is better coordination between the forest service and fema on communication responses during these natural disasters. if they are becoming worse, we better memorandums of understanding that require communications be set up right away so that our communities can continue to deal with these disasters. i know we can get a head of these issues. we need more hazardous fuel inner urban the interface. and we need to figure out how to -- to offset these costs. i look for to the testimony. i am eager to hear from the witnesses on more prescribed fire burns. to address fresh ideas on how to fund service efforts to protect our communities. senator wyden is going to introduce legislation on this. i'm happy to look forward -- i'm looking forward to discussing that. the scientist telling us wildfires are not hating the

same way they have in the past decade. and will talk more about why this is. make sure we discuss what our response is going to be to this evolving problem. weekrchers just last published a major scientific report. the report made it clear if we are ever going to get ahead of the problem the forest service needs to respond to wildfires in a fundamentally different way. a self reinforcing cycle of counter effective actions. the same keep using tired approaches we have for the last 100 years. we need to make sure we are focused on getting different results. common sense tells us our response these to be modified now that the problem is different. the service report does a great job tell -- great job summing up what the report needs to do. altering the current trajectory will require a total system transformation. states thebluntly

status quo increases losses we suffer from wildfires and significantly affects the ability to meet the core mission. we need new solutions. my chairg to work with and colleagues over the next few months to find those solutions. need to do what we can to reduce the probability of catastrophic fires. second we need to fight larger wildland fires, which are becoming very expensive. since 2000 the federal government has spent 20 $4 billion fighting the large wildfires. we need to treat large wildfires differently in our budget.

we need to make sure these fires and the management on the ground is being done to ensure accountability. we need to make sure we are incentivizing the right kind of cost savings in the budget. importantly, the assistance -- the assistance needs to show up quicker. it needs to be tailored to these issues. the government is responding to a new type of disaster where events are blowing up in a greater degree and reaching communities in unbelievable speed. have a more proactive upfront coordination with federal agencies. just in delivering real-time communications and making sure the resources are actually on

the ground. the fire season forecast came out last week. i hope people are ready to help and i hope fema will work to stage things like generators and equipment that will be closer to these areas so they can respond more quickly. thank you for this hearing. i look forward to the witnesses and without committee to try to institute some new approaches. >> thank you, senator. let's get started with our witnesses. we may just keep powering through. i may take a pause in the hearing. i would like to welcome our witnesses before the committee. we appreciate your leadership at the u.s. forest service there. we have dr. stephen behind.

he is a professor at the school of life sciences at arizona state university. dr. sharon hood is with us this morning area a postdoctoral researcher at the college of forestry and conservation. great to have you with us. finally bruce, the director of water rights and contracts at salt rivererever -- project. if we can begin you with your five-minute comments, and to each of the witnesses we ask you limit your testimony. in your full statement will be included as part of the record. your commentsd to and the opportunity to ask questions. >> thank you for giving us the

opportunity to be here, especially with other panel members to be able to talk about our upcoming fire season, but things we're currently doing and the things we need to continue to do to a trust this issue. shared,ave already predictions for this coming fire season are generally what we had definitely a much more active fire season out in the west. as the summer develops this will continue to expand to the partsest and over in two of utah, idaho, and montana. cannot stressd, i enough that fire seasons we are seeing today, these are the normal fire seasons. we can look out and say they are more active a decade ago. it is important to understand it today this is the fire season we are going to continue to have. we have the resources. we need to make sure we have an

adequate number of large caretakers to respond to these fires. we already have exclusive use. can bring up another 200 helicopters if we need that. we will have our firefighters, our type one cruise. 900 engines for the forest service. we have the airplanes from the national guard and air force reserve ready to come on when we hit those search times of the year. when i look at the millions of acres we have been treating and the combination of managing natural fire. fire, ourcribed treatment primarily in the urban interface, we are making a difference. in our fy 16 budget falling for that same level.

it has less impact on the watershed and less impact on our communities. i want to thank the committee for our budgets issue, the considerable increase. we can increase our ordination with states and other partners it to be able to get additional work accomplished.

the wildland urban interface, not only are our fire seasons theyr, hotter, and dryer, are a another 60 through 80 days longer than what they were 15 years ago. we have only 15 million acres that we have to deal with. before we can even take on really suppressing these large wildfires. we continue to suppress 98% of the fires we take initial attack on. that doesn't include the ones we manage in the back countries for the benefits. i need to stress that. even with 98% fair is that 1% to 2% that escaped that we see on the news.

once again i appreciate the support for members of this committee to find a solution to deal with the fire suppression. is a 90% chance we will not have enough money, we will have to look at transferring funds. tired some of you to our of listening to me talk about this. it is time for us to find a solution and be able to move on and stop this disrupting practice of shutting down operations in the fall and to be able to transfer for money. i think it is no question that of ourhis concept of 1% fire should be considered natural disasters. the 10 most costly fires equals which is0 million, what we were talking about, 30% of the costs. thank you for having the letting me -- for

have never did is he to be here. but also to find a solution to dealing with the cost of fire suppression. thank you. thing were is one would agree on as members of this committee is we have to figure out a way to stop the fire borrowing. as we talk about other things that go on within the forest and admissions, it comes back to the fact that you do not have the funds if you are not using all of your budget. we will put a little pause here. andnute and a half there back. we stand adjourned for three minutes.

we will come back to order here. that is three minutes in senate time. we apologize for that. what we turn to your comments this morning ago we thank you for your indulgence. >> thank you for the opportunity to speak. call it a strategy of resistance. it sought to eliminate threats before they could become serious. that doctrine failed because it excluded could fires.

which leads to a consideration of what might the next 50 years hold. to berategy seems congealing in the west that we might label resilience. it seeks to make the best of the hand we are being dealt. let me consider the strategies in turn. there remains an old guard that returns to the former order. there are progressive thinkers who want to upgrade that tradition into an all hazards emergency service model. or the national coast guard for the interior. if your primary land uses urban or exurban.

if it retains the strength of fire suppression it also magnifies suppression weaknesses. restoration is upgrading its mission from the simple hope that a prescribed fire may substitute for wildfire. now it embraces complex withborations, supplements other treatments, and tries to operate on the scale of landscapes. the vision has proved costly, not only in money but political and social capital. it requires tens of millions of acres out of whack. resilience. in the west the strategy is emerging that expect -- that accepts we are likely to get ahead of problems coming at us. allows for the management of wildfire lands to

aift, where feasible, to thames of more direct control and containing outbreaks. there were some fires that bold away from the moment of ignition and some that threatened people right from the onset. many fires opportunities to back off and burnout. elsewhere they will try to pick places and draw boxes. long urged by critics. it can look like a mashup and the outcomes will be mixed because the fires are patchy. some will burn more severely than we would like, some may hardly burn at all. the rest will likely burn in a

range. in such burnouts may well be the future of prescribed fire in the west. to push theing analogy too closely we may like the resistance strategy to iraq. and the resilience strategy to paper. time and place one trumps another. all three. we need rocks around our prize assets communities. we need scissors to buffer , and we needurns paper, because the ideal could be the enemy of the good, and a mixed strategy that includes boxing and burning. it may be the best we could hope for. >> dr. hood, welcome.

