a loss last ..

september industry can be sustainable but the funding required for srs without offsets, and an absence of timber harvesting, it's not.

we have many communities around the country that are dependent economically on the active management of our national forces. as you know, southeast alaska is full of such communities. this is not a budget that they will find it appealing. on the tongass, the secretary of tongass, the secretary of agriculture has directed the forest service to expedite a transition away from old growth timber harvesting torta timber program focused on predominately young growth. we know this is a secretary mandate. it will fundamentally change the way the tongass is managed but there is no mention of the transition in this budget to explain how it will be executed and how it will be funded. and yet that doesn't stop the forest service from moving on ta plan a minute to lock in this transition before this administration leaves office. i think the forest service needs to do what's right and what the talk is advisory committee called for in its recommendations, and that's a comprehensive stand level

inventory to address the uncertainties that exist in the amount, volume and timing of the availability of young growth to support a transition. a successful transition will only be possible if it is grounded in strong science and backed by comprehensive data. as a starting point as a matter of common sense we need a complete inventory before we allow a plan amendment to move forward. in the meantime it's critical the forest service provide enough timber to make marketed in because if you don't do that, we've had this conversation before, if we don't do that there isn't any industry left to transition to. another issue that i know that we will hear a lot of discussion about this morning is how this budget proposes to address wildfire your again, the forest service budget ask congress to fund his 70% of the ten-year average of suppression caused. proposed cap adjustment would pay for the many 30% a as thosen

cost above the 10 year average. this lady has been rejected every year since it was for first to post in fy '2015 budget. ffy '2015budget. there just isn't agreement in congress on whether or how to address what this proposal is aimed at, there goes the fire programs as a percentage of the forest service's annual budget. but what we do agree on and i think you'll probably hear it echoed from all of us in this mode, what we agree on is putting an end to the unsustainable practice of fire borrowing. we know we cannot continue to fight fires by diverting funds from other parts of the forest service's at it. we agree with you. that's why last year we worked so hard to include wildfire provisions in the omnibus. i think they were proposals that were responsible and pragmatic. it included $1.6 billion for fire suppression which is 600 million about the average cost over the past and used it included 545 million for

hazardous fuels reduction and includes 369 for the forest service september program which will help us begin to resume active management. so barring a truly record-setting fire season this year, fire borrowing should not be an issue for the rest of this fiscal year. that gives us some time to advance legislation that addresses wildfire budgeting and how we manage our forests. we need to do both at once. because we know the wildfire problem is not just a budgeting problem. it's also a management problem. high up front cost, long planning horizons and regulatory requirements including what seemed like i'm in the environmental review process are impeding our ability to implement treatments at the pace and the scale that wildfires are occurring. we must work with our state agencies, local communities and the public to increase regardless and install fire breaks to break up the fuel conductivity to keep fire small.

as you know, we have a vested interest in the state to ensure we're doing this right. about half of the 2 million acres that burned in last year's fire season were in alaska. we've already had our second wildfire this year in the state. this is what, march 8, and we've already had our second. so i'm eager to work with you as was the other members of this committee under the committees accountable on this issue. we all the greek we've got some real challenges that will only grow worse if we fail to address them. i look forward to working with you to address these challenges and others. without i will turn to senator cantwell. >> thank you, madam chair, and thank you, chief, for coming today to discuss the budget. as you know, in 2014, washington experienced the largest and worst wildfire in state history, the carlton complex. in 2015, as we were still will recovering from the carlton complex, washington was hit hard again, this time even harder, and experienced the worst fire season in the history of our state. in one month, more than 1

million acres of washington burned. that's an area larger than the size of the state of rhode island. adding to the economic losses and the loss of homes and businesses that were quite tragic, on top of that, firefighters were killed and another was severely burnt in an entrapment. the colville tribe lost 20% of its timber, that's about $1 billion worth of timber. and i spent last summer traveling the state, meeting with firefighters and residents to talk about everything from the evacuation process to loss of their homes, to numerous things that we as policymakers can do to help so that fewer homes burn down, so we keep our firefighters safe and to decrease the intensity of these fires so they can be managed better. i appreciated that the committee and my colleague, senator barrasso, attended a field hearing in seattle to talk about these issues, as well.

