SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 1 TOP OF DOC
70-955 DTP
2001
NATIONAL FIRE PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
OVERSIGHT HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON FORESTS AND
FOREST HEALTH
of the
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
March 8, 2001
Serial No. 107-3
Page 2 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Printed for the use of the Committee on Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/house
or
Committee address: http://resourcescommittee.house.gov
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250
Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah, Chairman
NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia, Ranking Democrat Member
Don Young, Alaska,
Vice Chairman
W.J. ''Billy'' Tauzin, Louisiana
Jim Saxton, New Jersey
Elton Gallegly, California
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee
Joel Hefley, Colorado
Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland
Ken Calvert, California
Page 3 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Scott McInnis, Colorado
Richard W. Pombo, California
Barbara Cubin, Wyoming
George Radanovich, California
Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Carolina
Mac Thornberry, Texas
Chris Cannon, Utah
John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania
Bob Schaffer, Colorado
Jim Gibbons, Nevada
Mark E. Souder, Indiana
Greg Walden, Oregon
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho
Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado
C.L. ''Butch'' Otter, Idaho
Tom Osborne, Nebraska
Jeff Flake, Arizona
Dennis R. Rehberg, Montana
VACANCY
Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts
Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American Samoa
Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
Page 4 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
Calvin M. Dooley, California
Robert A. Underwood, Guam
Adam Smith, Washington
Donna M. Christensen, Virgin Islands
Ron Kind, Wisconsin
Jay Inslee, Washington
Grace F. Napolitano, California
Tom Udall, New Mexico
Mark Udall, Colorado
Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
James P. McGovern, Massachusetts
Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Hilda L. Solis, California
Brad Carson, Oklahoma
Betty McCollum, Minnesota
VACANCY
Allen D. Freemyer, Chief of Staff
Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel
Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk
James H. Zoia, Democrat Staff Director
Jeff Petrich, Democrat Chief Counsel
Page 5 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
SUBCOMMITTEE ON FORESTS AND FOREST HEALTH
SCOTT McINNIS, Colorado, Chairman
JAY INSLEE, Washington, Ranking Democrat Member
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee
John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania,
Vice Chairman
Mark E. Souder, Indiana
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho
Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado
C.L. ''Butch'' Otter, Idaho
James V. Hansen, Utah
Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
Tom Udall, New Mexico
Mark Udall, Colorado
Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Betty McCollum, Minnesota
C O N T E N T S
Hearing held on March 8, 2001
Page 6 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Statement of Members:
McInnis, Hon. Scott, a Representative in Congress from the State of Colorado
Prepared statement of
Rehberg, Hon. Dennis R., a Representative in Congress from the State of Montana
Prepared statement of
Simpson, Hon. Michael K., a Representative in Congress from the State of Idaho
Prepared statement of
Udall, Hon. Mark, a Representative in Congress from the State of Colorado
Prepared statement of
Letter submitted for the record
Udall, Hon. Tom, a Representative in Congress from the State of New Mexico
Prepared statement of
Statement of Witnesses:
Hartzell, Tim, Director, Office of Wildland and Fire Coordination, U.S. Department of the Interior
Prepared statement of
Laverty, Lyle, National Fire Plan Coordinator, U.S. Forest Service
Page 7 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Prepared statement of
Martz, Hon. Judy, Governor, State of Montana
Prepared statement of
Additional materials supplied:
Charts and Pictures referred to by Laverty and Hartzell
Letter to The Honorable Dan Glickman, Secretary of Agriculture, and The Honorable Bruce Babbitt, Secretary of the Interior, dated October 20, 2000
OVERSIGHT HEARING ON THE NATIONAL FIRE PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION
Thursday, March 8, 2001
Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health
Committee on Resources
House of Representatives
Washington, DC
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:58 a.m., in Room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Scott McInnis [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Mr. MCINNIS. As our audience can see, our membership is not here yet. The reason I am going to start, Governor, frankly, is as a courtesy to you. We have a vote expected in about three minutes, which means I will have to leave in about 15 minutes. I want to get your testimony. And it is also my understanding that members that are not too pleased with today's procedure will file a number of stalling motions over on the House Floor, so we will have a series of votes.
Page 8 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Under those circumstances, Governor, I would like to have you testify when more members of the panel are here. But if we do that, I am afraid that you probably will not get an opportunity to testify. So I am going to skip over initially here any kind of opening statement on my behalf and on behalf of the ranking Committee member.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McInnis follows:]
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE SCOTT MCINNIS, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON FORESTS AND FOREST HEALTH
It is appropriate that the Subcommittee's first hearing this Congress is on the subject of the National Fire Plan. No single program has a greater potential to transform our nation's forests and the way they are managed. The National Fire Plan is the culmination of years of scientific analysis, General Accounting Office studies and Congressional hearings, and is a direct response to the fundamental fact that fuel conditions on our federal lands are the worst they have ever been, dramatically demonstrated by last year's fires. But what was really unusual about the 2000 fire season wasn't that seven million acres burned, but that the average size and intensity of individual fires were much larger and hotter than they have been historically. These super-hot fires not only destroy habitat for fish, wildlife and, of course, people, but they also put firefighters at extreme risk. I personally witnessed such tragic consequences to brave young firefighters on the Storm King fire in Colorado eight years ago.
So it is for these just reasons that Congress appropriated an additional $1.8 billion for the fire plan for FY 2001, and for these same reasons it will remain crucial that we continue to maintain full funding for these activities. But continued funding will depend on the success of the fire plan, and success will be measured by accomplishments in the field, with tangible results such as the number of acres treated for hazardous fuels removal or the number of new, highly trained and well-equipped firefighters. Failure to implement the plan successfully will also result in tangible, but adverse, results: billions more spent for fire fighting, millions of acres of destroyed habitat, billions lost in property damage and, most certainly, the tragic loss of lives.
Page 9 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
This isn't to say that the agencies alone are responsible for implementing the fire plan; much of that responsibility falls with Congress, requiring thoughtful bipartisan effort and support. So I look forward to working with all my colleagues and the agencies on this immense effort. This, then, is the purpose of this hearing: to review the National Fire Plan, to measure its accomplishments to date, to review what yet needs to be done, paying careful attention to all barriers and impediments, and to determine what role this Committee and Congress can play in its successful implementation.
Mr. MCINNIS. Governor, welcome to our Committee. We appreciate it. I will let you proceed with your testimony.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JUDY MARTZ, GOVERNOR, STATE OF MONTANA
Governor MARTZ. Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, for the record, I am Governor Judy Martz. I am here today representing the Big Sky State of Montana. It is an honor to be here today to testify on behalf of my State and the Western Governors' Association regarding the National Fire Plan. I want to thank the Chairman for his interest in an issue that is critical and of great importance to those of us in the West, and that is forest health.
Please consider the testimony in its entirety that I have given to you, and let me begin by saying that those of us in Montana are pleased with the prospects of the National Fire Plan. For the first time in nearly a decade, the National Fire Plan offers a ray of hope for our Nation's forests.
Page 10 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
While the smoke has cleared from one of the most devastating fires in our history, we must remain vigilant in our efforts to minimize future devastating fires. Already in Montana, at this time we fear that the potential exists for another significant fire season. I will not refer to the charts again that I have placed here today, but I did want you to see just some of the devastating headlines and what was happening in Montana. And as I just looked at those headlines, it brought me back to the fire season last year, and there is something very devastating that happened.
This picture I think everyone in this room is familiar with of the elk down in the fire, as the elk were displaced by the fire. This happened to a lot of our wildlife, but thankfully someone caught the picture, and you have all seen it. Now, having been made into a pin, it is a constant reminder of the displacement of the wildlife.
Drought continues in Montana, and the consequences of an extended drought impose an even greater fire danger for this coming year.
In the interior West, the wildfires of 2000 burned nearly 7 million acres. Of the nearly 7 million acres, 900,000 acres in Montana were reduced to ash. Three hundred homes were destroyed, and nearly 6,000 were threatened. We had over 20 communities evacuated as a result of an out-of-control wildfire.
While we cannot prevent drought, lightning strikes, heat, or wind, we can prevent some of the devastating impacts that result from mismanagement and inaction.
We must manage our national forests. ''Hands-off'' is not management. We have successfully excluded fire from our landscape for the past 90 years. And while the Forest Service was quick to respond to fire starts across our Nation, an action plan for forest management sat on the shelf. Entire watersheds and landscapes have grown dense with small trees and brush, creating unnatural and unhealthy conditions ripe for catastrophic fires. In fact, the General Accounting Office in a report requested by this Subcommittee identified nearly 40 million acres of national forest land at risk of catastrophic fire within the interior West. Last summer, we burned in Montana less than 10 percent of the acreage identified by the GAO.
Page 11 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Instead of focusing on how much timber we harvest, we need now to focus on how much we leave on the land. Instead of focusing on acres harvested and board feet processed, we need to focus on the overall health of the forest ecosystem.
Some of our forests have grown dense and have accumulated large amounts of hazardous fuels, making it nearly impossible to prescribe burn. In cases such as this, man needs to mimic the purpose of fire by cleaning or clearing overgrown and over accumulated fuels. Only after successful restoration can we introduce fire in its natural form.
The National Fire Plan offers a full range of forest management tools, from prescribed burns to mechanical treatment. State and local governments are active participants.
The Forest Service will follow nine operating principles guiding their work to implement the National Fire Plan, and I am encouraged by those principles, frankly, that are outlined and look forward to working with the Forest Service on implementing those principles in Montana.
Last summer's fires affected private and State lands as well. In Montana, we saw over 14,000 acres of State forest burn. Recognizing that the value of burnt, dead timber decreases rapidly with time, our Department of Natural Resources, the DNRC, moved in an environmentally sound and fiscally responsible manner. DNRC quickly evaluated the affected resources in accordance with the Montana Environmental Policy Act, similar to NEPA, and prepared a plan to treat the area's most severely impacted by fires. Today, the State has completed 90 percent of the treatment plan on 5,400 acres of State land. This treatment plan has rehabilitated many of the burned acres and generated $3.7 million for our public education system. The harvests were also conducted while adhering to the letter of the State Forest Land Management Plan, which is to manage for biodiversity and forest health, in effect, similar to the USFS ecosystem management philosophy.
Page 12 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
To date, the United States Forest Service in Montana has not removed any timber affected by the fires of last summer, and I ask why.