dr. hood: thank you for inviting me here today. previously i worked as an ecologist prior to running -- prior to turning my phd in 2014. across our country. today my testimony focuses on my showing mount pine needle. also it is not a substitute for fire. it is a type of fire that burns through the forest understory and causes mortality to larger trees. increasedf fires has composition in many areas. we continue to actively suppress the majority of wildfires today.

we must allow more fires to burn -- to achieve the goal of allowing more fires to burn we must accept the critical role of fire as the natural ecological process. low severity fire increases -- --se docs are used by trees entries with more dogs are likely to survive attacks. when low or frequent severity defensese removed, declined over time. low severity fire at as a natural agent to reduce forest density. this also promotes an increase in defenses and increases were -- increases resistance to mountain pine needle.

a long-term study site? 10 a creative these treatments were originally designed how to effectively restore the forest and increase resilience to wildfire. they were implemented five years before the outbreak began. duct increased with the burn only treatment threat the length of the study. differs markedly between treatments. in the control, 50% of the ponderosa nine -- ponderosa pine was destroyed in the outbreak. high levels of douglas for both the control and burn only treatment, due to 100 years of fire exclusion, coupled with a high pine mortality, has reduced resilience beyond the ability to return to a pine dominated system.

a forest type where there is strong scientific support. further research is needed throughout the u.s.. i found thinning with or without pinealbed fire to a outbreak, groovy reducing tree mortality. term, thinning with prescribed fire created the most resilient forest by stimulating tree defenses and the beneficial effects of -- these affects a fire cannot be replicated. very useful and necessary restoration and management toolkit of is crucial for long-term maintenance of low and byelevation fires

stimulating defense that can entry -- that can increase survival. there is no one-size-fits-all approach. aimctive treatment should to increase forest resilience through a multitude of stressors and foster conditions that allow wildfires to burn under more natural intensities. all my study is just one example, these findings are supported by other scientific literature, showing the critical role of fire and creating a resilient ponderosa pine forest. thank you for the opportunity to testify here today. >> good morning senator murkowski and members of the committee, it is an honor to be here to share my experience with you today. i have been involved with fire .y entire life a fire behavioral analyst for 15

.ears i like to think of myself as a student of fire. i learned in southern california that we will always have extreme fire, we will always have a drought. ignitions,ways be and ignitions are plentiful and random. the driver of the entire system is fuel. doesn't burn very well and doesn't burn very fast, even under extreme conditions. conversely burns extremely hot, extremely well, and extremely fast. the age of the fuel at origin fires in san diego county since 1950 -- the average age of the fuel where the big fires start is 71 years. fire starting in fields less than 20 years old

had become major fires. the fire problem has gotten worse. california is not a good spot to be in the lead. what we have seen in the past 50 years is becoming the norm in the western united states. i see two main issues with costs. we recognize the fire problem is the fuels. we are now treating to -- treating close to 2%, which is a 50 year rotation cycle, which means as we are doing a great job we are not even getting close. our fuelo be doubling treatment. it has to be mechanical and fire. the fire will not thin them. it has to maintain with fire.

we need projects picked by forest service, multidisciplinary teams, not just fire but forest health people, sociologists and risk assessment, to pick the ones that are going to give us bang for the buck. we need to spend our dollars wisely. san bernardino national forests is on its or tier of a one-year -- on its fourth year of a one-year document. people are gaming the system. shoppingt building a center or freeways. we are mitigating damage to the forests. the budget process, i pointed out they do a plan for state and local tribal governments, when the fires need a certain

criteria for you fix up 75% of the cost. they can do that for the federal agencies also. we can reduce the cost of fires by managing them better and i think there is a technological aspect. we need to have the guy on the ground laptop computer that can predict where the fire is going and measure the results of what they are doing based on that. we need to know where the fire is. we don't know where the fire is because we can't see through the smoke and we can't map them. they need to map them in the first day, not three days later. that kind of technology is going to go along way to managing things like managing the fire than managing the air assets. we can model where the aircraft is good and effective.

we can let the fire managers make those kinds of decisions based on sound science. we need to know where the fire is, where the firefighters are, and the people were supervising those fire writers need to have a nap in their hand and shows them where everybody is on the ground. just knowing where they are doesn't help. i appreciate the opportunity to comment today. >> welcome to the committee. >> ranking member cantwell and

members of the committee, thank -- for the opportunity over 100 years the salt river -- tot has provided a fulfill this responsibility yes rpa operate seven dams and numerous groundwater wells. on thealso dependent health of a 13,000 square mile watershed to provide a renewable protectingy and these headwaters has been a priority since its founding. watershed protection efforts focused on setting aside lands in the federal forest system to ensure development and timber harvest in a way that preserved a sustainable water supply for arizona. state of unhealthy

these national forests are causing catastrophic wildfires that threaten sustainability and quality of drinking water for millions in arizona. the situation was not unique to arizona. we are working with the national water resource association and others who are facing similar threats. catastrophic fires have severe and long-term impacts to watersheds, which are felt far beyond the area impacted by the fire. firee the low intensity the aftermath for the severe fires we are experiencing as a result of the unnatural force conditions increase sentiment loads and debris that restored -- and reduce storage capacity and affect the predictability of runoff.

these treatment facilities have been handled to increase levels at the costs of 100 -- of the cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. to bew exactly what needs done to mitigate these impact. we need to quickly too thin overcrowded and unhealthy forests. we need to reestablish a force product industry to carry out treatments and create an economy around forest restoration. and we know we need public policy at all levels of and invest in forest restoration. srp is actively involved in efforts to expedite forest restoration by committing resources in all of these areas. we started a northern arizona forest fun in partnership with the fourth foundation. we are also involved with the project of four service and the

national forest foundation to watershed.4,000 acre the projects we are currently involved with highlight the need to improve federal policy to more efficiently made progress in restoring our forests and protecting our watersheds. we greatly appreciate the priority of the forest service and the department of interior have placed on this project. however despite the significant funding and staff dedicated to undertaking the project is expected to take at least two, if not three years before anything can be done on the ground.

--written testimony includes as the committee continues to address fire suppression budgets, it is also important that the provisions include a dedicated secure funding stream for forest restoration in order to promote the certainty needed. we need to rebalance the requirements placed on these kinds of projects to reflect that reality. the problems, the solutions, and the consequences are clear and i look forward to working together with this committee on our shared goals of protecting the forests and watersheds our communities rely on and enjoy.

thank you again and i look forward to answering any questions you may have. >> thank you to all of our witnesses here this morning. after the chiefs testimony, we all agree we need to the ground how to stop this fire borrowing. when we talk about how we deal with treatment, how we deal -- how we work to mitigate the risks, it takes dollars. when you spend dollars on the suppression, it doesn't leave you much room for further opportunity there. the concern is the suppression costs are out of control. i know you are very supportive of a wildfires cap adjustment. from what we heard about everybody here this morning. it is not necessarily the silver getting costress

of wildfire suppression spending. how we deal with that is something i would like to focus on this morning. to a certain did extent you have described the hazardous fuel reduction projects that are critical to protecting the ,atersheds that you have noted or just other areas there. -- we know you make what it is we need to do and yet we can't get to that point. three years to possibly implement -- we thought a lot about this analysis paralysis around here, where we have endless process.

