Hearings to examine S.90, to prohibit the use of funds by the Secretary of the Interior to finalize and implement certain travel management plans in the State of Utah, S.91, to improve Federal activities relating to wildfires, S.140, to address the forest health crisis on the National Forest System and public lands, S.451, to amend the Mineral Leasing Act to eliminate an administrative fee, S.764, to provide for the designation of certain wilderness areas, recreation management areas, and conservation areas in the State of Colorado, S.790, to redesignate the National Historic Trails Interpretive Center in Casper, Wyoming, as the "Barbara L. Cubin National Historic Trails Interpretive Center", S.888, to designate certain land administered by the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service in the State of Oregon as wilderness and national recreation areas, to withdraw certain land located in Curry County and Josephine County, Oregon, from all forms of entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land laws, location, entry, and patent under the mining laws, and operation under the mineral leasing and geothermal leasing laws, S.902, to require the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to establish a standard for the response time to wildfire incidents, S.945, to amend the Smith River National Recreation Area Act to include certain additions to the Smith River National Recreation Area, to amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate certain wild rivers in the State of Oregon, S.1005, to provide for conservation and economic development in the State of Nevada, S.1175, to amend section 6903 of title 31, United States Code, to provide for additional population tiers, S.1195, to promote conservation, improve public land management, and provide for sensible development in Pershing County, Nevada, S.1228, to amend the Public Lands Corps Act of 1993 to modify the cost-sharing requirement for conservation projects carried out by a qualified youth or conservation corps, S.1319, to withdraw certain Federal land in the Pecos Watershed area of the State of New Mexico from mineral entry, S.1341, to amend the Colorado Wilderness Act of 1993 to add certain land to the Sarvis Creek Wilderness, S.1321, to amend the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 to provide for the transfer of the Moab site to Grand County, Utah, S.1363, to provide for greater cooperation and coordination between the Federal Government and the governing bodies and community users of land grant-mercedes in New Mexico relating to historical or traditional uses of certain land grant-mercedes on Federal public land, S.1468, to amend the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act to provide that Alexander Creek, Incorporated, is recognized as a Village Corporation under that Act, S.1476, to amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate certain segments of the Gila River system in the State of New Mexico as components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, to provide for the transfer of administrative jurisdiction over certain Federal land in the State of New Mexico, S.1737, to designate and expand wilderness areas in Olympic National Forest in the State of Washington, and to designate certain rivers in Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park as wild and scenic rivers, S.1860, to direct the Secretary of Agriculture to convey to Brian Head Town, Utah, certain National Forest System land, S.2016, to exchange non-Federal land held by the Chugach Alaska Corporation for certain Federal Land in the Chugach Region, S.2033, to direct the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a study on existing programs, rules, and authorities that enable or inhibit wildfire mitigation across land ownership boundaries on Federal and non-Federal land, S.2042, to provide lasting protection for inventoried roadless areas within the National Forest System, S.2262, to amend the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 to clarify the nature of public investment for purposes of certain rulemaking, and S.2273, to amend the Act of July 10, 1890, to modify certain provisions relating to the disposal of public land in the State of Wyoming for educational purposes.

1[Senate Hearing 119-237]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                                                        S. Hrg. 119-23756                          PENDING LEGISLATION7=======================================================================89                                HEARING1011                               BEFORE THE1213                            SUBCOMMITTEE ON14                   PUBLIC LANDS, FORESTS, AND MINING1516                                 OF THE1718                              COMMITTEE ON19                      ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES20                          UNITED STATES SENATE2122                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2324                             FIRST SESSION2526                                   on2728S. 90                           S. 1005                     S. 147629S. 91                           S. 1175                     S. 173730S. 140                          S. 1195                     S. 186031S. 451                          S. 1228                     S. 201632S. 764                          S. 1319                     S. 203333S. 790                          S. 1321                     S. 204234S. 888                          S. 1341                     S. 226235S. 902                          S. 1363                     S. 227336S. 945                          S. 14683738                               __________3940                            DECEMBER 2, 20254142                               __________4344[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]4546                       Printed for the use of the47               Committee on Energy and Natural Resources4849        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov5051                              __________5253                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE5462-250                    WASHINGTON : 202655=======================================================================5657               COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES5859                        MIKE LEE, Utah, Chairman60JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming               MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico61JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho                RON WYDEN, Oregon62STEVE DAINES, Montana                MARIA CANTWELL, Washington63TOM COTTON, Arkansas                 MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii64DAVID McCORMICK, Pennsylvania        ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine65JAMES C. JUSTICE, West Virginia      CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada66BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana              JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado67CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi        ALEX PADILLA, California68LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska               RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona69JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota70                                 ------7172           Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining7374                        John Barrasso, Chairman7576JAMES E. RISCH                       CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO77STEVE DAINES                         RON WYDEN78TOM COTTON                           MAZIE K. HIRONO79JAMES C. JUSTICE                     ANGUS S. KING, JR.80CINDY HYDE-SMITH                     JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER81LISA MURKOWSKI                       ALEX PADILLA8283                  Wendy Baig, Majority Staff Director84    Chris Prandoni, Majority Deputy Staff Director and Chief Counsel85           David Gardner, Majority Professional Staff Member86                 Jasmine Hunt, Minority Staff Director87                 Sam E. Fowler, Minority Chief Counsel88        Maya Hermann, Minority Natural Resources Policy Director8990                            C O N T E N T S9192                              ----------9394                           OPENING STATEMENTS9596                                                                   Page97Barrasso, Hon. John, Subcommittee Chairman and a U.S. Senator98  from99  Wyoming........................................................     1100Cortez Masto, Hon. Catherine, Subcommittee Ranking Member and a101  U.S. Senator from Nevada.......................................     2102Heinrich, Hon. Martin, a U.S. Senator from New Mexico............     3103Gallego, Hon. Ruben, a U.S. Senator from Arizona.................     7104Wyden, Hon. Ron, a U.S. Senator from Oregon......................   132105Hickenlooper, Hon. John W., a U.S. Senator from Colorado.........   190106107                               WITNESSES108                                Panel 1109110Bennet, Hon. Michael F., a U.S. Senator from Colorado............     8111112                                Panel 2113114Norris, Kelly, State Forester, Wyoming State Forestry Division...   140115French, Christopher, Acting Associate Chief, U.S. Department of116  Agriculture Forest Service.....................................   150117Raby, Jon, Nevada State Director, Bureau of Land Management, U.S.118  Department of the Interior.....................................   164119Torres, Jocelyn, Chief Conservation Officer, Conservation Lands120  Foundation.....................................................   185121122                          ALPHABETICAL LISTING123124Barrasso, Hon. John:125    Opening Statement............................................     1126Bennet, Hon. Michael F.:127    Opening Statement............................................     8128    Letters and statements of support for the CORE Act...........    10129Cortez Masto, Hon. Catherine:130    Opening Statement............................................     2131Daines, Hon. Steve:132    Letters of support for S.451 and S. 1175.....................   195133French, Christopher:134    Opening Statement............................................   150135    Written Testimony............................................   152136    Responses to Questions for the Record........................   217137Gallego, Hon. Ruben:138    Opening Statement............................................     7139Heinrich, Hon. Martin:140    Opening Statement............................................     3141    Photographs of mine pollution in the Pecos Watershed.........     5142Hickenlooper, Hon. John W.:143    Opening Statement............................................   190144Lee, Hon. Mike:145    Photographs of a public works facility in the Dixie National146      Forest.....................................................   206147Norris, Kelly:148    Opening Statement............................................   140149    Written Testimony............................................   143150    Responses to Questions for the Record........................   216151Raby, Jon:152    Opening Statement............................................   164153    Written Testimony............................................   166154    Questions for the Record.....................................   221155Risch, Hon. James E.:156    Statement for the Record.....................................   222157Torres, Jocelyn:158    Opening Statement............................................   185159    Written Testimony............................................   187160Wyden, Hon. Ron:161    Opening Statement............................................   132162    Written Opening Statement....................................   134163164                      APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED165166Responses to questions for the record............................   216167Letters and statements submitted for the record..................   