all of this underscores the importance of these issues and getting the right solution. we need to better protect our communities and our firefighters from these wildfires. guided by science, we need to invest in and pursue policies that will make our forests more resilient to these wildfires. we need more equipment and more efficient use of existing resources to have a more hasty response at the initial attack to these wildfires. fortunately, as you can see from the chart behind me, as chairman murkowski mentioned, the forest service had a 60% increase in firefighting funding for this year, giving us a window to come up with a more functional solution. we certainly appreciate the work of my colleagues in getting that 60% increase. i know that chairman murkowski's state also experienced one of its worst fire seasons in alaska's history, and we've been working together for months on legislation to get us ahead of

this problem. we've had several hearings where we have talked about different solutions to get different results. particularly, i believe we need a better fire preparedness strategy. better fire preparedness will reduce the risk posed to communities and our forests and will reduce the costs to our nation. some of these estimates are that we could be spending anywhere between $2-4 billion a year for the next several years, given the changes in conditions. so we need to start, obviously, once we get the energy bill done, to focus on this issue and come up with legislation that will help all of our communities. i believe legislation should set key priorities of preparedness. we must increase our communities' preparedness through activities such as hazardous fuels reduction, firewise programs, changing the time and function of prescribed burns, and risk-mapping. we also need to improve the efficiency of our operations by using aircraft when available and improving the safety of our firefighters. and for us in the northwest, it

even means getting a better doppler system just to forecast weather conditions since we have a blind spot right in the central part of our state. we can invest in, and prioritize, fuels treatments that we know make a difference in at-risk areas, such as prescribed burns and mechanical thinning. i hope that we will in the future talk about ideas to be very innovative on this. to me, it makes no sense to talk about what you do after the fires happen, as much as we should be talking about what to do to minimize the risk to everyone, specifically, the $2-4 billion in costs we are looking at each year from these fires. the funding that you awarded last week to groups in washington through the joint chiefs' landscape restoration partnership is a great example of this. thank you. it will help at-risk communities with fire preparedness in kittitas, chelan and okanogan counties. and finally, we can increase our use of technology, including unmanned aerial vehicles and gps, so we can more accurately

see the locations of spot fires when firefighters are sent out. i look forward to working out the remaining details with many of the members of this committee, including chairman murkowski, as we try to bring together legislative solutions here. turning to the secure rural schools program, if i could for a moment, i want to express my concern with the delay in distributing the 2015 secure rural schools payments. these 2015 payments have still not been distributed to communities. the fiscal years of counties in washington begin in a few months. so i can't imagine some of these counties trying to plan their annual budget not knowing how much funding they are going to get from the forest service. in skamania county, the secure rural schools payments represent more than 15% of the budget. these payments pay the salaries of more than half of skamania county's 65 employees. for our rural and timber communities, these are very serious issues. i noticed there was not a lot of

detail in the administration's proposal to reauthorize the secure rural schools program. but nonetheless, i look forward to working with you, the chairman and other interested members of this committee, including senator wyden, over the coming months to extend this crucial program. i also want to thank you, chief tidwell, for last week's announcement, concerning recreation permits. i completely agree that we need to be finding ways to streamline the forest service's processes in order to make it easier for more young people to get outdoors. i know secretary jewell announced a similar proposal across all of interior's lands programs. and it was right here in this hearing room, at last year's budget hearing, when you and i talked about the problems that the ymca of greater seattle was having in getting a permit from the forest service. i am delighted to hear that you and secretary jewell are embarking on what i think is a very significant process to make it easier for young people and groups like the ymca to move through the current permitting process and open the door for hundreds of young people and youth organizations. despite the good points, there

are gaps in this year's budget request. we should work to address these. we can do more to work together on recreational access. small businesses in my state that rely on the recreation economy are confused about some of the priorities in this budget. for example, the forest service is proposing to cut road maintenance and is currently exploring ways to close some major recreational routes in my state. we are going to hear loudly from people on this, so i hope we can ask a question and get some details on that. in the same budget, the agency is proposing a significant increase in new roads. so people are trying to understand the new roads versus the maintenance. but without much of an explanation, we want to understand how we make sure these priorities are met on both sides. i want to take a point of personal privilege, if i could, and conclude my remarks by recognizing the passing of my cousin, shelia cantwell. she was, like many forest service employees, dedicated to

her career. she served 23 years in the forest service, working at the mount whitney ranger station in lone pines. like many other people in the forest service, they do their work and love their job. i want to thank all of the people in the forest service for all of their work and dedication. and i turn it back to you, chairman murkowski. >> thank you, senator cantwell. and know that we share support for the good people who work for us to recognize your family members as well. chief tidwell, welcome again to the committee. thank you for being here and we look forward to your testimony. and i don't know, mr. dickson come if you will also be presenting comment this morning if you are here in supporting roles which we appreciate as the director of strategic planning for budget and accountability fbos forest service. thank you for being you.