can you speak to this? are we in a situation where we are more worried about checking the boxes here and making sure a criticale through process or are we acting with they thinkf urgency you have heard from everybody here at this table with regards thatese critical projects will help us from the preventive perspective. i think we would agree if we can prevent these in the first place we can get a hold -- we can get a better handle on the suppression costs. what is our problem with the process that seems to be slowing things up when we are dealing with treatment of hazardous fuels? >> madam chair, one of the issues we have dealt with in the past is needing to do a large enough project where it actually makes a difference. that is where we moved to take in a more landscape scale approach.

forestpast the restoration act, which you passed a few years ago, which gave us a streamlined process, was a very good tool. the problem with that is it was limited to certain criteria. when you look at larger landscapes, they can use that authority on the piece of the project, but it wouldn't apply to these tens of thousands of acres. with the farm bill authorities, it gives us more flexibility to be able to use looking at one action alternative and no action , so we can streamline the process. senator murkowski: there were additional authorities ever give him to do exactly as you have are these additional authorities being utilized at this point?

are they making a difference? beginning to utilize the authority and the farm bill. we have projects going forward with the bat. projects will be implemented and using these new authorities. we often take a year of planning before we implement. you will see those projects being implemented. center murkowski: is there anyway to expedite that in your view? >> we would prefer full-scale restoration. at this point we decided to move forward with the healthy restoration act green of -- act.

service has solidified hearsay and understanding the types of fires that occurred on this watershed, where the endangered species are the extent of the watershed itself on those areas that are highly susceptible to wildfire risk. they have to go through an entire dis process tot is essentially designed essentially avoid litigation. we know what the issue is. we know these forests need to be thinned. we know the greatest threat to the species designed to protect his catastrophic wildfire. unfortunately we have to go through the same process in another two years before we can ultimately get in there. >> we hear this story so often that we are attempting to do is avoid litigation and in the meantime lightning strikes and we are paying the costs. cantwell: thank you to

the witnesses. thank you for your testimony and your work in this area. about thinning and prescribed fire created the most long-term resilient forest disturbances, i want to drill down on that because i think that was a culmination of your conclusions. the budget year after year, you only request 300 million. is that sufficient funding needed for those highest priority areas, what do we need to do to get a more realistic number? wanted to ask you about -- sorry to put this all out there. some you can give me in writing.

this whole issue of do we have the best communication we need for communities during cease-fires? fl --ing these fighters during these fires. do we need a get a memorandum understanding between you and fema to make sure these -- you are busy fighting the fire and you are trying to communicate, but if the communication infrastructure doesn't exist anymore than how are we making sure we aren't waking -- aren't waiting till weeks. third, does your agency have a permanent agreement with the faa on an application on drones? i would like to see this as an issue where every state -- wants

to know whether the drugs can be applied to get a better understanding or mapping. i would like it to be a natural so we don't have to laze. -- don't have the laze. don't have to laze. ys./on't have the >> at team has been put to explore the challenge. the potential there is there is so much there that is available. we have to be up to prioritize it so it can quickly be a to use that. we are trying to move forward this year when we are working not only with faa but also with the state work closely to be able to try to use this information. mapping is one of the simple -- and looking for hotspots especially outside the line.

>> you will do a permanent applications he won't have to keep going back and forth all the time? >> we will be working in that direction so it is automatic. under these conditions we can use the aircraft. your question about what happened with the aftermath iting the carlton fire, really stresses how we need to do a better job with our preplanning. based on that experience we need to do a better job to deal with things like communication, we need to make sure communities have an emergency communication system that is in place so that when that happens, whatever it takes we are able to maintain communications. when i am up there visiting with , one of thers

things they stresses they didn't know what was going on and didn't have any way to contact anyone to i can't imagine that level of stress that would come from that situation. place, we get that in need to do a better job than we have been with utility companies. they are always great to step right in and ready to roll. but we need to include them in our preplanning and -- preplanning meetings with the next carlton happens we will have the fire to deal with but at the same time we can provide a better level of support to be at tomunities, to eliminate the impact and get their services restored faster. fema definitely least be working with us. solutionpart of the and we will continue to work with them. murkowski: -- >> this is after acres of earned.

fires were still all around them. without any communication, with the broadband burned off, no one had any way to communicate with people other than trying to go through the town. this taught me that communities need to be able to get mobile broadband units more easily deployed as opposed to waiting two or three weeks for the state to apply for a fema declaration. this is what we are seen because of the impacts of the drastic events of weather, we need to say we need a better education response in the aftermath and figure out how to do that for these communities.

am i share your support for solution to the wildfire challenge. i think we have great broad-spectrum agreement but some thing has to change in the way wildfires are funded. i'm hoping we resolved that this year. your offices providing information that came -- a very high risk of wildfire most of which are managed by forest service. that is one in four federally controlled acres in montana. i was further told nearly 2 million of these acres are most in need of treatment because they are near populated communities or the watersheds. unfortunately i was informed before service did has to treatment on only 52 thousands of those acres in the last fiscal year of million that are needed.

i have no doubt the work that was done there was important, but the current piece of treatment is simply not acceptable. certainly our communities, watersheds, our communities, watersheds, wildlife habitat, access to recreation. all these critical treasures are at real risk to wildfire. ago congressyears provided enhanced authority to reduce hazardous fuels. thf are a clearly has shortfalls. what are the barriers in your view to getting more done there? >> the healthy forest restoration act continues to be a good authority for us. it is limited based on the criteria required. hazardous fuele components.

we really need to be looking at higher landscape, the only restoration work. next to the community, but what we need to do in the entire watershed. we look at the healthy forests restoration act. now farm bill authorities allow us to use similar type of they also address is a totaldisease landscape approach. of looking at not thousands acres, we just have to be looking at tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands at a time. place for thee in next 10 years, we can be the to get in there and do the work thoseeeds to be done to are the things that are going to make the difference.

>> i truly appreciate your commitment to finding solutions. forward to further discussions with you to achieve that goal. i wanted to ask dr. hood question. first of all welcome to our nations capital. it's great to have the perspective of someone who is certainly the challenges facing our national forests in montana. your testimony focuses largely on the role of fire and firemen. my children are seeing now. now i know your research was primarily focused in the rocky mountain region montana has and based on your

research, how could increase to improvent be used to the health of forests in montana and reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire? >> in order to increase the , thinningour forest should be a good management tool . thatsearch also shows having prescribed fires and low severity naturally occurring wildfires stimulates tree defenses. having that combination of thinning and prescribed burning, and then areas that we have to consider allowing and allow fires to

arn further perpetuates healthy force that could be resistant to bark beetles. i think we are going to have some level of bark beetles. they are need of insect's to our forest. doing treatments and promoting a patchy landscape can certainly help reduce the severity of those outbreaks. >> chief, you and i have talked before about the role of climate change in all of this. about the removal of hazardous fuel. one of the ways we could

possibly -- i want to ask anybody about this -- to remove more hazardous fuel and to be in a way that costs less is by monetizing that biomass. and to by using it, burning it, andcreate electricity combined heat and power, which is something that the chair and i have talked about. there are lots of areas in alaska. biomass has a zero carbon footprint. a we can solve a lot of things at the same time. there are obviously a lot of challenges to this in terms of

.emoteness we are talking about the wildland urban interface, so there are obviously areas where this is near a populated area. what are some of the challenges standing in the way of more utilization of this tremendous resource? and what are your recommendations for overcoming these challenges? >> the challenge is to be able to demonstrate it is economically viable. make the investments to do the business case analysis.

