S.Hrg.119-121

1[Senate Hearing 119-121]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                                                       S. Hrg. 119-12156                     THE PRESIDENT'S BUDGET REQUEST7                     FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE8                     INTERIOR FOR FISCAL YEAR 20269=======================================================================1011                                HEARING1213                               BEFORE THE1415                              COMMITTEE ON16                      ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES17                          UNITED STATES SENATE1819                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2021                             FIRST SESSION2223                               __________2425                             JUNE 11, 20252627                               __________2829[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3031                       Printed for the use of the32               Committee on Energy and Natural Resources3334        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov3536                                __________3738                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE39  61-237                    WASHINGTON : 20264041               COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES4243                        MIKE LEE, Utah, Chairman44JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming               MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico45JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho                RON WYDEN, Oregon46STEVE DAINES, Montana                MARIA CANTWELL, Washington47TOM COTTON, Arkansas                 MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii48DAVID McCORMICK, Pennsylvania        ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine49JAMES C. JUSTICE, West Virginia      CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada50BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana              JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado51CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi        ALEX PADILLA, California52LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska               RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona53JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota5455                  Wendy Baig, Majority Staff Director56            Patrick J. McCormick III, Majority Chief Counsel57                 Jasmine Hunt, Minority Staff Director58                 Sam E. Fowler, Minority Chief Counsel5960                           C O N T E N T S6162                              ----------6364                           OPENING STATEMENTS6566                                                                   Page67Lee, Hon. Mike, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from Utah............     168Heinrich, Hon. Martin, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from69  New Mexico.....................................................     37071                                WITNESS7273Burgum, Hon. Douglas J., Secretary, U.S. Department of the74  Interior.......................................................     47576          ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED7778Burgum, Hon. Douglas J.:79    Opening Statement............................................     480    Written Testimony............................................     781    Responses to Questions for the Record........................    5782Cantwell, Hon. Maria:83    Poster of quote from the President in support of permanent84      funding for the LWCF.......................................    4585    Poster depicting National Interagency Fire Center Significant86      Wildland Fire Potential Outlooks for June, July, August,87      and September 2025.........................................    4888    Poster of Seattle Times Headline ``Wildfire Burns Buildings,89      Threatens Homes Near Cle Elum'' from June 9, 2025..........    4990Cortez Masto, Hon. Catherine:91    Map entitled ``Southern Nevada Economic Development and92      Conservation Act Disposal Map, February 6, 2025''..........    3993Daines, Hon. Steve:94    Photograph of June 2025 Environmental Impact Statement for95      Bull Mountains Mine No. 1, prepared by the Office of96      Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, U.S. Department97      of the Interior............................................    2198Heinrich, Hon. Martin:99    Opening Statement............................................     3100King, Jr., Hon. Angus S.:101    Photograph of FY25 and FY26 National Park Service Budget102      Justifications.............................................    24103    Chart entitled ``NPS Staffing and Visitation''...............    26104Lee, Hon. Mike:105    Opening Statement............................................     1106107                     THE PRESIDENT'S BUDGET REQUEST108                     FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE109                     INTERIOR FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026110111                              ----------112113                        WEDNESDAY, JUNE 11, 2025114115                                       U.S. Senate,116                 Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,117                                                    Washington, DC.118    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in119Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Mike Lee,120Chairman of the Committee, presiding.121122              OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE,123                     U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH124125    The Chairman. Good morning. The Committee will come to126order. We will be hearing today from Secretary Doug Burgum, as127we discuss the Fiscal Year 2026 budget for the U.S. Department128of the Interior.129    Welcome, Mr. Secretary, and to the Secretary's team. Thanks130for being here today. When we last heard from you as a131Committee, back in January, you were President Trump's nominee132to lead the Department at that time. You have since been133confirmed and have now taken the reins at the Department of the134Interior, and this Committee, and ultimately the full Senate,135has since considered and confirmed Kate MacGregor to be your136Deputy Secretary. This Committee has already favorably reported137several additional nominees for senior positions within your138Department, who are now pending on the Senate floor. We139encourage Senate leadership to bring those nominees to the140floor quickly so that we can provide you with the personnel--141the people you need to help you lead the Department in carrying142out the important work that you do there on behalf of the143American people, for which we are very grateful. I would just144add that I am very honored to have supported you, and am145thrilled with the work that you are doing so far.146    Last year, the Department of the Interior had a budget of147$16 billion, but our nation simply cannot fund on the scale148that we have for decades. We have spent money that we don't149have, and so we must borrow it, often from our adversaries, and150saddle our children and even our grandchildren with that debt,151much of which has been accumulated before some of the people152who have to pay it back were even born or were old enough to153vote. It is a form of taxation without representation. We154generally frown on that in this country. President Trump knows155that, and it shows in the budget that he sent to Congress. By156acknowledging limits on what can be spent, a reality that every157family, every business, every other organization in America158deals with on a daily basis, the budget that the President sent159to Congress is a long-overdue step in the right direction.160Decades of unchecked federal spending have created structural161deficits that now threaten our economic security and our162ability to respond to real emergencies. President Trump's163budget begins the challenging but essential work of turning164that gargantuan ship around.165    That work falls, in part, to your Department, Secretary166Burgum, from land and water management, to energy and mineral167development, to partnerships with states, territories, and168local governments. The decisions made at Interior affect169millions of Americans and shape the future of our public lands,170of our economy, and of course, our national security. The171Department has a hand in many things--in everything from172infrastructure projects to mineral policies that either enable173or block our ability to compete effectively with China. It is174responsible for stewarding vast tracts of land while supporting175rural communities that depend on access to those same lands for176jobs, for housing, for growth, for energy, for water, and many,177many other things. In the best case, the Department of the178Interior can serve as a partner to the states and an enabler of179prosperity. In the worst case, it can become a bureaucratic180gatekeeper that shuts out the voices of local communities. This181Administration is committed, of course, to the former.182President Trump's budget sets clear expectations: get results,183streamline operations, and stay focused on core184responsibilities. That means resisting mission creep, reining185in regulatory overreach, and prioritizing the needs of working186Americans over Washington's special interests.187    I want to commend the recent opinion by the Department of188Justice's Office of Legal Counsel, which affirms what many of189us have long argued, that the President has legal authority to190consider monument designations that are over-broad,191duplicative, or disconnected from the statute's stated purpose.192For nearly a century, the Federal Government has often operated193under a flawed interpretation of the Antiquities Act, one that194allowed presidents to unilaterally lock up millions of acres of195land but denied future presidents the authority to undo or even196revise those designations. But as OLC's recent opinion197discusses at length, there is actually a long history, spanning198decades, of presidents reducing the size of previously199designated national monuments or even de-designating them all200together. With this new legal clarity, we hope the Department201of the Interior will work with us to ensure that public lands202are managed in a way that reflects the needs of those who live203closest to them.204    Today's hearing is about the kind of government we want to205have and what it may take to achieve that. It is about whether206the Department is prepared to implement the President's agenda207with the urgency and discipline that this particular moment in208history requires. So we look forward to hearing from you how209you intend to align the Department's operations with the210President's budget and how you will ensure that the Department211of the Interior may plan to deliver on President Trump's212agenda.213    So, again, Mr. Secretary, welcome, and I would now like to214recognize my friend and colleague, the Ranking Member on the215Committee, Senator Heinrich, for his opening statement.216217          OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN HEINRICH,218                  U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO219220    Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman.221    We are here today to talk about the budget proposal of a222Department that is, quite frankly, not being resourced to meet223its mission. Parks are cutting hours and services for visitors.224Ranger tours are canceled. Toilets are overflowing and trash225cans sit unemptied. Permits are languishing on empty desks.226Energy projects are delayed or canceled. Contracts slowly wind227their way through a byzantine bureaucracy that was invented228overnight. The senior leadership positions at the Department229are mostly vacant. Roughly 100 park superintendent positions230are vacant. Five of the seven regional director positions for231the National Park Service sit empty. At the Bureau of Land232Management, about a third of senior leadership positions are233vacant, including both Deputy Director positions and the234Director position itself--and the front-line staff is in no235better shape. After promising to hire 7,700 seasonal employees236to serve Americans in their national parks this summer, the237Park Service has managed, at least according to public reports,238to hire only half of that. Memorial Day is gone. The Fourth of239July is around the corner. And all of this has occurred before240this budget request is put in place.241    Mr. Secretary, when you were going through the confirmation242process, I believed that you would be a responsible steward of243our public lands. Conservative, of course, but responsible. And244with your experience in the private sector and as a governor, I245believed that you could rein in the sometimes-reckless246tendencies of DOGE, at least within the Department of the247Interior. We are never going to agree on everything, but I248thought we could agree that our public lands are the greatest249heritage of our nation. And we have a responsibility to hand250them down to the next generation well-stewarded. This budget251request will not resource your Department to responsibly252steward our lands and waters. The proposal for the Interior253Department operations next year includes a 30 percent cut254across programs. It is no exaggeration to say that this would255cripple the Department as we know it. The cut to the Park256Service is paid for by getting rid of most park system units.257The National Park System would have to lose more than 350 of258its 433 units to swallow that kind of a proposed cut. And yet,259the Department has still not told us which units those might260be.261    Any hope for a speedier permitting system from the BLM is262gone with a 35 percent proposed cut to that agency. Anyone who263needs a recreation permit, a right-of-way, a grazing lease,264will be left waiting. That is not efficiency. The 35 percent265cut to the Bureau of Reclamation puts critical water266infrastructure at risk of failing to safely deliver water to267farmers, fish, and people. The proposal completely eliminates268the WaterSMART program that provides resources to local, often269rural communities and water users to conserve water and to make270efficiency improvements to their infrastructure, thereby271reducing conflicts over this scarce resource.272    The nearly 40 percent cut to the U.S. Geological Survey273would kneecap the scientific research we need to understand how274our natural world is changing in the face of a changing275climate. And the major reduction to the Natural Hazards Program276would leave communities more vulnerable to earthquakes,277volcanoes, and landslides. This proposal also completely278eliminates the Biological Resources Program at USGS, which279could mean abandoning bird flu monitoring, closing the most280advanced wildlife disease lab in the United States, and281discontinuing research efforts for climate adaptation. The282USGS's migratory bird research also directly informs the Fish283and Wildlife Service's bag limits for migratory bird hunting284seasons. Eliminating this research would hobble the management285of migratory bird hunting seasons. One of the seven pillars of286the North American Model of Wildlife conservation, the287foundation of wildlife management in the United States, is288scientific management. We cannot manage wildlife without289wildlife science.290    The budget proposal also overturns the bipartisan work of291this Committee in 2020 to pass the Great American Outdoors Act,292signed into law by this President. Instead of supporting293reauthorization of this great accomplishment, this budget robs294the Land and Water Conservation Fund in order to pay for295deferred maintenance projects. And lastly, but most296importantly, this budget request, if implemented, would cause297irreparable harm to Indian Country. With 30-plus percent cuts298to the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Bureau of Indian299Education, this budget represents a dereliction of every treaty300obligation this country has to tribes and their members. This301proposal even cuts the BIA's Public Safety Account, belying any302claim that this Administration might try to make that it cares303for the safety of people in Indian Country.304    Mr. Secretary, you promised to prioritize the needs of305Indian Country in your time leading this Department, but this306budget simply doesn't give you the resources to be able to307effectively accomplish that. I think we need to do better,308which I say out of respect for you and our shared values. It is309often said of presidents' budget requests that they are dead on310arrival on Capitol Hill. For the sake of the shared landscapes311that we hold and trust for our grandchildren, I hope that's the312case for this budget.313    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Heinrich.314    Mr. Secretary, we will now hear from you in your opening315remarks before we proceed to questions.316    The time is yours.317318             STATEMENT OF HON. DOUGLAS J. BURGUM,319           SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR320321    Secretary Burgum. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Ranking322Member Heinrich. To the two of you and the distinguished323members of this Committee, thank you for the opportunity to324testify this morning in support of President Trump's Fiscal325Year 2026 budget request for the Department of the Interior and326discuss what our team is doing to make America safer, stronger,327more beautiful, and more prosperous.328    The Department oversees onshore and offshore energy329resources, honors federal trust responsibilities with our330tribal neighbors, delivers water to the West, oversees wildlife331refuges and national parks. The resources we sustainably govern332directly impact the lives of every American every day.333Interior-managed resources hold a significant position on334America's balance sheet. The public lands and minerals within335Interior domain include more than 480 million acres of surface336land, 750 million acres of subsurface and mineral estate, and337more than 2.5 billion acres offshore. Our natural resources are338natural assets and should be responsibly developed to grow our339economy, help balance the budget, and generate revenue for340American taxpayers. With common-sense approaches and modern341systems, we can increase return for our citizens, strengthen342our economy, and create great-paying and meaningful jobs, all343while protecting our beautiful lands, our abundant wildlife,344and our clean air and clean water.345    President Trump's 2026 budget requests $14.4 billion in346current authority for the Department, providing significant347savings to the American people. The 2026 budget for the348Department features strategic investments to further President349Trump's commitment to energy dominance, which is the foundation350of American prosperity, national security, and world peace. We351are increasing production of affordable, reliable energy on352federal lands. We have already taken measures to increase353production of oil in the Gulf of America by 100,000 barrels per354day, which will help reduce the price at the pump for American355families. And we proudly announced that the first historic356lease sale in the newly renamed Gulf of America will occur this357year.358    We are also busy rectifying the mountain of restrictions359designed to restrict resource development in America, and360especially in Alaska. We removed layers of red tape that361undermined coal production on federal lands. Clean American362coal is a triple win for our country, because thermal coal363provides reliable and affordable baseload electricity.364Metallurgical coal provides the foundation for bringing back365our steel industry, and the mining and refining of coal that366contains critical and rare earth minerals is absolutely367essential to secure our own domestic supply chains for our368defense, transportation, and technology industries. Right now,369America is in an artificial intelligence arms race with China.370Keeping domestic coal-fired generation open will help us win371that contest, while also driving down electricity costs for372American families and increasing the reliability of our grid.373The Department is also undertaking efforts to establish our374position as the leading producer and processor of critical and375rare earth minerals, which will create jobs and prosperity at376home, strengthen strategic and important domestic supply chains377for defense for the United States and for our allies, and378reduce the global influence of adversarial states.379    Preventing and combating wildfires is vitally important to380protect people, communities, and the environment. Nearly 65,000381wildfires burned more than 8.9 million acres across the United382States last year, endangering communities, critical383infrastructure, and local economies. Federal wildfire384mitigation and suppression responsibilities for wildland fire385are currently split across five agencies in two different386departments. The current budget is duplicative and an387ineffective structure. Today, this budget reforms federal388wildland fire management to create operational efficiencies by389unifying federal wildland fire responsibilities into a new390centralized U.S. Wildland Fire Service within the Department of391the Interior. This new service will streamline federal wildfire392suppression response, risk mitigation efforts, and coordination393with non-federal partners to combat the wildfire crisis.394    The Department of the Interior upholds the Federal395Government's unique trust responsibilities by fostering396government-to-government relations between the Federal397Government and federally recognized tribes, American Indians,398and Alaska Natives. This budget supports programs at the Bureau399of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Indian Education, and the Bureau400of Trust Funds Administration, sustaining the Federal401Government's support for the core programs that benefit tribal402communities.403    Since becoming Interior Secretary, I have had the404opportunity to travel the national parks, historic sites,405wildlife refuges, and more, to learn and hear from the406leadership on the ground. We are instituting changes to get407more people actually working in our parks and refuges, and are408looking forward to an outstanding summer. By opening more areas409to hunting and outdoor recreation, we are helping to drive410tourism, create jobs, and generate revenue for local411communities, all while promoting responsible stewardship of our412natural resources.413    Interior is also focused on streamlining our core business414operations, which will result in dramatically improved415efficiencies and lower costs for American taxpayers. This416budget is about putting America first and doing the best for417the American taxpayer. As Interior moves forward, these418initiatives set the foundation for a renewed focus on419responsible resource management and economic growth. I look420forward to working closely with you to advance the President's421priorities.422    [The prepared statement of Secretary Burgum follows:]423    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]424425    The Chairman. Thanks so much, Mr. Secretary.426    We are now going to turn to alternating five-minute rounds.427I will ask the first series, then go to Senator Heinrich, and428then we will alternate back and forth in order of seniority,429subject to the early bird rule on the Committee, between430Democratic and Republican Senators. And we will proceed that431way.432    Mr. Secretary, the housing crisis is one that is felt in433many parts of the country, but it is especially severe in some434of our western states, like my home State of Utah, where the435Federal Government controls the vast majority of land--about436two-thirds of it, nearly 70 percent. Now, as you know, one of437my top priorities has been to make a small percentage of438underused federal land available to address housing439affordability. The truth is that federal land is a massive440underutilized asset, and local communities in the West are441often those that pay the highest price for federal inaction in442this area. Now, I was encouraged to hear President Trump talk443at length about the need to use unused federal land to address444the housing crisis, and I was very excited to see the joint445HUD-Interior task force that you helped to establish. Thank you446for doing that to take the lead in this area.447    A bill that I have introduced, called the HOUSES Act, is448something that follows through on the President's commitment--449promises made, promises kept. Could you expand a little bit450more on how just a fraction of one percent of underutilized451federal land could help address the western housing crisis?452    Secretary Burgum. Yes, I would be happy to, Chairman.453    As I said at the opening, just within Interior there are454about 480 million acres of surface. You take the U.S. Forest455Service, you can add another couple hundred million on that. If456you took that number, 680 million acres of surface, and you457said one percent of that, that would be 6.8 million acres. But458we don't need to even think about that, I mean, let's just459think about an example--Harry Reid, when he was the Senate460Majority Leader, passed bipartisan legislation called the461Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act, that instructed and462created a framework on how to dispose of lands in Southern463Nevada, particularly in fast-growing Clark County, around Las464Vegas. The Secretary of HUD and I were in Las Vegas there.465There was a land transaction that we conducted through that466process. Only 41 acres were sold--41 acres. We're not talking467hundreds of thousands or millions--41 acres produced $16.75468million back to the Federal Government from that small land469sale. Another parcel that we were on was being sold through470that to build affordable housing. It was about an 80-acre471parcel. This isn't recreation land. This isn't national park472land. This isn't resource land. This is right next to a four-473lane, you know, not a highway, but it was, you know, a busy474four-lane street with center turn lanes with billboards on the475side of it, billboards sitting on top of the federal land. And476that is going to provide much needed housing for the fast-477growing Henderson.478    In your own state, we have been able, since February, since479I have been in office, we have conducted two land swaps. These480were things that were long considered, but not executed, which481again, swapped land between the Federal Government and the482state, filling in the checkerboard. In one case, we got land483from Utah that helped us fill in a checkerboard of federal484wilderness, but we also freed up land for the State of Utah to485be able to use more productively. So, as you stated so486articulately, we have a lot of value trapped in land,487particularly bordering our fast-growing metro areas. We did a488study of all these federal lands, and there are 250,000 acres489that are within just a few miles of cities of 5,000 or more.490And again, in the states like Idaho, Utah, Nevada, and491particularly where we have a high, high percentage of federal492land, we have a great opportunity to help lower the cost of493housing by being smart, on a case-by-case basis, in moving494forward with projects that help communities and help our495states.496    The Chairman. Thank you.497    It's no secret that the Department of the Interior has a498maintenance backlog. It's a significant one. Backlog that some499have estimated at more than $33 billion, yet past500administrations have prioritized land acquisition over501responsible stewardship of the land the Federal Government502already owns. Would you agree that before we acquire more land,503the Department should first do everything it can to take care504of the land that it already owns?505    Secretary Burgum. Yes, absolutely, sir. And we have a506massive deferred maintenance backlog, not just in our national507parks, of course, we have it there, but across BLM, U.S. Fish508and Wildlife, every place I have been I have seen deferred509maintenance, whether that's building roads, access. Back to the510Southern Nevada Lands Act, which could be a model--some of the511revenue that came from those land sales goes into and back into512recreation. I had an opportunity to visit on BLM land a new513visitor center that is being built near Henderson. The funding514for that new visitor center is coming from a portion of those515land sales. The Bureau of Reclamation applied for and got a516grant. There is a new visitor center being built at Hoover Dam,517which is not only hugely important for electrical generation518and for irrigation, but there is a new visitor center there519also paid for by these land sales. So one of the ways to solve520for some of the deferred maintenance is to be strategic in how521we dispose of federal lands and then recirculate those dollars522into improving the recreational opportunities and the523educational opportunities for our citizens.524    The Chairman. Great. Thank you very much. My time is525expired.526    Senator Heinrich.527    Senator Heinrich. Thank you. Welcome, Secretary.528    I want to continue on this same vein, and when will we know529which lands are being considered for land sales? And also, I530want to ask you if you have--well, let's just start with that531so that we can have a public process here so that the public532can understand, really, what's at stake and so we can get533beyond the current dynamic of what people are imagining, but534actually understanding what lands you are talking about in this535process.536    Secretary Burgum. Yes, thank you, Ranking Member. Right537now, we are on the proposal stage. And so, we have taken a538look, as I have just described it, at a macro level. We have539tried to take a look and say--we have taken a look of how many540acres do we have that might be something that could be of high541value for an alternative use, say, like housing, that has low542value for recreation, mineral resources, et cetera. And those,543typically, are things that are directly adjacent to, you know,544an existing and fast-growing population center. So that was our545first target.546    And of course, those are occurring, most likely, in the547states that I have described as the three states that have the548highest percentage of federal land--or the four. Idaho, Alaska,549Utah, and Nevada have the highest percentage of federal land550and also have got fast-growing communities that are bumping up551against low-value federal land.552    Senator Heinrich. I think to make sure that we are dealing553with lands that are as you describe, one of the most important554things will be to have a transparent and public process. Will555you hold public meetings before offering those potential lands556up for sale?557    Secretary Burgum. Yes, absolutely. And I want to reassure558members here and the public that, you know, there won't be an559acre of any of our 63 national parks that are considered up for560sale. I mean, this is not about our most sacred and beautiful561places. This is often about, like I said, you know, barren land562next to highways with existing billboards that have no563recreational value, but you know, would represent--do564represent--a constraint. In some cases, cities are leapfrogging565their infrastructure beyond the federal land, creating566additional infrastructure cost for those cities. And of course,567when we can do infill, that helps create a great revenue568opportunity for us to help, whether it's deferred maintenance,569new recreational opportunities, or reducing the deficit, but it570also helps those cities operate more efficiently.571    Senator Heinrich. You talked about the Southern Nevada572legislation, but there is actually a federal program that is573available to every single state for the BLM to utilize, and574that is the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act. The575funds that get generated from public lands that get sold under576that legislation go to recreation, they go to access, they go577to conservation. We are currently developing some housing in578New Mexico using that framework. Is that a framework you have579looked at for this process?580    Secretary Burgum. I certainly want to look at all the581models that we have today that are already working and learn582from them as we go forward to make sure that we are using the583best practices that we have identified.584    Senator Heinrich. Obviously, the advantage of FLTFA over--585the Southern Nevada was designed for a specific county. And so,586it's kind of a one-off. I would urge you to look at FLTFA, in587part because it's something that is available to you now. It's588proven. We have used it in New Mexico several times, and it's589available west-wide.590    When you were before the Senate Appropriations Committee,591we talked about this plan to potentially downsize the National592Park System by transferring some sites out of federal593management to the states, and I sent you a follow-up letter on594that. I very much appreciate that you replied to my