with that, if you would like to proceed. >> madam chair, ranking member cantwell, members of the committee. i do appreciate the chance to be able to discuss our twentysomething budget request. our request for 17 is very similar to what we had in 16. which requires us to make some really tough decisions about, with basically a flat budget. this request will allow us to continue to increase our pace and scale to restore the nation's forests and grasslands by treating another 2.9 million acres to restore forest health, resiliency and improve watershed conditions. it allows us to decommission 2000 miles other unneeded roads, restore over 3400 miles of streams and improve the overall function on 22 different watersheds. and with one of the key outputs from this work, 3.2 billion board feet of timber. it maintains our 23 cfl our projects and allows us to

continue to work with the states to expand getting work done to the farmville i was a good neighbor authority. it also allows us to continue to reduce the threat to firefighters and communities by treating 1.6 million acres of highest priority areas of the wildland urban interface to reduce hazardous fuels plus another 400,000 acres that outside. through our state and private programs we are focusing using a landscape scale restoration approach that allows our state for stores to get a look at larger landscapes and accomplish multiple objectives are not having a combination of fund. with our research and development we will continue to do our work to be able to understand what we need to do to be able to restore forests, to address invasive come in second disease outbreaks and continue our work to be able to find ways to expand current markets and develop new markets for would,

be able to make use of the biomass that just has to be removed from our landscapes for us to be able to restore healthy forests. we also provide for an adequate level of thought that fire suppression to deal with fires and continue to suppress fires where we need to edit the same time be able to manage fires in the backcountry. we will have over 21 large air tankers, 300 plus helicopters, over 1000 engines and, of course, our hotshot crews. to think i need to stress, and i appreciate the support from this committee, on finding a solution to paying for the cost of fire suppression. i appreciate the additional money that was provided in fy '16 into the flame account but i think we all have seen what happens with the flame account and what that will help us this one year, it is not a solution. we just have to find a way to be able to permanently stop the transfer, the disruption of our

work every fall. we need to find an alternative to the 10 year average. that just no longer is working. it's not a viable budget approach. we need to i think come to agreement, understanding that there is one or 2% of these fires that occur every year they really are a natural disaster. it should be funded as a natural disaster. so w we're anxious to build work with this committee and work with the house to be able to find a solution so once and for all we can actually stop this disrupted practice and allow us to focus on what the public needs, to be able to give the committees the appropriators some discretion so that they don't have to use up all of their discretion to be able to pay for fires. one keynote from just fy '15 the fy '17, and our proposed fy '17 budget, the 10 year average goes up another $237 million.

that's what we are up against. what drives these costs? the primary driver is -- that along with the changing conditions, our fire seasons are now, researchers at 68 days longer. it to three months longer than we had 10 years ago. those things are not going to change. we can make a difference by reducing the hazardous fuel. we can reduce the severity of fires. we can make it safer for our firefighters, for our communities. it's going to take a combination of fixing the budget and allowing us to then be more proactive and get out in front of us. it's one of the best job creators we have to restore our forests. i appreciate the time you've given me and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, chief of note that the senator cantwell and i had hoped that march would be the month we would really be able to focus on spending a lot of time

both in and out of committee on the wildfire peace. i think we are pushed back a little bit because of trying to get this energy bill across the finish line. i know i certainly remain committed to trying to figure this out, and more than just on a year by year approach. i want to begin my questions with the tongass an issue that i raised in my opening statement about this transition two young growth without first completing a stand level inventory of the young growth. last year, forest service provide approximate 4 million from its budget for the transition framework, about 2 million has gone to start work on young growth inventory studies. i understand about four to 6 million more is likely needed for the studies, and additional inventory work.

the interesting thing is both the timber industry and the little groups agree that this work is needed -- environmental groups -- to basically prove this out. so can you give me information this morning in terms of how much money you're proposing to spend to support young growth of transition, where the money is coming from? because we don't see it listed in the budget proposal, the spiked this being a secretary mandated initiative. >> madam chair, the budget fund will be spending this year to be able to continue to stand level inventory is just part of the funding that we've allocated to the region. so with this -- >> did you take it from other parts within forest service budget allocated for alaska? >> it's part of the funding that we receive from our forest products to be able to do for sustained inventory. so that's part of the budget that region is receiving to be

able to do that work. with a cost share agree with the state of alaska working with the state forrester, to be able to do that stand level inventory so we are developing information project in addition to stand level inventory is the information that's needed to be able to man the forced labor for us to move forward into the future, because this transition is going to occur in the out years. it's not occurring today. but we are moving forward with that and so we will continue to not only did the stand level inventory but we are also doing a quality which studies from a research and develop a and folks so we have a better understanding about where's the potential markets for the future, for the young growth would? that type of wood that will come off of his young growth. in addition where continue to do our study about how to better understand how to thin out these force. we've been doing a lot of commercial thinning. we've had a study for 10 years