223168169----------170The text for each of the bills addressed in this hearing can be found171on the Committee's website at: https://www.energy.senate.gov/hearings/1722025/12/public-lands-forests-and-mining-Subcommittee-hearing-to-173receive-testimony-on-pending-legislation174175                          PENDING LEGISLATION176177                              ----------178179                       TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2025180181                               U.S. Senate,182 Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining,183                 Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,184                                                    Washington, DC.185    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:00 p.m. in186Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John187Barrasso, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.188189           OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,190                   U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING191192    Senator Barrasso. Good afternoon. Thank you all for being193here today. A number of the bills on today's agenda are194priorities for my home State of Wyoming, including two of my195own bills. I would like to first focus on basically one of196those two, and that is S. 140, which is the Wildfire Prevention197Act of 2025, which will help us improve forest management198practices and address our nation's wildfire crisis.199    There is broad agreement that the U.S. Forest Service and200the Bureau of Land Management have failed to manage our forests201in a serious and credible way over the years. While I am202grateful to President Trump and his agenda for improving many203of these practices, there is still plenty of work that needs to204be done.205    Roughly 63 million of our 193 million acres of the National206Forest System are at severe risk of catastrophic wildfires. My207bill will set clear expectations for federal forest management.208It will provide additional tools to federal agencies. It will209help these agencies treat more acres, sell more timber, and210remove the red tape that has hindered forest management211projects for far too long.212    The Wildfire Prevention Act will increase the pace and the213scale of forest treatments and improve data transparency as214well as accountability. It will reduce wildfire hazards through215mechanical thinning, prescribed fire, utility line vegetation216work, hazard tree removal, and grazing. It is essentially a217tool for wildfire prevention, and it streamlines many current218practices.219    The bill will also support our wildland firefighters so220that we can put more boots on the ground during fire season.221Wildfires are devastating communities across America and222especially in the West. Wyoming is no exception.223    I am so delighted to have here with us today Kelly Norris,224who is Wyoming State Forester, as well as all the witnesses who225will join us for today's hearing. I look forward to hearing all226of your testimony.227    Senator Cortez Masto.228229       OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO,230                    U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA231232    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Senator Barrasso. I, too,233want to thank Chairman Lee and Ranking Member Heinrich, as well234as Subcommittee Chairman Barrasso for holding today's235legislative hearing.236    As he said, we have a full agenda--26 bills. Many of these237bills are the products of years of on-the-ground work to try238and develop a local consensus on the appropriate balance of the239many competing priorities for use of our public lands. Several240of today's bills were previously processed through the241Committee last Congress, and I look forward to working with my242colleagues to further advance these important bills through the243Committee.244    I want to recognize as well that we have two Nevadans with245us today: Jon Raby, the BLM State Director for Nevada,246representing the agency's views, and Jocelyn Torres, the Chief247Conservation Officer for the Conservation Lands Foundation,248which is based in Las Vegas. I also want to welcome back to the249Subcommittee Christopher French, with the U.S. Forest Service,250and I would like to welcome Kelly Norris from Wyoming, the251Wyoming State Forester. Welcome to all four of you. We look252forward to hearing today's testimony.253    I want to highlight just two of my bills that are on the254agenda today. One is S. 1005. It's the Southern Nevada Economic255Development and Conservation Act. This bill is supported by a256broad bipartisan coalition, including the State of Nevada,257local tribes and municipal governments, conservation258organizations, local business associations, affordable housing259advocates, and chambers of commerce. It was favorably reported260by this Committee last year on a bipartisan basis, and I hope261to work with the Full Committee Chairman and Subcommittee262Chairman to gain their support.263    This bill is an extension of the 1998 Southern Nevada264Public Lands Management Act, or SNPLMA, which has created a265process by which the BLM and Clark County would jointly select266designated land parcels to sell in order to responsibly manage267expected growth and development needs. Land sale revenues then268come back to Nevada to invest in education and local269conservation projects.270    In fact, when Interior Secretary Doug Burgum testified271before our Committee earlier this year, he highlighted SNPLMA272as a model for land disposal and for its ability to direct273investments into local conservation and improving local274recreation education opportunities. This bill builds upon the275successful SNPLMA model and expands the number of acres276available for disposal under the program.277    Las Vegas's population is expected to grow by more than278820,000 in the next few decades, and we need to responsibly279manage that growth. Additions to this disposal boundary are280critical because Las Vegas is fully encircled by federal land.281Over 90 percent of the county is comprised of federal land.282    This bill helps BLM release certain lands for necessary283residential and economic development in a coordinated and284responsible way. It also allows the county a say in whether285potential development is in keeping with the county's master286growth and climate mitigation plans.287    Overall, the bill sets a cap of a potential 25,000 acres to288be disposed through SNPLMA, and the bill also protects over289350,000 acres specifically for habitat mitigation and290conservation.291    The bill facilitates outdoor recreation by expanding the292immensely popular Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area,293and includes requests from our two local tribes to expand their294reservations that will help facilitate tribal housing, energy295development, conservation, and economic development needs.296    The bill also creates two job creation zones to help local297communities steer new construction toward lands that are298already developed with relevant infrastructure and299transportation routes. Finally, the bill accelerates and300prioritizes BLM's review and processing of affordable housing301project applications.302    I also want to highlight one final bill that I have on the303agenda today, and that is S. 91. This is the Western Wildfire304Support Act. Last year, this bill was favorably supported by305the Committee through a voice vote.306    My co-lead Senator Sheehy and I hope to have the same307support from the Committee again this Congress. This bill308provides at-risk communities with additional resources to help309prevent wildfires before they start, and also to combat those310that do spark, and help communities touched by wildfire recover311and rebuild.312    We have already delivered funding to help support wildfire313risk reduction in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law that we314passed under the previous administration. Passing this315legislation is a critical next step to combat the threat of316wildfires across the country. Again, I want to thank the317Chairman for holding today's hearing, and I look forward to the318conversations today.319    Senator Barrasso. Well, thanks so much, Senator Cortez320Masto, for your comments. I would like to invite any of the321other members of the Committee who would like to speak about322bills on the agenda.323    Senator Heinrich.324325          OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN HEINRICH,326                  U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO327328    Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman. And I want to very329much thank you and Ranking Member Cortez Masto for convening330this Subcommittee hearing today. I look forward to working with331both of you to get some of the bills we are hearing about today332signed into law in this Congress.333    I want to talk briefly about two bills on the agenda334supported by my constituents in New Mexico. The first, to335designate portions of the Gila and San Francisco Rivers as wild336and scenic rivers, represents decades of work by the local337community to protect the Gila River and its incredible338watershed.339    From its headwaters high in the Gila Wilderness--America's340first wilderness--to the Lower Box, where it enters neighboring341Arizona, the Gila River is the lifeblood of western New Mexico.342And the Gila River boasts some of the best whitewater rafting343in the Southwest and some of the best trout streams where I344have spent countless hours with family and friends.345    Named for long-time Gila defender Dutch Salmon, who346described himself as a ``redneck environmentalist,'' S. 1476347would provide permanent protection for many of the stream miles348in the Gila River region.349    The second bill would protect another watershed in New350Mexico, this time in the northern portion of my state. The351Pecos Watershed Protection Act would prevent new mining claims352from being staked in the Upper Pecos Watershed. This area was353home to lead, zinc, gold, copper, and silver mining in the3541920s and 1930s. Because the waste and tailings from those355operations have never been adequately cleaned up, the356communities and landowners in the Pecos area still suffer with357polluted water and soil today.358    In 1973, tailings dams failed at the Alamitos Canyon Mill,359sending mine pollution into Alamitos Creek and the Pecos River.360The tailings were never remediated, and the dam was never361fixed, so pollution continued to stream into the watershed. And362then, in 1991, an early spring rain washed mill waste into the363river, resulting in a massive fish kill. Ninety-thousand trout364died at the Lisboa Springs Fish Hatchery alone, not to mention365the damage to the Pecos River as a whole. Cleanup efforts since366that spill have been very limited and have left the community367to deal with ongoing pollution of their soil and water. These368photos were taken on a farm in the Pecos Watershed.369    [The photos referred to follow:]370    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]371372    Senator Heinrich. The orange here is mine pollution that373flows into these farm fields anytime there is a heavy rain,374especially during the spring snowmelt at the beginning of the375growing season. And these are not historical photos. These were376taken earlier this year. This is the pollution that my377constituents are still living with today. And yet, a company378wants to open a new mine in the exact same area as the old379Tererro mine that is still polluting streams and farms today.380How can we ask these people to live next to a new mine when381this is what the land in the basin looks like every time it382rains?383    There is not a single person in this community that I have384met with who supports this proposed mine. Not one--not county385commissioners, not local businesses, not the state, the386farmers, not the tribes, not the acequia parciantes--like,387literally no one. I also want to say a quick word about the388person who took these photos.389    Ralph Vigil was a lifelong Pecos resident who was the glue390of this community and the champion of this living river. And he391owned Molino de la Isla Farm, and in his spare time, he392organized his neighbors to advocate on behalf of this river. He393knew every nook and cranny of the Pecos Valley, and he fought394to protect his and his neighbors' ability to sustain their395traditional way of life.396    Ralph died suddenly in May of this year at the age of 46,397and it grieves me to know that he did not live to see his398beloved Pecos protected from future mining. But I know that the399people of Pecos are carrying on his work and carrying it400forward, and I hope we can finish it soon. Thank you very much,401Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Cortez Masto for having this402hearing.403    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Heinrich. Senator404Gallego.405406           OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RUBEN GALLEGO,407                   U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA408409    Senator Gallego. Thank you, Chairman Barrasso and Ranking410Member Cortez Masto. I am excited to say that this afternoon we411are considering one of my bills, my Cross-Boundary Wildfire412Solutions Act.413    This legislation will help us prevent and manage wildfires414that burn across federal, state, tribal, and local lands. As we415all know, wildfires really do not care about boundaries and416they do not stop so people can adjust to whatever the proper417way to fight that fire is on that jurisdiction.418    But unfortunately, our current laws do, and that's actually419slowing down a lot of these responses in western lands. So420right now, federal, state, tribal, and local fire crews have to421follow different rules, even though they are preparing for and/422or responding to the same fire.423    So that makes it harder for them to share information and424work together quickly. There are also funding sources that can425only be used within a single jurisdiction, making cross-426boundary fire mitigation even harder or slower. So my bill427would require the GAO to conduct a comprehensive study of the428programs, rules, and authorities that impact cross-boundary429wildfire mitigation and to provide clear recommendations to430help streamline and improve collaboration between different431levels of Government.432    With this bill, we can cut through the red tape and get433ahead of these fires, and this could not come at a more urgent434time. This year, Arizona alone saw more than 200,000 acres burn435across the North Rim of Grand Canyon National Park and the436Kaibab National Forest.437    The Dragon Bravo Fire, one of the largest fires in Arizona438history, destroyed iconic landscapes in the North Rim and439devastated local businesses whose livelihoods depend on440tourism. Arizona, like many western states, is a patchwork of441state, federal, tribal, and private land. If fires are moving442across these lands faster than different levels of government443can coordinate and prepare for them, the fire has the444advantage.445    As our wildfire season grows longer and our wildfire446landscapes change, we need stronger research and better447coordination to manage these fires and keep communities safe.448The Cross-Boundary