letter, but595what your reply did not include is just what sites might these596be. Where are you in that process? Because, you know, we are597several months now from the next budget year, and if this is598going to be a serious proposal, the American people deserve to599understand what is potentially on the list.600    Secretary Burgum. Yes, and I want to go back to your601opening remarks that suggested that we would need to be602disposing of hundreds and hundreds of these smaller park units603to make up some kind of budget deficit. I just would say,604having had an opportunity to dig into the park service budget,605I don't think that is the case. I think we have a tremendous606amount of overhead that we are operating across the Federal607Government in general, and across Interior in general. And I608think that, as I learned as Governor of North Dakota, when we609were able to reduce spending by 27 percent, there was a lot of610anxiety when we had to do that, but we were able to do that and611not--we actually increased the money that went to our parks. We612created a new state park in North Dakota, even after reducing613budgets, because we took cost out of what I call the overhead614that was occurring in the capital.615    Senator Heinrich. That is precisely why we need a plan,616right?617    Secretary Burgum. Yes.618    Senator Heinrich. So that we're not arguing over619hypotheticals.620    Secretary Burgum. Yes.621    Senator Heinrich. So that we are arguing over real numbers.622Given the fact that this is a budget year that we have to deal623with now, as the Congress, I want to understand what those real624impacts are, what the sites are that are being considered. Is625there a list or a plan that you can get us, you know, in a626week? In a month?627    Secretary Burgum. Well, certainly not in a week because one628of the challenges we are having, even if we have a proposal629like this, one of the things I have found is, I would say,630really almost staggering from an operational standpoint, is631that the systems that we have make it almost impossible to get632information. You know, I hear regularly about, you know, we633have 330 million people visiting parks. Those aren't 330634million different people, those are visitor days, but then we635often don't even have the data to find out, are those people636that live in the local community? Are they international637visitors? How often? I mean, if you are going to dispose of638something like the Knife River Indian Village in North Dakota,639that I think only, you know, may have less than a thousand640visitors in an entire season, and yet, we have a park641superintendent and other people there and federal dollars, and642that would fit, in my own state, nicely into our state historic643society framework, which could then take advantage of local644resources to manage it.645    You know, our target would be to look at the places that646have very low visitation, but even if you would ask a question647like, hey, please give me the visitation by each of these over648400 sites, that, you know, there are numbers that are not--649there are not good data on that. So it's going to be difficult650to make great decisions quickly. We just have to try to create651the data framework, because I would want to have any decisions652we make be data driven, and that is going to make it more653difficult to identify how we can do things that make sense from654a budget standpoint.655    The Chairman. Thank you.656    Senator Barrasso.657    Senator Barrasso. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.658    Good to see you again, Mr. Secretary. Thanks for the great659job you are doing. A couple of quick questions.660    I think during your initial hearing for this position, we661talked about leasing and permitting for energy development, and662I thought it was a disaster under the previous administration.663Can you just talk a little bit about what actions the664Department has taken over the past number of months to correct665course and what it plans to do in the next fiscal year?666    Secretary Burgum. Thank you, Senator.667    Well, first of all, part of what we are doing is trying to668reverse some of the activity which didn't follow the law last669time around because, you know, part of what precedes permitting670sometimes is leasing, and the Federal Government, under the671Biden administration, was, as proven by court--you know, states672took the Federal Government, the Biden administration, to673court. The Biden administration lost. They were supposed to be674holding lease sales. They weren't. When they don't hold a lease675sale, that is lost revenue to the American public. So again,676trying to get back on track on both onshore and offshore lease677sales, both in the Lower 48 and the Gulf of America, and in678Alaska, has been a big effort. On the permitting standpoint, we679are getting closer to putting up a transparency dashboard,680which will be able to show by department, by state, by permit681type, where permits are in the process, how many days they have682been in the queue. I think that shining this light on this will683help the public and others understand, you know, just how much684red tape we have created, but it will also create an685opportunity for us to accelerate.686    We also quietly announced that we felt that we could get an687environmental assessment (EA) done in less than 14 days and688that we could get an environmental impact statement (EIS) in689less than 28 days. On the pilots that we have done already,690both of those have been accomplished.691    Senator Barrasso. Great.692    Secretary Burgum. People have said, how is that even693possible that you can reduce something by such a factor, but it694turns out that if you are doing an EA and somebody works on it695for a few hours and they pass it on to somebody else and it696sits on their desk for a month and then they pick it up, they697work on it and they pass it on. By the time you get it, a year698has gone by. You know, we have an opportunity where we could699put more minutes on mission, more time on task in two weeks700than what they might have put in a year in the quality of701product we can put up. At the end of that we will inform the702decisions that the private sector and public local political703subdivisions need to make. So I know that we can actually704deliver a work product faster.705    Senator Barrasso. Great.706    Secretary Burgum. But this is about improved business707processes. And of course, in your state, we are now--in a few708weeks, we are going to be permitting new mining operations for709the first time in decades in this country, and we have approved710it for the first time in Montana, some mining operations. So711again, we are back--this nation has to get back in the mining712game. We have got to get back in the energy development game,713and we are pleased to be part of that.714    Senator Barrasso. In addition, talk about my state, you715know, after the Biden administration lost the election, they716came out with some punishing things. Out of office, they lose717the House, lose the Senate, lose the White House, and their718Bureau of Land Management finalized what was the Rock Springs719Resource Management Plan, which is the final plan. It is720punishing to the State of Wyoming, devastating the people and721the economy of Southwest Wyoming, locking up millions of acres722of land that local communities and the entire state rely upon.723Can you just talk about what the Department is doing now?724    Secretary Burgum. Well, the Rock Springs RMP, as well as725the Buffalo one, I mean, these are a couple of things that were726incredibly egregious that weren't really management plans. I727mean, they were creating new concepts out of whole cloth that728were really meant to restrict all forms of land use, as opposed729to following the multi-use mandate that we are given. So those730are under review, and we hope to get back to following the law731and making sure that the citizens of Wyoming and those private732landowners that live in those areas have the same opportunities733to thrive that others do without the heavy hand of government.734    Senator Barrasso. And we knew, as in your home state and735mine, we are very fortunate to have great relationships across736the state with private, state, federal partners. In Lander,737Wyoming, there is a U.S. Fish and Wildlife office that serves738both tribal nations--the Northern Arapaho, the Eastern739Shoshone--on the Wind River Reservation, along with our740neighboring counties. The office does valuable work for741Wyoming, such as big game monitoring, studies of wildlife742disease, grizzly bear management, habitat restoration. There743has been some confusion on the status of the office as to744whether the staff are currently present or not. Can you give us745an update on the current status of the Fish and Wildlife office746there?747    Secretary Burgum. The Lander, Wyoming office is an748important office, and we are going to make sure that it is749staffed and able to execute their important duties and do that750from the Lander office as opposed to working remotely from751someplace else.752    Senator Barrasso. Great.753    In terms of sage grouse, we are the home of a large754population of Greater Sage Grouse and habitat. For over 15755years, Wyoming has been in the forefront of adopting and paying756for new management approaches to protect this species. The757Biden administration proposed to designate over 600,000 acres758as so-called areas of critical environmental concern, which is759basically a way of locking up the land. Is the Department760planning on reopening the Greater Sage Grouse Management Plan,761do you know?762    Secretary Burgum. Yes, the greater sage grouse is neither763on the threatened or endangered species list, and this critical764habitat, you described again, is another whole-cloth creation,765effectively creating a wilderness area out of nothing. And so,766we are taking a hard look at that because we want to get back767to following the actual law.768    Senator Barrasso. Great.769    Thank you, Mr. Secretary.770    The Chairman. Senator Wyden.771    Senator Wyden. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.772    Good to see you, Mr. Secretary, and I know when you came to773see me, you didn't know a whole lot about the details of the774clean energy tax law that I wrote, and particularly its775manufacturing encouragement and the critical minerals. And so,776I want to talk to you about where we are now. I believe the777administration today, on this technology-neutral law, is making778an unforced error because the administration, with the House779bill, is basically taking clean energy sources off the table.780Now, just in the last couple of days, energy company owners781that have gas plants, they have gas holdings, are saying they782need more energy now and that renewables have got to be part of783that equation. So my question to you is, why not work with us784here in the Senate so that we can fix these provisions in the785House bill on renewables that basically are putting clean786energy through bureaucratic water torture. Let's clean that up,787and as a result, we could do more to work together for your788concept of energy dominance, market growth, and more than789anything, do it without mandates. That's what the law says790today. Why not go that route and clean up the House bill now?791    Secretary Burgum. Well, Senator, I would love to connect792with you following this hearing and learn more about the gas793plant operators that you are saying need more.794    Senator Wyden. Ketchum, the head of NextERA Energy, the795President's hometown utility, said ``I need electrons now. Get796them to me from any possible source.'' But renewables have got797to be part of it. So why can't we make that part of your798agenda?799    Secretary Burgum. Well, I would say the House bill800reflects, I think, a priority, which is that we need to have801reliable and affordable, and some of what we tend to call802renewables would fall into the category of being intermittent803and expensive. And so, I think that has been the----804    Senator Wyden. But this is about creating choices. And my805time is short. There are no mandates here. I understand you are806interested in issues relating to batteries, that can deal with807intermittent questions, but let's get down to fixing this808flawed House bill that--executives are now all over Capitol809Hill saying that we really like technology-neutral. We like the810concept. We want to make it work. Right now, it includes811provisions that--so, make the provisions with respect to812international aspects unworkable. They call this ``Hill kill813the American business structure.'' We need to correct those814kinds of provisions. I would like you to be part of that, and815we will follow up with you.816    Let me talk to you next about the parks. We are having817terrible problems with respect to Crater Lake. The818superintendent of this treasure left because he didn't have the819staff to protect it. Now, you all are saying that these reports820say that visitors can have the same kind of experience this821year that they have had in the past. That's not what we are822hearing in Oregon. What we are hearing in Oregon, you know,823they have problems even with volunteers running the show. So my824question on this issue is, can you make a commitment to work825with me to ensure that all the national park sites in Oregon826have the staff and resources they need?827    Secretary Burgum. Yes, absolutely. And I would say at this828time that we do have thousands of positions that we filled for829summer, hiring in the parks, and in addition to summer help in830the parks, also wildland firefighters. And so, if anybody is831listening, we are still hiring at the parks for summer832positions. So I would be happy to continue to work with you on833staffing up.834    Senator Wyden. The last one is on wildfire. I can tell you835we are expecting more heat in Oregon than we thought we were836going to have, particularly in eastern Oregon. Federal staffing837is well behind where it should be because of the hiring freeze.838Can you assure Oregonians today that despite these issues, we839are going to have the firefighting staff that we need?840    Secretary Burgum. Yes, because there is no hiring freeze on841wildland firefighters, and we are staffed between Interior and842U.S. Forest Service about identically where we were last year,843at about 17,000 firefighters. If there is a discrepancy in844Oregon, we will be happy to look at that.845    Senator Wyden. I have a few seconds left. I want to go back846to my first request. My door is open to work with you on this847question of a technology-neutral policy. It makes sense. The848markets like it. Companies like it. It would allow us,849particularly in the case of somebody having gas holdings, to do850something now about this great need when we are concerned about851AI to make sure we have enough energy. You are interested in852that, but we have got to fix the problems in the House bill853because companies are telling me they are drowning in the854bureaucracy and trying to figure out how it would work. We can855do better than this, and we would like to work with you.856    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.857    Secretary Burgum. Thank you, Senator.858    The Chairman. Senator Daines.859    Senator Daines. Secretary Burgum, good to see you here860today. I am grateful for your leadership. You have made a lot861of significant accomplishments here over the first five or six862months of your tenure. Thank you.863    One issue that we are focused on in Montana, among many, is864grizzly bears. As you are well aware, the Fish and Wildlife865Service advanced a proposal on grizzly bears in January that we866have spoken on. I want to again emphasize that this Biden-era867proposal punishes Montana's successful grizzly bear recovery868efforts. We should celebrate the fact that the bear populations869are way over the recovery targets, delist the bear, and870transfer the responsibility of the management of that great871species back to the State of Montana. Your agency reviews the872status of bears. Would you commit to looking at those recovery873targets that were set by FWS for the Greater Yellowstone874Ecosystem and the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem, which,875by the way, have been well exceeded?876    Secretary Burgum. Yes, absolutely, I will commit to that.877And you are absolutely correct, well exceeded by more than878double, I think.879    Senator Daines. It is. You are exactly right. You know, for880Greater Yellowstone, 500 bears was the recovery target. We are881at 1,100 bears right now. So it's time to celebrate recovery882and