and we want to continue to do that so we better understand how to manage these as we move forward. spin let me ask you because i am concerned that if you haven't specifically allocated within the budget funding for these inventory studies, you are just taking it out of the region's accounts, again where we see things shortchanged. we had a conversation just last year about how the recreation funding within alaska, within our region, had effectively been cut back dramatically we knew put it side by side to was going on within the rest of the country. we have asked that be rectified and that's another question i have for you because i can tell that it has been. idea and it speaks to the issue. if you haven't allocated more for this inventory and you have analysis, at least three

independent analysis, that say that the current young growth stands are too small, too few to support a local manufacturing industry, how can you make a plausible determination that we can do this transition? so i'm looking at this, recognizing how long it takes to do this study. the cost of sosa with it, not seeing a specific in your budget. so the question at this point is whether not the forest service will consider postponing this transition into we have a complete young growth inventory and a financial analysis that are completed in order to determine whether or not a transition is even feasible? >> senator, it's essential that we move forward and complete the amendment to the forest glen -- >> but do we have to have the study and the money? >> not for an amendment, no. it's been -- >> did you have an amendment

that isn't based on a strong, sound analysis and the signs attached to it. >> two decades of controversy and litigation around old growth harvest. that's gotten us nowhere. >> i understand that but you still have to know that it is possible to get to a second growth. because we can't make those trees grow any faster that's our problem. >> heart of it is also to develop new markets for second growth and we're working together with -- >> new markets are good but you still have countries that are mature enough to harvest. i'm going to try to be more respectful of everybody five minutes because last year in i was very generous with folks i'm going to try to keep to five minutes would be to everyone's question. i'm going to turn to senator cantwell because i will have another opportunity. >> you mentioned a couple of things we are talking about is getting at the front end of the problem and the costs. you are saying homes in the

urban interface and changing of conditions. i'm assuming you are talking about whether. do you think that an increase in preparedness strategy, prevention, prescribed burns, fuel reduction would yield dividends in this process? do you think that 10 year stewardship contracts have been successful? do we need to look at if we look at scoring and cancellation savings, looked at making them even more predictable than they are? he mentioned product value to what you think of cross laminated at something in that mix of solutions? >> senator, the work we've been doing over the years is making a difference. we have dozens to probably hundreds of examples now where we send out our forests and introduce the threat, made it easier for us to suppress the fires, made it safer for our firefighters. that combination of doing mechanical thinning, prescribed burns is making a difference to reduce the overall threat.

in addition to the stewardship contracts, they have proven to be a very, very effective tool not only to build more trust, more support for the work, but provides that certainty, especially the longer-term 72 new contracts come a provides certainty for operators to make investments, they can get the loans. they know the work is there. it's making a difference. do we need to look to find ways to make it easier or not only the operator but the agency? yes. i'm interested in being able to do that. our biggest challenge right now is to be able to accelerate the work, expand the work in a way. the problems i have and i need to go back to madam chair's comment, i'd love to be other asking for more money. i'd like to more money. i can make a strong case asking for increase in our forest products budget. a strong case for our recreation. but once again in increases of

the forest service in the budget goes into the cost of fire suppression. that is the burden which is no longer bear. >> if i can ask about that because i think what i have is 88% of the fuel treatments were effective at stopping wildfires that burned in fy '15. what i would like is to get something from the forest of service as an analysis of what you think a robust program on preparedness and fuel reduction would look like in reducing what i just again guesstimates because we don't know, we are not weather predictors of everything that will happen. i think with the carlton, to 1000 acres burned up in an afternoon basically, because of high winds, we never know when something like that is going to happen. with 88% effectiveness of few reductions like it would look at what an aggressive program would be and come up with some estimates on how, if we are

predicting between two and $4 billion the year cost to the federal government for suppression, what percentage reduction might we see in the cost? and again i know there's a little bit of guesswork here, because you don't know, but it seems to be we need to get a better understanding of this. do you think that more than 10 year contracts are needed? >> yes. i definitely, i think it's one of the best products that we have. the more of those we can get in place, the better off we are all going to be. it's one of the things we would like to continue to expand. we are doing about 30% of our work through stewardship contracting. i would like to see more of these long-term contracts. >> did you say about clt? >> on clt? >> and yes. >> that's another one of the efforts we have from our forest products allowed to develop new markets. currently we have the four plans

in the united states that are using clt. one of those plans is having to import their material. this is a great opportunity for us to be able to expand, to be able to use the small diameter material to be able to use it like for tall buildings is one of the things we're trying to encourage engineers and architects to use wood and tall buildings. it's the clt, that product is what allows us to build these tall buildings. we are moving forward. a couple examples of those to show people that would is a good tall building material. >> thank you. >> senator barrasso. >> thank you, madam chair. i have serious concerns about the way the forest service is prioritizing its management objectives. the budget mexico the forest service values expansion of costly counterproductive programs much more than maintenance and management of current assets.