Wildfire Solutions Act would help us get449there by improving the working relationship between federal450agencies and their state, tribal, and local counterparts.451    I want to thank specifically the nonpartisan Wildland Fire452Mitigation and Management Commission, whose expertise helped453shape this bill, and my friend, Congressman Joe Neguse, who454introduced this bill in the House. I am proud to see it455included in today's hearing, and I look forward to working with456the Committee to keep it moving toward passage. So, thank you457again, and I yield back.458    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Gallego. If there are459no other members that would like to be heard, I would like to460welcome Senator Bennet to the Committee. Thank you for being461with us this afternoon.462463         OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL F. BENNET,464                   U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO465466    Senator Bennet. It's wonderful to be here. Thank you very467much for your allowing me to come, and Ranking Member, thank468you very much for having me here. And I want to say to both469Senators Heinrich and Gallego how incredible it is to sit here470to listen to the passion you have for our part of the world and471how much I deeply, deeply appreciate the values that you are472fighting for.473    Thank you for working with Joe Neguse in the House. Mr.474Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing, and for giving me475the chance to testify today. I am grateful to have the476opportunity to speak about a bill that is very important to477Colorado, the Colorado Outdoor Recreation and Economy (CORE)478Act.479    The CORE Act will protect over 420,000 acres of public480lands across Colorado. It creates new wilderness, recreation,481and conservation areas, providing lasting protections for482iconic landscapes like Mount Sneffels, the Tenmile Range, the483Thompson Divide, and Mount Emmons.484    The CORE Act demonstrates Colorado's approach to protecting485public land. Over the past 15 years, Coloradans negotiated this486bill at trailheads and at kitchen tables. County commissioners487across the political spectrum, outfitters, ranchers, hunters488and anglers, and local businesses rolled up their sleeves to489find the best way forward to preserve our special places.490    These Coloradans know how fundamental public lands are to491our identity and economy, and they did the hard work to ensure492the CORE Act reflects the diverse interests of our diverse493state. The result is a balanced bill that enjoys the full494support of seven counties, 17 towns and cities, and our495Governor.496    It also has the longtime support of Senator Hickenlooper,497and I am very grateful for his continued work to advance the498bill through this Committee. Today, I have over 50 letters of499support from counties, tribal leaders, conservation groups,500sportsmen, water groups, and community leaders. I would ask for501unanimous support, Mr. Chairman, that these letters be entered502in today's hearing.503    Senator Barrasso. Without objection.504    [Letters of support for the CORE Act follow:]505    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]506507    Senator Bennet. Thank you, Chairman. I really appreciate508your giving me the chance to be here, Chairman Barrasso and509Ranking Member Cortez Masto, for this opportunity.510    The CORE Act enjoyed bipartisan support from this Committee511last Congress, and I hope that you will respect the years of512work that went into this bill and honor the Coloradans who have513spent over a decade drafting, refining, and pushing for its514passage. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the chance to515testify.516    Senator Barrasso. You are welcome, Senator Bennet, and I517know you have lots of things going on. You are welcome to stay518for the hearing. We have wonderful witnesses who are going to519testify. And if you have to leave because of other pressing520matters, we certainly understand, but we will keep you well521informed of the discussions, and we appreciate your efforts. So522thank you, Senator Bennet.523    Now, I would like to invite the other members of the panel524to join us at the table, and as you are joining us at the525table, I see that we are now joined by Senator Wyden, and I526would like to ask Senator Wyden if you would have any comments527or remarks that you would like to share with members of the528Committee.529530             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN,531                    U.S. SENATOR FROM OREGON532533    Senator Wyden. Yes, Mr. Chairman. And Mr. Chairman, thank534you, and I appreciate the bipartisan cooperation with you. As535you know, in Oregon, we are very interested in the Owyhees. You536have priorities in Wyoming. We have been able to find common537ground, and I thank you for it. Today, we wanted to talk538briefly about the Oregon Recreation Enhancement Act.539    Our legislation would protect and enhance Oregon's most540iconic recreation destinations, the Rogue and the Molalla541Rivers. It also contains key protections for several sources of542clean drinking water across the state and would provide543direction for wildfire risk reduction.544    These special rivers are home to some of the world's most545iconic salmon and steelhead runs and have helped to supercharge546Oregon's local recreation economy. We have a long history of547working to protect this remote area of southern Oregon.548    Since it first passed, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of5491968 has been able to protect over 44 miles of the Rogue River,550but more must be done. Despite this, the Trump administration551has testified it doesn't support the bill because of concerns552over energy and mineral dominance. This is a remarkable claim553for several reasons.554    For one, it has never been clearly established that this555region has the potential for successful, sustainable commercial556mineral production. If it was, and if it proves to be, I would557be happy to follow my long record of working with all sides for558mutual benefit of multiple use.559    I have been outspoken about my concern for increasing560domestic production of critical minerals, even introducing561federal legislation to further that goal. I do believe it needs562to be done in a balanced kind of way with responsible voices at563the table. This is not where we are with these places in this564bill.565    A report prepared and reviewed by multiple certified566mineral examiners found that the proposed withdrawal would not567cause the loss of any known economic mineral deposits. Even568more remarkable is that this administration justifies its569opposition to the proposal over concerns that it interferes570with priorities surrounding energy dominance. The571administration that just gutted the country's domestic energy572production by killing so many renewables and creating a573manufacturing energy crisis is now crying wolf about energy574dominance. It makes your head spin.575    It is further evidence that the Trump administration simply576isn't willing to look at locally driven, crafted solutions for577responsible resource management. What's in this legislation578represents years of direct feedback and input from people on579the ground.580    Of the 45,000 comments on the withdrawal, all but 27 were581in support of the proposal. Mr. Chairman, you and colleagues582have been very gracious to allow me this time. I would ask to583put the rest of my remarks in the record, but it is a noted584point of pride on this Committee for generations that we have585respect for locally driven solutions being honored.586    That is what we are doing in the Owyhees. I look forward to587continuing to work closely with you and my colleagues, and588appreciate the chance to make these remarks, and put the rest589of my comments in the record.590    Senator Barrasso. Well, without objection, it will be591included in the record. And thanks so very much for your592leadership on all of these important matters. Thank you,593Senator Wyden.594    [Senator Wyden's written opening statement follows:]595    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]596597    Senator Barrasso. I understand Senator Hickenlooper is on598his way. We are going to move ahead with introductions of the599panel, and when he arrives, we will allow him an opportunity to600make comments on his legislation as well. I am honored to601introduce Ms. Kelly Norris to join us today. Kelly is no602stranger to the Committee. You have been here testifying603previously, and you are Wyoming State Forester. You have been604in that position for a couple of years, but before that you605served as our Interim State Forester.606    And you are a resident of Cheyenne, Wyoming, and have a607degree in forestry from the University of Wisconsin-Stevens608Point. Most importantly, you worked for the Wyoming State609Forestry Division for 15 years. So she knows forestry, she610knows Wyoming, and her experience working as a forester for611both the State of Wyoming and the U.S. Forest Service qualify612her clearly to be here sharing her knowledge with us today.613    You have years' worth of critical on-the-ground knowledge.614It's a valuable resource to the Committee, so we are delighted615that you are here. I am grateful you have taken on the616responsibility of protecting Wyoming's forests. So, thank you617for joining us.618     I also do want to take a moment to thank our other619witnesses for being here today, especially the Associate Chief620of the U.S. Forest Service within the U.S. Department of621Agriculture, Mr. Chris French. Welcome back to the Committee.622    The Nevada State Director for the Bureau of Land623Management, you may be doing a little more of an introduction624in a second, Mr. Jon Raby. And we promise to get you out of625here before the sun goes down and the lights are illuminated on626the beautiful Capitol Christmas tree, which has come from your627State of Nevada.628    We also would like to welcome Ms. Jocelyn Torres, who is629the Chief Conservation Officer for the Conservation Lands630Foundation. In light of Senator Hickenlooper not yet being in631the room, we will turn to Kelly Norris for your testimony.632Thank you.633634              OPENING STATEMENT OF KELLY NORRIS,635        STATE FORESTER, WYOMING STATE FORESTRY DIVISION636637    Ms. Norris. Thank you, Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member638Cortez Masto, and members of the Subcommittee, for holding this639hearing today, and for the opportunity to testify on behalf of640Wyoming State Forestry Division.641    My name is Kelly Norris. I am the Wyoming State Forester,642and a member of the National Association of State Foresters. I643appreciate the Subcommittee's commitment to forestry and644wildland fire issues, and the recognition that we need to work645proactively to address wildfire and forest health problems of646the nation. The Wildfire Prevention Act of 2025 is one such647example.648    I also appreciate being on a panel with my state's close649federal partners, the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land650Management. The Wyoming State Forestry Division is the651connection between federal agencies and our local652municipalities, communities, nonprofit partners, and all who653have a stake in safe and healthy landscapes.654    We lead in cross-boundary work because we are responsible655for all forestry matters in the state. This is including656private, state, and community forests. Because of this unique657role, we know where our highest risks are, where current658capacity lies, and where we need help plugging in the gaps with659support of our partners. I appreciate the Wildfire Prevention660Act's efforts to create increasing goals for federal land661management agencies.662    Over the past decade, state foresters have been using tools663such as the Good Neighbor Authority to partner with federal664agencies and accomplish more active management and fuels665reduction activities that are needed to protect our communities666and watersheds.667    In fact, many states are investing significant financial668resources to accomplish more work on state, private, and669federal land. These coordinated efforts help prevent670catastrophic fires. The 2024 Elk Fire in Wyoming had the671potential to be highly destructive, burning over numerous672leased cabins on state trust lands.673    But due to the combined efforts between state and federal674partners, a large cross-boundary project that included timber675harvesting and aspen enhancement stopped the Elk Fire on state676trust lands, saving cabins, important wildlife habitat, grazing677forage, and costs associated with dozer lines, retardant drops,678and firefighters trying to save and protect that area.679    State foresters around the country continue to help the680federal agencies reach these attainable goals. Stable funding681is needed to ensure we can continue to increase accomplishments682together. I also appreciate the bill's effort to accurately683describe how many acres are treated each year and their684location. State foresters are working closely with the Forest685Service and Bureau of Land Management to develop a686comprehensive all-lands forest health treatment database. This687includes working toward standardized reporting metrics so688Congress and Americans can clearly understand the costs and689benefits of proactive land management on all ownerships.690    In addition, Wyoming and state forestry agencies have been691readily deploying privately available wildfire technologies. As692core members of the National Interagency Fire Center, we ask693the Subcommittee to ensure the bill's Public-Private Wildfire694Technology Deployment and Testbed Partnerships incorporate695states and locals into planning