we need to continue to use our authorities where we can subsidize and actual transportation of this biomass material. we need to continue our research, not only to increase the efficiency of the systems but also things like pellet production, to be able to find a more efficient way to increase the btu, to increase the economics on it. we also need to factor in the consequences if we don't. what is this cost avoidance? if we can capture a way to really consider that, i think it will help the economics of this. forests,ng out these the reduction of risks has occurred. and by using the material into a root -- into a product material

or for energy consumption, if we could factor in the cost avoidance benefit, i think the economics would sell itself on this. we have to continue on demonstration projects and also have a guarantee supply of biomass. if you are going to make an investment you need to have the bank loan money. we need to use our stewardship authority where we can show there is a 10 year contract. those are some of the things we need to continue to work on. >> i think there is a cost to not doing this. i we do in the pilot projects, are we exploring this enough? doing need to do anything here in this committee and congress

to facilitate overcoming this challenge and the more use of , how we canenergy make this a piece where you have the ability to do hazardous fuel. >> thank you for the question. plan -- thatomass is the fact to ensure that you have material at that plan. we need to make sure there is material at the biomass plant. there is another added value benefit, by going in and thinning these forests there is avoided release of carbon.

when you have these catastrophic for -- catastrophic wildfires -- >> electricity rather than going up into the atmosphere. every time you testify -- i bring this a little further but i want to keep exploring fat, especially with the chair. >> good to see you. we have talked on a number of and i appreciate the testimony from those who know so much on this. i appreciate working with chief tidwell. knowledge thea positive developments we have seen related to forest management. last month all of us were -- the chief

talked about large-scale management rather than a couple of thousands of acres here for the paltry 3000 acres that have thus far been treated is emblematic of the pace. we have to do it on a much larger scale. and very high risks. we have to move on a larger scale. all recognize achieving reduction and hazardous fuels as critical. i like some of the proposals that has been put forward.

by way of distracting these , we are putting the hazardous fuel reduction on hold. we know all too well in arizona. we were also increasingly creating challenges for maintaining a healthy watershed. for all these reasons i am obviously supportive of efforts to restore and resolve the fire borrowing issue. when the forest service and the --y exceed anticipate a bull wildfire suppression costs, there is no doubt wildfires are disastrous. they have a tremendous impact on

communities that drive their livelihood from national forests on water quality and wildlife. the disastrous nature of wildfire make us lose sight of many of the costs of fighting fires. let me be clear of that, many of the costs of preventing and fighting fires can be intensive paid it, like municipal fire for expected personnel. i believe we can do much the same here. significance of the problems that wildfires present. disagreements some in dealing with these anticipate , i would support efforts to recognize that at some years there will be large fires the tribe the wildfire suppression costs well above

those that were anticipated. i think limited budget cap adjustments to allow the agencies to fight fire without --rowing from other sources fully anticipated as a realistic cost of suppression then that would apply. we would all like to see sufficient funds on the front end to be put into suppression activities as well. it requires dealing with preventable symptoms as well as resulting disasters. what i disagree with is the simplythat we should

move 30% of those anticipated costs off budget cuts it is convenient or because it creates additional flux ability for increased spending under the statutory audit caps. aimed for one disaster while furthering our current fiscal disaster doesn't make sense, and we need to be realistic here about what we can do.

think this is a key part of what this committee will be grappling with. it is exactly how we deal with this. i, too, hope we can find that agreement here. we have got to be realistic in terms of what we are facing, and it has to be a solution that is more lasting than what we're dealing with right now. which is kind of interim, stopgap, and again, borrowing that hurts everybody. know that we will be working with you on this. senator heinrich. thank you veryh: chief, at the beginning, you apologize for bringing up fire far away. once again, most of us would say don't apologize, and keep bringing it up until we find a workable way forward on this, because it is sort of the elephant in the room here. we have got to fix that of all

of this one where the other two be able to really scale these projects up -- one way or the other to be able to really scale these projects up. i want to ask you, if you go into little more detail about the kinds of projects you are doing and the partnerships. i know in a new mexico we have started to look at this and we have a couple different things going, one in the santa fe watershed, the santa fe waterfront, which uses contributions from water uses to match up with forest service funding, and treat the watershed above santa fe in addition, the rio grande the water fund is doing a similar partnership on a much larger geographic area. the rio grande's watershed south of colorado and new mexico. if you would just tell us a little bit more about those partnerships and how we might be

able to learn from those things and scale them to other regions to get some of those benefits that we see when we are able to connect downstream water users effectively to the health of their watershed, which may be hundreds and hundreds of miles away. mr. hallin: thank you, senator, for the question. we found very quickly that there was a definite disconnect with many of the businesses and water users in the valley. when i am talking about the valley, the phoenix metropolitan area, the disconnect between the healthy forest and the healthy watershed. getting the subject matter to a broader based group of individuals, we decided to work together with some of our larger power customers and other customers that receive energy srp, and many of those organizations have an green

initiatives that they are looking at spending money to their productly -- the products they are delivering, but to improve their image. we sat down and realized that there are opportunities within our watershed to link this issue with end-users. and so we established this fundern arizona forest with the national forest foundation. the national forest foundation is congressionally authorized, uses private funds, a 501(c)(3) organization. an users to think that there was something in his for the salt river project. it is something for the watershed. this force fund, essentially we identify projects and partnership with before service that are outside of these large full-scale restoration projects. but they are smaller projects that have a begin date and end date. when you invest your money, you

know specifically what you are investing in and the result of that. sen. heinrich: i think that is really key, connecting these users who don't have an intuitive connection to wear their water comes from. in santa fe's case they can see the watershed. phoenix, that or watershed may be a long way away and connecting those things together is a powerful tool. chief, i want to ask you a quick question with my remaining time. we heard a lot from dr. hood about the benefits of using these treatments together, not just having stovepipes around mechanical treatment, and prescribed low intensity fire, but using them in combination, by far having the best results. are you able to do that as you scale of the landscape level fuel treatments? are you able to plan both the

prescribed and natural fire these and the mechanical setting piece together in concert? yes come in a lot of places, it is necessary to have at least two entries into the area. we do the total biomass and follow it up with prescribed fire pit -- prescribed fire. that is the right approach. once you have that done, you can continue to run -- the prescribed fire or natural fire. often we need to do the mechanical treatment first, the timber harvest, to reduce it down to a level of the biomass that we can then handle when we have a fire. and probably a more historical level, at least with the preponderance of pine in the west. mr. tidwell: yes. sen. heinrich: thank you, manager o.