Additionally, the treatment plan addressed rehabilitation measures that included soil stabilization measures, stream bank stabilization, and reseeding wherever it is necessary. This summer, the State will begin the process to evaluate and address necessary treatment of the areas less impacted by the fires.
My point is simple. If the State of Montana can move in a timely, environmentally sound, and fiscally responsible manner with limited resources, should we not expect our Federal neighbors to do the same? We need them to do the same.
I would like to present the balance of my testimony now on behalf of the 21 members of the Western Governors' Association, of which I recently became a member.
Since last summer's fires, States have been working collaboratively with Federal agencies and other stakeholders to develop a national 10-year strategy to reduce the risk of wildfires. The Governors of the Western Governors' Association requested this strategy, and Congress concurred on the need for a long-term approach in the Fiscal Year 2001 Interior Appropriations report. A draft of that strategy for public and congressional comment is appended to my testimony. We are aiming to complete it by May 1st. I encourage Congress to remain vigilant in improving the health of our Nation's forests. We must be dedicated to a long-term strategy that addresses the health of our forests and reduces the risks to our population. And we must fully fund the National Fire Plan. The goals set by the National Fire Plan are crucial to minimizing threat to lives and to property in our entire region.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Governor Martz follows:]
Page 13 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JUDY MARTZ, GOVERNOR, STATE OF MONTANA
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, for the record, my name is Judy Martz and I am the Governor of the great state of Montana. It is an honor to be here today to testify on behalf of my state and the Western Governors' Association regarding the national fire plan. I want to thank the Chairman for his interest in an issue of critical importance to those of us in the west; the health of our forests.
Let me begin by saying that those of us in Montana are very excited about the prospects of the National Fire Plan. For the first time in nearly a decade, we view the National Fire Plan as a ray of hope for our nation's forests. And the reason we are hopeful lies in the opportunity to work together with our federal partners on solving issues that we witnessed last summer. Devastating and catastrophic fires swept across vast acres of Montana and the west last summer. We need to do everything possible to avoid that scenario from repeating itself again.
While the smoke has cleared from one of the most devastating fires in our history, we must remain vigilant in our efforts to minimize future devastating fires. Already in Montana, we fear the potential exists for a repeat performance of last year's fires. Drought has hit Montana hard, and the consequences of an extended drought have serious impacts to our natural environment.
In the interior west, the wildfires of 2000 burned nearly 7 million acres. Of the nearly 7 million acres, Montana witnessed over 900,000 acres reduced to ash. The State of Montana watched in horror as over 300 homes were destroyed, and nearly 6000 were threatened. We had over 20 communities evacuated as a result of an out-of-control wildfire.
Page 14 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The Big Sky State fell under a brown hue of smoke. From August 5th to September 8th, the Montana Department of Environmental Quality issued a total of 21 ''very unhealthy'' advisories and 19 ''hazardous'' advisories for communities in the northwest part of the state. Visibility hung around 1 mile or less for most of the summer. A state proud of its ''clean and healthful'' environment had fallen to air quality levels worse than Los Angeles. Environmental groups long opposed to active management fell silent amidst the smoke, chaos and personal trauma of last year's fires.
While we cannot prevent drought, lightening strikes or hot windy days, we can prevent some of the devastating impacts that result from mismanagement and inaction.
In particular, we must manage our national forests. ''Hands-off'' is not management. We have successfully excluded fire from our landscape for the past 90 years. And while the forest service was quick to respond to fire starts across our nation, they were slowly drifting away from active management of those lands. The result, entire watersheds and landscapes have grown dense with small trees and brush, creating unnatural and unhealthy conditions ripe for catastrophic fires. In fact, the General Accounting Office in a report requested by this subcommittee, identified nearly 40 million acres of national forest land at risk of catastrophic fire within the interior west. Last summer, we burned less than 10% of the acreage identified by the GAO.
Unless we move aggressively, with a unified plan and strategy, we can expect many more summers like last. While spring has not eased into the intermountain west yet, the impacts from last summer's fires remain to be seen. Impacts to water quality, wildlife habitat, endangered species, erosion and regeneration will play itself out with the coming spring run-off and summer rains.
Page 15 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
As a nation, we need to move away from the confrontational gridlock we have experienced in the past. I have long maintained that there is no constituency for dirty air and dirty water. We all want a clean environment. But a clean environment does not happen by accident. It happens with measured purpose. And the National Fire Plan is a move in the direction of a cleaner and healthier environment.
By focusing on the health of our forests, we can achieve many of the objectives important to all Americans. Instead of focusing on how much timber we harvest, we need to focus on how much we leave on the land. Instead of focusing on acres harvested or board feet processed, we need to focus on the overall health of the forest ecosystem. We need to manage our forests for an end result; and that end result must be a healthy forest.
Charles Keegan, Director of Forest Industry and Manufacturing Research and Research and Carl Fiedler, Research Associate Professor, School of Forestry, both of the University of Montana, Missoula, have long advocated for healthy forests through active management of our nation's forests.
In a nutshell, Chuck and Carl recommend active management to bring our forests back to a more natural and healthy condition. This management technique involves clearing under-story and over-story of overly crowded trees, and prescribed burning where appropriate. And the key word here is appropriate. Some of our forests have grown dense and have accumulated large amounts of hazardous fuels, making it nearly impossible to prescribe burn. In cases such as this, man needs to mimic the purpose of fire by clearing overgrown and over-accumulated fuels. Only after successful restoration can we introduce fire in its natural form.
Page 16 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The National Fire Plan endeavors to offer a full range of forest management tools, from prescribed burns to mechanical treatment. And by including state and local governments and the affected public to participate in management decisions, we have an honest opportunity to positively affect the health of our nation's forests.
The National Fire Plan moves us in the direction of sustainable and healthy forests. The Forest Service will follow nine Operating Principles guiding their work to implement the National Fire Plan. I am encouraged by the principles outlined and look forward to working with the Forest Service on implementing those principles in Montana.
Responsible agencies must use expedited procedures to implement this plan. I understand the agencies have the available procedures to expedite this plan, and if not, then Congress must act prudently and expeditiously itself to provide legislative language that allows expedited procedures.
We can and we must move in an expeditious manner to address forest management. Last summer's fires affected private and state lands as well. In Montana, we saw over 14,000 acres of state forest burn. Recognizing that the value of burnt, dead timber decreases rapidly with time, our Department of Natural Resources (DNRC) moved in an environmentally sound and fiscally responsible manner. DNRC quickly evaluated the affected resources in accordance with the Montana Environmental Policy Act (similar to NEPA) and prepared a plan to treat the areas most severely impacted by the fires. Today, the state has completed 90% of the treatment plan on 5400 acres of state land. This treatment plan has rehabilitated many of the burned acres and generated $3.7 million to the school trust that will be used for our public education system. The harvests were also conducted while adhering to the letter of the State Forest Land Management Plan, which is to manage for biodiversity and forest health, in effect similar to the USFS ecosystem management philosophy.
Page 17 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
To date, the United State Forest Service in Montana has not removed any timber affected by the fires of last summer.
Additionally, the treatment plan addressed rehabilitation measures that included soil stabilization measures, stream bank stabilization and reseeding where necessary. This summer, the State will begin the process to evaluate and address necessary treatment of the areas less impacted by the fires.
My point is simple. If the State of Montana can move in a timely, environmentally sound and fiscally responsible manner with limited resources, should we not expect our federal neighbors to do the same?
I would like to present the balance of my testimony on behalf of the 21 members of the Western Governors' Association of which I recently became a member.
Since last summer's fires, states have been working collaboratively with federal agencies and other stakeholders to develop a national 10-year strategy to reduce the risk of wildfires. Western governors requested this strategy and the Congress concurred on the need for this long-term approach in the FY 2001 Interior Appropriations report. A draft of the strategy for public and Congressional comment is appended to my testimony. We are aiming to complete it by May 1. Once completed, we believe this document will demonstrate that a broad range of interests are in agreement on the need, resource levels and approach to addressing this issue.
And I would like to take this opportunity to encourage Congress to remain vigilant in improving the health of our nation's forests. We must be dedicated to a long-term strategy that addresses the health of our forests and reduces the risks to our population. We must, and I repeat must, fully fund the National Fire Plan. The goals set by the National Fire Plan are crucial to minimizing threat to lives and property. We must remain committed for the long run.
Page 18 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We were lucky last year. With the grace of God and a mobilization of forces like we have never before seen, lives were saved and property was protected. Unless we seriously commit to addressing the risks posed by unnatural and unhealthy forests, we will not always be able to say we were so lucky.
Mr. MCINNIS. Thank you, Governor.
Governor, the panel appreciates the effort that you made to travel clear across the country to make your presentation. Later in the meeting, we intend to have the Forest Service. I am pretty positive about some of the steps that they have taken.
There are a couple of comments that stand out in your comments that you have made, in particular your comment that ''hands-off'' is not management. You label it directly. That is exactly correct. You also said that, to date, the United States Forest Service in Montana has not removed any timber affected by the fires of last summer, and I think what is of interest, Governor, is you compare it to what your State Department of Forest Service has done in comparison. It is clear that one agency is able to move on a much more rapid basis than the other agency.
Considering the fire potential that we have out there, it is important that we move on an expedited basis, not a careless basis, not a reckless basis, but an expedited basis. And I think that we are heading in that direction.
I think your point that the State of Montana can move on that—and you have set a good example for us—is the kind of thing we need to hear back here.
Governor, as you will remember, at the beginning of the meeting we waived opening remarks because of the fact we wanted to get your testimony in, and I want to allow as much questioning as possible. In view of that, I will waive the remainder of my time and yield to the ranking member for a couple comments, and, members, we will go to the 5-minute question rule. I yield my time to the ranking member and welcome the ranking member.
Page 19 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. INSLEE. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I really will not have too much of a comment here. Should we move to some questions here? Is that appropriate?
Mr. MCINNIS. That would be appropriate.
Mr. INSLEE. Great. Thanks again, Governor. This is twice in two days. You are doing yeo-woman's service, so we appreciate it.
Governor MARTZ. Thank you.