and deployment of new696technologies.697    Forest management and fire suppression are inherently698linked, and so are local, state, and federal wildland fire699agencies, with each entity responsible for its own specific700jurisdiction. Nationally, state forestry agencies provide safe,701effective wildfire response on approximately 1.1 billion acres,702a large portion of which is in the most complex and difficult703firefighting environment, the wildland-urban interface.704    Collectively, state and local fire departments respond to70580 percent of the wildfires nationwide, with hundreds of706thousands of firefighters and resources. I will end with an707example of how this works in Wyoming, where local volunteer708fire departments provide fire protection not only for state and709private land, but also have agreements to assist with the710protection of federal land, such as the Thunder Basin National711Grassland.712    The Thunder Basin National Grassland is over half a million713acres in size, is located within four Wyoming counties, and714staffed by one federal engine. Wyoming operates as all-hands,715all-lands when it comes to wildfire response. And when a fire716starts within the Thunder Basin National Grassland, local717volunteer fire resources respond immediately with dozens of718engines and typically suppress these fires on federal lands all719within a mutual aid time period.720    This highlights the need for state foresters and local721governments to be a key component of a coordinated, all-722government approach to fire suppression, with an equal emphasis723on proactive mitigation and forest management before wildfires724ever start. Thank you.725    [The prepared statement of Ms. Norris follows:]726    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]727728    Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Mr.729French.730731OPENING STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER FRENCH, ASSOCIATE CHIEF, U.S.732            DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOREST SERVICE733734    Mr. French. Good afternoon. Thank you, Chairman Barrasso735and Ranking Member Cortez Masto, and the rest of the members of736the Subcommittee for having me here today to present the views737of the U.S. Department of Agriculture on the 18 bills under738consideration pertaining to the U.S. Forest Service.739    My name is Chris French. I am the Associate Chief of the740U.S. Forest Service, and have worked with the agency for more741than 34 years. These bills cover a wide range of issues,742ranging from how we approach wildfire reduction and risk743management to land exchanges, designations of wilderness and744wild and scenic rivers, and more. I defer to the U.S.745Department of the Interior for its views on those elements of746the bills where we have shared equities.747    Under President Trump and Secretary Rollins' leadership,748the Forest Service has the largest and most prepared wildland749firefighting force in the world. We successfully put out 98750percent of the wildfires during initial attack, keeping fires751small so they don't threaten communities or require large752amounts of resources.753    In service to the President's vision, articulated in754Executive Order 14308, ``Empowering Commonsense Wildfire755Prevention and Response,'' the agency is working closely with756the Department of the Interior to more closely align operations757between the two departments.758    The wildfire bills that are subject to this hearing--S. 91,759140, 902, and 2033--could help transform how the Forest Service760and other wildfire agencies prepare for and respond to761wildfire. They demand faster detection and shared standards762across agencies, expand our use of technology, increase763resources for firefighters and postfire recovery, and764accelerate hazardous fuels treatments and hazardous tree765removals. USDA supports the intent of these bills, as they766generally align with the administration's goals to improve767federal response to wildfire. We would welcome the opportunity768to work with the bill sponsors and the Committee to address769some implementation concerns.770    There are a number of bills, including S. 764, 888, 945,7711319, 1341, 1476, 1737, and 2042 that add new wilderness areas772and sections of wild and scenic rivers, establish new773recreation areas, and withdraw some lands from mining and774logging. The Forest Service actively manages forests to provide775multiple benefits while reducing the risk of catastrophic776wildfire for communities in the wildland-urban interface. While777some of the areas in these bills were recommended for inclusion778in the Wilderness Protection System or in the Wild and Scenic779River System, USDA does not support the inclusion of these780areas, as they are contrary to the administration's timber781production, energy, and mineral dominance priorities.782    The administration opposes S. 2042 and views the 2001783Roadless Rule as a barrier to managing critical areas that are784at high risk for wildfire and protecting communities on over 40785million acres of inventoried roadless areas of National Forest786System lands.787    Bills S. 1860, 2016, and 1005 would transfer or exchange788federal lands for local government, tribal, or corporate789purposes. These bills aim to increase the prosperity of local790communities by supporting development of infrastructure and791resolving jurisdictional issues while providing for792conservation. USDA supports the intent of these bills and would793like to work with the bill sponsors and Committee to address794some of our implementation concerns.795    S. 1363 and S. 1228 aim to strengthen partnerships the796Forest Service has with communities and expand youth corps797involvement in land management. Forest Service supports the798intent of these bills and would like to work with the bill799sponsors and Committee.800    S. 2262 would restrict public participation in federal land801policy rulemaking to U.S. citizens and safeguard against AI-802generated comments. USDA supports the intent of this bill and803would like to work with the bill sponsoring committee to804address some technical concerns.805    In closing, I want to thank you, Chairman Barrasso and806Ranking Member Cortez Masto, for the opportunity to appear807before the Committee today, and I look forward to your808questions.809    [The prepared statement of Mr. French follows:]810   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]811812    Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Mr. French. Mr.813Raby.814815OPENING STATEMENT OF JON RABY, NEVADA STATE DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF816        LAND MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR817818    Mr. Raby. Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member Cortez Masto,819and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity820to provide testimony on the bills on the hearing agenda related821to the Bureau of Land Management.822    My name is Jon Raby, and I am the State Director for the823Bureau of Land Management in Nevada. The BLM manages824approximately 245 million surface acres located primarily in 12825western states, and approximately 700 million acres of826subsurface mineral estate.827    The Federal Land Policy and Management Act, or FLPMA, sets828forth the BLM's multiple-use mission, directing that public829lands be managed for a broad range of uses, such as energy830development, livestock grazing, timber production, hunting and831fishing, and recreation. FLPMA also requires the BLM to manage832public lands on a sustained-yield basis for the benefit of833current and future generations.834    Under the Trump administration, the BLM is managing the835public lands as national assets, capable of growing our836economy, helping balance the budget, and generating revenue for837the American taxpayers. The BLM is also working to fulfill the838President's vision that public lands serve the American people.839    Many of the bills on today's agenda further the840administration's priorities, particularly those related to fire841management, recreation and access, and supporting states and842local communities. The Trump administration is focused on843streamlining organizational structures and regulations,844including those needed to address today's wildfire crisis.845Wildfires threaten lives and livelihoods and cost our nation846hundreds of billions of dollars nationally and annually.847    The Department welcomes the Subcommittee's interest in848wildfire preparation, management, and recovery, as well as849mitigation activities like hazardous fuels reduction, and850supports the goals of S. 91, S. 140, and S. 2033. We look851forward to working with the Committee to ensure that the safety852of our firefighters and the public remains the highest priority853of wildland fire management efforts.854    The administration is also committed to unleashing American855energy and expanding timber production as part of a broader856agenda of strengthening the economy and lowering the cost of857living. The Department has a renewed focus on responsible858resource management and economic growth, while ensuring the859responsible stewardship of the nation's public lands and860resources, and the BLM is working to ensure a reliable, secure,861and resilient domestic supply of minerals and timber. Several862bills on the agenda propose restrictive designations that are863contrary to the administration's energy dominance and timber864production goals.865    The Department does not support legislation that would866eliminate future mineral development opportunities, limit867access to domestic sources of critical minerals, or impede the868management and harvest of timber. As such, the Department does869not support S. 764, S. 888, or S. 1476. The Department supports870congressional action to resolve wilderness designations and871wilderness study area statuses.872    While the Department supports WSA releases in some of873today's bills, it does not support wilderness designations,874wild and scenic river designations, or mineral withdrawals,875such as those found in S. 1195, S. 1319, and S. 1476. The876Department believes the BLM has sufficient authorities to877appropriately manage these lands without impeding public878access, limiting outdoor recreational opportunities, and879prohibiting mineral development.880    The BLM is working to ensure its plans and permitting881decisions reflect the input of state and local governments and882the people who are most affected by public land management. The883BLM supports the bills on the agenda that would benefit local884communities, including S. 1175, which would expand the885eligibility for payments in lieu of taxes to help fund critical886community services.887    The Department recognizes the challenges presented by888irregular land ownership patterns and believes that land sales889and exchanges are an important tool to ensure management890strategies are effective and in the public interest. As such,891the BLM supports the land conveyances proposed in S. 1005, S.8921195, and S. 2016.893    The Department is also committed to fulfilling its trust894responsibilities to tribes and Alaska Natives and supporting895tribal self-determination, and has no objection to provisions896taking land into trust for the benefit of tribes in S. 1005, S.8971468, and S. 2016.898    The Department appreciates the legislative intent to899enhance coordination with New Mexico's land grant-mercedes in900S. 1363. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on these901important topics, and I look forward to your questions.902    [The prepared statement of Mr. Raby follows:]903   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]904905    Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Mr. Raby.906    Ms. Torres.907908    OPENING STATEMENT OF JOCELYN TORRES, CHIEF CONSERVATION909             OFFICER, CONSERVATION LANDS FOUNDATION910911    Ms. Torres. Chair Barrasso, Ranking Member Cortez Masto,912and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity913to testify in support of S. 1005, the Southern Nevada Economic914Development and Conservation Act. My name is Jocelyn Torres,915and I am the Chief Conservation Officer for the Conservation916Lands Foundation. We represent a broad nonpartisan national917network of community leaders and advocates solely focused on918protecting lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management.919    The work of the Conservation Lands Foundation and our920network of more than 80 community-based organizations across921the West is something personally important to me. Having grown922up in Las Vegas, Nevada, the ancestral homelands of the923Southern Paiute people, there were recreational opportunities924easily within reach.925    Although the community has significantly grown since I was926a kid, we have done so without diminishing the quality of927public lands and recreational opportunities. If anything,928thanks to legislation such as the Southern Nevada Public Lands929Management Act, which Senator Cortez Masto mentioned, and the930Land and Water Conservation Fund, recreational opportunities931have increased over those 30 years.932    In the last year alone, I attended a groundbreaking for the933Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area visitor center and took934the newest little member of our family to a visitor center that935just opened for the Ice Age Fossils State Park that opened last936year in 2024. All of my life, Nevada's public lands have taken937care of me, my loved ones, and my community. It is important to938me that I care for the land in return, and it's something that939Nevadans value as well.940    The essence of the Southern Nevada bill before you revolves941around this shared concept, that we mitigate for the resources942we use in order to