Madam Speaker, today I am introducing an additional bill to address the danger to Colorado's communities, water supplies, and infrastructure from the increasing risk of very severe wildfires on our…
Madam Speaker, today I am introducing an additional bill to address the danger to Colorado's communities, water supplies, and infrastructure from the increasing risk of very severe wildfires on our forested lands.
I have put a priority on reducing those risks since I was elected to Congress. In 2000, with our then-colleague, Representative Hefley, I introduced legislation to facilitate reducing the buildup of fuel in the parts of Colorado that the Forest Service, working with State and local partners, identified at greatest risk of fire--the so-called ``red zones.''
Concepts from that legislation were included in the National Fire Plan developed by the Clinton Administration and were also incorporated into the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003. As a Member of the Resources Committee, I had worked to develop the version of that legislation that the committee approved in 2002, and while I could not support the different version initially passed by the House in 2003, I voted for the revised version developed in conference with the Senate later that year--the version that President Bush signed into law.
Since then welcome progress has been made--in Colorado, at least--in developing community wildfire protection plans and focusing fuel- reduction projects in the priority ``red zone'' areas, two important aspects of the new law. But at the same time nature has continued to add to the buildup of fuel in the form of both new growth and dead and dying mature trees.
In recognition of the serious nature of the problem, the entire Colorado delegation--both here in the House and in the Senate, too-- worked together to reach consensus on a broad-scale legislative response. The result was legislation--H.R. 3072 and S. 1797, the Colorado Forest Management Improvement Act of 2007--which I introduced last year in the House with the cosponsorship of the entire Colorado delegation and which Senators Salazar and Allard introduced in the Senate. Together with two bills I introduced last week--H.R. 5216, the Wildfire Risk Reduction and Renewable Biomass Utilization Act and H.R. 5218, the Fire Safe Community Act--the bill I am introducing today is designed to complement the Colorado Forest Management Act to respond to the increasingly widespread extent to which our State's forests are being altered by infestations of bark beetles and other insects.
These insects help to balance tree densities and set the stage for fires and thereby the generation of new tree growth. And when forests are healthy and there are adequate supplies of water, their effects are relatively low-scale and isolated. But under the right conditions--such as drought, unusually warm winters, or when there are dense stands of even-aged trees--the insects can cause large-scale tree mortality, turning whole mountainsides and valleys rust red. And that is happening now in many parts of Colorado, as was made unmistakably clear recently when Federal and State foresters reported that the beetle infestation first detected in 1996 grew by a half-million acres last year, bringing the total number of acres attacked by bark beetles to 1.5 million, and has spread further into Front Range counties east of the Continental Divide.
My goal in introducing legislation dealing with this issue is not to eradicate insects in our forests--nor should it be, because insects are a natural part of forest ecosystems. Instead, I seek to make it possible for there to be more rapid responses to the insect epidemic in those areas where such responses are needed in order to protect communities from increased wildfire dangers.
The bill I am introducing today would add a new section to the Healthy Forests Act. which would apply only to Colorado, to specifically address insect epidemics. It would authorize the Forest Service or Interior Department to identify as ``insect emergency areas'' Federal lands that have already been slated for fuel-reduction work in community wildfire protection plans and that have so many insect-killed trees that there is an urgent need for work to reduce the fire-related risks to human life and property or municipal water supply.
The Forest Service or Interior Department could do this on its own initiative or in response to a request from a State agency or a Colorado political subdivision (such as a county, city, or other local government). After receipt of such a request, a decision must be made within 90 days.
In any such emergency areas, the Forest Service or Interior Department would be authorized to remove dead or dying trees on an expedited basis, including use of a ``categorical exclusion'' from normal review under the National Environmental Policy Act, NEPA. Although categorical exclusions from NEPA are controversial, I believe they are appropriate for these emergency situations.
For the information of our colleagues, here is a more detailed outline of the bill:
colorado forest insect emergency response act
This bill, based on provisions in the Udall-Salazar bill (H.R. 4875) of 2006, will add a new section to the Healthy Forests Restoration Act to specifically address the forest insect epidemic in Colorado.
It would authorize the Forest Service or the Interior Department, as relevant, to identify as ``insect emergency areas'' Federal lands in Colorado that have already been slated for fuel-reduction work in community wildfire protection plans and that have so many insect-killed trees that there is an urgent need for work to reduce the fire-related risks to human life and property or municipal water supplies.
The Forest Service or Interior Department could make such a determination on its own initiative or in response to a request from any Colorado State agency or any Colorado political subdivision (such as a county, city, or other local government). The relevant Federal agency must respond to such a request by making a decision within 90 days.
The bill would reduce the extent to which analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, NEPA, must be done prior to implementing fuel-reduction--i.e., thinning or tree-removal projects in insect-emergency areas. This would be done in two ways:
(1) by allowing the abbreviated NEPA reviews to be used for projects on any lands covered by a wildfire protection plan for a Colorado community in or adjacent to an insect-emergency area (the Act now allows this only for projects on lands within 1.5 miles of a community's boundaries); and
(2) by allowing the Forest Service or Interior Department to forego NEPA analysis entirely through use of a ``categorical exclusion'' with regard to a project involving only lands that are both within an insect-emergency area and covered by a community wildfire protection plan.
Before making a decision to exempt a project from NEPA review, the Forest Service or Interior Department would have to consult with relevant Federal and State agencies, seek comments from the public, and follow existing procedures for such decisions.
