Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. (text: CR S794)
This bill amends the Healthy Forests Restoration Act to accelerate hazardous fuel reduction and insect/disease treatments on National Forest System lands by directing the Forest Service to use certain categorical exclusions and to prioritize risk-reduction objectives in designated areas. It adds definitions, expands categorical exclusion application (including Fire Regime Group IV), requires annual public reporting of treated acreage, and clarifies that timber-sale revenues from Good Neighbor Authority agreements retained by Governors must be used for authorized restoration services in-state.
Progressives emphasize NEPA/public input loss; conservative values speed.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that provides reasonably specific statutory amendments directing expedited treatment for certain hazardous fuel and insect/disease projects, identifies implementing authorities, and prescribes limited reporting.
This bill amends the Healthy Forests Restoration Act to accelerate hazardous fuel reduction and insect/disease treatments on National Forest System lands by directing the Forest Service to use certain categorical exclusions and to prioritize risk-reduction objectives in designated areas.
It adds definitions, expands categorical exclusion application (including Fire Regime Group IV), requires annual public reporting of treated acreage, and clarifies that timber-sale revenues from Good Neighbor Authority agreements retained by Governors must be used for authorized restoration services in-state.
Narrow-to-moderate administrative changes with bipartisan potential, but liable to litigation and opposition over reduced reviews.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that provides reasonably specific statutory amendments directing expedited treatment for certain hazardous fuel and insect/disease projects, identifies implementing authorities, and prescribes limited reporting. It integrates clearly with existing statutory provisions.
Progressives emphasize NEPA/public input loss; conservative values speed.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize NEPA/public input loss; conservative values speed.
Skeptical overall: supports forest restoration goals but worries the bill narrows environmental review and public input.
Concerned about potential logging labeled as 'restoration,' impacts on biodiversity, and broad Secretary discretion.
Some provisions (reporting, revenue use) are helpful, but impacts on aquatic habitat, old growth, and community consultation are uncertain.
Cautiously supportive of speeding up treatments that reduce wildfire and insect risk, while seeking safeguards.
Views reporting and state revenue retention as pragmatic.
Wants clearer limits on where categorical exclusions apply and assurances of monitoring; some effects remain speculative depending on implementation.
Supportive: sees the bill as cutting red tape, empowering efficient forest management, and giving states more control over restoration funds.
Values faster action to reduce wildfire risk and insect outbreaks and prefers federal discretion to expedite necessary work.
Few concerns so long as state revenue use remains within restoration purposes.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow-to-moderate administrative changes with bipartisan potential, but liable to litigation and opposition over reduced reviews.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize NEPA/public input loss; conservative values speed.
Narrow-to-moderate administrative changes with bipartisan potential, but liable to litigation and opposition over reduced reviews.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that provides reasonably specific statutory amendments directing expedited treatment for certain hazardous fuel and insect/disease proj…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.