Order Code RL33917
Forestry in the 2007 Farm Bill
Updated August 20, 2007
Ross W. Gorte
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division

Forestry in the 2007 Farm Bill
Summary
Many programs authorized in the 2002 farm bill (P.L. 107-171) will expire at
the end of FY2007, and the House has passed and Senate Agriculture Committee is
likely to consider bills to reauthorize these programs. General forestry legislation is
within the jurisdiction of the Agriculture Committees, and past farm bills have
included provisions addressing forestry, especially on private lands. Most federal
forestry programs are permanently authorized, and thus do not require periodic
reauthorization in the farm bill. Nonetheless, the 2002 farm bill reauthorized one
office (international forestry), created a new private landowner cost-share assistance
program (the Forest Land Enhancement Program) replacing two previously existing
programs, and enacted a new Community Fire Protection Program.
A 2007 farm bill may also include forestry provisions addressing various issues.
Funding for forestry programs may be discussed, as recent appropriations have been
inconsistent and mandatory spending for the Forest Land Enhancement Program has
been cancelled. Protecting communities from wildfire continues to be a priority for
some, as the program enacted in the 2002 farm bill has not been funded directly.
Controlling invasive species is another forestry issue that might be addressed in a
new farm bill. Funding and programs to assist forest-dependent communities in
diversifying their economies could also be debated in this context, as funding for
existing programs has dwindled. Finally, some interests have expressed interest in
trying to create markets for ecosystem services — the values produced by forests that
have not traditionally been sold in the marketplace.
The Administration’s 2007 proposed farm bill includes a forestry title. It
proposes four new programs: (1) comprehensive statewide forest planning; (2)
competitive landscape-scale forestry grants; (3) a 10-year, $150 million forest wood-
to-energy technology development program; and (4) financial and technical
assistance to communities for acquiring, planning for, and conserving community
forests. The Administration’s proposal does not include a forest landowner financial
assistance program, essentially terminating the Forest Land Enhancement Program.
On July 27, 2007, the House passed the Farm, Nutrition, and Bioenergy Act of
2007, H.R. 2419 (the 2007 farm bill). The bill contains a separate forestry title, with
national priorities for forestry assistance programs, mandatory statewide assessments
and strategies for forest resources, a new Forest Resource Coordinating Committee,
and competitive allocation for a portion of forestry assistance funding. The forestry
title also reauthorizes the Office of International Forestry, the Rural Revitalization
Technologies Program, and the Healthy Forest Reserves Program. It creates an
Emergency Forest Restoration Program and provides grants to Hispanic-serving
institutions to increase diversity in forestry and related fields. In addition, the
bioenergy title contains two woody biomass energy programs, and wood and forest
practices are included in other energy and conservation programs.
As the Senate debates the 2007 farm bill, it will likely consider the House-
passed bill, the Administration’s proposals, and other options for forestry assistance
programs.

Contents
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Forestry Issues for a Farm Bill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Forestry Assistance Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Wildfire Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Invasive Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Economic Diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Markets for “Ecosystem Services” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
The Administration’s 2007 Forestry Proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Landowner Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Comprehensive Statewide Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Landscape-Scale Competitive Grant Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Forest Wood for Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Community Forests Working Lands Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
The Farm, Nutrition, and Bioenergy Act of 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
National Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Statewide Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Forest Resource Coordinating Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Competitive Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Reauthorizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Emergency Reforestation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Hispanic-Serving Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Woody Biomass Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Forestry in the 2007 Farm Bill
Forestry programs have been addressed in past farm bills and other agriculture
legislation. Federal forestry has historically been associated with agriculture, and
with agriculture legislation. This report briefly describes the Agriculture Committees’
jurisdiction over forestry, with examples of legislation addressed by the committees.
It discusses forestry issues likely to be debated in the upcoming farm bill. It then
presents information on the forestry provisions in the Administration’s proposal for
the 2007 farm bill, followed by the forestry provisions in the House-passed 2007
farm bill, the Farm, Nutrition, and Bioenergy Act of 2007 (H.R. 2419).
Background
Both the House and Senate Committees on Agriculture have jurisdiction over
“forestry in general” and acquired national forests.1 Thus, the committees have been
able to exert considerable influence over federal forestry activities over the years.
For example, the Forest and Rangelands Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974
(RPA; P.L. 93-378) and the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA; P.L.
94-588), which guide Forest Service planning and management, were both initially
referred to the Agriculture Committees. More recently, the Healthy Forests
Restoration Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-148) was referred to and reported by the
Agriculture Committees.
In addition to forestry on federal lands, the Agriculture Committees have
jurisdiction over forestry research and forestry assistance to states and to private
landowners.2 Forestry research is governed largely by the Forest and Rangeland
Renewable Resources Research Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-307), which revised and
updated the McSweeney-McNary Act of 1928. Forestry assistance is governed
largely by the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-313), which
revised and updated the Clarke-McNary Act of 1924.3 Both laws were referred to
and reported by the Agriculture Committees.
Recent farm bills have also included forestry provisions, primarily addressing
the forestry assistance programs. The 1990 farm bill (the Food, Agriculture,
1 Jurisdiction over national forests established from the public domain lies with the House
Natural Resources Committee and the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
See each Committee’s website for details on its jurisdiction.
2 These three programs — forest management, forestry research, and forestry assistance —
have traditionally been the three principal branches of the USDA Forest Service.
3 For more information on these programs, see CRS Report RL31065, Forestry Assistance
Programs
, by Ross W. Gorte.