Mr. INSLEE. I just want to ask you a real broad question, if I can, and feel free to philosophize or rhapsodize at your pleasure. And I will go right to the heart of a controversy that we will be talking about, something that can be a controversy on this issue, and that is, the need in certain instances to remove fuel from the forest which in certain instances needs to be done because our previous fire suppression policy has allowed tremendous growth to some degree in fuel.
But in doing so, many of our constituents have concerns that any fuel suppression program could end up as a masquerade for, in fact, an increase in commercial harvest. That was really motivated not so much by fuel suppression but, rather, simply the increased harvest levels where the law, the ESA, and various other restrictions may not allow it.
I would just like your thoughts on how you think we can structure or should consider structuring a program to avoid that second possibility of disguised commercial harvesting, if you will, under the guise of fuel suppression while still, you know, reaching that goal. And feel free to give us your thoughts even if you haven't thought all the way through it.
Governor MARTZ. Thank you very much, Congressman. I really believe that within my heart I think what we are trying to do is talk about healthy forests. And if we consider that and keep the argument of timber harvests as being jobs related or creating jobs for the industry out of this, we will look truly at creating a healthier forest. And that is what we have been saying for years in Montana.
Page 20 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The fuels are laying there. They are laying dead. Trees can't even grow to the size they should grow. Thinning is better for forests. We are finding that out for sure. And I really think that for the ecosystem the argument is that we really need to do—we need to leave some of that dead and burnt timber. But how do we do that in an environmentally and ecologically safe way? And I think that has got—we need to continually take the harvesting or the removal out of the picture, but start to look and really concentrate and focus in on the reasons we want to do this. And the reason we want to do it in Montana is to have a healthy forest.
Our fires last year, as you know, were so large. We had the best firefighters in the world there. And to sit in the same room with them and hear them say these are too hot, we cannot put them out, flames flashing over 300 feet in the air, and there was no way because of the hot box that sat underneath them.
Now we are faced with different problems—erosions, watersheds, those kinds of things. So for a healthy forest, we must take away the equation. The equation, yes, is going to bring some timber harvests, and we must be diligent to get that out of there. But the first and main concern and the argument that we need to keep focused on is a healthy forest.
Mr. INSLEE. Let me ask you, you said something to the effect of wanting to remove the issue of harvest from this debate. I want to make sure I understand you. I have many constituents who basically are looking for a level of trust in a decision-making process. What they want to have is trust that a decision to remove any fiber or timber from the forests under this program, in fact, would be done for a fire suppression purpose rather than for a purpose of, although it may be laudable at times, job creation, profit creation, commercial harvest.
Could you suggest to us ways in fashioning this program which would help build that trust in the public? And let me just give you an example of some things that I have heard tossed about as far as ideas. I have heard tossed about having a maximum diameter of tree that can be removed. I have heard it tossed about that you limit actual commercial use or sale of the timber. I have heard ideas tossed about that would, in effect, artificially restrict the removal of the timber for commercial purposes.
Page 21 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
What could you suggest to us that would give confidence to the public on how we would structure such a program in that regard?
Governor MARTZ. First of all, you can't fool yourself. There will be jobs in this, and there will be tree harvest. There has to be, or else all of the dead, burnt, standing timber right now is going to be diseased, and each of those trees, depending on what kind of tree they are, is a very limited time before they are diseased. Now, we can't have a diseased forest either because then as new growth comes in, we start to build another tinder box. So you do have to do removal.
When we did our State lands, Congressman, we had to designate how many of those trees and what diameter they are to be left standing. So in the prognosis of how you go forward, you do it by prescribing what you want to have standing in that.
We have through the Western Governors' Association what we believe—concentrating on what we want to see, we have a list of goals and outcomes, and this is just in draft form. So as soon as it is in its final form, we will get this to you. We have several recommendations on the outcomes and what we believe we need to do.
But to get confidence in the general public, I think we have to be very honest. There are going to be some jobs in this, but that is not our main focus. Our main focus is to get the dead timber out of there so it doesn't disease, then create another hot box in several years, which it will do. As that undergrowth goes up again, we may have a predicament this summer in Montana that will cause us to not be able to get back into the forest again. If we continue in the drought that we are having right now, we may not be able to get in. If we don't get those trees out early that are dead standing, we may not be able to get into the forest because of the fire danger again.
So I think we just have to be honest with them, for one thing. That is the greatest thing.
Page 22 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. INSLEE. Thank you.
Governor MARTZ. You are welcome.
Mr. MCINNIS. Governor, I might point out, before I yield to the next member, that I agree with the gentleman from Washington in regards to that we don't want to use this fire policy as a guise to sneak in commercial logging.
Governor MARTZ. Right.
Mr. MCINNIS. On the other hand, Governor, we don't want to use this as a tool or a vehicle to prevent logical, scientific logging. If we have timber in there that we need to harvest for forest health, it is beyond me why we would not go ahead and offer it for commercial sale instead of, I guess, stacking it up somewhere and burning it and so on.
I will yield to the gentleman from Tennessee.
Mr. DUNCAN. Governor, I was present in 1998 when we had a hearing in which they warned us about these fires and that they were coming, and then again in early 2000 and the GAO report that you mentioned with the warning that there were 40 million acres in the West in immediate danger of catastrophic forest fires. And then we saw those warnings that we received as early as 1998 come true, and I remember reading one article that there had been $10 billion worth of damage from this roughly 7 million acres that you mentioned burned.
If I had gone out there and set fire with some matches, or whatever, to even a few acres, I probably would have been put in jail. And yet these policies that we followed resulted—the policies that I think we followed because of radical or extremist environmentalists who seemingly don't want us to cut a single tree any place. Somehow, though, they have almost brainwashed the children in this country because I think if I went to any school in Knoxville, Tennessee, and told them I was opposed to cutting a single tree in the national forests, I would probably get applause.
Somehow people seem to have the idea that the national forests are national parks, and nobody is advocating going in and logging in the national parks. And I don't know—I agree with the Chairman on most things, but I am not opposed to commercial logging. People have to think that if we don't have some commercial logging in a few places in this country, people aren't going to be able to build affordable houses or furniture or have toilet paper or books or whatever.
Page 23 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
How do we get the message out that to have healthy forests we need to cut some trees, and to have low prices for all these products that we want, we have got to cut some trees? And if people stop all logging, you are going to drive up prices and you are going to destroy jobs. How do we get this message out? Because we seem to be, I think, losing in some ways on this.
Governor MARTZ. And I am not sure that I can answer how we get it out. We try very hard in Montana. We have what is called best management practices that they use in the forests where they are only able to cut so many trees in a certain area, they can't cut within so many feet of the watershed. There are very strict guidelines on how they do cut.
For us to pretend that we don't want to have the jobs, that is ludicrous. We need the jobs. The health of the forest depends on those people bringing it out in a scientifically conscientious manner. But when we talk about that, it almost seems like we are shifting the focus to the jobs it creates, when we really need to concentrate. In a sense, we did put the fire—we did start those fires. In 1998, we came up with a plan where we knew better, and we didn't really do it. Now we know better because we are seeing the ramifications of that, and we need to do it.
I think education, continually educating, if we can—if you go see a cut, it doesn't look pretty when it is being done. When they harvest it, it doesn't look pretty because you have the stumps. But you go back a year later, and the new growth, and you will see new seedlings coming up, that is pretty. And it is usable. Cattle can graze there, and they don't hurt the ecosystem. They can't graze there probably the first year, especially after a prescribed burn, but they can go on there and graze within the next two years and you have a healthy forest again.
So I think education is key to what we are doing in sync with the process that we are using to have a better managed forest.
Page 24 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. DUNCAN. I remember reading in the Knoxville News Sentinel that in 1950, 39 percent of Tennessee was in forest land, and by 1990 it was up to 45 percent, and today about half of Tennessee's 27 million acres is in forest lands. And then I read in the Christian Science Monitor where just about every Eastern State, the amount of forest land has gone up significantly over the last 50 years, yet very few people realize that.
I mentioned yesterday in this hearing that Congress passed in the mid-1980's this law that was hailed by the environmentalists that we wouldn't cut more than 80 percent of the new growth in our national forests, yet today we are cutting less than one-seventh of our new growth. And what I think it is, some of these groups can't raise money unless they keep raising the bar and scaring people and convincing people that we are raping the environment and doing all of these horrible things, when really we have made great, huge strides and, in fact, we are not even cutting enough trees to keep these forest fires from happening.
Governor MARTZ. I could not agree more.
Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you very much.
Mr. MCINNIS. Governor, those buzzes you heard obviously were an indication of a vote. We will be getting a couple more. It appears to me we probably will only have time for one more set of questions.
I would request that the remaining panel members who will not have an opportunity to ask those questions to you be allowed to submit those questions in writing to your staff for response back.
Governor MARTZ. Absolutely.
Mr. MCINNIS. We also appreciate the courtesy of you coming. After this next set of questions, I do not anticipate that we will be back here for probably half an hour. I would ask the other people to stay, certainly the second panel. Your testimony is very important. We intend to continue the hearing, but at that point I understand you need to keep with your schedule, Governor. So let's wrap it up. As you will see, Colorado pretty well dominates this Committee, and that is by choice. But the fine Congressman from the State of Colorado, Mr. Udall.
Page 25 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. UDALL OF COLORADO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome, Governor. It is important that you are here today to share with us your perspectives on Montana's approach to this.
The Colorado delegation last year in the person of Congressman Hefley, who is chairing another Subcommittee of this large full Committee, and myself introduced a bill that would have applied to the lands in Colorado in the so-called Red Zone. That is the urban-wildland interface. And that is where we have had the most pressure on our forests and, in fact, where we had a couple of the catastrophic fires last year. And our emphasis has been on focusing there to educate the people who live in those areas, but also to do the kind of fuel reduction and forest health work that would save lives, save property, and save people from the heartaches that come when these fires get out of control.
Is it your sense that—I am not trying to lead you on this, but ask if this would be the kind of policy that we first implement with these monies and with this large-scale program that we now have before us?
Governor MARTZ. It is, and could I just tell you some of these recommendations from the Western Governors, and I think they will line up with what you are thinking. We believe that we must reduce the risk and consequences of catastrophic wildfires and increase public and firefighter safety, to improve conditions of fire-adapted ecosystems to make them more resilient, to promote local action by increasing public understanding and providing the tools to enhance local responsibility. We need to maintain and enhance community health, economic and social well-being, increase resources for protection capabilities. We need to provide the restoration and rehabilitation of fire-damaged lands and to enhance collaboration, coordination among all levels of government and stakeholders for joint planning, decision-making, and implementation.
