direction? >> i'll be blunt. we think it's a brilliant solution. it will stimulate markets and create jobs and i think it's a very wise and sound decision. >> i appreciate that. i've been called a lot of things. this may be the first time that my name and brilliance has been associated in the same statement, though. >> i recognize mr. gibbs from ohio. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you for coming in today. in your testimony you talk about the house tiff than and i know up share my frustration and i wanted to ask you a couple things about that. you talk about the duplication, you know, going to get mps permits. first question on that aspect, are you starting to see delays since, you know, this was delayed all through last year

and now the usd an and states have to start implementing it. and then the second part of the question, there was a report a kouk weeks ago, i saw there was a concern that because of this there might be pesticides used that are in a less strength manner. i don't know how else to say it, that we won't get a good kill, evasive species. and i think you mentioned here in your testimony you talk about it can have problems with reestablishing forests and managing areas. do you want to comment on those two areas? >> yes. >> turn your microphone on again. >> the use of herbicide and

pesticides are essential and we have worked with chemicals for years and find some are much more effective, cost effective and are environmentally safe and sound. and duplication of regulation does not seem to make sense. and i guess i answered question number two first. >> you did. that's fine. >> what was your first question again? >> since, you know, the legislation hasn't passed, the u.s. epa has to move forward. i talked last night about the concern that there could be literally thousands of permit application as -- are we starting to see that, a bag log or what's happening in the permitting? >> quite frankly, i cannot answer that question right now. but i can find out and we'll

it's not just pesticides here and for use in the forestry but also in mosquito control disabilities. i think we're going to see some very negative consequences this coming, you know, summer, mosquito season. another prior question of mr. dye and i don't know if mr. might want to get into it. the ninth care lien a. can you explain house of representatives best management practices what's the best workable solution. >> sir, being from the neighboring we have an excellent program in that state and we do

something very similar where we work with the logging community and ensure that bmps are installed. and bmps is basically handling water and small quantities to prevent erosion and sedimentation of of the state's waters. all states, across the nation have varying degrees of this program. but it's certainly that the state forestry agencies have handled for 35 years or more. we recognize the importance of it and we feel that this is being handled and anything further would simply be duplication and added expense. >> would you agree that just going, enforcing -- producers, farmsers, whatever, to go out and get an spn permit.

it even if they were doing the best man but it wouldn't really have a significant. i totally agree with that. >> i'd just like to drop a couple -- sorry. i'd just like to add a little bit to that. in addition to adding cost, it could create unintended consequences. we could discourage a recovering market with forestry. this farm bill had the wisdom to realize that voluntary and center based programs are more effective than the hammer of legislation.

i think it was the cultural regulatory consistency act would be a good solution to remove the uncertainty that hands over the head of forest land owners. ? i fear that if it were enforced as some think it might under the ninth circuit weeshs can have an unintended concentrate. >> it's hard for me to believe that this issue is an issue that, you know, really obviously on forest road is when there is timbering going on in that how

big of a deal is this and should the epa and so on be focused on other areas? >> i think they should shor their emotion elsewhere. it's a nonevent with respect to mobil -- a road by definition is to avoid random come packs. you put your hod rode in a small place, you need those road when is you need to and you promptly discover a reasin tanment things this what the bmos as it results so very much. >> brian: mr. charm, tip ton for

5 seconds. you're running a brilliant subcommittee harring here. i'd like to thank our panel for taking the time to be able to be here. mr. gergen, you spoke to something that speaks to my heart in the western united states. better than 70% of the land is either federal, state and tribal landed. it's creating an incredible challenge in terms of maintaining healthy forests and in terms of the fire threat. mr. burke was noting a bit about water quality issues. if these time of pak pact been if you look at what happened after some of the big fires in colorado to the denver water should, the costs are as strom

om call. in denver they're relying on water from other parts of the state to be clean and healthy. when the trees burn and the soil a birched, it couldn't have tree kpend -- >> would it be accurate to say we do not follow to eso they would healthy for us. so would literally -- when we're talking about protecting our water, protecting our watersheds in the midwest weeks have maybe 12, 14 inches of rainfall that comes in a total year. it's in the best interest of this country rng the environmental protection agency, our states and nation to actively man and these forests. >> there's no question.