funding increases for new roads, land acquisitions while funding for capital improvement and maintenance, timber products remains level or goes down a bit. it seems the forest service should evaluate its priorities. not only would investment in active management and maintenance of current assets lower the future minutes backlog, i think it would help improve experience, health, watershed health and help decrease the incidence and severity of the catastrophic wildfires we are all concerned about. i would if you could explain how yoyou justify adding this staff can do lions, new roads when the forest service has about a $5 billion maintenance backlog of projects and is unable at this point to address these within the current priority structure. >> with our request for lw cf funding which is a close what we received for the last few years, once again its target on acquiring those key properties,

a lot of it to provide access to be able to guarantee access to the public. once again in the cases i have personally dealt with everything we've acquired those lands it reduces our administrative costs and allows us to do much larger projects. we don't have to worry about boundary management. it's really an investment is something the public is very interested and that's acquiring these key parcels. with our roads, budget, request is less than what we received last year. i wish we could ask for more but when you look at finding additional funding into coaching budget to put in the fire suppression, something has to give. that are very difficult choices that we have to make and so it's one of the areas that went down in our request between 16 and 17. he also said were asking for additional money in the cost off fire suppression but that's what they're up against. >> i want to switch to sage

grouse. last september the interior announced landscape scale conservation plans for the greater sage-grouse habitat 11 western states that impacted. given the successful conservation work that has been undertaken in states like wyoming with her special management plans, and so five months have now passed since the announcement and yet to my knowledge agency personal in wyoming still would have guidance documents about how or when the agency intends to implement the plans. it hasn't stopped agency from stating seasonal uses like grazing on local forests may change. how is it possible to agency staff to notify that policy might change when they haven't yet even received guidance document? >> what we are starting out is to have statewide meetings to be able to meet with folks throughout the state and to be able to talk about how to move forward with this.

we have like a two to three year period of time. we want to focus on what other changes we can make, where can we apply the investments we want to make to improve sage grouse habitat? at the same time to work with permit these about how they can modify their operations over the next three years to be able to mitigate some of the impact. the forest service, we're going to put over $7 million into habitat improvement projects and then whether fy '17 budget request we will increase that along with all the money the bureau of land management dispensing. but our plan is able to work with folks to be able to address these issues. your state has done an excellent job to be able to put information together and so we are optimistic that give us a few years, we will be able to mitigate the impacts, improve sage grouse habitat but at the same time ensure the ongoing users are still there. spirit that's my concern in

terms of wyoming the last couple of weekends hearing specific about that, asking me to committed more clearly with permittees and the governor's office because you're right, wyoming has done an exceptional job. it's a place that is done it right and we don't want to compromise the hard work being done in wyoming and other western states. thank you. thank you, madam chair. >> senator heinrich. >> thank you, madam chair. chief tidwell, welcome back to i want to start with a collaborative forest landscape restoration program. and we have a couple of projects in new mexico that have done some really great singing work. it's a tool in the toolbox that's working for all the things we say we want to do on our forest. we are about seven years into the program and am starting to get questions from collaborators about how to continue the progress that we been able to make in these forests. for meals in particular as you know three years is just not a lot of time.

i wanted to ask you to support an extension of cf lrp or maybe a second round of authorization projects and how can communities that are successfully implement these projects make sure that the work continues after the end of the authorized collaborative in -- collaborative project. >> we are in our 17 budget request to continue the funding for the 23 projects we have ongoing. also for our year we want to expand that to be able to expand the program both financially but also to be able to add additional projects. we are to that point where we also need to be thinking about how to extend this be on the original 10 years. it's something that will take legislative action to be able to add additional projects, expand the funding that is a fable but extend this to i look forward to working with the committee to find ways for us to do that. >> i look forward to working

with you to make sure we do it, extend the program, and working with my colleagues. this is a program that is effectively gaining our forests, doing it right. with the committee support and we need to use those tools that are working. on an issue of the more geographically specific to new mexico, in western new mexico, the trails partnership has been working now for many, many years to build out a mountain bike and other trail system in the national forest. after several years of delays we were expecting a final ea on this project that it was further delayed until the spring. recreation is one of the growing sectors in this part of the state, particularly on this forest. the counties out of the partners had committed to working to contribute funding to build trails. we just need to forest service to get a final decision in place

so that this can move forward. can you commit to me today that we are going to see that final ea next month as was expected? >> senator, it's my understand we will get it done thi this ye. i will have to get back to you as to just house and i'm not sure we'll have it done next month. i am confident from what i've been told that we will get it done this year. >> that timeline on this has slipped in slipped in slipped. it's an example of where you have counties, businesses, the local forest all working together on something that has the potential to really build a lot of trust and be an example, a successful example. so it's quite frustrating when these timelines slip, without the facts on the ground changing.