>> i am concerned with the ever-increasing need to fire borrow money from fire prevention activities and the declining health of our national forests. did administration seems intent on wanting more money for a fire cure while refusing to engage, i believe, in any serious land management fire prevention performs. the administration is set on maintaining the failed status quo policies and culture of litigation surrounding forest management. as i said to the undersecretary last month, before service has, i believe, once instruction and its purpose. the forest service has become a bureaucracy, bureaucratic agency emphasizing internal processes over real results and improvements on the ground. if we are going to increase fire prevention activities, congress needs to mandate results and outcomes. does either the administration , the wildfire35

disaster funding act, contain language that the funds go to prevention activities such as hazardous fuels reduction, and is either proposal contained the language providing legislative reforms aimed at streamlining active management and reducing litigation? no, it only eliminates the need to transfer and the stoppage of work. sen. barrasso: so i look at this and say we must prevent the practice of fire borrowing and prioritized funding for treatment activities to reduce future while life suppression costs. that is why i cosponsored senator mccain's bill, the flame act amendments of 2015. i think we also have to streamline the way forest management activities are approved, make meaningful policy reforms. s. 508 includes ideas like arbitration to get the forest service out of the courtroom and

back into the forest. we need to solve the challenges facing our national forest in a financially responsible way. is the forest service willing to work with this committee and the sponsors of the different bills to find solutions? are, ofell: senator, we course, very interested in working with the committee to find those illusions. this concept of arbitration, something i am interested in trying. i would like to see it take on a pilot approach to that. part of that is i need to see it is a better solution. it sounds good in concept but i really think we need to kind of move into that and do some pilot approaches just to see where that can take us. it is one of the things we want to continue to work with you on. sen. barrasso: so often those who oppose active management of our force claim hazardous fuel projects, timber thinning activities, they will destroy watershed, health, and wildlife

habitat. your testimony paints a different picture of what is threatening watersheds, wildlife, and sustainability of high-quality drinking water. in your view, what are the primary roadblocks to improving wildlife habitat? mr. hallin: in our experience today, it has been partially the process associated. if we can find opportunities to accelerated, we see it as an opportunity to move more rapidly forward. secondly, and we are seeing this begin to change when it comes to the attitude of the forest service, to be in the project management business, to toage those forests, and refocus their efforts on the reason many of those forest reserves were created, essentiay to protect the water supply. and thinking: about your professional career, one of your responsibilities was to protect and improve watersheds. he described the national environmental policy act as a

weapon in the hands of a few. in his testimony you talk about the amount of time to complete the impact statement. totook over three years undertake an action that is prudent and necessary for ecosystem health and the protection of life and property, a misapplication of the intent of the law. beingten do you see nepa used as a weapon or barrier to improving watershed health? mr. eisele: i think it is common. it is a long process, and the whole field has had litigation from people who are obstructionists, in my view. sen. barrasso: in your view, if we do nothing, one of the consequences of what is happening with fires? mr. eisele: to do nothing is catastrophic fires, continuing catastrophic fires, having unhealthy forests, all the things we have talked about today. sen. barrasso: thank you, madam chairman. senator hirono.

hirono: i want to know for the record that hawaii has a fire problem also and it is estimated that 5% of land in a hawaii prince each year, percentage equal to or higher than what is experienced in western states. given that hawaii's native ecosystems are not fire adaptive, we are losing analog -- an alarming amount of native flora and fauna to wildfires, often to be replaced by invasive species that fuel future fires. the non-native grasses covers ,nd 24% of hawaii's land creating landscapes that are flammable and highly susceptible to wildfires. clearly this issue touches every single state. chief tidwell, you talked about healthy forests restoration act. it sounded as though you have thought about making some were

asking for some amendments to this law that would enable the forest service to, as you put total landscape approach, not just looking at thousands of acres, looking at tens of thousands of acres. the you have some suggested language that would provide more flexibility for the four service to deal with -- for the forest service to deal with this problem? , senator, withll the passage of the farm bill, and thank you again for the 2014 farm bill, it didn't extend east of the healthy forest restoration act to deal with disease. if you combine that authority with what we have with the healthy forests restoration act, it does extend our ability to use that more efficient nepa process on much larger landscapes. one thing that may be helpful is if we just have one authority instead of the two so it would be a little easier for folks or communities to understand.

the thing i want to stress is the reason we are able to get more and more work done each year is the level of support we have through these collaborative efforts. and it's been mentioned with the panelists year, we need to be looking at not just the hazardous fuel issue, but the total restoration projects and the work that needs to be done to restore the overall watershed can reduce the hazardous fuels, .reate this resilient system it is essential that we always recognize that need to have the engagement with our communities about being able to really reduce the number of alternatives that we needed to , definitely speeds up the process and he keeps everybody at the table and allows us to get the work done sooner. are you saying that with a combination of the farm bill provisions and what you have under the healthy forest restoration act of that you have enough authority, but it would need clearer if we could put it

all in one -- mr. tidwell: it is one of just to signify it and make it easier for the public to understand, and we have both these authorities and we can use it on a larger landscape. it is one thing that we are thinking about, if that is something that would really help us, that we have had discussion on it. sen. hirono: you talked about the need for collaborating with communities across the board. do you have a state-by-state program or plan that would enable communities and fire departments and the state and counties to work collaboratively with the forest service to prevent these wildfires? do you have some thing for hawaii? we tidwell: in the past, have done it more community by community, with the communities that developed the community wildfire protection plan. now with the cohesive strategy we had just put out, it allows us to take a much larger

landscape approach. it recognizes not only do we need to have fire adaptive natural communities, we have these restored, resilient force, but we also need to have fire-adapted human communities so we are taking actions around people's homes and on private land so that we are working together to reduce this threat, and these 2 efforts, along with the need to keep the resources we have, is going to be, i think, very helpful to move forward and address this problem that goes way beyond the federal lands. sen. hirono: chief, i'm sorry, i'm running out of time, but you say you work community by community paid are you working with any particular communities in a haughty? -- in hawaii? you can get back -- mr. tidwell: i will have to get back to you on it, but the point you raise about the invasive's you are dealing with in hawaii, that is what we are dealing with in so many states. i appreciate you bringing it

forward, that your state also deals with this issue. we will get back to you with the list of communities -- sen. hirono: basically, the invasive species capital of the country. thank you. thank you, madam chair. thank you, manager, and thank you, chief tidwell, and the other witnesses for being here today. senator bennet and i in colorado are hosting fire summit in colorado springs, which was the site of the black forest fire couple of years ago, and another murder of other devastating events have happened in the state. experts will be joining us and i will ask you about that in a little bit, but i want to follow-up on the testimony you had made. you talked about progress in thatfitting the aircraft the service acquired from the u.s. coast guard. how many of these aircraft will be ready to perform wildfire suppression missions this summer? mr. tidwell: we will have one of those aircraft in the latter part of the fire season and we

are putting a tank in it to start to use that this year. by the end of the year we expect to receive the second one. it will be 2019 before we have probably all seven of them with the tanks built in. sen. gardner: and the timeline -- that gets the timeline of completing the tank work that is required to bring them into service 2019? mr. tidwell: yeah, we will have all seven of them in operation by then. sen. gardner: thank you. you have an update on the forest service groundwater rule? what is the status of that right now? mr. tidwell: we have withdrawn our initial proposed rule to allow us more time to continue to work with the states and the stakeholders to really address this issue, our concern about making sure we're not impacting the groundwater. we are also -- i am working with to ensureal foresters that as we have to address these issues, especially on some large

leases,d oil and gas that the lack of having a systematic, consistent process doesn't become a barrier from being able to move forward and address those projects. but we have withdrawn it for this time and we will continue to work with the state to be able to sometime in the future have a solution to this issue so that we do not become the barrier to implementing some of these projects. sen. gardner: one of the things you heard that is a common theme from the many members of the committee is continuing to talk about the litigation and the parent process that prevents in terms of making sure we are managing our force appropriately so that we can avoid in preventing catastrophic wildfire from happening in the first place. if there is one particular avenue of litigation, perhaps the legislation that you could draft yourself to avoid a litigation that is stopping or upholding forest management