i would actually ask the kwong and this committee to even take a look at could we clarify parts of the healthy forest regs racial act to ensure that the forest service can get this work done on an oj right opinion. >> so would you agree we just sold a. >> is the bark beatle an imminent threat? >> the forest service, the blm should abe louing the plex ability to be able to address this properly. and they have the skills to do it. the problem is the process. >> that leads me back to mr. burke when you're talking about regulatory compliance. you'll find this shocking but across the board we continue to hear about overregulation,

duplicitous regulation, which is inhibiting common sense decisions, increasing talk. >> if you think again of the forest as that water shed, it's allowing the water to proceed to streams and livers gently and carefully but also filters it. in our farm clp that are grassy oils kbrar in our forested areas in compliance with many of the farm bill programs, again, not regulatory complains but incentive based voluntary compliance. we are leading forest at buffers under the bmws, which connect

the krsh a private land owners. the help of the forest on fed lands is very important to us because we are your neighbor. if a bug outbreak gets to warring or if there's improper forest management on adjust ent property, there can be fire risk to us as neighbors to federal property. so forest health is important across the board and these farm bill programs are set to do that and should continue. >> great, i appreciate that. mr. schwab, you have some counterparts in colorado that share your concern when it comes to some of the forest contracts. colorado we have 1 million remaining in the state of colorado and it's under receivership. we have 1 thune,000 trees falling every year, create ling in florida oh, y an p mus do you

have have a recommend baegs in so that you can make your business work and i think and we'll be working with often sen. >> i worked with the steward sthiep contrasting system owe but to simplify the process, to make it work for everybody would you super but the biggest hurd that will we're experienced as logger trying to bit on federal contract, is go with and to go threw environmental studies and archaeological studies and there's just the bureaucrat

bei system to go through to get it sold, if you could increase efficiency in the government, bureaucracy side of it, then we could be moving forward. you're taking a resource over here and applying it to needs over there, whether it's road building or fire line creation or even if it's a cost situation of getting beetle kills down and bumper strips around those beetle kills, you can fold that right on into stewardship. so making it simple and giving your foresters on the ground the ability to bible to make a decision and follow through with those decisions will be crucial and able to solve these problems. >> just to jump in very quickly, on the federal side it can take 18 months to get some of these projects done.

mr. burke has these problems in virginia. he told me the trees that i have with pine beetles were at the mill before the beetles woke up pore winter. >> i yield back, mr. chairman. >> i'll recognize the gentleman from plachlt for mr. sutherland. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. schwab continuing on the note from my good friend from colorado, you had mentioned in your testimony that our nation's loggers are in trouble. in a recent study completed indicates we have lost close to 40% of logging capacity here in the united states. i personally know many of these small family-owned businesses and know they contribute greatly to communities wherein employment is hovering between 15% and 20%. we would prefer promoting job creation and chick stability here in the united states.

could you quickly elaborate on the major challenges you face, you know, today in your history. because i know your family business, i know the impact you have on your community and i know it's a sacrifice for you to be here. i mean, what are the top two biggest things you feel are a threat to you in your live live hood if. >> today it's overregulation. we in the forestry side have a tremendous amount of victory, we're spending anywhere from 20,000 to $50,000, peries and what's do -- i'm not getting any

more production because of that piece of equipment and cost. uncertainty. with the ninth circuit court ruling on water run off across forest roads and calling that a point source is as nine. that is causing uncertainty in our industry. where new markets are being developed, they wanting to know what is this increased regulation going to cost me? and the other thing is access to the resource. the congressman from colorado mentioned that he has beetle problems in his forest. well, there are regions of this country where 80% of the land base in rural america is owned or managed by the federal government. we do not have access to those forests today as timber harvesters to be able to manage that resource that doesn't cost this country anything to grow.

it should be putting money into the coffers. i heard another congressman mention in the first panel about where are we going to get money from? how are we going to pay for these federal programs. gentlemen, you have the money growing in the forest right now. it time for us as persons to go out there and harvest and enjoy and to be able to put that. >> we're wanting to money in the treasury. if you eliminate regulation from stifling our industry and you eliminate bureaucracy on trying to cut your -- our timber on federal lands, i think our industry could have a great chance of recovering. >> touche, mr. schwab. mr. holmes, i'm familiar with your neck of the woods.

you have some pretty nice deer hunting up there in the black belt so my family enjoys your area. let me ask you being from alabama, talk about -- we've talked about, you know, the ninth circuit and what has occurred. it seems to me that the epa in many ways produces solutions that are looking for problems. so tell me about your area. i know you're several -- a couple hundred miles north of us but relating to that issue and even piggy back off what mr. schwab has said. >> yes, sir. one of the other things that i would like to address that mr. schwab said that i think would be beneficial to you is in the south we also have a pine beetle. we have the southern pine beetle in the south. and it has devastated us back in the 80, really devastated us. >> yes, sir.

>> and he was talking about the cost of his equipment and getting things done. in florida we had little pulp wood trucks and in alabama we had the little pulp wood trucks running around with people that would southern pine beetle and i'm wondering what's going to happen because we've already missed one cycle of pine beetles in the southeast. we are due for another big slam. and what's going to happen when you call up mr. schwab that's got to bring a half million dollars of equipment to come in and cut 20 acres of pine beetle infestation? he's going to laugh at you. >> right. right. >> and i'm very worried about what's -- what is going to happen now, because we had -- we had small bases that could go in and cut out these areas and ten to that. and we don't have that now.

and it's going to be something to look at. but as mr. burke said, you know, our log roads, i have 4,000 acres of timber on my farm, the whole family's got about 18,000 acres of timbered land. we maintain our own roads. when we cut timber, we try not to have large timber sales. we take out a retainer up front, they pay us an amount of money to make sure that our roads are re-established, water bars are put back in, if there are any stream crossings disturbs, they're to be put back the way that they were. we can handle this in -- being with the water conservation districts, we speak a lot of being locally led, and this is

locally led, but also a voluntary movement. with us having best management practices, having smz guidelines to go on, i see this as a nonissue. >> right. yeah. many of us do as well. is that okay, mr. chairman? >> very briefly to echo this point, you've made excellent points of overregulation in the ses, the chief of the forest service, the chief forester said that voluntary and some cases manner to are doing the job. i would be happy to provide the committee with na information. >> without objection. >> i'd be asked that be added to the record. >> absolutely. i think the real issue here is national alliance of forest owners estimates the costs could be almost $6 billion if this was a regulatory action that came down from epa. we know it's not necessarily

epa's fault, courts are overzealous, et cetera, but $6 billion spending on improving forest habitat for wildlife, improving it for people, for water quality, there's much better use of money than on this regulation. thank you. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you. one final question, actually, for all of the panelists who would like to weigh in on, the purpose of regulation, and the impact of overregulation, i guess is what my question is. we talk about healthy forests and you have to manage a forest for to be healthy, timbering, dealing with the fire load, preventing wildfires and managing the invasive species that have been mentioned here today. you know, so whether it's overregulation is related to being declared as a point source, regulation in terms of

road -- the 9th circuit ruling with roads or overregulation in general, you know, we've talked about jobs, we've talked about economic impact, those type of things. i want to focus -- with my final question -- a healthy forest that has to be managed to be healthy, how devastating is overregulation to having healthy forests in this country? >> mr. chairman, it's very devastating because we have proven this industry as a whole nationwide has proven that we can create our best management practices ourselves, we can police ourselves. in florida, where i'm from we're at 9% compliance to the best management practices we put in place ourselves. we don't need the epa to tell us that our air quality coming out of our equipment that we're using to harvest the forest where the air is the cleanisterest is too dirty. we don't need the epa or 9th

circuit court telling us that our roads that -- that rain is a point source pollution running off a road, it's insane. it is -- it is -- what it's going to cause is the economic advantage of going in here and doing the first-time thinning or doing a clear-cut on a stand that needs to be clear-cut because it's beetle infested or whatever it is to regenerate new growth, it's not going to be economically advantageous for us as an industry to do this. the forest would continue to continue to fall in disrepair, fire hazards happen, the water quality will go down. overregulation is what is stifle wag we're doing as an industry. >> go ahead, mr. owens, please. >> just to follow up, again, on what mr. schwab said, you know, about 30 years ago i was in

pierre county with an 8-year-old child, going on a logging road, and i had a piece of ground flagged and my son says, daddy, what are you going -- what's going on? i said, son, i said, we're going to clear-cut this track of timber right here. we were having infestation of bugs, we lost a good many of the pine trees, a lot of them were over 100 years old from old fields that had grown back up into trees. he starts trying, because that's one of the places he liked to hunt he killed his first deere when he was 8 years old. trees are just like people, and i said, we all have a lifetime. and to maintain a healthy forest and to maintain the beauty and the aesthetics and the wildlife that you want to see sometimes we have to remove some of this.

i've seen it -- i've been to alaska and i've seen the beetle outbreaks there and i've been to colorado and i've seen the outbreaks there. we have got scientistic proof, research done, that shows that if we can keep the understory removed out from some of the forest and keep a thinning on some of these trees, that we have a healthier forest that provides abundance of wildlife, abundance of water quality, air quality, and everything else. i agree with mr. schwab. why can't we do something about using that -- those monies that we, as americans all have, to take carry of the needs that we have taken -- that needed to be taken care of and also have a healthier forest? >> very good. go ahead, mr. burke. >> let me just share an example of where i think regulation with

respect to roads would be negative as opposed to a positive approach. if you required a road permit, the cost would be significant. it would not benefit the land directly and you'll see why in a minute. it would simply be an additional cost, which would make the cost on land owners and the cost to the loggers more to conduct healthy for evidence harvesting and thinning. compare that to the voluntary incentive-based leverage, if you will, when farm bill money is put into hands of private land owners. the private land owner adds his or her additional money, sweat equity, and they do practices which will last for a long, long time. those benefits given significant leverage effect and provide much better forest protection, provide better water quality protection, better fire management. so that's a much better approach than to regulate. >> mr. dye, did you have

comments? >> regulations are meant to protect us from something. but if you look at the list of activities in the forest, and what is regulated, it has gone 180 degrees the other way, because of regulations, we have increased forest fires, increased bug outbreaks. worsening economy, uncertainty from those that want to invest in businesses, which leads to declining employment. so regulations to protect ourselves from -- has gone 180 degrees of its actual intent. >> very good. i want to thank all of the members of the second panel. i want to thank you for your expertise, your experience, and your endurance for joining us