grow and thrive as a community. This was the943basis for the community conversations, which began almost a944decade ago, to craft this legislation. The early days involved945several meetings with different communities, from conservation946to affordable housing, to economic development interests. Those947conversations continue to this day, not only between the bill948sponsor, Senator Cortez Masto and these various parties, but949through healthy debates at municipal planning meetings,950roundtables, presentations regarding zoning, water951conservation, and affordable housing.952    I am here today to ask you to continue this bipartisan work953and move this bill forward. You have an opportunity before you954to not only enhance protection for places such as Red Rock955Canyon National Conservation Area and the Desert National956Wildlife Refuge, but to do so in a manner that invests in the957local economy by addressing the needs of a rapidly growing958region in a very thoughtful manner.959    Red Rock Canyon is expected to see more than four million960visitors this year, and the bill would expand Red Rock Canyon961by more than 50,000 acres, allowing for more opportunities to962hike and bike, and more protected areas for the endangered963Mojave Desert tortoise. Often referred to as Southern Nevada's964crown jewel, Red Rock Canyon was Nevada's first national965conservation area and was originally protected for its unique966and nationally important geological, ecological, and cultural967values.968    The Desert National Wildlife Refuge, the largest national969wildlife refuge outside of Alaska, is the wildest part of the970Silver State, containing Nevada's best wildlife habitat and one971of the largest populations of desert bighorn sheep. The refuge972has been utilized for thousands of years by the Southern Paiute973people, Southern Nevada residents, and visitors alike, and was974originally proposed as wilderness in 1974, and it is past time975that we conserve it for its priceless values.976    Beyond conserving and enhancing some of Southern Nevada's977most beloved places at a time when demand for public land978access is at an all-time high and the need for enhanced979conservation is at a critical point, the Southern Nevada980Economic Development and Conservation Act would also restore981lands to the Moapa Band of Paiutes and the Las Vegas Paiute982Tribe, helping them also achieve their nations' conservation983and economic development goals.984    Nevada's federal and local elected officials, tribal985governments, and local communities have come together to put986this proposal before you today. The work to conserve our987landscapes and quality of life has always been important, and I988know this Subcommittee understands the urgency and importance989of action in ensuring we uphold these values.990    Lastly, I would also like to express support for four other991bills under consideration today, S. 764, the CORE Act,992sponsored by Senators Bennet and Hickenlooper of Colorado; S.9931195, the Pershing County Economic Development and Conservation994Act, sponsored by Senator Rosen; S. 1319, the Pecos Watershed995Protection Act; and S. 1476, the M.H. Dutch Salmon and Greater996Gila Wild and Scenic River Act.997    The four bills, like SNEDCA, honor commitments to998strengthen our bonds with the lands that we know and love.999Thank you for the opportunity to share today.1000    [The prepared statement of Ms. Torres follows:]1001    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]10021003    Senator Barrasso. Well, thanks to all four of you for your1004testimony. Before proceeding to the questions, I would like to1005turn to Senator Hickenlooper in case you would like to make1006some comments about legislation that is pending.10071008        OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER,1009                   U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO10101011    Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Ranking1012Member--Ranking Members. And thank you for including our two1013Colorado wilderness bills in today's hearing--our Sarvis Creek1014Wilderness Completion Act and the Colorado Outdoor Recreation1015and Economy Act, also known as the CORE Act.1016    I think Senator Bennet was here earlier, so I won't belabor1017that too much. Sarvis Creek Wilderness is located in Routt1018County--the Routt National Forest near Steamboat Springs, which1019is in the northern part of Colorado. Our bill would expand this1020area by roughly 7,000 acres, fulfilling actually the original1021vision of the community as was first proposed roughly 50 years1022ago.1023    The expansion will protect watersheds that feed into the1024Yampa River, a tributary of the Colorado River, and help1025conserve the habitat that 250 to 300 elk rely on. Coloradans1026generally all love our wilderness. I haven't met--I am sure1027there are some people that don't trust or are suspicious about1028wilderness--I haven't met one yet. Sarvis Creek Wilderness has1029outdoor recreation opportunities and landscapes that are hard1030to imagine anywhere but where you see them there, and1031Coloradans across the state want to make sure that that's1032protected.1033    We are proud of the support we have received from local1034governments, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe, and various1035conservation and recreation groups. Similarly, the CORE Act was1036developed with amazing widespread and broad on-the-ground1037support. It is a product of more than a decade of Colorado1038communities, businesses, outdoor recreation enthusiasts,1039conservationists--various advocates working together to protect1040over 400,000 acres of public lands in our state.1041    Senator Bennet has led the charge on this, pulling together1042stakeholders all over the state that cherish these landscapes,1043from the 14ers, like Mount Sneffels, to the shores of Blue Mesa1044Reservoir, the largest body of water in the entire state. It's1045a big deal for small businesses, for hunters, for anglers,1046farmers, ranchers, conservation and recreation advocates, for1047Coloradans who want to make sure this land is permanently1048protected.1049    Both of these bills play a significant role in our $171050billion outdoor recreation economy. I appreciate their1051inclusion today, and I hope we can work together to continue to1052advance and enact these bills. Thank you. Thanks to all of you1053for being here as well.1054    Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you, Senator Hickenlooper. We1055will proceed with questions. I would like to start with Kelly1056Norris, because this year in Wyoming, we had fires especially1057devastating in western Wyoming, the Red Canyon Fire, 124,0001058acres outside of Thermopolis and moving to the East from there.1059    Last year, the Elk Fire burned about 98,000 acres. Rural1060communities in the West are feeling the aftereffects from1061another devastating wildfire season. As more incidents start,1062and suppression resources are spread thin, federal and state1063agencies need to work together. How do the state, local, and1064federal agencies work best together to accomplish incidents1065such as these wildfires?1066    Ms. Norris. Thank you, Chairman Barrasso. The one important1067part of all of this is that we are working at the same time1068together, not just during the fire in the fire season, it's all1069year round. So currently, right now, coming up in Casper is our1070Wyoming Rural Fire Association meeting, and we will have BLM1071and Forest Service representation with the counties all working1072together to talk about next year's fire season.1073    But on the ground, when we are in a fire season, what we1074know is state capacity and local capacity. We know where our1075risks are, where the resources are, and we are quickly1076gathering those, looking at state contracting systems. And1077then, we work with our federal partners quite closely when it1078comes to--as that fire grows.1079    One great example is the Wyoming Aviation Program. We1080utilize a full time employee from the Medicine Bow-Routt to1081help us with our contracting system for the state's two1082helicopters. We are able to keep them going 24/7 because of the1083associated personnel that the Forest Service provides for us.1084    Senator Barrasso. Can I ask you a follow up on that? So,1085how do you see the Wildfire Prevention Act helping to1086streamline authorities between state and federal agencies?1087    Ms. Norris. Thank you, Chairman. Great question. We see1088that as helping the agencies in many different ways, looking at1089the new technologies and having the state and locals1090participate in those new technologies that you talked about1091with the testbed systems. And also, having the agencies do1092exactly what the authorities say they should be doing. And many1093of those could be done through Good Neighbor Authority as well.1094    Senator Barrasso. Well, in terms of the Good Neighbor1095Authority, I think it has been a very successful tool. Since10962017, when the Forest Service launched the program, we have1097contracted over 12,000 acres of federal land in the state.1098Included in my legislation are reporting requirements to track1099how much work is being done through Good Neighbor Authority.1100Are there things that are holding us back in terms of using the1101Wyoming State Forestry Division and Good Neighbor Authority?1102    Ms. Norris. Thank you, Chairman Barrasso. Good Neighbor1103Authority is a huge success in Wyoming. We have seen really1104great strides going forward with it. One of the great parts of1105Good Neighbor Authority is that we can reinvest that money back1106into projects on the ground onto the units, but there is just1107so much work to be done. And some of that timber revenue just1108does not provide the same amount of funding to get the work1109done that we need to do.1110    So one thing that we are looking at when we look at1111Wyoming, and growing, we are going to need to grow capacity and1112state staffing. And having some consistent, stable funding1113would really help for short, long, and really long-term1114planning for us. And so, that is one area that we see as a1115barrier.1116    Beyond that is just planning and coordinating with the1117Forest Service and making sure that we are following through on1118the projects we are going to commit to.1119    Senator Barrasso. So, about half the land in Wyoming is1120owned by the Federal Government. So land managed under multiple1121use is required to be managed without impairment of1122productivity of the land. I have long supported all use of1123federal land, as wildfire mitigation is a tool. Are there big1124barriers to accomplishing more active management, in addition1125to the money aspect of it?1126    Ms. Norris. Thank you, Chairman. I would say, when we look1127at wildfire, we are all--we have talked about it. We leverage1128each other's resources. We are working together. We are1129seeing--hey, you have this, I have that, let's get this done,1130there is an emergency on the ground.1131    If we were to look at active management in the same1132capacity and in that same light, and say, hey, look, we need to1133leverage your state resources. Let's look at leveraging our1134other partners in the same way that we are doing it and see it1135as the emergency that it is. We need more work done on the1136ground. Yes, we could get a lot more work done on the ground1137that way.1138    Senator Barrasso. Mr. Raby, another one of my bills on the1139agenda today is called the American Voices in Federal Lands1140Act, because during a previous administration, I was concerned1141over the public comment process regarding the BLM. My bill aims1142to ensure that public comments being submitted for review are1143submitted by U.S. citizens, and to prevent the risk of AI1144commenting on public land rules. We saw last time the number of1145comments coming in from China and how that was impacting1146things--well, we got all these comments, but they weren't1147people that were necessarily looking into the best interest of1148our home states or of our nation. Can you just explain the1149current safeguards that are in place at the agency to prevent1150non-U.S. citizens or outside agents from influencing federal1151land policy in the U.S.?1152    Mr. Raby. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for the1153question. And candidly, the agency does not have very good1154safeguards to prevent non-U.S. citizens from providing comments1155and malicious actors from providing comments that could put1156critical planning efforts at risk. Certainly, your proposed1157legislation would shore up that gap that we have in that1158oversight that we need. And so, we would welcome that1159direction, and it would help us greatly in our planning1160efforts.1161    Senator Barrasso. Terrific.1162    Senator Cortez Masto.1163    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. Senator Barrasso, I am1164going to defer to the Ranking Member of the Committee on ENR,1165Senator Heinrich.1166    Senator Heinrich. Thank you both. Mr. French, the1167administration recently reversed a very popular administrative1168withdrawal in the Upper Pecos Watershed despite overwhelming1169public support in that community for the withdrawal. Your1170agency even canceled a public forum that would have allowed for1171discussion of the withdrawal and given the community a chance1172to share their views with the Forest Service. Would you commit1173to coming out to the Pecos Valley and meeting with that1174community and having a public meeting?1175    Mr. French. Yes, thank you very much for the question,1176Senator. Of course, and we will have a conversation around any1177of those issues. We know that the comments that we received on1178the withdrawal itself overwhelmingly supported the withdrawal.1179But across the agency, the administration's policy is to1180preserve the spaces we have right now for future development1181until such time that we understand what our current mineral1182development is across the agency. So, it is more about a1183broader administration policy around the use of public lands1184and----1185    Senator Heinrich. But why not meet with the local community1186before making a decision? I mean, that's kind of the way we1187typically do planning in these public land agencies is, first1188you listen to the community, just like Senator Barrasso, the1189Chairman, articulated his issues with BLM planning. We want1190these decisions to be rooted in local communities, and yet they1191seem to have been cut out of this process.1192    Mr. French. Senator, as you are aware, when this was first1193proposed more than two years ago, there was a broad comment1194period on that so that we could understand what the feelings of1195the community were. I am not aware of any comments that opposed1196that withdrawal. But that is in conflict with the broader1197administration's policy right now on the use of public lands1198and supporting mineral and energy development.1199    Senator Heinrich. My dad worked for Anaconda Copper and my1200grandfather worked at Battle Mountain Gold Mine in Nevada, so I1201fully recognize that there are many places in this country1202where mining can be done safely and with strong local support.1203I just don't think the Upper Pecos is one of those places, and1204I wonder, can you tell us, does the Forest Service even1205consider values like recreation, agricultural productivity, or1206traditional uses when making decisions about where to permit1207new mining activities?1208    Mr. French. Of course we do. Yes, so there is a difference1209between an administrative withdrawal versus when we actually1210get an expression of interest, and we go through the1211environmental process to look at what the consequences of1212permitting something like that would be.1213    In those cases, we are looking at all the various impacts--1214whether they are economic, social--to the environment that1215surrounds where the mine would be, including the uses of that1216area, such as recreation or cattle grazing. All that is taken1217into consideration in how we permit areas and allow for that1218activity to occur.1219    Senator Heinrich. Well, I very much appreciate your1220willingness to come out and meet directly with the local1221community, and I look forward to that happening. You called the1222Roadless Rule a barrier. Do you know what sportsmen in New1223Mexico call the roadless areas that are protected in our state?1224    Mr. French. I do not.1225    Senator Heinrich. They call it elk habitat.1226    Mr. French. Yes, they do.1227    Senator Heinrich. And if you overlaid the Roadless Rule1228with--I mean, I almost hesitate to suggest people do that1229because they would see places that I like to go and have some1230solitude when I am elk hunting. But how many public meetings1231did this administration have before proposing overturning the1232Roadless Rule?1233    Mr. French. The administration has only proposed a new1234approach on the Roadless Rule. The general approach there is1235thinking about what are the barriers to protecting communities1236from wildland fire risk. There are more than 24 million acres1237of the wildland-urban interface that are either within roadless1238or within a mile of roadless, of which we are restricted from1239how we treat those areas, other than let's say using prescribed1240fire. Access----1241    Senator Heinrich. I looked at a number of state roadless1242treatment numbers and there are substantial amounts of those1243roadless areas being treated for fire prevention.1244    Mr. French. That is correct. But it limits the type of1245activities that you can do. And I will go back to the1246discussion that was happening earlier with Senator Barrasso and1247the question around how do you expand these areas.1248    Oftentimes when you are doing fuels reduction work, the1249actual value that is coming out of those materials is minimal1250compared to the actual cost of doing that work. So in order for1251us to do more acres and create broader areas of treatments, we1252need to do the most efficient treatments that we can.1253    Providing access and providing the ability to get in there1254and do that is the way to make that happen. Otherwise, those1255costs for doing that work are extremely, extremely expensive1256per acre.1257    Senator Heinrich. Well, once again, I would just encourage1258you to have a robust public process before making these1259decisions. Thank you.1260    Senator Barrasso. Senator Daines.1261    Senator Daines. Chair Barrasso, Ranking Member Cortez1262Masto, thank you for the opportunity to examine some great1263pieces of legislation here today. In fact, today's agenda1264includes two bills of mine, Senate bill 1175, the Small County1265PILT Parity Act, and Senate bill 451, the Restoring State1266Mineral Revenues Act.1267    Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask for consent to add the1268letters of support I have received from counties for the1269record.1270    Senator Barrasso. Without objection.1271    [The letters referred to follow:]1272   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]12731274    Senator Daines. I want to start with my bipartisan Small1275County PILT Parity Act. We have discussed the importance of the1276PILT program in this Committee many times. It has strong1277bipartisan support. I can tell you it's essential for Montana's1278rural counties to be able to provide crucial services, such as1279emergency response, as well as public safety. However, the1280current PILT formula puts counties with a population of less1281than 5,000 at a disadvantage by capping their payments and1282limiting the revenue streams that they have.1283    The Small County PILT Parity Act, which has previously1284passed out of this Committee with bipartisan support, would1285rectify this disadvantage. To fix this, the PILT calculation1286table should be expanded to accommodate population tiers at1287levels down to 1,000 people or even fewer, and not just stop at12885,000.1289    These counties can and should receive fair compensation1290without reducing payments to counties with larger populations.1291When you are kind of this East Coast-centric world of D.C.,1292they look at everything on a per-capita basis. If you get out1293West, it's all about square miles. And so, I've got some very1294large counties in terms of geographical area, but very small1295populations.1296    And talk to the folks who are trying to--the road grading1297teams, the public safety teams, they have a lot of ground to1298cover, despite the fact that they've got low population but1299massive landmasses. So, I want to thank Ranking Member Cortez1300Masto for co-leading this bill to help bring parity to the PILT1301Program, and I want to thank the members of this Committee who1302have also co-sponsored it.1303    A question I have for Mr. Raby: Nevada and Montana both1304have numerous counties with populations of less than 5,000.1305Those are the kind of counties I like to go to. You don't see1306hardly anybody, and you have a chance to experience amazing1307parts of--I will still call it the real Montana that is still1308out there. Do you agree that expanding the PILT table will help1309support counties with high federal land ownership but low1310populations?1311    Mr. Raby. Senator, thank you for the question, and I1312absolutely support that. I have seen that in Nevada, places1313like Esmeralda County, where they have 98 percent plus public1314lands and a population of 1,000 or less. And so, it would1315absolutely help those counties. Having worked in Montana, prior1316to my time in Nevada, I have seen the same need, and your bill1317would absolutely address that and benefit those counties.1318    Senator Daines. Thank you, Mr. Raby. A follow-up question--1319can you confirm for the Committee that the bill does not change1320the calculations for counties with populations above 5,000? We1321are simply expanding the pie, not taking away from larger1322counties.1323    Mr. Raby. Senator Daines, thanks again for the question.1324And yes, I can confirm that. It does not change the payments1325above.1326    Senator Daines. Great. Thank you. I think it's an important1327fact because I know there have been concerns in the past that1328somehow we are just going to reshuffle the dollars, but that's1329not the case the way we have the language written here in this1330bill.1331    I want to turn to my Restoring State Mineral Revenues Act.1332Under the Mineral Leasing Act, revenues generated by oil and1333gas development on federal lands are supposed to be split 50-501334between the Federal Government and the states and counties1335where the oil and gas is actually developed.1336    But in classic D.C. bureaucracy form, the Federal1337Government charges states a two percent admin fee on their half1338of the revenues. This is just a backhanded way to take more1339money from the states and counties that are affected the most.1340    This bill that I have is very simple. It eliminates the two1341percent fee and returns the revenue back to a true 50-50 split.1342It has strong support from county governments and has passed1343this Committee multiple times in various revenue-sharing bills.1344Now it's time to get it to the President's desk and make our1345counties whole.1346    Mr. Raby, back to you again. Do you agree that the states1347and the counties where federal oil and gas development actually1348occur should receive their fair share of revenue generated1349within their borders?1350    Mr. Raby. Senator Daines, thank you for the question. And1351of course, in places like Montana or Nevada, 50-50 means 50-50.1352And so, your bill would absolutely do that, and I agree 1001353percent that that should happen.1354    Senator Daines. There is an old saying that somebody who1355says they will meet you halfway sometimes is a poor judge of1356distance. I would say that's probably true of some DC1357bureaucrats here. But thanks, Mr. Raby, and thank you, Chairman1358Barrasso.1359    Senator Barrasso. Senator Cortez Masto.1360    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. I want to talk a little1361bit about one of the bills that I have before the Committee1362that we have passed in a bipartisan way previously, which is1363the Southern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act,1364S. 1005.1365    Mr. Raby, let me start with you. You talked a little bit--1366and Ms. Torres talked a little bit--about SNPLMA. I am very1367familiar with that in Southern Nevada. It has been in existence1368since 1998, and it created a disposal boundary around Las Vegas1369and directed the BLM and Clark County to engage in a joint1370selection process to approve parcels of land for disposal. This1371ensures that local government has a role in determining whether1372land is developed--where, when, and how. And this legislation I1373have builds on that legislation to expand the boundary and1374places a cap on the amount of acres that can be developed in1375the future under SNPLMA.1376    Quick question: the legislation that's before you today--1377does the Clark County lands bill mandate land sales in the1378legislation that's before you today?1379    Mr. Raby. Well, the Clark County lands bill--and thank you1380again, Senator, for the question. It provides the opportunity1381for those land sales on those acres, and is a much-needed1382opportunity for expanded growth and development in the greater1383Las Vegas area, Las Vegas Valley, and Clark County in general,1384for everything from housing to, again, other development needs.1385    Senator Cortez Masto. But it doesn't mandate that land1386sale. In other words, because of that collaboration within--if1387we are expanding the disposal boundary, it doesn't mean that1388everything is going to be sold. There is a process that the1389county will work through with the BLM to determine when and1390where they will move forward with that land sale. Is that1391correct?1392    Mr. Raby. Yes, Senator Cortez Masto, that is absolutely1393correct.1394    Senator Cortez Masto. Right, and because I am trying to1395dispel some of the misinformation out there, this doesn't1396mandate that the 25,000 acres is being sold. I also know, and1397we know in Nevada, Las Vegas uses less water than it did in the13981990s. And that's because of the incredible conservation and1399drought mitigation work that we have done, particularly in1400Southern Nevada. Is it your understanding that these water1401conservation efforts will still be a priority in the Clark1402County lands bill for future development as well--that it isn't1403going to be negated in any way whatsoever?1404    Mr. Raby. Yes, that's correct, Senator Cortez Masto. Those1405will still continue on and remain a focus into the future.1406    Senator Cortez Masto. And then part of the collaboration1407around this particular piece of legislation focused on the need1408for affordable housing. And can you touch on that? What I would1409really like you to confirm is, because in Nevada, for us to1410address housing needs, working with the Federal Government,1411there are actually two agencies we have to work with--not just1412the BLM, where the land would come from, but HUD, right? So,1413can you confirm how BLM implements that authority when we are1414invoking it under SNPLMA and looking at affordable housing, and1415how you would work with HUD?1416    Mr. Raby. Yes, again, thank you for the question, Senator.1417And the way we work with HUD and with the local communities is1418that the local entities nominate those parcels for