is a little disappointing because this is not the first time i've heard this timeline slipped multiple times now. it's frustrating for the local community. we will follow up with you on that but i have certainly helped that this would finally be done next month. i aware of no reason it shouldn't be done next month. no new information, no major changes in direction. i look forward to following up with you and getting more specifics. i hope that this can happen a little sooner than that. >> i do, too. >> one last thing. evidence of ongoing efforts to address the permitting issue that's something i've got a lot of extremes with as a former outfitter guide myself. can you talk just a little bit about your efforts of there? i think this is incredibly important to streamline this

process and make it easier to get our constituents out in these forests, whether they're doing that with an outfitter guide or a ymca for a nonprofit. >> would have been going through a process that we currently use to authorize outfitter guide. to get a look at how we can do a better job to streamline that, make it a lot easier on our outfitter and got. in addition we're also looking at how we can change our current policies to allow those noncommercial groups to go out without a permit. it's one of the things we are working on in conjunction with the department of interior to make it a lot easier for the noncommercial groups, the church groups, the city groups, et cetera. and to be able to facilitate that to encourage more people to get out. i'm really excited about the progress we're making and we'll start implementing that this year. >> very glad do that.

thank you, madam chair. >> thank you, madam chair come and welcome, chief tidwell. i have said for the construction and maintenance of adequate pipelines, we were talking about pipeline. i'm talking about a different pipeline capacity in the state of west virginia. we've got this shale gas boom and who want to maximize the obvious potential there. i want to ask you about the forest service's involvement for process but as you know a forest service is a coordinating agency. thanks to chairman murkowski, the base includes my provision on streamlining the natural gas permitting which we designate ferc as the lead agency to make it hopefully the process move forward more quickly a morsel to mostly. permit of the process is moving as fast as a good. i hear there are delays and the forest service is part of the problem. some of the problems are getting permission to survey to get on the ground, dated to find a

suitable route, getting to forest service staff to review the data and then provide feedback in a reasonable amount of time. and then to determine if an admin is needed. these are some of the major areas. -- amendment is needed. thus the four service has adequate resources? if not what does the forest service nude? >> we have adequate resources. if we had a larger staff, similar to what we had 10 years ago, we would be able to be more responsive. we would be able to work a little bit faster. we it comes to a pipeline, the issues come from the public. the public's concern about the place become that man is a pipeline. they want to be assured that it's going to be constructed in a way that doesn't cause unnecessary impacts to resource.

it's also constructed a way that it's safe. so we work out, with the companies, and ideal if the companies would come in and let the up front discussions about whether proposed to put that pipeline, and the retention of information we have about the geology, et cetera, so that we can quickly eliminate certain areas that are going to be potentially problematic, certain areas that are environmentally sensitive and to build to route the pipeline around those. that's how the process works and we are making across this -- making good progress. that's one of the things that we're trying to do a better job so that when we hear about a proposal is to quickly sit down with a proponent of people to share our information and to be able to find that right route for the pipeline so we can quickly go through the analysis to be able to make the decision so that they can go ahead. >> and i don't disagree with anything that you said.

i think you said quickly three times. i think that's sort of the basis of my question is the timeliness of the decision to is not disputing that you are problem areas or sensitive areas that you know and precisely would enumerate to the companies and the general public. that's not the dispute. i think it's trying to streamline the process. these are difficult, difficult issues in certain areas. and that's understandable. i would just ask you if, you know, we will follow up with you to see if maybe there's a way to make the process actually move quickly in a timeframe that works. i tried to get timelines into but couldn't quite get them all the way into the bill. my second question is, as you know two-thirds of the nation's forests is in state and private forests. the stewardship program is providing assistance to our state forester's.

90% of those plans are successfully implanted. i guess as a bride part of those plans, the forest owned by individual states provide almost 50% of the nation's would supply. my question is why is the administration proposing to increase agency fuel management and forest management budgets for federal lands and yet decreasing the fund in the stewardship program? >> we are not decreasing that something. we have moved some of the funding that's been in that account into a we call our landscape scale restoration account which allows the state to foresters to be able to use those funds for forest health, stewardship, urban and humidity forestry. those funds together. they can look at larger scale projects and not be limited to just looking at one piece of the problem. the feedback we're getting for state of foresters when i started this program is they like it.

they have to compete for it but the ones that are quick to give you see how they can compete especially to work with her neighbors got their able to compete well for these funds and get more work done. our overall funding stays the same. we just are proposing to add additional funding into the landscape scale restoration account. >> so the restoration is competitively, there's no minimum amount each state forester would get or that nature speak with they compete for that. >> thank you. >> senator wyden. >> thank you, madam chair. chief, this effort of fire borrowing seems like the longest-running battle since the trojan war. we've been at this since before i was chair of this committee. and for colleagues, shorthand, this is about rating the prevention fund in order to fight fire. very pleased our chair senator murkowski is talked about this.