activities that are so needed around the country, what would it be? mr. tidwell: i would start by looking at ways to incentivize collaboration. as i look at the success we are having today versus earlier in my career, that is the one thing that is making the difference, the level of support and understanding to do these projects. anyway we can continue to encourage that. i also think this concept of arbitration is something i am interested in exploring in a pilot fashion to see if that would be a better way. the other thing is when we talk about using the farm bill authorities to reduce the amount of analysis we have to do instead of looking at five and six alternatives, we look at 2. that allows us to be able to ensure those issues around s versusive

looking at a much broader piece of work, that will help us to be more efficient and more effective. those are the things i have been thinking of. talking about the theme and the disaster declarations, are you aware when it comes to the fema declarations themselves, is the fourth service waiting on a proposal to change disaster declarations? mr. tidwell: we worked closely with the states during a fire on those to make sure they are getting -- send those in as quickly as they possibly can, and to be able to provide -- sen. gardner: i guess am talking about after the fire, we had the ongoing flooding issues, and fema can sometimes leave even though it creates secondary emergencies. as the forest service waiting on changing the national declaration process so we can avoid the regulatory hurdles

that are naturally occurring after the fire? sen. gardner: we not engaged we have on that the we recognize the problem and we have to be able to find a way to recognize that there is the fire and then there was the recovery afterwards. that is more detrimental and more impacting than the fire itself, as you see in your state. i think it is an opportunity where we can look at taking a different approach so that he can do a better job to work with our communities to be able to have a timely response that goes again what we are currently doing with our area emergency. sen. gardner: i was on the western slope this week -- one final question -- talking to an individual who manages a railroad. he has his own firefighting fire thatuse it was a is started by the railroad, it

creates liability and substantial damage to his community. he is sometimes limited and where he can send the firefighting fleet to put the .ire out before they have contracted to go in. i would love to work with you to find a way we could partner with the forest service and the .irefighting fleet the four service and individual have the same goal in mind to prevent a forest fire from happening. if we could put the fire out without finger pointing. we would be glad to work with you and the individual on that. what we have in we share the concern with safety to make sure

everyone responding to the fire has the equipment and the knowledge and skills so they can do it safely. senator resch. chief tidwell, you and i spoke about the correspondence you and i received from the state land board, and having lived in idaho, you are familiar with the state land board. they oversees the state forest holdings and the other holdings. they are concerned, as you and i have discussed and you discussed with many members of congress, they are focused on optimism, hopefully, around the provisions in the farm bill that are going to give us the opportunity to some of these treatment projects we have wanted to do. i don't need to tell you, but there is a lot of frustration there, moving as fast as we like it maybe people have expectations raised beyond what is reality when it came to the

federal government. i would urge you to continue. untested,is is still making progress on it, but i hope we continue to put one foot in front of the other and try to mature this process as rapidly as we can. senator, i agree with that, and i'm glad to provide the landlord to you and your staff just a list of all the projects we have planned in authorities,the and then later this summer we will finish the paperwork reduction act requirements of that we can move forward. we have taken some additional time to work with the state foresters to produce templates about how to use that. because of taking that additional time and actually ,oing some scenarios with them where you actually go through a process to see how it is actually play out -- how would

this actually play out to implement the project could because of that we have made significant changes to that template that the feedback i'm getting from state foresters is they feel it is going to be much better tool comments are taking a little more time on it. mr. risch: i spoke to scholz, the head of the state land board, and he is very anxious to see this move forward, and he is in agreement that this has real potential if it is moved expeditiously and appropriately. i appreciate your efforts in that regard. mr. eisele, i'm surprised to hear you say you were short on the ground on overhead of photography in a fire. we had as governor, summer there was a lot of fire on an every morning before it got light, i hadn't had a map of what the fire had done from the satellite imagery and some other

overhead imagery of what the fire had done the day before. i'm surprised to hear you say that it isn't available to you in san diego. i'm assuming you have satellite imagery in san diego like we do in idaho. what can you tell me about that? mr. eisele: the process you are referring to is where the force service runs the airplane -- forest service runs the airplane over rather fire is burning in the western united states and they have the information before 6:00 in the morning. changeues that the fires during the day. the issues we know where the fire was last night and the night before. we don't have real-time information. the forest service research does happen airplane with the program that can fly above the altitude of the air tankers and helicopters to and now can continuously map the fire and send real-time data down.

looking foryou are our by hour as opposed to what happened -- eisele: at least once every try for hours. sen. risch: it seems with the technology we have that is not difficult to do. sometimes it is relatively predictable and sometimes not, so thank you very much. thank you. manager. sen. murkowski: thank you. senator hoven. chief, good to see you again. thanks for your recent visit to north dakota. first question goes to the environmental assessment and the allotment plan. in both cases they wanted changes made proactively. can you give me a status report on how you are coming with that? senator, to follow

up with that meeting, our staff will continue to work with the association members to address their concerns. i want to thank you for hosting that meeting, because i also think it helped to clarify a few wishes that help us move forward and address their concerns. feel youen: so you will be able to, working with your state director, make adjustments that should work for the grazing associations and the ranchers? optimistic: i was listing to the work they done for the university that they provide a slightly different approach, one i think that will work for both of rangers and address our needs. that is the thing i left from that meeting, a little different approach being proposed there that could help once and for all settle this issue we have had there. i appreciate that

did the other thing i would like to emphasize this working with are theys -- not only knowledgeable and focus on the science, but they also have a lot of credibility with the ranchers in the area. i emphasize that you work closely with their range scientists. -incharticularly on the 3.5 visual obstruction reading, i think they can help get to a solution that the ranchers feel is common sense and workable. mr. tidwell: that is the issue that the university and the actor, he has come up with different approach to determine which areas have the capability to produce that. from the discussions we had your meeting, and a little bit of follow-up discussion, i left to their being more optimistic than i have been for a while that, approach is a better that the university is coming up

for us to be able to answer that question about which areas are capable or not. it seems like that is really the issue. the ranchers can't manage the an manage thec livestock to produce the stubble height we need. we need to understand which areas are capable and which ones are not. we can come to agreement on that. i am optimistic that we can put this issue behind us and move forward. to. hoeven: in order continue the grasslands demonstration project, this that require legislation or is something you can do without legislation? sen. hoeven: at this point we don't need any additional legislation. let me search to the fireplace. i know you are getting questions on fires, but looks like we are drier this year -- we certainly are drier is your starting out than we have been several of the

last. i direct you were approached of the grasslands in terms of steps you are taking to be prepared for fires this season. obviously, we're focused on the forest, but the grasslands of the fire issue as well. the grassland is part of the national forests and when i talk about the national forest, i'm including the grassland. what we are doing in the state is what we are doing across the country, to work with our cooperators and the long-term fire department so that we are ready to go when the fire season, which in your case has already started -- i recall the day i was up there a couple days before, we had already had several fires in your state that people were explaining to me they just never see this level fire behavior occurring so early in the year. those are things to make sure that we have the resources we need, that people are ready, and that if there is anything we need to address, we can take care of it ahead of time.