And I think there is something further that needs to be entered into the discussion at some time, is when people build in these areas where the trees are right up to their houses, maybe local planning or planning on Federal and State land, they have to have their own buffer zone, put that in before they can build, of some many feet before timber can be right on top of the house. I think something has to be looked at in that way, too, because we spend millions of dollars fighting fire over one home. And is that fair to every taxpayer? I don't know.
Page 26 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. UDALL OF COLORADO. Thank you for that response. I want to associate myself with my colleague from Washington, Mr. Inslee, when he discussed the concerns that some of us share that we don't put the cart before the horse and that in the end this approach is about making our forests healthy.
I would tell you, when you talk to the environmental community, who I think is very well intentioned and understands that forests are part of our economic base in the West, that we sell our views and our recreation as well as the commodities that we bring off the public lands, that when you say forest health to those communities, they think that means clear-cutting. When you say sustainable forests, which is what the environmental community tends to use as their approach, the commodity interests and other economic interests think that means lock up the forests and nobody ever has any access. And I think we have got to work to find some additional common ground here, understanding that in the end we all want the same thing, which is healthy forests that can provide for our families in recreational amenities and the views and the experiences we all enjoy in the West and the out-of-doors, but also, where appropriate, that allow for access to those wood products.
I also think we have an enormous opportunity—and you mentioned leaving some of this material in the forest because it is needed for the forests to regenerate themselves. But with the emerging energy crisis, we had a hearing yesterday, and there is a whole industry emerging around biofuels, and a lot of this small-diameter material can be used with the emerging technologies to produce ethanol. It is a cellulosic ethanol. And I hope that we will look at that as a potential feedstock for ethanol production so that we become more independent and we don't have the national security issues that are tied to our dependence on foreign oil.
I am not giving you much chance to comment, but the last question I would ask you is: In our bill, Mr. Hefley's and my bill, we included a 12-inch diameter limit. Now, some people think that is too big. Some people think that is too small. But we felt it was important to begin with a standard and at least put something on the table. I am curious if you have a reaction to that particular size limit for cutting. And, again, this would be in the Red Zone, in this urban-wildland interface.
Page 27 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Governor MARTZ. We have designated in Montana certain—it may be 9, it may go to 12, but you have to leave so many of those standing. I mean, it doesn't mean that you leave every one of them that are 12 inches in diameter standing. It would mean you leave so many in a certain area for a healthy forest.
We call it best management practices, and you are calling it something else, but we are talking about the same thing, managing it in a viable way that is good for the ecosystem, is good for the ground, is good for everything that is around it.
I want to go back to the ethanol use. We are considering everything in the way of ethanol use in the State of Montana to the extent that we are looking at building an ethanol plant there right now. The legislature is looking at a couple of bills. And so that is something that we are seriously considering.
Mr. UDALL OF COLORADO. We would like to work with you through the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus in the House, which has about 180 members from both parties and is very interested in ethanol maybe being a transition fuel to what I think eventually may be a fuel cell economy over the next 50 to 100 years.
Governor MARTZ. Right. In fact, the next State car I have will use both ethanol and—it is a good start.
Mr. UDALL OF COLORADO. Excellent.
Mr. MCINNIS. Governor, again, we are going to have to conclude our testimony temporarily. There are a couple of things that I would point out.
First of all, I do want to make note that there is some danger in getting into specific measurement of diameters. I mean, you may have a species that is not natural to the forest which exceeds 12 inches, and all of a sudden you have got a Federal bureaucracy, and I think our bureaucracy has pretty clearly demonstrated in lack of movement, as compared to your State Forest Service—which, by the way, in my opinion are closer to the soil than the Federal agency is.
Page 28 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I wish that we could continue this meeting because I am sure you would be interested in the follow-up panel, Mr. Laverty and Mr. Hartzell. We are going to hire 4,000 new firefighters. I think our communication with your State, with all the States on these fires will be enhanced. I think some very positive news will be held in the rest of the hearing.
I understand that you need to go. We certainly need to go vote. I appreciate the courtesy, and safe travels home.
Governor MARTZ. Thank you very much.
Mr. MCINNIS. The Committee will reconvene after the vote.
[Recess.]
Mr. MCINNIS. If everyone could be seated; also, just as a reminder, no cellular phones in the room, please.
As the Committee knows, we have been delayed by a vote. I think, however, we can wrap up the second panel. I would ask members to submit their opening statements for the record. I also have a statement to submit for the record from Congressman Rehberg.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Udall of Colorado follows:]
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE MARK UDALL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for scheduling this hearing today. I don't think you could have chosen a more timely subject for the start of your tenure as chairman of the Subcommittee.
And, as you know, Mr. Chairman, it is also a subject of particular interest to me—and to everyone back home in Colorado as well as other western States.
Page 29 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Across Colorado—and across the west—rapid population growth means that more and more communities are pressing against and into our forest lands, enlarging the so-called ''urban interface'' that in Colorado is also known as the ''red zone''—the area where forest fires present the greatest dangers to people's lives and homes.
The danger of forest fires in such areas is certainly not new. But last year's combination of a Presidential election and very damaging forest fires—including those in Colorado and Montana as well as the disaster in New Mexico resulted in important new developments, including the legislation whose implementation we are reviewing here today.
That legislation, which set up the National Fire Plan, resembles in important ways a bill that our colleague, Representative Hefley, and I introduced earlier in the year and that was also cosponsored by Representatives DeGette and Tancredo.
However, our bill would have applied only to Colorado's ''red zone''—and it also had some other important provisions that were not included in the legislation setting up the national fire plan.
For one thing, our bill emphasized public involvement by providing for setting up a committee—representing a broad spectrum of interests—to establish priorities for use of funds.
And, our bill specifically provided that fuel-reduction projects would have to meet some essential guidelines.
Page 30 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
For example, the bill specified that projects could not be performed in Congressionally-designated wilderness areas, that roadless areas would have to be protected, that the projects must comply with all state and federal environmental laws and regulations, and, most notably, that projects could include removal only of trees up to 12 inches in diameter.
That last requirement—a cutting limit based on tree size drew many comments from people holding differing views about the use of mechanical thinning to reduce fire risks.
Some people do not support allowing removal of trees that big, or perhaps of trees of any size. Others see the 12-inch limit—or perhaps any specific limit—as both arbitrary and too restrictive.
I respect the sincerity of those raising those objections. However, I think that our bill struck an appropriate balance and represented a legitimate starting point for legislative action.
The bill recognized that where the risk of catastrophic wildfires comes from overly-dense vegetation, it is because of the build-up of small-sized materials, including trees smaller than 12 inches in diameter.
It was also shaped by an understanding that cutting larger trees often can lead to more severe fires, for a variety of reasons, and can also have other adverse effects.
Page 31 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The limit in our bill also reflected the fact that cutting larger trees is controversial—especially when the larger trees may have commercial value.
It is simple fact that some will see the inclusion of larger trees as evidence that a project ostensibly aimed at reducing the risk of fire is really intended to be a commercial undertaking, by the Forest Service and by industry.
This could lead to challenges that would unnecessarily complicate necessary projects that were otherwise not controversial.
In short, both on the scientific merits and for reasons of public acceptability, I thought—and I still think—that there should be limits on the scope of these projects, of the kind that would have been set by our bill.
That is why last year, after enactment of the legislation setting up the national fire plan, I initiated a letter—ultimately also signed by 25 other Members of the House—to the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior urging that the fire plan be implemented under appropriate safeguards and conditions.
I now have received a response from Michael Rains, the Deputy Chief of the Forest Service for State and Private Forestry. The response states that the Agriculture Department shares the concerns expressed in our letter and outlines how those concerns will be addressed in the implementation of the national fire plan.
I ask unanimous consent that both of these letters be included in the record of today's hearing.
Page 32 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. Chairman, in Colorado's ''red zone'' and other areas covered by the national fire plan, there are very real risks to people, property and the environment—some of them resulting from past fire-management policies.
But it is very important that the need to respond to those real risks is not misused as a convenient rationale for projects that do not meet proper standards.
I think it is essential that fire-plan projects reflect public involvement, are based on sound science, and are completely consistent with applicable environmental laws.
In fact, it is precisely to help assure that fire-plan projects meet those requirements that last month I joined in cosponsoring a bill to clarify that funds appropriated to implement the fire plan can be transferred to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service. That will enable those agencies to review projects to assure that they will comply with the Endangered Species Act. I think we should act promptly on that legislation, to forestall problems and to keep the fire plan both on track and on a sound legal and environmental footing.
With that being said, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses.
Page 33 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[The prepared statement of Mr. Simpson follows:]
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF IDAHO
Mr. Chairman, thank you for conducting this oversight hearing on the implementation of the National Fire Plan. As you know, I have the dubious distinction of representing a district that had one of the largest fires in the United States during the 2000 fire season: the Clear Creek fire in the Salmon-Challis National Forest. The Clear Creek fire covered an area of over 200,000 acres, outside of Salmon, Idaho. However, it is but one of many that burned throughout Idaho and the Western United States.
I was able to spend a couple of days on the Clear Creek fire and saw first-hand the devastation catastrophic forest fires cause. It is unfortunate that it took a fire season like the one we had last year in order for the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior to produce the National Fire Plan. However, I am pleased that the U.S. Forest Service and the Department of the Interior responded with a comprehensive plan and strategy for dealing with heavy fuel loads, and restoration and rehabilitation of lands already stricken by catastrophic fires. Moreover, I was pleased that the U.S. Forest Service and the Department of the Interior worked with the Western Governors' Association to draft report language ensuring cooperation and consultation between governors and the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior.
We need to restore our forests. They are in an unhealthy state as evidenced by the 2000 fire season. The Forest Service and the General Accounting Office estimate that more than 72 million acres are at risk of uncharacteristic wildfire. We must restore our forests to a more healthy and natural state that includes managed prescribed burns and thinning. We may not agree on every aspect of achieving that natural state, but we can find common areas where we can agree that fuels reduction is better than the alternative—catastrophic forest fires.