delist the bears.883    I want to move to the Bull Mountains mine and coal884operations. Montana is home to three major coal mines that have885been in limbo for years because of inaction by the Biden886administration. But under your leadership--I was talking about887it on the radio here this morning, in fact, what you did--you888have got Montana back on track. Earlier this year, you approved889the Spring Creek Mine in eastern Montana, and just last week,890you approved the Bull Mountains Coal Mine in Roundup. I can891tell you, there are a lot of Montana families who depend on892those jobs who are--it's a big sigh of relief at the moment. So893I want to thank you for prioritizing that made-in-Montana894energy. It's not going unnoticed. And, by the way, some have895said this was not well thought out and that this was a knee-896jerk reaction. This is the 700-page EIS for the Bull Mountains897Mine.898    [Photograph of the Environmental Impact Statement displayed899follows:]900[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1237.006901902    Senator Daines. It is the result of extensive public903comment, extensive public input, years of review, and that is904contained in this EIS. I know the community in Montana is905grateful for the hard work your team put into this. The last906piece of the puzzle is the Rosebud Coal Mine, which feeds the907Colstrip Power Plant. I hope to see that permit in the very908near future.909    Secretary Burgum, my question is this: could you speak to910the work you are doing to support more made-in-America energy911and the work you have done in Montana?912    Secretary Burgum. Well, be happy to, and again, it's913exciting to see what is going on in Montana. It's an example of914what could happen in this country, because when we have915reliable, clean, affordable baseload going into our grid, that916creates opportunities for everyone. Lower energy prices drive917every aspect of the economy. Having affordable, reliable918electricity right now is key to artificial intelligence. It is919key to manufacturing, and in a state like Montana, that is920supportive of having ample amounts of baseload, it is going to921be attracting advanced manufacturing, attracting AI data922centers, attracting jobs, helping your universities and your923schools.924    And it's an interesting thing right now, where we have925people that are pursuing energy poverty in some other states.926It's great we have 50 states, because states can have some of927their own approaches. We are--in Interior and the Trump928Administration--we are trying to help all 50 states. Some are929welcoming that help. Others less so. But I think Montana is a930shining example of what a state can do. I mean, you're going to931have electricity prices that might be 50 percent lower than932other parts of the country.933    And you know, if you're someone who is thinking about a $10934billion capital investment in an AI data center, you're going935to go to a place like Montana and say, I am going to go to a936place where they actually believe in having affordable,937reliable electricity.938    Senator Daines. You know, what's amazing, Secretary Burgum,939is Montana has the most recoverable coal of any state in the940United States. It's one of the sometimes undertold facts. The941welcome sign is out, Secretary Burgum. Thank you for your942leadership.943    Secretary Burgum. And in that coal, in addition to thermal944coal for electricity, there are also critical minerals.945    Senator Daines. There are.946    Secretary Burgum. And those critical minerals are947absolutely important for us to have secure supply chains. This948is one of the important challenges we are facing as a country,949and Montana can be part of the solution.950    Senator Daines. Secretary, I want to close with the America951the Beautiful Act. My good friend Angus King and I have worked952long to protect and strengthen our national parks. Last month,953we introduced the America the Beautiful Act to reauthorize the954National Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund.955Remember, when President Trump signed the Great American956Outdoors Act, many said it was the greatest conservation win in95750 years, signed by President Trump. The only problem we have958is that it expires after five years. Well, it has been five959years, believe it or not. It's time to renew this to deal with960the crumbling infrastructure and the deferred maintenance961problems we have in our national parks. With America's 250th962birthday around the corner, I can't think of a better gift to963give America than to sign that bill. We are working hard on964that, Senator King and I. This is a legacy item for President965Trump.966    Mr. Secretary, will you work with Senator King and me to967get this to the President's desk as soon as possible?968    Secretary Burgum. Absolutely.969    Senator Daines. All right, thank you.970    The Chairman. Senator King.971    Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.972    Governor, which I consider a higher title than Secretary or973Senator, just so you know. I am disappointed----974    Secretary Burgum. As a former Governor.975    Senator King. That's right. Oh, yes, that's true.976    I am disappointed, Mr. Secretary, with the budget,977particularly for the National Park Service. First, is what978materials we have been given. This is the budget justification979for the National Park Service for the 2025 budget that's980submitted to Congress so that we have something we can work981from and work with. That's 2025. This is what we have been982given this year for 2026.983    [Side-by-side comparison of the FY25 and FY26 National Park984Service Budget Justifications follows:]985[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1237.007986987    Senator King. That's just--that's an insult to the988Congress. That's not adequate to give us the data that we need989in order to make the oversight decisions, because we don't know990the details of what's being done. There is some boiler plate in991here about how we are going to make things more efficient. It's992hard for me to understand how gutting America's best idea isn't993America's worst idea.994    A 37 percent cut in the National Park Service budget, which995was already underfunded, I don't believe is responsible. The996word stewardship has come up in this hearing several times.997That ain't stewardship. Here is some data.998    [Displayed chart follows:]999    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1930.04010001001    Senator King. This is visitation at our National Parks1002going back to 2010. The blue bars are visitation. The orange is1003staff at the National Park Service. So you can see there was1004already growing disparity back in 2010. This is where staffing1005was. This is where visitation was. Here is where we are as of1006this budget. We are here. That's where we are as of this1007budget. We are already woefully understaffed, and you are1008talking about cutting the budget by another third.1009    Now, my real question is why? The $1.2 billion you are1010cutting from the National Park Service is devastating to the1011National Park Service. It doesn't amount to anything in terms1012of our federal budget. I did a calculation. If our federal1013budget was the height of this room, what you are cutting from1014the National Park Service is the combined height of two credit1015cards. In other words, to save virtually no money from the1016federal budget, we are devastating one of America's treasures.1017That's what I don't understand. And you, yourself, a few1018minutes ago said we don't have the data. You don't have the1019visitation data. This is ready, fire, aim. How about waiting a1020year, developing the data, finding out what it is, because you1021can't convince me that a detailed analysis of the National Park1022Service took place in the last couple of months to justify this1023pitiful submission to this Committee.1024    So I am anxious to hear. We all know the term bang for the1025buck. This is damage for the buck. This is huge damage to the1026Park Service for a very minimal return in terms of reduction to1027the deficit, reduction of our federal budget. Why in the world,1028given your commitment to the National Parks, the new park, the1029Teddy Roosevelt Park in your state, why did you let them do1030this?1031    Secretary Burgum. Senator, I want to just--first, I1032appreciate the chart that you are holding up behind there. I1033believe that that number, if I can see it correctly, probably1034is the full-time staffing, as opposed to the summer and1035seasonal. I think that we actually have, you know, it's a mix.1036I think that line, I am trying to see there.1037    Senator King. Well, you allowed more seasonals for this1038year, but I understand only half of them have been hired and we1039are in the summer right now.1040    Secretary Burgum. More than half have been hired, but I1041think, again, this is a mix. Again, I just got back from a trip1042to Alaska. I was at Kenai Fjords. This is, you know, a1043beautiful and amazing park. It's, you know, the road gets1044plowed in May. It snows over in November. You know, this is a1045classic case where we need a lot of staffing. Cruise ships are1046stopping in Seward. They get, you know, hundreds of thousands1047of visitors over a three- or four-month period, and in the1048wintertime, the visitor centers aren't even open. So we have to1049figure out a way to be able to do flex staffing. It's not just1050as simple as the raw number. And the one number that I was able1051to----1052    Senator King. Well, the raw number--there may be details in1053here, but it's pretty unmistakable, the trend on this chart1054and----1055    Secretary Burgum. But the other thing----1056    Senator King. But again, I don't understand. You are saving1057a very small amount of money. You are gutting the--I looked it1058up last night--the National Park Service is the most popular1059federal agency--the most popular federal agency. Why in the1060world would you target this agency, particularly when you,1061yourself, in your testimony today, said, I don't have the data?1062    Secretary Burgum. Well, we are working----1063    Senator King. That's ready, fire, aim. Get the data.1064Understand the details of the budget. Give us something like1065this, and then we can decide what the plan should be. To echo1066the Vice Chair, what is the plan for doing this in a thoughtful1067way, not an arbitrary way of, you know, all probationary1068employees and that kind of thing?1069    Secretary Burgum. Well, in that thick book that you have1070there, I am certain that there is one thing that is missing,1071which is how many of those people actually work in a park,1072because we spent eight weeks this spring rebuilding all the1073H.R. data to find out, of all the people you have in your1074chart, how many work in a park, because the real issue that1075citizens want is, do I have an interpretative person? Do I have1076a ranger? Do I have, you know, are the bathrooms clean? And so,1077part of that is making sure that we have fewer people working,1078you know, in places like Washington, DC, and more people1079working in the parks. I believe that we can reduce what we1080spend in overhead in the park and have more people actually1081working in the parks. And in a place like Yellowstone this1082summer, there are more people right now on the ground in1083Yellowstone than there were three years ago.1084    Senator King. And I would like to see that plan before you1085submit a budget that cuts the budget by 37 percent, that's all.1086    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1087    Secretary Burgum. I just want to say one thing, Mr.1088Chairman. It's one thing that we are in the saddest point in1089America if we say that cutting a billion dollars is1090meaningless, or it's as thin as a piece of paper. We are all1091Americans. We were all part of a budget. Last year, this1092country spent $2,000 billion--$2,000 billion--more than we1093brought in. That's what a $2 trillion deficit is. And to think1094that we can't find savings in every agency, particularly when1095we have got, you know, decades-old IT systems and way too many1096people in overhead. I mean, we just have to all agree that we1097can be more efficient and still deliver great services at1098places like our national parks. We can do both of those things.1099It's not an either/or. These are false trade-offs. We can have1100better experiences at the parks, better staffing at the parks,1101and we can have fewer people working for the National Park1102System. My best guess is that barely half of the people of that1103number actually work in a park. The rest are in some other1104jobs.1105    Senator King. Part of the responsibility of the National1106Park Service is stewardship and resource management, not1107necessarily being park rangers. That is part of the1108responsibility of the Organic Act of the National Parks. And I1109point out that $600 billion of that deficit that you mentioned1110could be covered by better enforcement at the IRS of a lot of1111people not paying their taxes--$600 billion. That is the1112estimate that the deficit could be reduced.1113    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1114    The Chairman. Thank you.1115    Senator Hoeven, you are up next.1116    Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Secretary/Governor1117Burgum, thanks for being here. Thanks for your commitment to do1118both. And I agree, provide better service, and still find1119savings. And I think you can do it, and I think you will do it.1120I think you will show that that's exactly what you are going to1121do. I have seen you do it before. Thanks for being here today.1122    In addition to all your tasks as Secretary of the Interior,1123you are also the leader, or the Chairman of the National Energy1124Dominance Council. So I want to talk to you about that work and1125how that is progressing as well. So if you would, I mean, as1126you know, I am all in on energy dominance for this country. Our1127state is a huge part of it, and we want to continue to be a1128huge part of it, and that involves both private land, but also1129public land, right? So it fits with your day job as Secretary1130of Interior. So talk to me. What steps is the Department and1131are you taking to unleash more oil, gas, and coal production on1132federal lands, onshore and off, to help meet the growing demand1133in our reliance, not only for ourselves, for energy with AI and1134everything else that is going on, but also, to partner with our1135allies to get them off energy from countries like Russia and1136other adversaries?1137    Secretary Burgum. Well, thank you, Senator Hoeven and thank1138you for being such a champion for energy policy. You understand1139as well as anyone that the right energy policy drives American1140prosperity and it drives peace abroad. So thank you for your1141support.1142    The approach has been, again, a lot of this is coming from1143President Trump's executive orders, unleashing Alaska's1144extraordinary potential, the energy emergency that he signed on1145day one, appropriately, because of the risk that we are facing1146with our electrical grid in this country and also the risk that1147we are facing with critical minerals. These are key things that1148our nation is up against for insecure supply chain. So across1149the board, we have been working to try to accelerate projects.1150We do that first by following the law. As you know, the Biden1151administration failed to hold lease sales, onshore, offshore.1152They closed down areas, even like the National Petroleum1153Reserve-Alaska, which was, you know, designed in 1923 to be a1154petroleum reserve. Going through the steps to reopen the public1155lands that were designated for energy resource, we are going1156through those steps.1157    As you have heard from some of your fellow Senators here,1158whether it's coal mines in Wyoming or Montana, or Alabama,1159metallurgical coal, we are back in the business. We have to get1160back in the mining business. We have killed mining--not we--but1161the prior administration has basically killed mining in this1162country. And if we're not mining, we're not in the critical1163minerals business. If we're not in the critical minerals1164business, we can't build a fighter jet, we can't build a car,1165we can't build a cell phone--all of those things that we need1166to be. So it's across the board, oil, gas, you know, rolling1167back the Biden export ban. We are seeing record amounts of1168capital investment coming to this country around AI because1169they know that this is a country now that is committed to1170building the power to power the future economy.1171    