senator cantwell talked about it. i think everybody knows in this room, getting to yes on forestry policy is a really heavy lift. a real challenge and got to have a bipartisan approach. i think by way of trying to get this going this year, chief, how important is it to you to have the bipartisan leadership of this committee get with the bipartisan leadership in the house, start working with all of you, going through the regular order, we are using the committees, bipartisan leadership, bipartisan leadership in the house but we will get out of the cage. we are now i think 20 bipartisan senate cosponsor, 145 bipartisan members of the house, 260 groups. i just want to find a way working with my colleagues, bipartisan leadership of both bodies to get this going.

how important is that you that that sort quickly? >> it essential and it's not just for me. this is essential for the american public. almost every question i get asked, and they are all very good questions, i would have a different answer if we would have been able to exist a few years ago. when i think about the additional funding we've had to keep putting into this 10 year average, and i think about what could we do it with another $237 million to be able to address the recreation needs, the roads needs, to be proactive, to address for hazardous fuels, i understand the difficult this is but it's essential we find a solution. when i asked last year, what happens if we don't, if this keeps going, in 2025, 67% of our budget. laughter when i was a. we were talking 50.

in fy '16, it's 56%. there's got to be a solution. i really appreciate all the hard work that's gone into. i understand it's difficult because it put it was easy would it would've been to a long, long time ago. it's essential we find a way and we are committed to work with the senate, worked with the house to be able to find a solution. your bill is one of those solutions. there's other good ideas out there and we are committed to be able to work without to find something that's a durable. you passed the flame at the few years ago. i was up here applauding that. it looked good. it didn't work for a lot of good reasons, so i appreciate the ranking members -- excuse me, the chairs comment about this needs to be durable. we've been active for a long time so let's find a way to be able to do it so that it isn't something we revisit in a couple

of years. >> i appreciate that answer, and you could indicated that you are open to a variety of approaches. as the chair noted and something i've long agreed with, we've got to have active management. there's no question about that. we also have to find a way to get this done because this makes a mockery out of the forest service budget which is probably a little bit more colorful way decide what you have been saying and other people in the forest service have been saying it for years. we will do everything we can through leadership on both sides of the capitol to work with you and to get this done. i don't senator crapo feels the same way. one last point. use of the rest of my time. i want to thank you for the good work your folks have been doing in portland. they have done some exceptional work that as you know involves tree moss. we've had some really serious public health questions. i live in southeast portland. it's not directly in my neighborhood but not that far away and people are really

concerned about the risk of these toxic metals that relate to invest to work done in the community. it looks like there are some big gaps in epa clean air laws that looked to me like gaps the size of a lunar crater. but none of this would've come to light without their groundbreaking research that you people have done. i'm almost out of time, but are you going to need additional funds in order to continue this research in the future? >> senator, it's just another example of how important our research and develop branch is to be able to develop the science, to do the studies, to be able to not only identify problems but more important, find the solutions. it's one of the things i think it's essential we find ways to maintain our research and develop a budget. when i look at where we were back in the mid '80s we had over 1100 scientists and we have less than half of that today.

our scientists are doing a better job to be working with universities, et cetera, but it just shows you the power and the benefit of science. this is one example to identify problem, but i can tell you it leads us defining the solution, to be able to use vegetation, use our forest to provide a clean air, clean water. that is the solution that will come out of science. >> and know that there's a great deal of commitment for the bipartisan bicameral effort to find the enduring endurable solution. senator flake. >> thank you. thank you chief tidwell. the question was asked, our stewardship contracts and other activities undergone making a difference. i tell you in arizona as using an icing they have. they have made a difference. we have doubts that are still to that wouldn't be otherwise. we have a lot of forest to treat and i appreciate you coming to

the office in january in detailing some of the plans you have to expedite that, a new chief executive assistant, that's important. budget increase for region three and more acreage designated to existing industry. it's so important. can you talk more about the biggest of its kind in terms of projects, the restoration initiative. what plans do we have with existing contracts we have and those on the outside to expedite this forest restoration. >> as you mentioned it was the first of its kind to be able the analysis of an and acres of one document so now have 540,000 acres under the project.

we continue to work with the contractor to be able to expand their production. they did at their best month on record in the simper and indicate they will continue to expand. that's good. but in addition to that we also are moving forward to provide additional acres that need to be treated for other operators in thainthe state so that we can bd on not only the work that's being done by the good earth contractor but also to be able to get additional work going. and at the same time he got the rest of the state to work about. for frey was a good product but it was a piece of the. it's the other challenge that we have been so we look at additional hazardous fuels funding and some changes we've made in our management through cost reductions we need to be able to dedicate some additional funds, but it's going to take multiple operators to be able to address the work that needs to be done in your state.