Page 34 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The old adage ''an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure'' is very appropriate. A well-funded fuels reduction program will pay significant dividends in the reduction of fire fighting and restoration costs over time. I am hopeful that the U.S. Forest Service and the Department of the Interior will continue to aggressively implement the National Fire Plan. In addition, I trust that the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior will continue to work together with state and local officials to improve forest health.
I am committed to working with state and local officials, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Department of the Interior to address any barriers that might stand in the way of successfully treating our forests. In addition, I am committed to working for continued funding for a long-term forest health initiative.
Once again, I want to take this opportunity to thank you for holding this hearing. I am hopeful that the information presented here will bring us one step closer to healing our forests.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Rehberg follows:]
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DENNIS REHBERG, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MONTANA
Page 35 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I would like to thank Chairman McInnis for the opportunity to participate in this hearing about the National Fire Plan. This is a very timely issue, as we must prepare now for the fire season to come while we continue to deal with the effects of the wildfires of last summer. The national fire plan is an important thing for the state of Montana in our efforts to rehabilitate affected communities and National Forest lands.
I am concerned that though the fire management plan contains many projects and programs that will be invaluable to the future of fire management, the President's Budget does not provide for continuing funding. In Montana we know that the risk for catastrophic fire is not over. Less than ten percent of the 3.5 million acres the GAO identified as at risk for catastrophic fire burned during the summer of 2000. And again this year, snowpack levels are below normal. If forecasts are correct, we are looking at another fire season that is worse than normal—perhaps even worse than last year.
Another thing we face today in Montana is the presence of dead and dying trees as a result of fire on our national forest lands. State, tribal and private foresters have removed salvageable timber from their lands and I look forward to working with the Forest Service to expedite action on National Forest lands. It is important that we are able to get people on the ground to remove dead and dying stands while they are still salvageable.
In addition to the devastation catastrophic wildfires leave in their wake, experts agree that such fires will prevent the Forest Service from meeting its mission requirement to sustain the national forests' multiple use because fires damage soils, habitat, and watershed functions for many generations or even permanently.
Page 36 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I am pleased to see the Forest Service working to devise a cohesive strategy to address barriers to reducing excessive fuels on national forest lands, deal with the potential threats to people and property wildfires produce, and to provide affected communities with the assistance they need to rehabilitate.
[The prepared statement of The Honorable Tom Udall follows:]
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE TOM UDALL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, thank you for affording me the opportunity to comment on some of the issues presented as a result of last summer's extraordinary wildland fire season.
The National Fire Plan identifies a strategy to deal with ecosystem health issues in a manner that protects our communities and their citizens. It is a good start to a complex problem: A problem that exists because we have ignored the critical role fire plays in shaping the ecosystem. Now we have an opportunity to begin to undo what 100 years of fire suppression, overgrazing, and poor logging practices have done.
The National Fire Plan addresses several key elements that will safely and effectively manage our wildlands for future generations: 1) To adequately prepare our Federal, Tribal, State, and local governments for fighting wildland fire when they need to; 2) To restore landscapes damaged by last season's wildland fires; 3) To invest in projects to reduce fire risk; 4) To work with communities to ensure adequate protection through community assistance programs and; 5) To provide Congress with accountable results of these goals.
Page 37 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Although wildland management agencies have long identified a need to address the risk of wildland fire, the Fire Plan is not a one-time effort. Congress should be committed to the program for the long haul and maintain adequate funding for 10 to 15 years. We should not measure the Fire Plan's success from start to finish in only 1 year. This process will take time.
The intent was not to set up agencies and local governments for failure, nor expect them to solve the problems in 1 year. Rather, Congress needs to provide funding and oversight to our Federal land management agencies and Tribal governments to achieve key elements identified in the National Fire Plan.
To be successful and to comply with congressional intent, Federal agencies, the Tribal, state, county and local governments, along with contractors, service providers, and the public need to collaborate and work in cohesive partnership. Of the major concerns I have toward implementation of this Plan, this one has major importance because of the planning and management that led up to the escaped prescribed burn in Los Alamos last year. We must ensure all groups and agencies are communicating and are in agreement with these efforts.
Another concern is that we must work to ensure adequate funding is made available for the long term. Although the President's Fiscal Year 2002 budget maintains funding levels for preparedness and other programs, it lacks adequate support for fire facility maintenance, fire science research, and community assistance. The backlog of fire facility maintenance exists throughout the country and this funding is inadequate to take care of the backlog. The research component will guide the development of the National Fire Plan and must be adequately funded. We need to support our states and local communities through community assistance funding to ensure they can make their communities safe through FIREWISE and other treatment methods. I believe it is important that adequate funding is made available for the long-term strategy. The current proposed budget does not do that.
Page 38 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In the past, land management agencies have proposed and implemented fuels treatment and risk reduction projects in areas that are non-controversial, inexpensive, and easy to do. Now is the time to look at the communities, watersheds, and species that are at risk from high intensity wildland fire. These areas tend to have the higher fuel volumes, higher resistance to fire suppression efforts, and threaten to burn homes or other valuable resources. Consequently, it will require more collaborative planning and higher costs to safely and effectively reduce risks of wildland fire.
The process may include commercial timber harvest, non-commercial thinning, chipping, piling, or prescribed fire, or a combination of all. Let's keep our focus on sound land management practices.
In conclusion, the National Fire Plan is a step in the right direction. However, the agencies must apply the best land management practices, be fiscally responsible, and demonstrate that their efforts are paying off. Finally, I want to recognize all the agencies and partners who are working together to make the National Fire plan a success. Their long tireless hours and their dedication to make this Plan a success is commendable.
Mr. MCINNIS. With that, we will call up the second panel. Mr. Hartzell, thank you for attending today. Lyle, thank you for coming out. I am familiar with both of you. I appreciate the effort.
I am very excited to hear your testimony. We had a visit the other day, for the rest of the people in the room, which I thought was very interesting. I think we are focusing on fire control. Whether we discuss biomass or whether we discuss the hiring of new firefighters, communication, of course, is the key. As the two gentlemen know, I was on Storm King Mountain when Storm King Mountain blew up. That was not a result of bad forest health. That was a result of poor communication, unfortunate weather, dry conditions, and the lightning storm.
Page 39 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So, needless to say, not all efforts in fighting forest fires necessarily pertain to the management of that particular forest. Communication is critical. And we had a good discussion the other day—I hope that one of the two gentlemen will mention that—on coordination of firefighting. That was a major contributing factor to the fatalities that we suffered on the mountain during that fire.
So, with that, I will turn to the ranking member very quickly for comment, and then we will turn it over to our two witnesses.
Mr. INSLEE. Thank you, Mr. Chair. My comments are brief. It is my belief that we face the prospect of a fire storm in the West this summer. It is my belief that the current budgetary projections will leave us grievously short of resources to deal with this. And if that occurs, it probably will not be the two witnesses' fault in this regard. It will be the U.S. Congress' and the White House. I am going to look forward to your helping us figure out what decisions need to be made on a budgetary basis to allow you to do your job to keep this natural disaster from occurring in the West this summer.
Mr. MCINNIS. With concurrence from the ranking member or without objection from the ranking member, I am going to waive the 5-minute rule, because I think both of your presentations, number one, are absolutely critical and, two, based on what I have seen, will take longer than 5 minutes.
Lyle, do you want to start off?
STATEMENT OF LYLE LAVERTY, NATIONAL FIRE PLAN COORDINATOR, FOREST SERVICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Mr. LAVERTY. Mr. Chairman, it is truly an honor to be here and have a chance to share with you this morning actions that we are taking regarding implementation of the National Fire Plan. I am here today, along with Tim Hartzell, to bring you up to date on what has been accomplished thus far and, perhaps more importantly, what we will be doing this summer to implement the provisions of the National Fire Plan.
Page 40 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
As the Governor really eloquently addressed, the fire season of 2000 certainly captured the attention of the American people on the need to find ways of protecting life and property and at the same time minimizing losses to natural resources.
On September 8th, the Secretaries issued a report entitled ''Managing the Impact of Wildfires on Communities and the Environment,'' and that report, which has been referred to as the National Fire Plan, contains a series of recommendations to reduce the impacts of wildland fires on rural communities and ensure that we do, in fact, have sufficient firefighting resources in the future.
Mr. Chairman, the implementation of this National Fire Plan is well underway, and we have made significant progress to date. Cooperation between the Federal agencies, the Governors, in collaborations with the tribes and local communities probably is beginning to set a new standard and new model of how Government can work, in fact, responding to the needs of the people of this great country. We clearly recognize there are many challenges to complete this significant increased workload that has been designed as part of this plan.
Long term, it is going to take many, many years of a continued commitment and investment of resources to effectively reduce the impacts of wildland fire on rural communities. And if there is a theme that we will share with you over and over again, it is that this is a long-term journey; 1 or 2 or 3 years will not do it. And we need to be able to ensure that we are in this for the long term, but at the same time that we are responsible with the resources that are given.
Even though it is early in the year, we have made really a good start in some major areas of accomplishment. We have, in fact, treated over 80,000 acres of some of the areas that were damaged during the 2000 fire season. We have restored 713 miles of roads, we have treated about 245 miles of trail, and we are doing those emergency actions to protect those resources.
Page 41 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We have already reduced fuels on over 400,000 acres of the national forests of the 1.8 million acres that we plan to treat this year. We have been involved collectively in terms of hiring the resources to staff the fire organizations, and we have hired over 815 permanent firefighters, and we expect to hire another 1,900 additional firefighters before April 30th.
In addition, we plan to acquire new engines, new fire engines. We are going to bring new equipment under contract and begin to staff the organization to be responsive to what we know is the potential for another fire season.
We have already started the process of providing funding and training and equipment to over 4,000 volunteers just on the Forest Service side. We published a list of the communities that are at risk, which was prepared by the National Governors and the tribes to begin to start the discussion on how can we begin to more effectively target and focus our fuels reduction projects on those communities that are at greatest risk.
We have initiated action on over 63 research projects, which are what I would consider to be the intellectual mutual fund in terms of how are we going to begin to acquire new knowledge about the effects of fire and these actions on resources in this country.
We have developed the framework that the Governor referenced in terms of a draft of a national 10-year comprehensive strategy with the States and the tribes as full partners—full partners—in the implementation of the National Fire Plan. Very, very significant.