Senator Hoeven. Well, I am not surprised, but you went1172right to my next question before I even asked it, and that is1173critical minerals. You will be glad to know in your home state1174we are just christening a plant that is going to convert--or1175that is going to process nickel for advanced battery1176manufacturing in the United States, so we don't have to get it1177from China. And of course, that is the legacy of some of the1178great work that you did as Governor. But you went right to my1179next question, which was on critical minerals, which is a key1180part of it, too.1181    Also, I would add that under the very strong leadership of1182Chairman Lee, we are going to provide some more tools for you1183both in terms of lower taxes and less regulation that is going1184to help continue this all-in effort for energy dominance.1185    The other thing, and again, as people get to know you, they1186are going to know that you have a love for the national parks.1187I mean, I know it. I have known you for over 30 years. You love1188the national parks. But you are also a rancher, so talk to me1189about what we can do for our ranchers who are on public lands1190as well, grasslands and other aspects, and of course, that1191farming, ranching, that goes to forestry, that goes to so many1192things. People don't realize what a huge diverse industry Ag1193is. What can you do in that realm?1194    Secretary Burgum. Well, one of the things we can do is make1195sure that we are speeding up permitting. And again, as we work1196toward, I mean, because, again, you have a grazing permit on1197BLM land or U.S. Forest Service land that can hold up people,1198and if they have uncertainty about their permits, that affects1199these ranch families. So we are redoing the whole permitting1200process, putting up a permitting transparency dashboard,1201holding the BLM offices at the state and local level1202accountable for how fast they get permits, helping them with1203the IT systems to address backlog.1204    We just have to be in the business of serving our1205customers. When a rancher is getting a grazing permit from us,1206they are the customer. They pay us, the Federal Government, for1207that right. When someone is getting a timber permit from us,1208they are paying us. We want to be in the business of serving1209those customers because when they pay us, they are paying us,1210meaning that is revenue to the Federal Government. That helps1211reduce the deficit. That helps, you know, us have resources to1212be able to, you know, tackle deferred maintenance. So we just1213have to, again, get back into the business of the people that1214are utilizing public lands, appropriately following the law,1215that we serve them like the customers that they are.1216    Senator Hoeven. Right. And they live out there. They are1217good stewards of the land. That's their home. And the other1218thing that is really important is access, as I know you know.1219    Thank you for your good work.1220    Secretary Burgum. Yeah, and we have opened up--we have1221taken steps to open up hundreds of thousands of more acres to1222hunting and fishing. There is red tape there, so we are1223increasing access as we go through this.1224    Senator Hoeven. Glad you brought that up. We both love1225hunting and fishing, so thank you.1226    Secretary Burgum. Yeah.1227    The Chairman. Senator Padilla.1228    Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and just to note,1229I don't have questions this morning about critical minerals,1230but I am glad to hear Senator Hoeven and the Secretary engage1231in that conversation.1232    Mr. Secretary, the invitation remains open to come visit1233Lithium Valley in Southern California and see the tremendous1234potential there for lithium and other critical materials as1235well. It feels like it has been years since you were here for1236your confirmation hearing and your vote and our previous1237conversation. So I hope you are enjoying the job and it's1238everything you were looking forward to and then some, but look,1239we are knee-deep on a number of issues and concerns, so I will1240get right into it.1241    As I am sure you are aware, the Department of Justice, just1242yesterday, published an opinion that asserts that presidents1243have the authority to abolish national monuments. I know the1244Chairman made a reference to that in his remarks earlier today.1245I believe this is an extremely dangerous opinion that flies in1246the face of 90 years of precedent. And you and I discussed this1247when you were coming through for confirmation, because we1248worked very hard in recent years on establishing and expanding1249monuments in California in a very thoughtful and balanced way.1250So this is personal for me. Given the recent opinion, I do need1251to ask you, for the record, what are your intentions towards1252recently designated national monuments in California, which, as1253I have shared with you, enjoy strong bipartisan support, not1254just at the federal level, but from local and tribal leaders as1255well?1256    Secretary Burgum. Thank you, Senator, and I do want to tell1257you, I would love to accept your invitation to come out and1258visit, and of course, California does have some of the top1259critical mineral resources in the country and can play a really1260important role in our national security. So I look forward to1261talking to you about that.1262    On the monuments, we have a responsibility and direction to1263take a look at the recently created ones. I think this is1264something that we all know, if you just, again, we do have the1265data on that. And most of these monuments have been created in1266the last weeks and months of presidential terms, and always1267under the idea that everyone was consulted. I have had people1268in my office--not for the ones in California--but I have had1269people in my office saying hey, we weren't consulted. So,1270again, as we listen to the feedback from tribes and citizens1271and others around the country, we have a responsibility to get1272on the ground and do some ground truth. And I think the1273question is not whether their monument serves a purpose, I1274think the real question is the size that generally comes up,1275because there are people in communities, when we create1276restrictions on land use that does restrict some of their1277economic opportunity, and we want to listen to those as well.1278But again, we are looking for a balanced approach and I am1279happy to continue that dialogue with you.1280    Senator Padilla. Well, I appreciate that, but just, again,1281for the record, recognizing that states in the West tend to be1282larger than states in the East. So the appropriateness and size1283of monuments and other areas of designation tend to be larger1284because of the acreage that we are talking about. You mentioned1285engagement and consultation in the creation of monuments. That1286absolutely happened, as you know, in California. So I1287appreciate you recognizing the distinction. If it's going to be1288revisited or undone, we expect that same level of engagement on1289the back end before any action is taken or before any decisions1290are made.1291    I know my time is limited. Let me move to another topic. As1292you and I have talked in the past--water, water, water--so1293important to California and to everybody, but especially1294California. The Bureau of Reclamation, according to reports,1295has lost 1,400 public servants, approximately 25 percent of the1296agency's entire workforce. In the Bureau of Reclamation's1297regional office in Sacramento, there used to be 50 staff1298handling financial issues alone, and now, there are only 12.1299This is the staff that works to approve contracts, grants,1300agreements, et cetera. Yet, the Bureau of Reclamation's1301California office has cut its staff responsible for these1302aspects of water infrastructure by nearly 80 percent. Will you1303commit to look at the number of finance staff at Reclamation's1304California regional office to ensure that there is sufficient1305capacity there to meet the administrative needs of our critical1306water infrastructure and investments?1307    Secretary Burgum. Yes, happy to, for sure, take a look at1308that. I am a little surprised at the 80 percent because the1309only reductions so far would have been through people taking1310one of their early retirement options, unless in that data, and1311my team can follow up because we did take some people that are1312in finance, HR, and IT and roll them up to the Secretary's1313office because we felt there was an opportunity for unification1314at a broader level--you know, state, you know, versus say,1315regional. So I would want to make sure that some of those1316people--I am just wondering if they are still there and they1317are just being accounted in another area.1318    Senator Padilla. Well, accounted, but also where is their1319work--the roles, and responsibilities, and have they changed to1320still be California-specific or more broad for the Department.1321    I know my time is up. Let me just put a pin in, both on the1322Reclamation side, how critical it is, not just within1323California infrastructure, but also as we have discussed1324multiple times, the role Reclamation plays for all the Colorado1325River states, both in the Lower Basin and the Upper Basin. So1326we are going to be calling each other more frequently yet again1327after this hearing.1328    And lastly, we will submit for the record questions about1329the cuts to the U.S. Geological Survey. They play a critical1330role in developing ShakeAlert, the nation's only public1331earthquake early alert system that more than 50 million1332Americans depend on. Technology has come a long way. It can be1333very helpful to preserve, to save lives, and minimize damage in1334the event of inevitable earthquakes. And so, I want to revisit1335some of the budget cuts to that program as well.1336    Thank you, Mr. Chair.1337    The Chairman. Thank you.1338    Senator Hyde-Smith, you are up next.1339    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you1340Mr. Secretary for the great job that you are doing. And I so1341appreciate you revitalizing our nation's offshore energy1342potential. The short-sightedness of the last administration to1343block the lease sales in the lease areas could have been so1344much more detrimental, but thank you for bringing us back. And1345I truly think that the Department is headed in the right1346direction, and that revitalization is so important to states1347like Mississippi, who are on the Gulf of America, and the1348offshore oil and gas leasing in the Gulf of America is vital to1349ensure the entire nation's energy dominance, as we well know.1350And allowing states like Mississippi to continue to receive the1351GOMESA funds for coastal conservation and the restoration work,1352and for making funds available through programs like the1353American Battlefield Protection Program. The Battlefield1354Program plays so many important roles across the United States1355and helps to preserve the historically significant battlefields1356and parks like the Vicksburg Military Park, which is our number1357one tourist attraction in Mississippi, and it's good to see1358that the President's budget has included the funds for that1359program.1360    My question is, will you speak to the Department's1361commitment to ensuring our historic battlefields continue to1362have access to these funds, because it is very critical to us?1363    Secretary Burgum. Yes, thank you, Senator.1364    Yes, we have a commitment to that, and also, again, I mean,1365this is one of the--on a broader policy standpoint, when we1366develop our nation's resources, we have the revenue to go back1367to protect other things that people care deeply about. And one1368of the things, which I don't think is widely understood, is1369that the number one contributor to coastal restoration around1370the Gulf is revenue coming from the oil and gas industry as1371part of the revenue sharing from the royalties that the1372government receives from those that are developing. And so,1373again, whether it's, you know, battlefields or coastal1374restoration, it's a win-win for our Gulf states and it's a win-1375win for America when we have got the revenue to be able to, you1376know, both lower the cost of energy for all Americans, improve1377energy security, have more prosperity, but also have revenue1378that's not tax revenue, it's royalty revenue from an asset that1379we are participating in that helps pay for these things like,1380you know, the tourist attraction that is number one in your1381state, or whether it's coastal restoration, which matters to1382everyone.1383    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you for that commitment, and we1384are all enjoying that.1385    I am pleased that the budget request also highlights the1386need for marine minerals and expanding critical mineral1387information and access in the Gulf of America. The University1388of Mississippi--Ole Miss--has provided support to these efforts1389over the years and is a willing partner in continuing to1390provide the technical and scientific support. What is the1391Department and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management's vision1392for critical mineral exploration and development in the Gulf of1393America, and will the Department continue to rely on1394partnerships with research universities to achieve all of this?1395    Secretary Burgum. I think that the partnerships are key,1396and this is, again--one of the ways that we can stretch a1397federal dollar is working in conjunction with, you know, great1398universities, private sector, private companies. There are1399private companies doing advanced research around the potential1400for ocean-bed critical minerals. So I think this is an exciting1401area, and I think we, again, as we, you know, are in the1402current global environment that we are in, where we are in a1403battle, where it has been well understood for some time that1404China is controlling 85 percent of the refining of the rare1405earth minerals that we are dependent on, this has to be a1406national priority of the highest order that we have got to get1407into the critical minerals game because we, like I said, we1408can't build a fighter jet, a drone, a car, or a cell phone1409without them. And yet, somehow, we have found ourselves1410dependent on an adversary for that. So whether it's onshore or1411offshore, that's a game that this administration is committed1412to making sure that America's secured future is secure, and1413these offshore opportunities present a great opportunity to1414help secure that future.1415    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you very much. I love the1416direction you are going and want to be very helpful, as much as1417we possibly can.1418    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1419    Secretary Burgum. Thank you.1420    The Chairman. Senator Hickenlooper.1421    Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Mr.1422Secretary--Governor--thank you for being here.1423    Your budget proposes transferring public lands out of1424federal management, and in a couple of places it refers to a1425bloated federal estate, but in many cases, these lands are1426supportive of our outdoor recreation--$17 million in recreation1427in Colorado, $1.2 trillion nationwide--and there is discussion1428in your remarks about increasing outdoor access, but the BLM1429recreation budget, which is where most of that access gets1430created, is down 60 percent, and that's not just compared to1431last year, that's compared to pre-COVID. I am very sensitive to1432that notion that, you know, during COVID--so I have done all my1433numbers back to 2019. And that 60 percent cut, I mean, as a1434former business owner--we both are--when you make those kinds1435of dramatic cuts, it's often hard to get just the fat. You end1436up getting a lot of what's really necessary as well.1437    So, I guess I would ask, shouldn't we be looking at ways1438that make better investment, but still maintain, to a1439significant extent, those investments in outdoor recreation and1440in our access to public lands?1441    Secretary Burgum. Yes, Senator, thank you--or I should say,1442Mayor/Governor/Senator--we agree with your comments, and this1443is certainly--we want to make sure that we are being strategic1444in terms of where we are applying the dollars. Love the fact1445that you have gone back and done that analysis to 2019. You may1446be ahead of some of the work we are trying to do with the1447systems because we are trying to put together a look so we can1448see where we were, because when people talk about dramatic1449cuts, sometimes the