affordable1419housing to the BLM. We then coordinate with Housing and Urban1420Development to ensure it meets the requirements under the1421Cranston-Gonzalez Act, again, the annual mean income, so that1422we can ensure that those parcels will be utilized for1423affordable housing in perpetuity.1424    Senator Cortez Masto. Right. And are there barriers that1425you can speak to or hurdles that you face in deploying these1426projects?1427    Mr. Raby. I would say the barriers that we are seeing right1428now have to do with the nomination process. I think we could1429look at a joint selection process that would allow the BLM a1430more active role with the local communities to help guide that.1431    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. And then finally, with1432respect to this legislation, S. 1005, based on the property and1433the sale of certain property, there is revenue that is1434generated, and that revenue comes back into the state.1435    I am going to ask both Mr. Raby and maybe Ms. Torres, talk1436about the revenue that comes back to the state. How does it1437benefit, and is it just Nevada? What is that revenue used for,1438and how does BLM make that decision? And then Ms. Torres, if1439you could touch on the conservation piece of it as well.1440    Mr. Raby. Yes. Senator, again, thanks for the question. And1441just in brief, the funds that are generated through the land1442sales are deposited in a special account. And those are1443utilized for everything from hazardous fuels reduction work, to1444capital improvement projects, to parks, trails, and natural1445areas that communities benefit from, especially rural1446communities, in addition to the urban areas--places like White1447Pine County, Lincoln County, and Churchill County benefit from1448the opportunity to receive funding through the Southern Nevada1449Public Land Management Act special account.1450    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. I know I am running out of1451time. And if Ms. Torres can just address this question, I would1452appreciate it.1453    Ms. Torres. Thank you, Senator. Yes, there are two ways I1454think really that those funds benefit conservation. One is, you1455are allowed to use those funds to purchase land that can help1456create wildlife quarters and strengthen the investments and1457other protections that we have in the county.1458    The second, which I mentioned in my testimony, has been1459used to really enhance recreation and conservation1460opportunities, either through stewardship or creation of new1461trails, really creating a complete package for the conservation1462protections with stewardship investment and then guiding1463recreation to be used in a way that's not creating more damage.1464    Senator Cortez Masto. I appreciate that. Thank you. I know1465my time is up, but I thank you for the add additional time.1466    Senator Barrasso. Senator Lee.1467    Senator Lee. Thanks so much, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to each1468of you for being here. Mr. Raby, I would like to start with you1469if that's okay. In September 2023, the Biden administration1470released a new series of travel management plans for the1471Labyrinth Canyon and Gemini Bridges area near Moab, Utah. Those1472renewed plans close off 317 miles of roads. And of that 3171473miles of roads, more than a third of that--114 miles of the 3171474I mentioned a moment ago closed by the Labyrinth Canyon Travel1475Plan are historic roads protected under R.S. 2477.1476    Now, R.S. 2477 was, of course, enacted back in 1866 and1477repealed non-retroactively with FLPMA in 1976, but the valid1478existing rights-of-way, in existence and in use prior to that1479date, still are to be respected. Now, by preserving the valid1480existing rights-of-way under R.S. 2477, FLPMA did a good thing.1481Unfortunately, Congress didn't provide enough clarity as to a1482clear path about how to resolve disputes arising under R.S.14832477. And that gap creates significant friction between1484counties, the state, local residents, and BLM field offices.1485    How would explicit direction that keeps a route open until1486it has been fully adjudicated give BLM staff more certainty to1487reduce these conflicts and reduce their severity?1488    Mr. Raby. Mr. Chairman, again, thank you for the question.1489And that clarity would be welcomed and would ensure that the1490R.S. 2477 rights are protected and preserved and would prevent1491any potential misapplication of management actions on the1492ground that may, you know, diminish those rights.1493    Senator Lee. And I believe S. 90 would help us in that1494regard substantially. I want to switch now to S. 1860 and go to1495you, Mr. French. As you can see, these pictures show a public1496works facility that already sits on this parcel inside the1497Dixie National Forest.1498    [The pictures referred to follow:]1499    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]15001501    Senator Lee. The facility, as it is built, as it exists1502today, is quite insufficient for storing essential safety1503equipment, safety supplies, and including but not limited to1504snow removal equipment. Just yesterday, the public works staff1505had to drive 20 miles--20 minutes away to replenish their own1506supply of snow-melt material, as the storage capacity in this1507current facility was depleted after just two relatively minor1508snowstorms.1509    So, that's kind of a problem. Any time you are delaying1510access to critical safety equipment and supplies, it's kind of1511a problem. This bill would fix that, but if it's not conveyed1512as the bill tries to do, to the town of Brian Head, what1513ongoing management and safety concerns could arise as the town1514continues to grow?1515    Mr. French. Thank you, Senator. As you know, we support the1516bill, and we think there are ways that we can help you make it1517more efficient so we can see this happen more quickly.1518    Senator Lee. Great.1519    Mr. French. We basically agree with you that there are a1520number of safety concerns here in terms of the town. The Forest1521Service is supportive of creating access, conveying land, or1522doing some sort of permit to help the town out, but we do think1523we can make this go faster with a little bit of work with you.1524    Senator Lee. Thank you. Mr. Raby, let's go back to you.1525About two weeks ago, this Committee held a hearing on the land1526planning process, and both sides of the aisle seem to agree1527that the process needs reform. The reality of how the process1528currently plays out is that the views of states are often left1529out entirely, and restrictive designations often end up getting1530layered one right on top of the other, and ultimately public1531lands in countless circumstances are just locked away. And as a1532result, BLM's ability to carry out needed management activities1533involving critical things like fuel treatments or habitat work1534ends up being hamstrung.1535    As the state BLM Director for the State of Nevada, where1536you have the highest concentration of federal land of any state1537in the country, you have real on-the-ground experience with1538these issues. Can you tell us how the current process affects1539BLM's ability to make real-time management decisions and1540execute projects?1541    Mr. Raby. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the question. And you1542know, what I have seen in my experience is that our current1543planning process, as we are directed, is complicated,1544cumbersome, and can take years to complete. I see opportunities1545for us to enhance the ability to not only streamline but to1546decomplicate the process, as well as ensure that our mandate1547under FLPMA to include states, counties, and tribes in the1548planning process is met, as well as opportunities for us. As a1549plan is in place and we implement it, we need the ability to1550update that more nimbly than we have been able to in the past.1551And so, the ability to adjust on the ground is important as1552well.1553    Senator Lee. And you can do that in a way that helps you1554carry out the priorities of FLPMA rather than eroding them.1555Thank you very much. My time has expired. I will submit the1556balance of my questions in writing. Thanks.1557    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Lee. Senator Cantwell.1558    Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for1559holding this important hearing, and thank you for including the1560Roadless Area Conservation Act, which would codify the 20011561Roadless Rule, which protects nearly 60 million acres of1562pristine national forests in 39 states.1563    There are about two million acres protected of roadless1564forests in the State of Washington. And obviously, the idea had1565been, let's not keep building roads everywhere. Obviously, take1566advantage of the lower forest to get timber, and then1567obviously, keep some of our most pristine forests. Some of the1568most visited areas of outdoor recreation in Washington are1569these areas, and they help drive a $26 billion economy in our1570state. So, we are excited to keep it.1571    The Tongass is another special place. I know my colleague1572is here from Alaska. We may not share the same views on this,1573but I know she thinks the Tongass is a very, very special1574place. And you know, it is clean water, and carbon1575sequestration, and unmatched recreational and tourism1576opportunities, and wildlife habitat supporting hunting and1577fishing, and commercial activities.1578    But obviously, if we cut down most of those forests, some1579of them 800 years old, that economy goes away. So, we know that1580fishing, and I am talking now in many parts of my state and1581others, also are supported from these forests.1582    And clearly, with 370 miles of Forest Service road, they1583have a $5.9 billion backlog of maintenance. So, instead of the1584Forest Service maintaining the existing system, this1585administration wants to rescind the longstanding Roadless Rule1586to potentially buy more roads the Forest Service will not be1587able to take care of.1588    In addition, the Roadless Area Rule ensures that more than1589240 million people living within 100 miles of the national1590forests continue to have pristine public forests where they can1591fish, hunt, and recreate. That is why my colleague from1592Arizona, Senator Gallego and I reintroduced the Roadless Area1593Conservation Act.1594    And I wanted to ask you, Ms. Torres, I think my numbers are1595right about this, but obviously, this economy has broader1596importance to the U.S. outdoor recreation economy. Do you think1597the sector will take a hit if we repeal the Roadless Rule?1598    Ms. Torres. Thank you, Senator. I think generally the1599outdoor recreation economy takes a hit any time we remove1600stability and certainty. You know, we are all talking today1601about planning ahead, and the outdoor recreation economy also1602needs to plan ahead. They need to submit for permits, they need1603to ensure that those areas are going to provide what the1604visitor wants to see, and if you remove things and add roads1605and add other things, it takes away from that experience.1606    Senator Cantwell. And the challenge is, we already have1607this backlog that we're not dealing with. So Mr. French, did1608the administration do an assessment on the fiscal cost of1609rescinding the Roadless Rule in terms of how much taxpayers1610would be asked to pay for new roads in these pristine areas?1611    Mr. French. Well, the roadless rule doesn't compel road1612construction. All it does is change the restrictions we have in1613roadless areas for doing other work that is necessary for1614healthy forests and protecting communities.1615    The primary driver of this, as I said earlier, is that1616there are more than 24 million acres that are within our1617wildland-urban interface or within a mile of it within roadless1618that we can't effectively treat right now to protect1619communities, and faced with the choice of protecting the1620community versus the inherent cost of providing access to thin1621those forests, we are going to make that choice to protect1622those communities. I also recognize----1623    Senator Cantwell. We're talking about very special places1624that oftentimes are at much higher elevations and definitely1625don't have communities that are right adjacent to them. But----1626    Mr. French. We have more than 24 million acres that are1627directly adjacent to----1628    Senator Cantwell. I am well aware of where our forestlands1629are. And my state has probably done some of the best treatment1630available. Even the Chairman of this Committee came and helped1631have a hearing with me at Seattle University and talked about1632this years ago when the fires were rampant.1633    But guess what? We started doing better planning and better1634treatment and promoting CLT, and basically trying to get--1635basically saying let's get better management of our forests. We1636can do both things. We can basically have better treatment1637policies and say that some areas really don't need roads built1638into them because why, with all the backlog, do we need more1639roads?1640    This is about--I think Senator Risch did a great job of1641coming here and explaining how as Governor he helped implement1642this policy in his State of Idaho, and it was a smart policy,1643because he made the decisions and then he got cost1644effectiveness for taxpayers and he also got the outdoor economy1645that he wanted to see.1646    So, I feel like we can do both, and I hope that we can do1647both. But I think the issue here is that we already have1648backlogs on roads that I am sure many of our colleagues would1649agree do need to be dealt with. And so, the issue is the1650juggernaut of the outdoor economy--are