Our success to date, beginning with the definition of the wildland-urban interface communities, the hiring of firefighters, and the ongoing rehabilitation and restoration of burned areas, fire-wise education work, is evidence of the strong start. We are committed to increasing the Nation's firefighting capability and to protect communities and restore resources. But it is going to take longer than a year.
Page 42 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
After my partner, Tim Hartzell, presents his remarks, we are going to take a few minutes to expand on the key points and add some additional specifics and then answer any questions that you or any of the members of the Committee might have.
Thank you again for the opportunity just to share with you some great results that we will pick up on a little bit more.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Laverty follows:]
STATEMENT OF LYLE LAVERTY, ASSOCIATE DEPUTY CHIEF AND NATIONAL FIRE PLAN COORDINATOR, FOREST SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee: Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to talk about the implementation of the National Fire Plan. I am Lyle Laverty, Associate Deputy Chief and National Fire Plan Coordinator of the Forest Service. I am here today to bring you up to date on what has been accomplished thus far and what we plan to do next.
The severe fire season of 2000 captured the attention of the American people on the need to find ways to protect life and property and minimize losses of natural resources. On September 8, the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior issued a report entitled, ''Managing the Impact of Wildfires on Communities and the Environment. The report, referred to as the National Fire Plan, contains recommendations to reduce the impacts of wildland fires on rural communities and ensure sufficient firefighting resources in the future.
Mr. Chairman, implementation of the National Fire Plan is well underway and significant progress has been made. However, we recognize that there are many challenges to complete the significantly increased workload. Long-term, it is going to take many years and a continued commitment in resources to effectively reduce the impacts of wildland fire on rural communities.
Page 43 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Even though it is early in the year, we have made a good start with the following:
Treated over 80,000 acres, 713 miles of roads and 245 miles of trails to restore and rehabilitate areas damaged during the 2000 fire season.
Reduced hazardous fuel on over 400,000 acres of the 1.8 million acres we plan to treat this year.
Hired over 850 new permanent fire personnel and expect to have another 1900 (650 permanent, 1250 temporary) hired by April 30, 2001 along with planning to acquire 412 fire engines and the services of an additional 47 contracted helicopters to provide the highest practical level of firefighting capability.
Initiated assistance for training and equipment for 4000 volunteer fire departments.
Published a preliminary list of communities at risk prepared by the States and Tribes to ensure that we increase the focus of our future efforts on reducing fire risk in the areas adjacent to these communities.
Started 63 research projects to increase scientific knowledge in support of the National Fire Plan.
Initiated discussions on a framework and draft of the national ten-year comprehensive strategy for the National Fire Plan.
Page 44 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Before I talk more about our accomplishments and our planned actions let me explain how conditions on our forests and rangelands developed the level of uncharacteristic fire risk that exists today.
BACKGROUND
Fire conditions
Decades of excluding fire from our forests and past management practices have drastically changed the ecological condition of western forests and rangelands and dramatically affected fire behavior. A century ago, when low intensity, high frequency fires were commonplace, many forests were less dense and had larger, more fire-resistant trees. Over time, the composition of our forests has changed from more fire-resistant tree species to species non-resistant to fire such as grand fir, Douglas-fir, and subalpine fir.
Fire ecologists point out the paradox of fire suppression: the more effective we become at fire suppression, the more fuels accumulate and ultimately create conditions for the occurrence of more intense fires. As it became Federal practice to extinguish fires aggressively in the west, firefighting budgets rose dramatically and firefighting tactics and equipment became increasingly more sophisticated and effective. In the early 1930s the annual acreage burned by wildfires in the lower 48 states was about 40 million acres a year. In the 1970s because of our effective fire suppression the annual acreage burned by wildfires in the lower 48 states dropped to about five million acres. In the 1990's, the annual average acreage burned by wildfires was less than 4 million acres.
Page 45 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In addition to changes in tree species and ecological conditions of forests and grasslands more communities are at risk of wildfire than in earlier years. During the last two decades dramatic increases in the population in the West has resulted in housing developments in fire-prone areas, often adjacent to Federal land. This area where human development meets or intermingles with undeveloped wildland is called the ''wildland-urban interface.''
Reversing the effects of a century of aggressive fire suppression and past management practices will take time and money targeted to high priority areas to protect people, communities, readily accessible municipal watersheds, and habitat for threatened and endangered species. Although not all areas will need to be treated, the Forest Service and the General Accounting Office have estimated that there are around 60 million acres at risk of uncharacteristic wildfire in the interior West and more than 72 million acres nationwide.. Many of these acres are not in the wildland-urban interface and include acres distant from habitation.
The Forest Service and its interagency partners have increased their efforts to reduce risks associated with the buildup of brush, shrubs, small trees and other fuels in forest and rangelands through a variety of approaches, including controlled bums, the physical removal of undergrowth, and the prevention and eradication of invasive plants. In 1994 the Forest Service treated approximately 385,000 acres across the United States to reduce hazardous fuels. In 2000 we treated over 750,000 acres almost double our earlier efforts.
Addressing fire conditions: The key points of the National Fire Plan
Page 46 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
To address these changed conditions the recommendations in ''Managing the Impact of Wildfires on Communities and the Environment'' and actions implementing the National Fire Plan focus on five key points:
Firefighting. Be adequately prepared to fight wildland fire.
Rehabilitation and Restoration. Restore landscapes and rebuild communities damaged by the wildfires of 2000.
Hazardous Fuel Reduction. Invest in projects to reduce fire risk.
Community Assistance. Work directly with communities to ensure adequate protection.
Accountability. Be accountable and establish adequate oversight, coordination, program development, and monitoring for performance.
The report also recommended substantial increases in funding for the land management agencies to address the five key points.
In response to the recommendations in the Report, Congress and the Administration increased funding for agency firefighting, fuels reduction, and other fire-related programs. We appreciate the quick and decisive actions of Congress and the Administration to fully fund the fire budgets for both the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior. (See Appendix A.)
Page 47 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The Conference Report for P.L. 106–291 contains explicit direction for the implementation of the National Fire Plan. The Appropriations conferees directed the agencies to work closely with State and local communities to maximize benefits to the environment and to local communities. They directed the agencies to seek the advice of the State Governors and local and tribal government representatives in setting priorities for fuels treatments, burned area rehabilitation and public outreach and education. The Appropriations conferees also directed the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture to work together to formulate complementary budget requests and to carry out the other tasks, including developing criteria for rehabilitation projects, developing a list of all communities within the vicinity of Federal lands at high risk from fire, and working collaboratively with the State Governors to develop a 10-year comprehensive strategy. (See Appendix B.)
ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE NATIONAL FIRE PLAN
Implementation of the National Fire Plan is well underway. Since the very beginning we have worked collaboratively with Department of the Interior agencies, the Governors, State Foresters, tribal governments and county officials.
Our implementation efforts focus on addressing the five key points of the National Fire Plan. The status of our actions include the following:
Firefighting readiness
We are focusing on increasing firefighting capability and capacity for initial attack, extended attack, and large fire support. We believe our efforts will keep a number of small fires from becoming large, better protect natural resources, reduce threat to adjacent communities, and reduce the cost of large fire suppression.
Page 48 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The expanded capacity will be used in a manner consistent with our knowledge and experience of the causes of fire risks. The agency will be guided by fire management plans that we intend to have updated and completed by the end of 2001.
To date the Forest Service has hired over 850 new permanent fire personnel and plan to hire a total of over 2,750 (1500 permanent, 1250 temporary) to provide the highest practical level of protection efficiency. This will include twelve new hotshot crews for a national total of 74 crews. We plan to acquire an additional 412 fire engines and have contracts for an additional 47 helicopters for a total of 106 helicopters and 40 fixed-wing aircraft. In addition we will have another 500 aircraft available through ''call when needed'' contracts. We are also in the process of awarding the retardant contract for 2001–2003 to ensure adequate supplies.
In addition, we will construct several new fire facilities and increase the level of maintenance on existing fire facilities to support initial attack. This construction includes projects such as a new airtanker base and national fire cache in Silver City, New Mexico, new hotshot crew housing in Ft. Collins, Colorado, and a new helitack base in Price Valley, Idaho.
The agency is also investing in applied research to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and safety of the national firefighting effort. In addition to the progress made in the Forest Service research and development program, the Joint Fire Science Program (JFSP) has been increased. This additional applied research and development will assess fire behavior and fire restoration techniques during and immediately after fire events; upgrade aircraft-based tools for monitoring fire behavior; increase understanding about post-fire conditions, fire effects, and the effectiveness of past land management treatments; and establish protocols for evaluating rehabilitation measures. The Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior have also established a stakeholder advisory committee to advise the JFSP Governing Board. The committee plans to hold its first meeting in April.
Page 49 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Rehabilitation and restoration
We are focusing rehabilitation efforts on restoring watershed function, including protection of basic soil, water resources, biological communities, and prevention of invasive species in priority watersheds. Healthy, diverse ecosystems are resilient and less likely to produce uncharacteristically intense fires when they burn.
Burned area emergency rehabilitation (BAER) teams mobilized after the 2006 fire season. Plans were developed and approved for over $40.8 million of emergency stabilization for 235 projects on moderately and severely burned National Forest System lands. Most of the emergency treatments were completed before winter, including 62,000 acres of grass seeding, 3,606 acres of mulching, 17,886 acres of intensive log and wattle erosion barriers, and drainage improvements on 713 miles of roads and 245 miles of trail. For example:
In Idaho, 650 acres were seeded, 242 acres intensively mulched, and erosion control barriers installed on 3,157 acres on the Trail Creek fire on the Boise NF.
In Montana, drainage was improved on 410 miles of road and 4,732 acres of intensive erosion control barriers were installed on the Skalkaho-Valley fire on the Bitterroot NF.
In California, 890 acres were seeded and 200 acres intensively mulched on the Manter fire on the Sequoia NF.
In New Mexico, 13,500 acres were seeded, 3,070 acres intensively mulched, and 5,170 acres of erosion control barriers installed for the Cerro Grande fire on the Santa Fe NF.
Page 50 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In Colorado, 1,000 acres of mulch and erosion barriers are being installed on the Bobcat burn.
The remaining acres will be treated as soon as the land is accessible this spring.
In addition, long-term rehabilitation and restoration on over 400 projects is currently underway. These activities will include reforestation, replacement or repair of minor facilities, treatment of invasive species (including noxious weeds) resulting from fire, survey and monitor impacts to wilderness, survey and rehabilitate impacted heritage resources, reconstruct fencing, restore critical habitat and restore impacted trails.