cut would take us back to 2021 spending.1450And I am like, wow, we got, you know, the world wasn't falling1451apart in 2021, maybe we could live with that for a while as we1452try to balance the budget, but I appreciate that.1453    Recreation is such an important--the outdoor recreation1454industry is massive. I mean, it's like three percent of the1455employment in this country is now in outdoor recreation. And1456that group does so much. I mean, they are doing so much. They1457do--this is a group, broadly, that is leading in conservation--1458you know, hunters, fishermen, anglers, campers, climbers. Those1459are the people that are contributing their own personal dollars1460back. So this is a community that's most important to us going1461forward. So I appreciate your zeroing in on that piece, and we1462will continue to take a hard look at that.1463    Senator Hickenlooper. Yeah, and I think even the U.S. Fish1464and Wildlife Service caught my attention--going back to 2019,1465it is cut 30 percent. And I know from experience as a governor1466that they run pretty lean, always anyway. And that's a kind of1467a foundational for a lot of outdoor recreation, making sure of1468the habitat for wild animals, for fish, that we maintain and1469always are trying to think about ways we efficiently and cost-1470effectively can improve that.1471    Secretary Burgum. And they run 65 fish hatcheries, which1472then help support all the entire fishing industry as well.1473    Senator Hickenlooper. Absolutely. And it's a place where,1474in many ways, it helped pay its own way, because there are all1475sources of revenue as well. You know all that.1476    Wildfires--confronting this wildfire crisis really does1477push us toward making our forests more resilient, but1478obviously, staffing losses and BLM's land resources funding1479being cut by a third, again, back to 2019. I am worried about1480our capacity to respond to the wildfire risk and especially how1481do we make sure we have resilience. And it's complicated, and I1482am not trying to gloss over the complications. How do you1483expect the BLM is going to be able to deliver on the wildfire1484and forest management goals when you are making these kinds of1485cuts to the workforce, and to critical parts of the planning?1486    Secretary Burgum. Well, as we head into this wildfire1487season, we just had a briefing yesterday, but Secretary Brooke1488Rollins and I have been working together. We have held joint1489reviews on firefighting. We have talked about ways to gain1490additional efficiencies at the operational headquarters1491overhead level so that we can put more boots on the ground,1492literally. This summer, we are at about 17,000 staffing across1493the two agencies for wildfire fighters, so we are about equal1494with where we were last year. But we do have--there is no1495hiring freeze on that. We still have positions open if people1496are interested in jumping in and having an amazing summer1497experience. We can get them trained up for wildfire fighting.1498    But we are also looking at some other models. There is a1499great model that is going on in Alaska between the state and1500Federal Government, and we also, this budget proposal does1501include that we would consolidate wildland firefighting,1502because there are four firefighting units in Interior, one in1503Fish and Wildlife. Sometimes we are well coordinated. Other1504times we have got like five generals pursuing different1505strategies and tactics, and we have a checkerboard of federal1506land. So we are taking a hard look at some opportunities there1507and Senator Sheehy and others are advancing legislation to take1508a look at this as well. So we would be happy to continue that1509dialogue, particularly with states that are deeply involved in1510having their own state resources.1511    Senator Hickenlooper. Right, like Colorado. I appreciate1512that. We will stay in touch and do that.1513    I yield back.1514    The Chairman. Senator Cassidy, you are up next.1515    Senator Cassidy. Hey, Mr. Secretary, great to have you1516here, sir.1517    Leasing off the outer continental shelf of Louisiana, as1518you might guess, it's on my mind. And the Biden administration1519couldn't have screwed it up more if they had actually just said1520let's screw it up, which actually, I think they tried to. How1521successful do you think you will be to get regularly scheduled1522lease sales, understanding that that not only contributes to1523American energy dominance, but creates a lot of well-paying1524jobs for people in my state and across the country, you know,1525well-paying jobs? So I toss it to you.1526    Secretary Burgum. This is a priority for us, to get back on1527a predictable, regular, follow-the-law schedule of lease sales,1528and for the Gulf of America, we are targeting to try to have a1529lease sale ready to go by December of this year.1530    Senator Cassidy. That's great.1531    Now, one thing I have heard from my industry leaders is1532that it used to be so clockwork that they could plan a fishing1533trip with their son, fly into New Orleans, go to the lease1534sale, and then go out there. Now, that's important, as you1535know, not just because they want to go fishing in our beautiful1536waters with their son, but because time is money. And if there1537is regulatory delay, it's just chewing up their capital, making1538it less likely that they can do this. So what is the1539possibility that we will get back to where a regular, like, you1540know, first week in May or something, where you can kind of1541count of it?1542    Secretary Burgum. Absolutely, predictability is a goal of1543ours because, again, it helps on all the capital planning1544processes, the internal planning processes of these companies,1545and they have other places to spend their money. I mean, if1546they know that a lease sale is coming and they know what date1547it is happening, they can do the research, they can do the1548evaluation, and they can try to figure out where they may want1549to bid. If they don't even know when the lease sale may happen,1550they go look at other fields and other opportunities and1551sometimes those dollars are going to other countries. We are1552chasing capital away from the United States. And if people care1553about the environment, you should want to have every drop of1554every barrel produced here, every electron produced here,1555because we produce it cleaner, safer, and smarter than anywhere1556else in the world. We are the country that is actually1557reducing, you know, solving pollution, solving environmental1558issues, solving CO2 issues. That's all happening in1559America. That's not happening in the rest of the world.1560    So we want to have those dollars for energy development1561come to this country. That's energy security for us. It's1562prosperity at home. It's peace abroad. And predictability of1563lease sales in the Gulf and on land is absolutely central to1564that.1565    Senator Cassidy. Music to my ears. It makes total sense.1566    Tell me, you talked a little in your testimony about mining1567the ocean for critical minerals and other things. Now, the law1568of the sea attempts to address that ability to do so. As you1569know, the U.S. has had several areas marked for itself. At1570least one or two of those areas, we have since lost because we1571have not ratified that treaty. What are your thoughts on that,1572and how do we progress on that?1573    Secretary Burgum. Well, I think that one of the things that1574is exciting about America is that innovation has always been1575the key to American greatness. The amount of innovation around1576mining in general--I think there is this, you know, outdated157730-, 40-, 50-year-old idea of what mining is, but mining, oil1578and gas development, I mean, again, I had an opportunity to get1579to an offshore platform off of your state--I mean, these are1580technology-rich, unbelievably sophisticated operations. You1581know, any American would be wowed or thrilled to see what we1582are accomplishing. And I think that the future for really1583clean, efficient--say, like vacuuming, but think of vacuuming1584the sea floor with little impact, but what it could mean to us,1585particularly when we're in a spot right now where we have1586ceded--us, ourselves and the rest of the free world has ceded1587the control of critical mineral refining to China. They control158885 percent of the refining on critical minerals, and for some1589rare earth minerals, they control 100 percent.1590    Senator Cassidy. So let me ask you that. Knowing that this1591could be part of the solution to that very issue, is there a1592plan kind of being initiated that we are actually going to1593begin to do just that, develop the technology or use our1594remote-operated vehicles to go deep and to pull up whatever?1595    Secretary Burgum. Well, I think you will see in the weeks1596and months ahead, and now with the threat of China flexing1597their muscles relative to control of the supply chain, that1598this is going to become a national priority for our country1599that we have to make sure that we never put ourselves in a1600position of being reliant on an adversary for things that are1601fundamental to our entire economy.1602    Senator Cassidy. Well, again, I like that. I always like to1603say, wherever there is energy in the world being produced or1604something like that happening, there is somebody from South1605Louisiana showing them how to do it. And so, this will be full1606employment for the people from my state. So thank you very much1607for your service.1608    Secretary Burgum. Thank you, Senator.1609    The Chairman. Senator Cortez Masto.1610    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and the1611Ranking Member.1612    Secretary, welcome. Thank you for being here.1613    I want to jump back to the public lands conversation that1614you had with the Ranking Member. In Nevada, as you well know--1615and thank you for being there, by the way. I appreciate your1616working with our state, along with HUD. But in Nevada, we1617support public land sales, particularly in Southern Nevada,1618within the parameters that are set by SNPLMA. And I thank you1619again, you identified SNPLMA as a model, and I think it is a1620model because the model was created and requires robust1621stakeholder engagement that really addresses all of the varied1622land management issues we need to work together on, from1623affordable housing, to economic development, to addressing our1624infrastructure needs, our water needs--it's a stakeholder1625group, and it is important we have that. And the money actually1626comes back to BLM, to the benefit of the federal lands in the1627State of Nevada.1628    But here is my challenge: you talk about the benefits and1629that it should be a model, but in action, you're not actually1630doing that. And through reconciliation, instead of supporting1631the model that you talk about and tout, and the Chairman also1632talks about this as well, and invokes Harry Reid all the time,1633but the reconciliation package isn't really true to the SNPLMA1634model. In fact, on the House side, I am assuming working with1635the administration, the reconciliation package included federal1636land sales, but those federal land sales, and particularly in1637Southern Nevada, weren't near areas where we could actually do1638affordable housing. Here is a map of Clark County. It's 8,0001639square miles.1640    [The map referred to follows:]1641    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1237.00916421643    Senator Cortez Masto. This is the area where Las Vegas is,1644and this is where the boundary is that we want to expand to1645address affordable housing and other issues, but in the1646reconciliation package on the House side, the pink areas are1647the federal land you guys identified, in the middle of the1648desert. There is no infrastructure. I don't know any builder1649that is going to build housing in the middle of the desert. It1650makes no sense.1651    And now I am hearing there is a proposal by the Chairman of1652this Committee, again, to put this back into reconciliation1653because that was taken out of reconciliation. It wasn't well1654thought out and it wasn't working with the local communities to1655figure how we actually build affordable housing and use the1656federal lands to benefit everybody living in those states. But1657now I am hearing that there is a proposal going to be put back1658into reconciliation to allow the Federal Government to sell up1659to two million acres of federal land. Is that correct?1660    Secretary Burgum. I understand that there is some1661consideration of that, but I don't believe that has been1662formally introduced yet.1663    Senator Cortez Masto. Okay. And so, if you are going to1664look at selling up to two million acres of federal land, and1665most of that land is across the West, what states will be1666involved in that process?1667    Secretary Burgum. Well, I would say that if the law passes,1668you know, what we would do is, in the executive branch, is1669follow the law, but generically, I think when anybody has1670looked at land sales, they would look at the states that have1671been most overburdened by the Federal Government percentage,1672and among the top of that, Nevada, Alaska, Idaho, and Utah are1673among the states that have the highest percentage of federal1674land. They also----1675    Senator Cortez Masto. And certain states, like Montana,1676might be exempted.1677    Secretary Burgum. Not familiar with that or understand why1678that would be or not be that.1679    Senator Cortez Masto. And then, so who are you working with1680in my state, if you believe that SNPLMA is a model and that1681stakeholders should be engaged because it makes sense? We don't1682want something like this, where you're selling land that1683doesn't--it's not going to benefit you because it's not a high1684dollar-value. It's not going to help us because it's not going1685to build affordable housing. So who are you working with in my1686state, as stakeholders, as you are looking to sell some of the1687federal land in Nevada? Who are you talking to?1688    Secretary Burgum. Well, we're not--I have got a hundred1689things on my plate, and right now, the only activity that we1690are involved in on a day-to-day basis in Nevada is following1691the existing law, which is the Southern Nevada Lands Act.1692    Senator Cortez Masto. But you just said you are going to be1693selling up to two million acres across the West----1694    Secretary Burgum. I didn't say that.1695    Senator Cortez Masto. Oh, you're not going to be selling up1696to two million acres of land, looking at two million acres of1697federal land in the reconciliation package? I thought you said1698you were.1699    Secretary Burgum. No, I think you said that, and I said1700that proposal may be coming, but----1701    Senator Cortez Masto. Oh, okay, so it's a proposal. So as1702it may be coming, and if it becomes law, who would you be1703talking to in my state as you look to sell federal land in the1704State of Nevada?1705    Secretary Burgum. This is a hypothetical about something1706that hasn't been introduced and hasn't been passed.1707    Senator Cortez Masto. It's coming. I mean, it's going to be1708dropping here any minute now. We are going to see a1709reconciliation package, I am told. There is going to be a sale1710of federal land in it. You can't deny that, or are you telling1711me that maybe the sale of federal land will not be in the1712reconciliation package?1713    Secretary Burgum. Well, wouldn't this be something the1714Senate would be debating?1715    Senator Cortez Masto. I would hope so. And that is why I am1716asking you, because we have not seen anything. The Chairman has1717it. He has the information. It's behind closed doors. I am1718assuming they are talking with the administration because you1719are going to be taking the lead on all of it. So you are before1720me now and that is why I am asking you the question.1721    So if you don't know, then I am really concerned. And we1722should all be concerned across the West. So that is my concern1723here, and I think from my perspective, and many of us in the1724western states, I would hope, as you are looking at selling1725federal land that impacts our states, you are going to be1726working with us to address that. And you talked about SNPLMA1727being a model, but the money comes back into BLM for the1728purpose of these western states, not into the Treasury to1729reduce the deficit. So you are also going to be looking to1730changing the formula, isn't that correct?1731    Secretary Burgum. Well, I think you are acting like I am1732proposing legislation, and I----1733    Senator Cortez Masto. Well, I am concerned that you are the1734lead agency and they're not talking to you about how the1735federal lands are going to be sold. So maybe I am assuming1736something that is not happening. You have no involvement in the1737reconciliation package when it comes to the sale of federal1738land?1739    Secretary Burgum. I think what I would say, which I have1740said here many times, is that the same principles, which I can1741repeat over and over again, which is, it would only make sense1742for us to sell federal lands if we were----1743    Senator Cortez Masto. I get the principle, but are you1744actively engaged in the negotiations in the reconciliation1745package?1746    Secretary Burgum. I am not actively engaged in1747negotiations----1748    Senator Cortez Masto. You're not actively engaged at all in1749the conversation around the sale of federal lands in the1750reconciliation package, the proposal? You are not involved in1751that?1752    Secretary Burgum. We have had--there are conceptual talks1753about how that would lay out, but there have not been1754negotiations.1755    Senator Cortez Masto. Okay.1756    I am running out of time. I am going to submit the rest of1757my questions for the record.1758    Let me just say this--this is not antagonistic. This is1759about how we work together. In the State of Nevada, over 801760percent of the land is owned by the Federal Government. We have1761always wanted a good relationship, and I work toward that 1001762percent. And I look forward to that continuing. But you can't1763come here and say that you support a model program that was1764started by Senator Reid in SNPLMA and then upend it and1765completely do something different. And that's all I am looking1766for, is accountability with this Administration and working1767with us and doing what they say they are going to do to the1768benefit of everybody in the State of Nevada.1769    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1770    The Chairman. I will add here that the language will be out1771shortly. These things take time. We have been going through the1772Republican-side Byrd process. We are going to be releasing bill1773text soon. Anything on public land sales in this will involve a1774public process that would be part of any sale.1775    Senator Justice.1776    Senator Justice. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, thank you1777all.1778    How you doing there, Mr. Secretary?1779    Secretary Burgum. Doing great, Governor.1780    Senator Justice. I will lead off by just saying just this--1781you know, we talk about so many different things, it is1782unbelievable, whether they be grizzly bears or, you know,1783government land sales, offshore, hunting and fishing, parks,1784energy. Can you imagine that all of that is going through this1785man? Now, let me just say just this--I am from West Virginia. I1786know an awful lot about energy. And I will get to that in just1787one second, and forgive me, these allergies are going crazy1788right now, but I can tell you this, and I can tell you this1789with complete confidence, here you have got a man that has been1790an unbelievable Governor. He has unbelievable experience. He is1791a business guy. He is a rancher. He is absolutely an1792outdoorsman beyond belief. He is the absolute perfect choice1793for this job. And it's an avalanche of stuff of what he has to1794do. That's all there is to it. He has got to wear so many1795different hats, it's unbelievable. Absolutely, without any1796doubt, he is the pick of the litter of all the secretaries, in1797my book, hands down. I have said it over and over and over.1798    One of our colleagues, just a little while ago, said that1799from the renewable standpoint--and I have been one to embrace1800all. I want us to all have a level playing field but embrace1801all. I did that in West Virginia over and over and over because1802we are going to awaken to a situation in this country in just a1803little while where we have an energy meltdown. We all know1804that, an absolute energy meltdown, and we are not moving at the1805speed that we will have to move at. But one of my colleagues1806says, you know, from a renewable standpoint, we are in a1807situation now to where we are having a Democratic water1808torture. Well, what do you think has happened under the Biden1809administration to the gas industry, the coal industry, you1810know, what has happened? You talk about water torture, it was1811off the chart.1812    Now, we have got to do something about it and we have got1813to all come together and we have got to have a kumbaya moment1814where we all come together and we move forward in a really,1815really good way. We can do that. We can genuinely do that. We1816have somebody here that cares for our parks, our lands, our1817nature, everything in the world, and we could never have1818selected anybody any better. So I will tell you just this--1819there is one thing, one thing in the budget here, and it jumps1820out at us all over the place, and it's Wildland Fire Service.1821Please explain a little bit more because it is the only thing1822that we have not found a way--and the last thing I will say in1823just one second, but please, please explain.1824    Secretary Burgum. Well, thank you, Governor/Senator, for1825those kind words.1826    Wildland fire--we have got some incredible people on the1827ground. We have incredible, dedicated professionals. We have1828got aviation resources combined between the four wildland1829firefighting groups in Interior and the one inside of U.S.1830Forest Service, over 400 aircraft that either we own directly1831or contract. We have all these resources. The thing that is1832missing sometimes is that we aren't deploying them in a way as1833fast as we could. I had this experience last fall as Governor.1834We had a wildland fire, prairie fire, pushed by 60-mile-an-hour1835winds, burned 124,000 acres. That's larger than--like, five1836times larger than the LA fires. Two people died--a rancher1837trying to save some horses, and another guy trying to dig a1838fire break on his tractor, and it just, you know, when it's1839coming from a mile away at 60 miles-an-hour, it's there in a1840minute, it's not there in ten minutes. And they just1841underestimated the power of that.1842    But here's the deal: as Governor, where the fire started,1843it's early on Saturday morning. We know we have a problem. I1844got the National Guard out. We got helicopters, Black Hawks,1845flying with buckets, you know, trying to save property. I1846called the feds on Saturday morning and said we have got1847something here, let's get after it when it's still small. We1848can get this thing out. We need aerial support. I mean, we need1849fixed-wing aerial support to go along with our National Guard1850'copters. That was Saturday morning. The planes arrived on1851Tuesday, after two people had died and 124 acres had burned and1852there were planes sitting in Bozeman, Montana on the ground1853that were never deployed because there wasn't the decision-1854making hierarchy to say let's send them over there. We only1855needed them for half a day. These skimmers come in, they pick1856up six tons of water in 11 seconds. They were flying laps off1857Lake Sakakawea, and they had this fire out in a canyon in the1858Badlands in four hours. So we have to get the right equipment1859at the right place at the right time. We have to respond. We1860have to have guaranteed--I don't want to say guaranteed1861response time--but if you are in a community and you call 9111862because your house is on fire, you know, maybe it's in your1863kitchen and then, you know, by the time they get there, your1864house is burned and so is the neighbor's, as opposed to putting1865it out when there is no damage.1866    So part of our expense for wildfire fighting is response1867time. The longer we wait to respond, the more money we spend on1868the back end. So Brooke Rollins and I, working together, are1869saying we need to have a unified approach in this budget. There1870are the transfers--the wildland firefighters from U.S. Forest1871Service. They will still be branded U.S. Forest Service1872firefighters, but we get them under a unified command,1873reporting up to a structure inside of Interior. So we take the1874four, because we have firefighters in BLM, BIA, National Parks,1875and U.S. Fish and Wildlife. All four of those have wildland1876fire groups, plus Forest Service. So we take the whole 7501877million acres of federal land and say you guys are reporting up1878to a unified command as opposed to five generals. We do have1879some examples. The Interagency Wildfire Center in Boise, Idaho1880gets us closer to that. We have some examples in Alaska we can1881build on between the State of Alaska and the BLM and Forest1882Service up there.1883    So there is some great work that we can do to build on, and1884we can give these people the technology resources, because we1885put them in danger. We're not giving them--we gave technology1886to our soldiers on the front lines in Afghanistan 25 years1887ago--better tech than we are giving wildfire fighters that are1888walking into these heat storms. And today, with satellite1889imaging and heat recognition, there are all these things we can1890do to protect land, protect property, protect the lives of our1891firefighters, and they deserve that. And we think we can get1892there, so that's in this proposal, is getting us unified across1893those five groups.1894    Senator Justice. I hope that everybody just listened to1895that answer. What you saw right there is a CEO, a business guy,1896a governor, absolutely a super-experienced and super-smart guy.1897Really and truly, that is who we have given the keys to, to1898lead us, and absolutely, the Secretary of the Interior today. I1899know you will do an incredible job. And I thank you so much1900from the bottom of my heart. And God bless us for having Doug1901Burgum right now. Thank you so much, sir.1902    Secretary Burgum. Thank you, Senator.1903    The Chairman. Senator Cantwell.1904    Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1905    Secretary Burgum, good to see you. I think that there is a1906big theme here about public lands. And I join my colleagues,1907the Ranking Member and the Senator from Nevada, who asked you1908about the selling of public lands, but we have already had this1909debate here. We had a very big debate here. So, my state,1910obviously, we like public lands. It's a juggernaut of an1911economy. So when you think of our state, you think of ports and1912parks and you think of $22 billion and over 200,000 jobs. So1913it's big money to us. We led a fight with many of our1914colleagues on this Committee to get permanent funding for LWCF,1915to get it reauthorized and permanent funding. In fact, this, if1916you will hold that up, is an actual quote from the President of1917the United States during the big battle. He said, ``I am1918calling on Congress to send me a bill that permanently funds1919LWCF and restores our parks. I will sign it into law. It will1920be historic and it will be for our public lands.''1921    [Poster of the quote referred to follows:]1922    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1237.01019231924    Senator Cantwell. Okay. So that--I was there. I was at the1925bill signing. I know what it says. It basically says you have1926to do acquisition. It is setting in law the amount of money1927that should be spent on acquisition. So when we are talking1928here this morning, we are all amazed that you seem to be1929putting forth a budget that is basically saying, I don't want1930to acquire, I want to actually sell public lands. What we1931figured out, as a coalition of people--hunters, fishermen,1932outdoor recreationists, travel and tourism people--we figured1933out that it's a juggernaut of an economy and we want to grow1934it. And we were able to get President Trump to sign a bill.1935    So now, your budget, and I asked you about this at your1936confirmation hearing, I asked you specifically whether, if1937confirmed, and you said, ``I will implement the law as enacted1938by Congress.'' Well, the law enacted by Congress basically says1939that you have to spend 40 percent of these LWCF funds and make1940acquisition. It doesn't say sell public lands. It says acquire1941lands. So I don't know how you are proposing a budget that1942basically is going in the opposite direction of what was, let1943me refresh my memory, 60 sponsors in the Senate, 254 in the1944House. This was not a little decision. This was putting to bed1945this notion that, oh, it's either I am going to fix some roads1946in our forests or I am going to do land acquisition. Now, I get1947it, even the Chairman, he and I have had many conversations, as1948did his former colleague from Utah, Mr. Bishop. We have had1949many conversations about LWCF in the past. I get some of their1950issues that they have brought up about LWCF, but Congress voted1951and President Trump signed the law. Now we are asking you to1952implement it.1953    And so, I want to understand how you are proposing anything1954other than following the Dingell Act.1955    Secretary Burgum. Well, certainly, we will continue and1956will follow the law and I think what we are having here is, we1957shouldn't be confused that two things can happen at the same1958time, which is--so it's about which lands and which1959acquisitions, because 40 percent of the LWCF is a pretty small1960number relative to the scale. I mean, it's meaningful--hundreds1961of millions of dollars--but the opportunity for us to1962accelerate purchases, say, of infill and fill out the squares1963where we might be acquiring land for the Federal Government1964that is a private inholding inside of a national park----1965    Senator Cantwell. But we do it all the time. One of the1966biggest things we used LWCF for is because the Federal1967Government kept having to spend money because a road washed1968out----1969    Secretary Burgum. Yes.1970    Senator Cantwell [continuing]. In accessing Mount Rainier.1971So we basically acquired more land, built the road on a1972different thing so we weren't paying $250,000 every few years.1973So we are all for that.1974    Secretary Burgum. Yeah, and we can----1975    Senator Cantwell. But we are for following the Dingell Act,1976following the law of the Great American Outdoors Act, and1977making sure that we are actually doing acquisition. Why?1978Because we have figured out--I think somebody said during that1979time that it was the third biggest industry behind finance and1980health care--so we figured out that it is a big economic engine1981for our nation. So we want to see it.1982    Now, I get that you have people here who didn't succeed in1983that battle and who may not believe that, but this was1984bipartisan, bicameral, and we need that support.1985    I want to just----1986    Secretary Burgum. I am just saying it's not--both of these1987things can happen at the same time. You can take LWCF funds----1988    Senator Cantwell. Your budget doesn't say that, and I think1989it's heading to a catastrophe. So that's why I am bringing it1990up.1991    On the fire point, we have a big fire in Cle Elum right1992now. They aren't getting the direction. I hear what you just1993described as Governor and the issues, but we are--this is where1994we are heading.1995    [Displayed posters follow:]1996    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1237.01119971998    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1237.01219992000    Senator Cantwell. This is where we are now. This is where2001we are going to be. What is this, September? All of this is in2002red. So we have a fire in Cle Elum now and we need direction.2003We need to know. My constituents want to know, what are people2004going to do to help coordinate with Interior and the Forest2005Service. We need to know now. So if you could help us with2006that, I would appreciate it.2007    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2008    The Chairman. Senator Hirono.2009    Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Aloha, Mr.2010Secretary.2011    We are dealing with an administration that is dismantling2012government services that provide services to our people by2013cutting employees, by cutting programs, by cutting whole2014agencies out of our departments. And you had the spectacle of2015DOGE cutting thousands--thousands of federal employees, and I2016don't think any of our secretaries, I don't think you were2017consulted as to who should be cut from the Interior Department.2018So our secretaries--you and others--are left to come and2019respond to our questions of why this happened, why these people2020were cut, and you sit here saying, well, you don't