in your state like many states, it is those volunteer fire departments that are a big part of our initial resources. they are responsible for being able to get out quickly and to be able to suppress so many of the fires. it is like in your state and the rest of the country, he takes all of us working together -- the federal government, the state, counties, and local fires, to be a bullet you with this. sen. hoeven: and address the controlled burn issue for a minute. i'm particular sensitive to this issue because it is dry. you want the people working on the ground, not just the landowners, but the volunteer fire departments and everyone else. touch on controlled burn for just a minute. are you just staying away from it this year? what is your plan? mr. tidwell: well, definitely -- when we have those conditions we have up there, we are not going to get the prescription to begin with. we are going to be doing prescribed burns where we have

the agreement and the support from the associations, the part of your state that is a little bit wetter, that association is very supportive of more fire. other parts that are drier, we don't have that agreement at this point. we are not going to be using prescribed fire in those areas. we have the right conditions and the level of agreement so that everyone is together on what is the value of this, to make sure we are factoring in the risk to avoid the situation we had a couple years ago. thanks again, chief. appreciate it. sen. murkowski: thank you, senator hoeven. we were discussing how we get the accurate imaging of the fire during the funny river fire we had last year on the peninsula. the state was able to use s tonds to digit-- use drone

determine where the hotspot was and found it very effective. it was one of those situations where the smoke was so thick you did not know what was happening and there was no real way to pinpoint it at that time. the technologies that are out there, i think can clearly help to make a difference as we try to battle these fires, and mr. eisley, you mentioned the appificance of having an where people know who is where and from a safety perspective, making sure those who are fighting fires have tools that perhaps we haven't had in the past. we haven't had much discussion --s morning about the wild the urban interface, and the fact that 50-90 5% of forest services fire suppression costs

are incurred protecting private aboutty, and we all know the program. we see the benefits of when a homeowner takes very proactive a level ofsure safety through clearing around .heir areas i remember flying over the peninsula some years ago after s, and you would see nothing but charred blackness, and then there would be this little island of green where they have created defensible space. and just the education that goes on with the program, i think we recognize that we can reduce the cost of suppression if the homeowner is taking an active role in management.

chief, can you speak to what we are doing to encourage that end of it? preventive, but are we using sufficient resources to allow for an understanding and training and education for folks making a difference? manning share, we are making even more and more progress each year, especially with our cohesive strategy, that we put together working closely with the state, counties, boroughs, and cities, too, up with an understanding of what it is going to take and the tools to be able to create that level of awareness especially with private landowners, and then to set a demonstration projects around the country to be able to show the difference we are making. and we are also prioritizing our field money so it is going to

those areas where the private landowner is doing the work on their land so that we can make a more effective treatment area. those are the things we're continuing to do. nothing that is encourages more people to do the right thing with their private land that you have those demonstration projects where they can see the difference it makes. they have ahink clear all the land of trees and brush. they are helping the private landowners be able to see this is what i really need to do. working closely with the state foresters, the state fire assistant programs, to provide funding to be able to do this work, not only on the national forests, but also on the private land together. through this cohesive strategy,

it is going to help us move forward in a bigger way than we have in the past. i've ever seen this level of support and understanding from -- i have never seen this level of support and understanding from our partners than i have based on this cohesive strategy. if you areski: looking for a demonstration projects, i would suggest you put people in an airplane flight over these areas where you have the blue tarps that mark where you still have surviving structures amidst pretty tough devastation here. i -- one quick question, and i was going to include it as part of the record, but i will ask it right now. i was up in nunavut territory for the meeting with secretary kerry.

that wase frameworks discussed there at the arctic council focused on an effort to reduce black carbon emissions in the arctic. the council's action is probably more focused on man-made black carbon. but the reality is that the to blackontributpr carbon is the wildfire. and i guess i would just ask if the four service is going to have -- the forest service is going to have any role in this black carbon initiative with the council. if you don't know, you can get the to me, or jessamine for record, but i do want to put that on her radar screen, because it is something we have not really talked about. we're talking about the man-made, but the issue of thefire is where we see

vast majority of the black carbon. madam chair, i will follow up, but i know we have a couple of our research digest -- research scientists working with a group. the other point you bring up about the carbon released from those fires, we can make a difference of we reduce the level of severity and the catastrophic size of some of these fires as far as the total release vs. doing it through more of a prescribed fire in a much lower severity. those are the things where if we really look at this problem, we need to be factoring in all of the benefits that come in from having an approach that can restore these forests and at the same time take suppression where we need to take suppression to protect our communities. sen. murkowski: one last question very quickly. in the fire potential outlook, highest risk of significant wildfire potential

andn the may time period. it is my understanding that we are seeing fire season earlier and earlier. i mentioned to you my personal view of flying into the interior this weekend. our week -- do we track that so that we can actually identify the fire season has started in even earlierlaska, than traditionally seen? yes, we track the changing conditions to make sure that if we need to bring resources earlier, we have those resources available. sen. murkowski: that was specifically what i was going to ask, because he basically budget have assetsause you

on standby, but if in fact we see this fires start earlier, do we have them are located- co- lated in areas where we can be responsive? mr. tidwell: we do not wait. sen. murkowski: ok, but i need to know. mr. tidwell: we position resources where they are needed. sen. murkowski: ok. senator cantwell. sen. cantwell: chief tidwell, i want to go back to the question i asked before any we couldn't get to that, the funding available versus the amount of on the urban interface. where do you think we need to go in getting resources? thewhat do you think biomass program i do to help? the increase in

funding we received this year for hazardous fields and where of the well and is on the urban interface, that will allow us to expand the program and treat more acres. for instance, we are having 2.5 million acres as our target for -- this year and 2.1 will occur in the highest priority areas. it is findingt of more use for the biomass, and whether it is through an integrated wood products that can expand markets or be able to conversion,nergy and substitute that for other energy sources, those are the things we have to continue to work on. if we have been able to use the authorities that subsidize itnsportation of biomass, allows for new facilities to come online to provide additional support for the new

businesses, and so those are the things we just need to continue to be able to work on. another program that we have to help folks -- and then the program we have to help folks receive grants to the economic analysis to put a business case together so that they are in a much better place before they make the decision to make that investment, and then the last point has been brought a couple times, the certainty. it is essential that we provide some level of certainty for especially these new operations so that that is the one thing they don't have to worry about, that there is going to be x amount of biomass guaranteed to be available for at least a 10-year period. sen. cantwell: why do i think of the set-aside issue when you say that? the notion of the forest service needs to adhere to the set aside for small businesses? mr. tidwell: well, it is one of

the things -- one of the issues -- thank you again for making a permanent for us. we are working with the small business administration to be able to go through world making to address that issue. --go through rulemaking to address that issue. sen. cantwell: we definitely want to make progress and if you say it is getting a flow of the biomass to create these businesses, but how much -- you said 300 million. what do you think that represents as far as addressing need? do you think that is a number that is double or triple that you could easily do if you have the resources? mr. tidwell: well, i would respond with what we requested , tour budget for fy16 maintain the increase in hazardous fields that we received last year, to expand the collaborative registration work, to be able to get more funding for our basic forest restoration work, and also,