we going to continue to1651keep it and protect it?1652    And I will meet with you or anybody in the administration1653to get a better plan on cross-laminated timber. To say to the1654mills, I will guarantee you a price of long-term contracts if1655you can do treatment and you put it into cross-laminated1656timber, this is a winning strategy.1657    The Colville, which had I don't know how many--I think $21658billion worth of timber burned up in one fire season--$21659billion worth of timber. So, we have to do a better plan than1660that. But, you know, basically building more roads into the1661pristine areas I don't think is the way to do that. Thank you,1662Mr. Chairman.1663    Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Senator Cantwell.1664Senator Murkowski.1665    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I always1666like to talk about things that we do share in common because I,1667as you know, have a great deal of affection for the Tongass--1668all of our national forests--but recognize the extraordinary1669potential that we have in our forests and recognizing that1670multi-use is not an inconsistent policy to have when it comes1671to our national forests, and that means everything from the1672very important recreation and tourism, to also the economic1673opportunities that we have for our communities that rely on our1674forests, and that sometimes it does require a level of access.1675And as you have pointed out, Mr. French, it's not a requirement1676that you build a road. It just allows--it recognizes there are1677different restrictions that are appropriate. And there are1678many, many restrictions in the Tongass existing, and they will1679continue with or without application of the Roadless Rule.1680    I didn't come here to talk about roadless. I want to talk1681about S. 2016, the Chugach Alaska Land Exchange and Oil Spill1682Recovery Act. Thank you for including this on the agenda. I1683would hope we might get our landless bill on as well, but maybe1684next time we will do that. Actually, we are working on that on1685the full Committee, so I think it's not on this Subcommittee.1686So, thank you for that.1687    I don't need to go into old history here, and really tragic1688history, but it was 1989 when the Exxon Valdez oil spill1689occurred--one of the worst environmental disasters in our1690history. It hit the Chugach region incredibly hard. Nearly1691wiped out the traditional ways of life of Alaska Native people1692who are so tied to the land and the sea there. And 35 years1693later, both the people and the environment are still reckoning1694with that.1695    Government tried to step in. Sometimes those efforts caused1696another set of problems. Back in 2019, in the Dingell Act, I1697included a provision that required the Interior Department,1698along with the Forest Service and Chugach Alaska Corporation,1699to review the long-term impacts of the spill and the recovery1700actions that followed. And one of those measures was a land1701buyout that was overseen by the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee1702Council.1703    So, surface lands from Alaska Native village corporations1704were purchased. They were divided up among the federal agencies1705and placed under strict conservation rules. But the subsurface,1706the part that Chugach, Alaska owns, was left unresolved. And we1707have seen over time our village corporations had to take steps1708that they had to deal with given the economic situations and1709sold some of their lands. But Chugach, as the regional1710corporation and the owner of the subsurface, was not part of1711that process.1712    So, they are left to navigate this split-estate issue with1713the Federal Government, which for decades has resulted in1714regulatory obstacles that undermine the promise that Congress1715made under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. So, we are1716in a situation now where I don't think it's right. The Federal1717Government cannot ignore Chugach and the Alaska Native people.1718    We have a responsibility to make this right here. So, what1719we have with this legislation is not a financial settlement.1720The federal government owes Chugach land in their region, land1721that they are entitled to under ANCSA. The native people who1722call this region home want the land because it's their1723connection--their connection to it is what matters. This is1724what is deep and enduring. The EVOS buyout resulted in a1725significant loss of native ownership. More than 241,000 acres1726were placed under federal control, and that has diminished1727native voices and the ability for native people to shape the1728future of their homelands.1729    So what we are trying to do now is to fix that. You can1730call it ``land back'' if you will, but to me I think it's just1731about honoring commitments. I think it's time to stop treating1732native communities in Alaska differently from native1733communities in the Lower 48 when it comes to federal land1734issues.1735    So what we offer in this bill I think is a win-win. It1736directs a balanced land exchange between Chugach, Alaska and1737the federal government that addresses the Dingell Act report's1738findings. It permanently protects the conservation lands. And1739it finally gives Chugach and its shareholders a fair resolution1740to their ANCSA claims.1741    I might note to the Chairman and the Ranking Member here,1742the House Natural Resources Committee has advanced a companion1743to this bill. They did that last month on a bipartisan basis.1744So hopefully we will be able to do the same here in the Senate.1745I am going to direct a quick question to you, Mr. French.1746    In your testimony, you say that the Forest Service supports1747the intention of the bill and you are looking forward to1748working with us to resolve any issues on the parcels identified1749in the bill for exchange that perhaps were not originally1750identified in the 2022 study and report. I would hope that we1751could count on you to be engaged quickly and in a responsive1752manner so if there are any outstanding issues, we can address1753them and get this bill moving to resolve, again, a very, very1754long-outstanding issue.1755    Mr. French. Thank you, Senator. Yes, we completely support1756the bill. I commit that I will sit down with your staff rather1757quickly to work out where we see those issues.1758    Senator Murkowski. Right. Thank you. Mr. Raby, you are in1759agreement there?1760    Mr. Raby. Senator Murkowski, yes, 100 percent agreement.1761    Senator Murkowski. Great. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1762    Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much.1763    Senator Cortez Masto.1764    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. One quick question, Mr.1765Raby, I have for you. It's my understanding that BLM has been1766collaborating with HUD on identifying appropriate parcels of1767public land to deploy affordable housing, and in fact, both the1768Secretaries of the Interior and HUD met in Las Vegas to discuss1769this issue. I am curious, can you provide the Committee with1770any update on the progress of this initiative?1771    Mr. Raby. Senator, thank you for the question. What I can1772say here is that the BLM, in conjunction with HUD, we have1773identified lands within and around areas in Nevada that are1774adjacent to population centers of 5,000 or more. It gives us a1775metric to look at where lands may be potentially available for1776affordable housing. There will be additional work, and we can1777certainly follow up with you and your team with a status update1778on that.1779    Senator Cortez Masto. I would appreciate that. Thank you.1780    Mr. Raby. You are welcome.1781    Senator Barrasso. Senator Hickenlooper.1782    Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you. And I appreciate you1783asking an extra question. I am sure that Senator Cortez Masto--1784as I was racing up the steps to get here, asked that additional1785question.1786    Ms. Torres, I want to thank both the Chair and the Ranking1787Member for including our Sarvis Wilderness Completion Act in1788today's hearing. As I mentioned earlier, it expands the1789existing Sarvis Creek Wilderness to what was originally1790proposed in the original designation back in 1993.1791    It was excluded at that time due to a proposal to develop a1792ski area, which in the end turned out to be unviable. So, it's1793safe to say that 32 years later, without that impediment, it's1794about the right time.1795    So, I guess I wanted to ask Ms. Torres if you could speak1796to the broader value provided by conservation and low-impact1797recreation on landscapes like Sarvis Creek.1798    Ms. Torres. Thank you, Senator, for the question. Yes, I1799mean, I think for states like Nevada, states like Colorado,1800it's so important to the quality of life to have that outdoor1801low-impact recreation. It provides different recreation1802opportunities, and I think we very much learned during COVID,1803and I think Senator Barrasso mentioned this as well, those1804areas with not a lot of people where we can really escape and1805check out, and really become kind of one with nature, provide a1806different experience that a Disneyland or a Las Vegas sometimes1807doesn't provide.1808    So, I think it's important as we talk about diversifying1809our economy, diversifying our outdoor recreation economy is1810also important, and bills like this provide that.1811    Senator Hickenlooper. Yes, thank you. I appreciate that.1812And certainly, when I first went up into the north of1813Yellowstone Park, in the Beartooth Wilderness area up there, my1814first summer of research looking at these volcanic rocks, and I1815hadn't--my father died when I was a kid, and then we as a1816family, we didn't go to church. We, you know, my mother was so1817brokenhearted that well, we just, rightly or wrongly, didn't go1818to church. And when you are a little kid, you know, there's no1819rush to go to church. So I hadn't been to church probably in1820over a decade, and I came back from that first summer doing1821field work up in the high Absarokas, and I, without thinking1822about it, went to church. I think the power of wilderness and1823making sure we protect these sacred places is really more1824valuable, I think, than we often realize for many, many, many1825people.1826    Let me turn back to Sarvis. And I have a question for Mr.1827French. The land that will be protected by the Sarvis Creek1828Wilderness Completion Act falls in the Harrison and Green Creek1829Watersheds. These are rare, pristine, subalpine regions that1830feed into the Yampa River. BLM categorizes this area as having1831no known potential for oil and gas development, and the Forest1832Service has testified in the past that there is no suitable1833timber base, no roads, no trails, no commercial use in this1834area.1835    So I was a little disappointed by the Forest Service1836testimony on this bill, which referred to the protections for1837Sarvis Creek as contrary to the administration's energy and1838mineral dominance priorities. I think we can still advance1839energy goals while conserving our special places.1840    So would the Forest Service agree that some areas don't1841make sense for development but do make sense for protections1842that the community supports on a broad level?1843    Mr. French. Thank you, Senator. Yes, we are incredibly1844proud of the 36 million acres of wilderness that we steward on1845behalf of the American public and understand the importance of1846these areas.1847    I have been to Sarvis Creek, so I understand the values1848that you talk about. I think as a matter of course, the1849administration right now has taken a position that they're not1850going to support adding more additional acres into the1851Wilderness Preservation System until we have been able to work1852through a number of other goals the administration has.1853    Senator Hickenlooper. So it's a more question of time and1854priorities, I guess.1855    Mr. French. I would just say at this time, we're not1856supporting--the administration is not supporting additional1857inclusions into the Wilderness Preservation System.1858    Senator Hickenlooper. I hear you. I'm not--just trying to1859get it clear. Thank you. I appreciate that. I appreciate all of1860your work, all of you. Very much appreciate the efforts and1861contributions you have made. I think--someday I am going to1862come back as a state forester, if I play the cards right. Thank1863you. I yield back to the Chair.1864    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Hickenlooper. I do1865appreciate your testimony that you did find God in Yellowstone,1866which is in Wyoming, so we appreciate your comments there.1867    Senator Hickenlooper. Actually, the Beartooth Wilderness I1868am talking about is just north of the boundary. If you took the1869eastern boundary and the western boundary of Yellowstone up for1870about 10 miles up there, about 300 square miles, but it's1871unfortunately, sadly, in Montana.1872    Senator Barrasso. Sad indeed. My goodness. Anybody is1873welcome to Wyoming at any time, and you will find magnificence.1874    Thank you all for being here. Members and Senator Lee1875probably will be introducing some questions for the record.1876They will be done within the next 24 hours. I would ask that1877you submit the responses within the week. If there are no other1878questions or answers, this hearing is adjourned. Thank you.1879    [Whereupon, at 4:33 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]18801881                      APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED18821883                              ----------18841885[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]18861887                                   [all]