have that2021information, you don't have that breakdown. Maybe for Forest2022Service people, these were not the people who were actually2023working in our national parks, but you don't really know that,2024do you?2025    So I am really glad that Senator King, right here, he2026talked about the concerns that he had about the cuts to our2027National Park Service people because these are the people who2028actually interact with the American people. And if the parks'2029bathrooms are not cleaned or if there are not the services that2030are provided at our national parks, it's kind of obvious. And2031so, you are not able to provide us with the kind of breakdown2032that we asked for. And I don't know why you have to come here2033without the kind of information that we ask. And this is not2034just you, but you know, I serve on the Veterans Committee. The2035VA Secretary says he doesn't know, he doesn't have the2036information as to all of the veteran employees who were cut,2037and maybe another 80,000 will be cut. He comes and testifies2038without that information. He says that he will provide that2039information. And when asked to commit, to come back to the VA2040Committee to respond to the questions that we will have, he2041doesn't make that commitment.2042    So there you have it. You know, while you may not know who2043has been cut, those of us who are actually on the ground know2044some of the employees who are no longer there. For example, in2045Hawaii, reductions in NPS, FWS, USGS, and more have eliminated2046necessary positions that are critical for these agencies to2047carry out their missions. And we have parks with extremely high2048vacancy rates. We have lost a superintendent, a chief of law2049enforcement, a chief of interpretation, the list goes on. These2050are the people on the ground who are providing services. And2051so, when they are gone, it's pretty obvious to us.2052    So that I can understand what efficiencies you claim that2053these cuts are providing, we need data. I would really2054appreciate it if you would provide a list of all the DOI2055positions in Hawaii that have been vacated since January 20th,2056including those that have been fired and those who accepted2057early termination, including locations, positions,2058descriptions, and justifications for their elimination. Will2059you provide that information to us?2060    Secretary Burgum. Yes, we will be happy to, Senator.2061    Senator Hirono. And will you commit to coming back and2062responding to our questions as to how all of this happened,2063once you provide us with the information and explanation?2064    Secretary Burgum. Yeah, happy to, but I should clarify that2065if there is anybody, so far, some of them would have taken2066early retirement because that is where the vast----2067    Senator Hirono. Oh, that's another thing, you know, yeah,2068the fork in the road early retirements. I don't even know if2069that's considered legal.2070    One more question: federal programs that research or2071address climate change, like the USGS Climate Adaptation2072Science Centers, have been indefinitely paused, whatever that2073means. Indefinitely paused--that sounds like they are not2074coming back. Is it your intention that any programs that have2075to do with climate change or climate-related programs within2076the Department will no longer be supported?2077    Secretary Burgum. Given the explosion of spending that2078occurred during the last administration, we are taking a look,2079operationally, ourselves. It wasn't a DOGE thing. It was2080something that I was fully supportive of to take a look at all2081contracts and grants. There were over 36,000 contracts and2082grants that were issued from the Department of the Interior----2083    Senator Hirono. So are you going to be targeting all those2084that have to do with climate change and the impact of climate2085change? Is that the directive from this administration? Because2086we know that this administration does not think that climate2087change is real, and our understanding is that departments have2088been directed to eliminate references to climate change. Is2089that what is going on in your Department?2090    Secretary Burgum. What's going on in our Department, if I2091would be allowed to finish, is that we are looking at the209236,000 contracts and grants that are totaling billions and2093billions of dollars of spending. In some cases, we have found2094that those grants were going to organizations that got 992095percent of their revenue from that grant. To me, that is no2096longer an NGO, that is just an extension of our own2097government----2098    Senator Hirono. Last question then. Of the thousands of2099contracts that you are reviewing, can you provide us with which2100of those deal with climate change?2101    Secretary Burgum. We can certainly take a look, but I think2102so many organizations included references to that as part of a2103way to access funding, it's hard to know who was actually2104working on it or who was just using that as a way to drag in2105more grant money.2106    Senator Hirono. Well, considering that you are doing a2107review, I would think that your review would be able to2108identify those contracts that have to do with climate change.2109    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2110    The Chairman. Senator Murkowski.2111    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2112    Mr. Secretary, welcome. You still have that Alaska glow. I2113can tell you have been up in the state doing your due2114diligence. Nobody takes a vacation up there. We work you hard.2115And I really appreciate the time that you and Secretary Wright2116and Administrator Zeldin gave to Alaska-specific issues. The2117fact that you were from the North Slope all the way down to the2118Kenai area, on the ground, listening to people and really,2119really leaning in on the President's executive order. I deeply,2120deeply appreciate it, and I know that you are all putting2121together your action plans. Know that I and the other members2122of the delegation stand ready to assist you with all of these2123efforts.2124    But just as important as it is that we are leaning in with2125you, I know that we all need your folks, your teams, whether2126it's those that are going to go through the process here and be2127back here in Washington or those men and women that are on the2128ground. And so, I have raised with you before some of the2129concerns that I have about some of the reductions in forces.2130You have kind of walked me through what you are looking at, how2131you want to get folks out of headquarters, out in the parks. I2132am supportive of this. I do ask for your help and your2133commitment. As the Chair of the Interior Appropriations2134Committee, and I am dashing in between these committees right2135now, it would be very helpful if you could provide us with a2136full list of the BLM, the U.S. Forest Service, and National2137Park Service staff positions and their locations that we have2138lost since the new administration. We are just trying to2139understand, again, where the staffing within the various2140agencies falls out. So this is an ongoing process, I get that,2141but as close as communication and connection that we can have2142on that, it's greatly, greatly appreciated.2143    I am going to ask you a question here. I have the Chief of2144the Forest Service in the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee2145room right now. We are questioning him, and my last question to2146him was with regards to the Wildland Fire Service2147consolidation. This is moving 11,000 wildland firefighters,2148$2.85 billion, into the new DOI Wildland Fire Service,2149eliminating the U.S. Forest Service wildland fire program2150altogether.2151    What I shared with the Chief is, I don't know whether this2152is right, wrong, or indifferent. I do think the effort to be2153smart with efficiencies and consolidations just makes sense.2154But I also know we have seen threats from wildfires all over2155this country. My Ranking Member on the Committee, Senator2156Merkley, what his state has seen in Oregon is just, I mean,2157it's scary stuff. You know all about it. I am just hoping that2158there has been good discussion and fair assessment about how2159this restructuring might affect the coordination between2160Alaska's interagency fire management efforts, particularly with2161our Alaska fire service, our state, and our tribal partners. We2162are going into our fire season, unfortunately for us--or2163fortunately for us, I guess--it has been the wettest summer2164that we can possibly imagine. So hopefully, we are going to2165escape the fires this year, but can you just share with the2166Committee a little bit of where you think we go on this fire2167services consolidation effort? And you may have repeated this,2168but I appreciate it.2169    Secretary Burgum. Let me just say on this topic, first of2170all, what we are doing for this summer and this fire season2171right now is just, at the top, very top, Secretary Rollins and2172I are just staying in close coordination. We have held, I think2173for the first time ever, we have held joint fire briefings. I2174have been over to the U.S. Forest Service with her to get the2175briefings there. She will be invited to hear briefings from the2176four firefighting groups that operate within Interior. And the2177proposal of the unification--I will call it unification--I2178wouldn't say move, because people aren't being asked to move2179where they work or where they report to, or their duty2180stations, it's just getting the five generals at the top to2181actually have, sort of, not just a joint chiefs of staff, but2182to have a unified strategy, particularly around things when we2183are optimizing across aircraft----2184    Senator Murkowski. Right.2185    Secretary Burgum [continuing]. Because this is one of the2186places where we know from personal experience, we are under-2187optimizing the decisions around when to deploy and, you know,2188if we can put out a fire early, it saves us a lot of cost on2189the back end being able to do that.2190    So first of all, it's not for this fire season.2191    Senator Murkowski. Right.2192    Secretary Burgum. We would have time to plan for next year2193to do that, but overall, we want to take a look at models. The2194positive models I have cited already today here, such as the2195National Interagency Fire Center in Boise, is what I would call2196a good start, and gets us a long way there, and then also the2197model that I was able to get deeper on in Alaska between where2198BLM takes the leadership across a number of agencies and then2199the coordination, including the co-location at a military base2200with the Alaska Fire Service, which is a fantastic fire2201service, and how they have divvied up the approach where they2202are covering each other's land in some cases, but then2203optimizing the use of forces. So I think the Alaska model and2204the Idaho model are two things we would look at as we would go2205forward.2206    But also, it's unifying pay. That's something I didn't2207mention earlier, but we have different pay and benefits for2208these different firefighting groups. And they should all be the2209same. I mean, the fire doesn't know, the fire itself doesn't2210know whether it's on BLM land, U.S. Forest Service, BIA, and2211the people that are fighting those fires are facing the same2212dangers. So getting unified pay, benefits, bonuses, retirement2213benefits, those things is another thing that Brooke Rollins and2214I are working on as part of this unification.2215    Senator Murkowski. Well----2216    Secretary Burgum. And the last thing I would say is2217technology. We have varying applications of technology. Some2218are way ahead and some are way behind. That puts us at risk,2219but when we are thinking about how do we budget and how do we2220make sure that the people that are fighting those fires on the2221ground have access to life-saving technology, how do we use2222satellite technology for early detection across these massive2223areas that we have, including Alaska, there are just some2224things we can, when we are applying these new technological2225resources, if we, you know, get one satellite system going, we2226don't need five. We need one for what would be the new Wildland2227Fire Service.2228    Senator Murkowski. Well, I look forward to talking with you2229more directly as you are moving forward with what this really2230looks like and how it's going to be implemented. I appreciate2231the recognition of some of the unique partnering that we have2232made work, but yeah, we don't need to reinvent the wheel here.2233We just need to fight the fire.2234    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2235    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Murkowski.2236    Okay, we have now completed round one. We had aimed to wrap2237up this hearing by noon because of other commitments we have.2238We aren't going to be able to do a full second round, but2239Senators King and Heinrich would like to say something briefly2240before I wrap up.2241    Senator King.2242    Senator King. Thank you.2243    Mr. Secretary, you and I differ on the National Park2244Service. You may have picked that up in our conversation, but I2245just want to compliment you on the fire service unification2246effort. That makes total sense, and I think it's a very2247sensible proposal. I think it will help in managing fires and2248managing the resources more efficiently. So we disagree on some2249things, but this is one where we agree. Nice work.2250    Thank you.2251    Secretary Burgum. Thank you, Governor.2252    Senator Heinrich. Secretary, in the exchange between you2253and Senator Cantwell, I wanted to point out that I think you2254are absolutely correct. You can use existing federal law, like2255FLTFA or like this other Nevada law, to dispose of isolated2256tracts next to urban areas for housing and simultaneously use2257the Land and Water Conservation Fund for public access for2258hunting and fishing, for filling in those inholdings in the2259midst of national parks or other federal public lands.2260    I think what is missing and probably generating some of the2261angst around the LWCF piece of that is that we haven't received2262the priority list from the administration. Normally around now,2263we get a list of those projects that make sense--the projects2264that create access, the projects that improve hunting and2265fishing conditions, and the conservation projects. So I would2266just encourage you to get that list to us so that we can have2267fidelity to both of these legal constructs at the same time.2268    Secretary Burgum. Great. Thank you.2269    The Chairman. Secretary Burgum, thanks so much for being2270here. Thanks for your willingness to serve our country. You2271bring to the table a lot of expertise, experience, and hard2272work, and our country is better off as a result. So thank you2273for being here.2274    This concludes today's hearing. I want to thank everyone2275for participating. Any Senator who would like to submit2276additional questions for the record, those will be due by 6:002277p.m. this evening.2278    Thanks again, Secretary Burgum, for answering our2279questions.2280    Yes, Secretary.2281    Secretary Burgum. Mr. Chairman, I just want to again say I2282concur 100 percent with your opening remarks. I do want to2283thank you for acknowledging that we have six different leaders,2284all of who could help advance the concerns of this Committee,2285who, some of them, as far away as April, went through and got2286approved in this Committee but have not yet had a floor vote.2287The sooner we can get those six executives actually working,2288the faster I can be responding to requests from people of this2289group, so I appreciate everyone's attention to that. I know,2290very busy with the Big Beautiful Bill, and lots of other2291things, but you know, making sure that we have the leaders to2292execute on your requests would be greatly appreciated.2293    The Chairman. Yes, that is an excellent point. I couldn't2294concur more, and yes, while we have other legislative matters2295going on, as has been said in other contexts in this hearing,2296we can walk and chew gum at the same time, and we have got to2297get that done. I am doing everything I can to expedite that2298logjam.2299    The Committee stands adjourned.2300    [Whereupon, at 12:04 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]23012302                      APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED23032304                              ----------23052306[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]23072308                                 [all]