additional funds to work with the states to expand the work they are doing. those of the things we ask for in our budget, along with recognizing that our 10-year average for fire suppression went up $115 million again, just this last year. when you total is novel together, our budget requests, plus what we are needing for fire suppression, it comes out to a little over $300 million. sen. cantwell: someone you say what usaid -- so when you say what you have said today in the: yourination of testimony, it sounds like we are on the right trajectory, and then when i see this research report from your organization, it says something different. where are you on that research report? it is within the forest service. mr. tidwell: i was reading that

at the start of the hearing. research, i think it identifies what we are focused on, and the shifts we have made over the last few years, to recognize the need for us to manage fire, not only the natural fire in the backcountry, but we will have our fires -- we are taking very active suppression on part of that fire, and then at the same time allowing another portion of that fire to be able to burn and reduce fuel. a good example of this was the room fire a couple of years ago in california. aggressive suppression to keep the fire out of the communities that at the same time we allow the fire to burn up into yosemite national park, where the park has been doing prescribed burning. those are the things we need to continue to do. when you look at the research paper, for me it describes where we are at. but we do need to expand. we need to explore natural fire

and if we are going to increase our prescribed fire, we need to increase our mechanical treatments, especially in the places to do the work where we put fire into the landscape. the other challenge we have, as pointed out in this paper, is for our communities to understand what needs to occur. when we are managing fire in the backcountry, there was a lot of concern, and at times a lot of our communities are scared, worried about where the fire is going to go, versus if they know, they see the flames flying and the resources on stuff. we need to do a better job to work with our communities so that they understand the actions we are going to take and that they recognize the work we have done to reduce the threat to the communities, but to build more support for it. the other thing that has not been mentioned yet at the hearing, we are going to have to work together with the states to

be able to address smoke management. there are times when we are going to have to put up with a little more smoke from the manage fire, low severity fire, to reduce this catastrophic situations. it is something we work together to provide the flexibility so that there is less impact not only to our communities, but i tourism,ut the loss of the loss of economic activity, when we have these large fires, and you saw it in your own state that those communities, nobody going up there. that is another reason we need to increase our pace and scale with this work. the incremental approach with the fy 16 budget is the right way so that we can continue to

ramp this up.- i know i am way over time, but the salt river partnerships coming together from communities, or water companies that recognize that it is a good investment to be able to change the conditions so that they don't have to deal with the aftermath of them are catastrophic fire, and we're seeing that across the country where people are willing communities, water companies and boards are willing to make the investment to be able to change the conditions on the landscape. sen. cantwell: thank you. i see you listening intently to every word chief general is saying. do you have any comments on that? pyne: no, i'm admiring his mastery of the material. the only comment i would add it to some the observations you

made is on the wildlife interface issue, we have tended to define it as a wildlife problem that affects communities, but you can pick up the other end of the stick. it's an urban fire problem with funny landscaping. if you think of it that way, we know how to keep houses from burning. we solved that problem before. in some ways it is a definitional issue. if we start thinking about the use of little fragments of cities, we start applying the same solutions we have had, and we can solve it technically. sen. cantwell: even in these extreme situations like carlton? it was such a blowout because of weather and wind and everything. mr. pyne: yeah, i think we can. we know how to solve some of that. through the extreme conditions you are going to have some damage. you are not point to stop everything. but think of it as a kind of hurricane event. we know how to prepare and take action.

in some ways i think we are mr. finding it to i'm struck -- misdefining it. and i'm struck, often with the aerial photos of the communities burned, you still see so many trees around it surviving and you are struck -- this is a house in the urban fire problem with funny landscaping, not just the wild land fire problem. but i wouldo both put more resources thinking about the other half of that equation. these houses in a matter of minutes burned down to the 4 -- and -- to the foundation. mr. pyne: well, i'm not familiar enough with the carlton complex. i know it was a lot of his first stop. but we had comments from , the black forest fire, some of these others, looking at the overviews and repeatedly that is what you see in forest

communities. the fire is going house to house. it is going along the ground. you are wondering, why are some of these communities burning? that is a house problem. that is an urban fire problem or in a given fire problem, not just a wildland fire problem. sen. cantwell: thank you. thank you, madam chair. sen. murkowski: thank you, senator cantwell. chief, i will not go back to fairbanks if they have got to suffer through more smoke. we have had extraordinary summers where there is no soccer being played, there is a health alert every morning. so densemornings it is you literally need to have your headlights on during the summertime. it is an issue we deal with. fairbanks has some of the poorest air quality during the winter because of inversion issues. but during the summer it is

because of the wildland fires that are all around. it is something that we struggle with, certainly. i listened to some of what you averageterms of the that we spent last year. i think you said about 150 million more than spent on average over the last 10 years. i have seen something that says almost $200 million more than spent on average. but what we have seen is that there have been less than half the number of fires, less than half the number of acres burned, less than half the number of houses burned. again, it speaks to the issue are we have here, where we experiencing skyrocketing suppression costs. and i think we get to a point where we can't continue to throw everything that we have at every fire, whether it is effective or

not. it just can't be a blank check the fires. fighting it is not sustainable. economically or perhaps ecologically. it is something that we must look at. i think we need to strategically address the fuel accumulation problem in our forests and integrate our fuel management objectives into the wildfire management operations. i don't think we can have fire vorced from land management, and i think we heard that from several of our witnesses today. we have got a great deal we have to do. it sounds a week to say it, -- sounds weak to say it, but i hope for our sake from a budget perspective it is not -oing to be a backfires is. -

bad fire season. i hope for the sake of those who have properties and concerns about their own safety that it is not a bad fire season. i hope for the men and women who in the case of pretty serious danger are willing to go out there and battle these forest fires, i hope for them it is not a bad fire season. but that is not a good policy, to hope that we get lucky, that we don't have a bad fire season. we are seeing things set up for a tough year this year with the drought in the west. everywhere, it seems, except here in the east. we have some real issues to deal with. you have a, again, real commitment to figuring out how we can deal with this fire borrowing, because we can't get to the fuel treatments, we can't

get to the important aspects of what we can do on the preventive side if we don't have dollars in the budget, if they have been spent on these skyhigh suppression costs. andave got some work to do, i think you have got the commitment from many around this dais to work to find solutions. to those of you who traveled far to be with us this morning, well , you may not have gotten the know thate questions, your testimony and input is greatly appreciated as we look to resolve these issues that have considerable impact, particularly to those of us in the west. with that, we stand adjourned. i thank you. host[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

sunday night on "q&a," former emergency manager of detroit kevyn orr talks about financial issues and his job overseeing the largest municipal pregnancy in u.s. history. : if detroit had taken that $1.5 billion in 2005 and 2006 when the stock market went -- 6700 and invested it in an index fund, the standard & poor's is -- start market is trading almost eight times what it was it not only could they have paid their money but paid the pensions in full and gotten back in the the 13th check, the practice of giving pensioners the 13th check at the end of the year in addition to the 12 they

are due. it could have fixed itself if there had been some sort of server management going forward, just like any organization, united states as well. if you have strong leadership and focused if you have strong leadership and focused at -- focused leadership, you can fix the problems. >> sunday night on c-span's duende. >> over the next hour, the c-span city store visits fort lauderdale. we will hear from authors of nolks about the semi indians, the florida intracoastal waterwaye, and spain's role in the revolutionary war. but first, we start with charles , author of then struggle for a more perfect union. charles: