management.

A discussion about how to best manage the upcoming wildfire season made up a good portion of Tidwell’s testimony to the House Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation, held in part to receive comments on two bills supporting active forest management in the prevention of forest fires.

The Healthy Forest Management and Wildfire Prevention Act (H.R. 818) aims to give states the authority to identify national forest areas at risk due to deteriorating forest health conditions and, subsequently, to engage in emergency hazardous fuel reduction projects in such areas.

The Catastrophic Wildfire Prevention Act of 2013 (H.R. 1345) addresses the threats wildfire on national forest lands poses to forest health, wildlife habitat and public safety by requiring the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to expedite forest management projects including hazardous fuels reduction.

Tidwell shared the USDA’s opposition to both bills, suggesting, in short, the department could not support bills that would transfer the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture to the states. Tidwell also noted concerns with the expedited project time frames set forth by each piece of proposed legislation. No further action has been taken on either bill since the subcommittee hearings were held on April 11.

Okanogan County (Washington) Commissioner Ray Campbell may have offered the best summary of the situation with his statement, “The lands owned by the people of the United States hold the potential of generating revenues far beyond their current levels and are capable of reducing the tax burdens of all of our citizens, if they are but managed properly.”

With nearly half the budget going towards wildfires, the Forest Service is admittedly limited in the other projects it can take on.  The states, meanwhile, have clearly demonstrated they are capable of managing the forests entrusted to their care. Which begs the question, why does the USDA hold tight to the idea of micro-managing the nation’s forests instead of delegating some of this tremendous responsibility to the states?

When questioned by Wyden, Tidwell agreed a collaborative approach is the best way to increase timber harvests. Just when and how the Forest Service might agree to such an effort remains to be seen.


Comments

PABLO KORACH

05-08-2013

Yes is my answer for caring and avoiding forest fires. But there is another subject. No R+D has been made in the last 20 which is to increase the yield of lumber from a log. This can be done but it seems nobody is interested. I wold like to know how many subscribers feel this is right.

Thank you

Pablo Korach

Engineered Wood Products

M.Sc.ChemicalEngineering