the changes we're making to be able to move faster, to be able to use the farm bill authorities on other projects and also working with the state potentially with good neighbor authority to be able to expand our current work. >> along those lines of allocation, budget and priorities, the eastern arizona counties organization has discuss with you a detailed list possible next steps in terms of forest restoration on the eastside. how do you plan to use the additional money for region three in that regard? will that be dedicating some of the priorities that outlined? >> yes. it will also look at using some enterprise teams to get work done. it's also to bring in additional people to be able to put the project package together. and also to be able to look at what are some errors we can quickly get into so that we can

continue to provide the wood that the eastside operators need. and at the same time to also move forward on some larger scale projects so that they can see multiple years of work in front of them versus what we'll be able to do in 16 and then have a question of what's happening in 17. it's just another need for these long-term stewardship contracts that if we can get a few going on the eastside, but i think you and i would be having a different discussion. >> thanks. as you arizona has a long history of planning for water needs. we have the colorado river. that's why it's a good percentage of the water that we utilize, one of the most important sources is the runoff, the watershed that we have in our northern forests. we asked the governor and others to put forward some of the priorities for the state. wine is to make sure that we treat our watershed under able

to realize all the benefits that we can from that, all the water, treating arizona's overly dense forest is a big part of that. as you know, healthy forest yields up to 25% more water than an unhealthy forest. given the forest service experience with nepa and solutions and streamlining authorities, how can we utilize that? we have h.r. 2657 the resilient federal forest ask which is intended to help in terms of streamlining nepa. how important is that to you? >> what's important to me is that the authorities we have our authorities that are supported across the board so we can actually successfully implement those. i look at the authority sticking out of the farm bill. the work we're doing with insect and disease, doing with good neighbor authority.

that is allowing us to be able to expand our work because there's a support. those authorities were put together in a way to provide some assurance as to those that have some questions and concerns about forest management. at the same time it allowed us to reduce some of the paperwork, some of the documentation of analysis. so they were very effective. so as we look forward for any authorities, for me it has to be something that provides that level of trust. so that we can actually use it. if you don't have that it creates more controversy and what you will find is that our employees will shot away from those verses to use different authorities. that's i think our challenge as we go forth and once again i think with the work from the 2014 farm bill, the insect and disease designations, those authorities are proving to be very helpful and we are implementing those now. >> thank you.

thank you, madam chair. >> thank you, madam chair. in recent years the forest service budget has been dominated by one thing, the cost of fighting wildfires. two decades ago the forest service spent about 17% of its budget on fighting fires. this year firefighting will eat up nearly half of the agency's budget, plus an additional $800 million has been separately proposed for disaster funding. in large part the cost has increased because of the number and intensity of fires has increased. fire season that lasts about two and half months longer than it did in 1970. last year was one of the worst in decades with more than 10 million acres burning across this country. the conditions that produce more wildfires are well known. chief tidwell, human activities have been driving dramatic changes in our climate. can you describe the impact that

climate change has had on major wildfires? >> center, the first what is the length of the fire season. it's not just because of the fire season is longer. it's another to a half months longer, it first of all allows those fuels to try out that much more because they have another 60 days under the sun. so we not only see fires occurring earlier in the year, but then towards the end of the fire season, our fuel moisture's are much lower. fires burn at a higher intensity, cause more damage to watershed and much, much more difficult to suppress. the other things we're seeing is just hotter and drier weather. you've got drier fuels, longer fire season and then you have just hotter, drier weather. and then the extensive droughts that were having. we've always had droughts in this country but what we are seeing today, the droughts are lasting longer and they are much more intense and so they're

causing even more problems. we sought to the west and we're we're getting some favorable moisture this year, but it will take a lot more than one year for us to recover from those droughts. those are the things that are contributing. there's one other key factor, and that is as we have this warmer environment with less of the really harsh, cold winters, especially early in the year, the insect and diseases are spreading. our interfaces are spreading. emerald ash fork is a good example here in the east. been around here for a while. it stayed in a few states and as we start to see a change in the climate, it's now been able to make it all the way to canada. that's the other problem we're dealing with that the affirmative changes, the climate changes we are seeing are also creating very stable environment for interfaces. >> this is very, very troubling. because the pace of climate

change is now accelerating. chief tidwell, if we can't make significant progress to address climate change, what can we expect about the cost of fires in the future? >> the cost of fires, it's definitely increase. but what's more problematic is, if we can't get out and make more changes on the landscape to reduce the fuels, to be able to do a better job today will do build defensible space we will continue to lose thousands of homes. ..