We are also conducting additional research in rehabilitation and restoration methods. One example is research at Rocky Mountain Research Station quantifying the soil and water quality consequences of catastrophic fire, using the Cerro Grande and other southwestern fires as study sites.
Hazardous fuel reduction
We are focusing hazardous fuels reduction projects in communities at risk, readily accessible municipal watersheds, threatened and endangered species habitat, and other important local areas, where conditions favor uncharacteristically intense fires. We will remove excessive vegetation and dead fuels through thinning, prescribed fire, and other treatment methods.
Page 51 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Following Congressional direction we asked State, local and tribal governments, and interested parties to identify urban wildland interface communities within the vicinity of Federal lands that are at high risk from wildfire. The Departments of Agriculture and the Interior published a preliminary list in the Federal Register on January 4, 2001. The States and Tribes each developed criteria for selecting communities that resulted in some States listing numerous communities and others listing only a few. The Departments of Agriculture and the Interior have asked the Governors and the National Association of State Foresters to help the Federal Agencies to work with Tribes, States, local governments, and other interested parties to develop a national list based on uniform criteria.
We have completed hazardous fuel reduction on over 400,000 acres of the 1.8 million acres that are planned for treatment this fiscal year. Many of these projects focus on wildland-urban interface areas. In the future, we intend to focus the majority of this work on wildland-urban interface areas where hazardous fuel conditions exist near communities.
In addition to work on Federal lands, we will also provide technical and financial support to State and local fire departments to implement 329 projects to improve conditions on wildland-urban interface areas on non-federal lands. The States will also be implementing projects in impacted areas using the Community and Private Land Fire Assistance funding.
Research is also focusing on hazardous fuels projects. An example is work to characterize and map vegetation and fuels from remote sensed data to locate urban interface areas exposed to high fire potential. These methods will be helpful in prioritizing investments in fuels treatment.
Page 52 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Our success in accomplishing hazardous fuel reduction objectives will be largely dependent on focusing our treatments in the areas of greatest need. Our goal is to do this efficiently and with the least amount of controversy, getting the most amount of high-priority work done. Protecting communities and restoring forests represents the sort of win-win solution that will allow us to build a strong constituency for ecologically sensible active management.
Community assistance
We are assisting State and local partners by providing funding assistance to rural and volunteer fire departments and through programs such as FIREWISE to educate homeowners to take actions to reduce fire risk to homes and private property.
We plan to expand community assistance to rural volunteer fire departments to increase local firefighting capacity. Rural and volunteer fire departments provide the front line of defense, or initial attack, for up to 90 percent of communities. Strong readiness capability at the State and local levels goes hand-in-hand with optimal efficiency at the Federal level. We will increase our assistance for training and equipment to 4,000 volunteer fire departments in high-risk areas.
The Forest Service has been working with the State and private landowners, the National Fire Protection Association, and local firefighting organizations to help ensure that home protection
capabilities are improved and to educate homeowners in fire-sensitive ecosystems about the consequences of wildfires. Also homeowners are being taught techniques in community planning, homebuilding, and landscaping to protect themselves and their property. Efforts include FIREWISE and other high priority prevention and mitigation education programs, as well as fuels reduction, defensible space development, and community hazard mitigation on non-federal lands.
Page 53 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We expect implementation of the National Fire Plan can create over 8,000 new jobs in rural areas and provide economic opportunities for rural forest dependent communities.
We are also beginning research to test the effectiveness of different models of collaboration, education, and community actions and to compare different local regulatory and incentive-based policies for encouraging residents to adopt FIREWISE practices. These new efforts will provide useful insights and guidelines for implementing effective community-level programs for wildfire protection.
Accountability
The agency is working to establish adequate oversight, coordination, program development, and monitoring for National Fire Plan performance to ensure accountability.
A key component in ensuring accountability is tracking funding and accomplishments. In keeping with Congressional reporting requirements, the Forest Service is finalizing a database to track projects funded by Title IV funds. It will include project accomplishments and funding for work in hazardous fuels reduction, rehabilitation, and community assistance. Once it is fully operational—which is planned for the end of this month—we will be able to report, for example, numbers and types of rehabilitation work being done in a particular national forest, congressional district, or state.
Of course, the Forest Service must be accountable for all funding. In Fiscal Year 2000, obligations in the Wildland Fire Management Appropriation totaled $1.5 billion, exceeding available funds by $274 million. An anti-deficiency report was sent to President Clinton and members of Congress as required by law. This violation was caused by delays in entering suppression costs into the agency financial system. The agency is conducting an intensive Anti-Deficiency Act violation review to more fully determine the specific causes and implement procedures to prevent a reoccurrence.
Page 54 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Another recent development associated with the implementation of the National Fire Plan is the ''Review and Update of the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy.'' The Review and Update was completed in January 2001 in response to a request from the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior. The working team concluded that the 1995 Federal Fire Policy is generally sound, but that some changes and additions are needed to address issues such as fire planning, program management and oversight, and program evaluation.
If you refer to the list of Reporting Requirements in Appendix B, you will see the Forest Service and the Department of the Interior have accomplished several other important tasks and reported to Congress in a timely manner. These include a report on criteria for rehabilitation projects; a report on the need for revised or expedited environmental compliance procedures; and a financial plan and an action plan showing how agencies will spend the emergency funds.
NEXT STEPS
The following are the next immediate actions to be taken by the Forest Service to continue implementation of the National Fire Plan:
Complete the fuels management projects underway and continue planning for 2002 focusing fuels treatments in urban interface communities where they are most likely to reduce risk effectively.
Continue work on a long-term strategy for the National Fire Plan (2002–2010) in collaboration with Governors and other stakeholders.
Page 55 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Complete the hiring of new fire personnel to produce an extremely high level of firefighting capability.
Complete analysis of fire risk and integrate with other resource information to prioritize treatment areas.
We will continue to provide timely information to Congress and other interested parties about the National Fire Plan.
SUMMARY
Mr. Chairman, my staff and I will continue to work closely with the Department of the Interior Team to work with communities to restore and maintain healthy ecosystems and to minimize the losses from future wildfires on National Forest System lands, other Federal, State, Tribal, and privately-owned lands. Our successes to date—beginning to define the wildland-urban interface communities, hiring firefighters for the 2001 fire season, and ongoing rehabilitation, restoration, FIREWISE education work—is evidence of the strong start. However, our continued success will depend on what happens this field season.
We are committed to increasing the Nation's firefighting capability and ability to protect communities and restore resources, but it will take longer than one year.
This concludes my statement. I would be happy to answer any questions you or the Members of the Subcommittee might have.
Page 56 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. MCINNIS. Thank you.
Mr. Hartzell?
STATEMENT OF TIM HARTZELL, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WILDLAND AND FIRE COORDINATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. HARTZELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Tim Hartzell, and I am the Director of the Office of Wildland Fire Coordination in the Department of Interior. I really appreciate this opportunity to address the Committee concerning a natural resource effort that is, frankly, historic in its scope and unprecedented in both its innovation and collaboration, that is, implementation of the National Fire Plan.
I am pleased to report to you that the Department of Interior firefighting agencies have already made significant and substantial progress in responding to the mandate and opportunity that Congress has given us in the appropriation language for Fiscal Year 2001 to minimize the occurrence of another fire season such as 2000, to lessen the danger to communities at risk, and to restore ecosystems and the natural role of fire, to protect our critical natural resources, and, most important, to keep our firefighters and public safe.
We are pleased to speak to you about this historic initiative that is truly a new approach to solving resource management problems. The key to our initial success has been in our openness and our desire to work with States, local governments, and others as full and equal partners in identifying and finding solutions to problems. I certainly hope that this is a clear message that you hear throughout our testimony.
Page 57 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
At this time I would like to forego the balance of my submitted testimony so that my colleague and I can focus on the critical actions that we have completed to date under the National Fire Plan and talk to you about future actions and opportunities under the plan.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hartzell follows:]
STATEMENT OF TIM HARTZELL, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WILDLAND FIRE COORDINATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Good morning Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee.
I appreciate the opportunity to address this committee concerning a natural resource effort that is historic in its scope and presents a unique challenge, implementation of the National Fire Plan. My name is Tim Hartzell and I am the Director of the Office of Wildland Fire Coordination for the Department of the Interior. I am pleased to report that the Department of the Interior firefighting agencies have made substantial progress in responding to the mandate that Congress gave us in the appropriation language for FY 2001 to minimize the severity of another fire season such as we had in 2000, lessen the dangers to communities at risk, restore ecosystems and the natural role of fire, protect our critical natural resources, and most important, keep our firefighters and the public safe.
Background
The 2000 fire season was long, stubborn, volatile and widespread. The fire season started on January 1st, when a small blaze ignited near Ft. Myers, Florida, and lasted well into the fall. As late as December, more than 14,000 acres burned east of San Diego, California, destroying fourteen structures.
Page 58 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In total, almost 93,000 wildland fires burned close to 7.4 million acres. While neither the number of fires nor the number of acres approached all-time records, the conditions, fire behavior and potential for an even more explosive season were perhaps unparalleled in the last fifty years. The intensity of the fires was the result of two primary factors: a severe drought, accompanied by a series of storms that produced millions of lightning strikes and windy conditions, and the long-term effects of more than a century of aggressively suppressing all wildfires, which has led to an unnatural buildup of brush and small trees in our forests and on our rangelands.
The 2000 fire season also caught the attention of the public. In early August, President Clinton visited a battalion of soldiers from Ft. Hood, Texas, pressed into duty as firefighters on the Burgdorf Junction Fire, near McCall, Idaho. During that trip, President Clinton asked the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior to develop recommendations on how to reduce the impacts of fire on rural communities and ensure sufficient firefighting resources for the future. On September 8th, the Secretaries responded with a report entitled, ''Managing the Impacts of Wildfires on Communities and the Environment: A Report to the President in Response to the Wildfires of 2000,'' also known as the ''National Fire Plan.''
The National Fire Plan recommended that the Departments of Agriculture and the Interior seek an increased appropriation for fire management, and do several things:
Continue to make all necessary firefighting resources available.
Restore landscapes and rebuild communities.
Invest in projects to reduce fire risk.
Page 59 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Work directly with communities.
Be accountable.
We are grateful that Congress took quick and decisive action once the report was issued. As a result, the wildland fire budgets for both the Department of the Interior and Department of Agriculture were substantially increased for FY 2001.
At present, we are concentrating our efforts in the Department of the Interior on three main areas: tire preparedness, fire operations, and assistance to rural fire districts. Later in my statement, I will detail some of the steps that have been taken and will be taken in the coming months to address these three critical areas.
Accomplishments to date
The FY 2001 appropriation provided an injection of critically needed support and funding for wildland fire and resource management. Although the agencies have managed wildland fire in the past as efficiently and safely as possible, the FY 2001 appropriation provided a much needed boost to ensure that adequate resources are available in the face of today's significant fire and resource management issues, such as rangeland and forest health, the increasing size and intensity of wildland fire that is resulting from much of the land's unhealthy state, and the ever-expanding wildland-urban interface. Late in 2000, the Department of the Interior and the USDA Forest Service began implementation of the National Fire Plan by detailing support, direction and funding for wildland firefighting agencies to better manage fire and resources on the land. An interagency steering group convened with representatives and leads from each Federal wildland firefighting agency, including DOI's Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, and USDA's Forest Service. Each of these agencies developed an agency-specific National Fire Plan implementation strategy to provide field personnel with procedural guidance.
Page 60 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The National Fire Plan is founded on a long history of cooperation among firefighting agencies. Its long-term success depends on cooperation and collaboration among Federal agency partners, Tribal, State, county and local governments, contractors and other service providers, and users of Federally-owned land. As soon as agencies received the FY 2001 budget, National Fire Plan leads from the Departments of Agriculture and the Interior met with such partners as the National Association of State Foresters, the Western Governor's Association, and the National Association of Counties, to discuss the ramifications of the FY 2001 appropriations.
Within weeks of the passage of the FY 2001 Appropriations Act, requests for pertinent data and status reports were sent to the field to determine staffing, rural fire district, and planning needs, and to determine which hazardous fuels treatment projects are ready for implementation in FY 2001 and which remain in the planning stages. Deferred maintenance and capital improvement projects were prioritized and allocated, and project tracking systems were developed. Weekly interagency and agency meetings, satellite broadcasts and information bulletins help coordinate efforts and disseminate information throughout the agencies.
In January 2001, the Department of the Interior and the Forest Service issued the ''Review and Update of the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy.'' This report came in response to a request from the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior. The National Fire Plan is built upon the foundation and framework of the Review and Update. The Review was conducted by 14 Federal agencies and the National Association of State Foresters, who concluded:
The 1995 Fire Policy is still sound, but additional emphasis is recommended on science, outreach and education, restoration, and program evaluation.
Page 61 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The fire hazard situation is worse than predicted in 1995.
The scope of the Urban Wildland fuels hazard problem is even more complex and extensive than predicted in 1995.
Additional research is needed on the effectiveness of different fuels treatment options, and post-fire rehabilitation activities.
Additional collaboration and integration of all Federal agencies with land management responsibility as well as non-Federal agencies is needed.
The National Fire Plan addresses these concerns by:
Increasing fuels hazard treatment activities for DOI to a planned target of 1.4 million acres of Federal land in FY 2001. This represents an increase from an average of 800,000 acres of fuels treatment activities. Increasing on-the-ground fuels hazard reduction work in FY 2001 around a greater number of vulnerable communities, and by developing a collaborative partnership with the State Foresters and others to design a long-term fuels treatment strategy in the Urban Wildland interface.
Increasing research in: (a) the economic and environmental consequences of fuels treatment alternatives in a variety of fuels types across the country; (b) the effectiveness of post fire rehabilitation techniques including the control of noxious weeds and invasive species.
Increasing outreach and partnership activities with the Western Governors' Association, the National Association of Counties, Tribes, other Federal partners, and nongovernmental organizations in designing a 10-year strategy to restore health to fire adapted ecosystems and a plan of action to implement the NFP.
Also in January 2001, the Department of the Interior completed an action plan to implement the National Fire Plan. This action plan contains proposed accomplishments for FY 2001 in wildland fire preparedness, operations, and rural fire assistance. It addresses actions needed to implement the National Fire Plan, including:
Page 62 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Hiring additional personnel and obtaining needed equipment.
Completing deferred maintenance and construction.
Enhancing fire science work.
Planning and implementing hazardous fuels treatments.
Planning and implementing burned area rehabilitation.
A financial plan for complying with Title IV of the 2001 Appropriation Act.
We divided our accomplishments under the National Fire Plan into the three key areas: fire preparedness, fire operations, and rural fire district assistance.
Fire preparedness
Wildland fire preparedness provides agencies with the capability to prevent, detect and take prompt, effective initial attack suppression action on wildland fires. Preparedness includes staffing, aircraft and equipment, maintenance and construction, fire science and research, and the associated Federal acquisition practices.
Interior and Forest Service personnel have been working together to create consistency in position classifications. Outreach and recruitment to obtain diverse, well-qualified candidates began in December 2000 to fill firefighter, fire manager and support positions, and for fire and fuels specialists. Many of these positions have been advertised jointly and centrally to eliminate duplication of effort and to streamline the application process.
Page 63 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We are contracting for the use of an additional 16 aircraft, and we purchased equipment, including 40 new heavy engines, 43 light engine upgrades, 14 crew carriers for Hot Shot crews, 7 water tenders, 5 helitack trucks, and 3 dozers and lowboys. Although this equipment has been purchased in 2001, some of it will not be delivered until 2002.
Within the Department of the Interior agencies, 50 fire facilities require maintenance or construction. These projects have been prioritized and the funding has been allocated.
The Joint Fire Science Program, a six agency partnership to address wildland fuels issues, was established in 1998 to fill the gaps in knowledge about wildland fire and fuels. The purpose of the Program is to provide wildland fire and fuels information and tools to specialists and managers who make wildland fuels management decisions. The information and tools will also help agencies develop sound, scientifically-based land use and activity plans. The Joint Fire Science Program will fund important new research to explore effective methods of mapping and treating fuels. The program will also direct a significant portion of funding to answer questions about important regional or local suppression, fuels management and rehabilitation needs. The Department of the Interior and the Forest Service recently issued a request for proposals for fire science projects. We expect new proposals to focus on the feasibility of developing a locally-based biomass conversion industry. Other proposals will examine carbon storage, soil compaction, water quality, and habitat as they relate to fuels treatments. We have also requested proposals to determine the cumulative effects of fuels manipulation on fire behavior and severity, wildlife populations, and habitat structure. In addition, on January 18, 2001, we established the Joint Fire Science Program Stakeholder Advisory Group under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). The purpose of the Group is to advise and assist the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior, through the Joint Fire Science Program Governing Board, on priorities and strategies for completing wildland fire and fuels research and implementing research findings.
Page 64 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The National Fire Plan calls for a dramatic increase in the amount of fuels reduction and fuels management work, and much of this work is targeted for completion by independent contractors or through service agreements. In December 2000, an interagency team of contract and fuels specialists met in Boise, Idaho, and developed model contracts and agreements that agencies will use for fuels reduction, rehabilitation and restoration projects, and model grants and cooperative agreements to assist communities and rural fire departments. We created a web site that houses these model contracts so that each field office can access them easily, saving valuable time and effort, and increasing consistency among agencies.
Although fuels management by contract has grown over the last 10 years, there is still a need to foster growth in the number of contractors available. A primary focus of the 2001 appropriation is to facilitate awards to firms that will hire locally. Although the term ''local'' is undefined, managers and contracting personnel will emphasize the use of sealed bid awards to firms that are in closer proximity to project work and best value awards to firms that commit to specific plans to hire local workers.
The interagency contract and agreement team has developed an outreach plan that will:
Locate firms that are not currently active in bidding or proposing on Government procurement for fuels management contracts.
Introduce local independent contractors to the benefits of contracting for this type of work with the Government.
Encourage continued participation by firms that currently have fuels management contracts.
Page 65 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Fire operations
Wildland fire operations include suppression, burned area rehabilitation and fuels management, including fuels reduction in wildland-urban interface areas that pose a risk to people, property and natural resources. To better facilitate these operations, several steps have been taken:
First, a list of communities most at risk from wildland fire in the wildland-urban interface (discussed in more detail later in this testimony) and hazardous fuels reduction projects within and around those communities has been developed. Work is continuing to refine the criteria and the list of communities at risk.
Second, a cohesive fuels management strategy has been drafted that will provide a broad, national framework for Interior agencies to ensure:
Effective collaboration among Federal agencies, Tribal, State and local governments and other stakeholders.
Alignment of all program areas to prevent further degradation, and to work toward the common goal of reducing unnaturally intense wildland fire.
Integration of fire and resource management within and across all agencies.
Third, on February 7th, Secretary Norton approved the release of $4 million to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and $2 million to the National Marine Fisheries Service, needed to perform consultations under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for work identified by DOI. This money will facilitate consultation for critical hazardous fuels treatment projects as implementation of the National Fire Plan progresses.
Page 66 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Finally, both Departments are engaged with the Governors, Tribes, non-governmental organizations and others in an active and open partnership to develop a ten-year comprehensive strategy to implement collaboratively the National Fire Plan and to begin to effectively and efficiently manage the nation's hazardous fuels situation. This ten-year strategy will unify State, Tribal, and Federal efforts to cooperate across jurisdictions, coordinate activities and maximize capabilities to reduce the impacts of wildfires on communities and the environment.
Rural fire department assistance (RFDA)
The 2001 budget appropriation provided $10 million to the Department of the Interior for a new program to enhance the wildland fire protection capabilities of rural fire departments (RFD). In December 2000, representatives from each of the Interior agencies met and developed basic selection criteria for the distribution of these grant funds. Grants will be limited to $20,000 per RFD, and the RFDs that apply will be reviewed for criteria that include:
Having an agreement in place with the State Forester or an Interior agency.
Serving a community with a population of less than 10,000, in the wildland-urban interface.
Using funding only for training, equipment and prevention.
Sharing a minimum of 10 percent of the total cost.
An Interior work group was formed to develop an interagency agreement/contract which will be used by field offices to facilitate the transfer of funds to rural fire departments. A draft of this document is currently undergoing field review and wi