CRS-2
Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990, P.L. 101-624) contained a separate forestry
title that:
! created four new forestry assistance programs;
! revised two existing forestry assistance programs;
! amended two forestry assistance programs;
! revised the administrative provisions for forestry assistance;
! created five special forestry research programs;
! amended three existing forestry research programs;
! authorized a private, non-profit tree planting foundation; and
! created a new FS branch: international forestry.
The 1996 farm bill (the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of
1996, P.L. 104-127) included only a few forestry provisions, extending the
authorization for the one expiring assistance program and adding a new funding
option within an existing program.
The 2002 farm bill (the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, P.L.
107-171) contained a separate forestry title, which was a product of compromise
between the Senate and the House. The House-passed version contained several
forestry provisions. The Senate-passed version modified most of these provisions
(deleting one), and added more than a dozen additional provisions. The conference
could not resolve many of the differences, and the conference agreement contained
fewer provisions than either the House or Senate version. (Some of the disputed
provisions were enacted subsequently in the Healthy Forests Restoration Act.)
Forestry Issues for a Farm Bill
Reauthorization of the many agriculture programs is a prime reason for the
periodic farm bills, but only two forestry programs have an expiring authority. The
authorizations for expenditures under the Forest Land Enhancement Program (FLEP)
and for the Office of International Forestry expire at the end of FY2007. All other
FS programs — forest management and planning, research, and assistance — are
permanently authorized, many at “such sums as are necessary.” This may reduce the
pressure to include a forestry title in upcoming farm bills. Nonetheless, various
forestry issues other than authorization levels may be raised, such as forestry
assistance funding, wildfire protection, invasive species, economic diversity, and
markets for “ecosystem services” that have not traditionally been marketed.
Forestry Assistance Funding. Federal funding for forestry assistance
programs has generally been rising, but the increase has not been spread equally
among the various programs. Since the severe 2000 fire season and the development
of the National Fire Plan, funding for cooperative fire programs (assistance to states
and volunteer fire departments) has risen substantially (more than triple pre-2000
funding), and has remained at very high levels. Funding for Forest Legacy
(acquisition of lands or easements on lands threatened with conversion to non-forest
uses) has also risen substantially, from less than $4 million in FY1998 to $60 million
or more annually since FY2001 (and a request of $100 million for FY2005). In
contrast, the Administration has proposed terminating funding for the Economic
Action Program (economic assistance to rural, forest-dependent communities), and

CRS-3
funding has fallen from a peak of $54 million in FY2001 to less than $10 million in
FY2006.
The adequacy of funding for private landowner assistance programs has been
of concern to many. These programs provide cost-shares to qualified landowners for
various forestry practices that increase tree growth, improve wildlife habitat, protect
watersheds (thus improving water quality), and more. One of the changes enacted
in the 2002 farm bill was to replace two programs — the Forestry Incentives Program
(FIP) and the Stewardship Incentives Program (SIP) — with the new Forest Land
Enhancement Program (FLEP). Because funding for FIP and SIP had been
discretionary and either stagnant (FIP) or lacking (SIP), FLEP was given mandatory
funding through the Commodity Credit Corporation of $100 million total through the
end of FY2007. However, some FLEP funds were borrowed to pay for firefighting
and other funding was cancelled; in total, less than half of the $100 million
“guaranteed” for FLEP will have been spent on landowner assistance. Given this
history, Congress seems likely to revisit the issue of funding for landowner forestry
assistance programs in the next farm bill.
Wildfire Protection. The threat of wildfire damages to resources and
property seems to have increased in recent years. Attention has focused on high
biomass fuel levels, particularly in federal forests, and on structures (especially
homes) in or near at-risk forests, a situation known as the wildland-urban interface
(WUI; see CRS Report RS21880, Wildfire Protection in the Wildland-Urban
Interface
, by Ross W. Gorte). Section 8003 of the 2002 farm bill created a new
Community and Private Land Fire Assistance Program to assist communities and
private landowners in planning and other activities to protect themselves from
wildfires. The program was authorized at $35 million annually through FY2007 and
“such sums as are necessary ... thereafter.” The FS has included such expenditures
as authorized activities in its State Fire Assistance Program. For FY2005, the House
Appropriations Committee directed that “$5 million of the increase [to State Fire
Assistance] is provided to fund, on a cost share basis, community wildfire protection
plans” (H.Rept. 108-542, p. 94). However, Congress has not appropriated funds
explicitly for this program.
Protecting private lands and structures from wildfires seems likely to continue
to garner congressional attention, as the threat of wildfire persists. How to assist
private landowners and communities, how to combine this assistance with other
assistance and incentive programs, and how to fund such assistance seem likely to
be a focus of debates over forestry programs in the next farm bill.
Invasive Species. Invasive species — non-native plants and animals that are
displacing native ones — are becoming recognized as a substantial problem. (See
CRS Report RL30123, Invasive Non-Native Species: Background and Issues for
Congress
, by M. Lynne Corn et al.) In a speech to the Idaho Environmental Forum
in January 2004, then-FS Chief Dale Bosworth identified invasive species as one of
the four major threats to the nation’s forests and rangelands.4 The FS’s Forest Health
4 The other three identified threats are fire and fuels, unmanaged recreation, and loss of open
(continued...)

CRS-4
Management Program has evolved from a mechanism to survey and control insects
and diseases, to a program to address all forest pests, including invasive species. In
its FY2004 and FY2005 budget requests, the Administration proposed an Emerging
Pests and Pathogens Fund to address rapidly developing problems of invasive
species, but the Appropriations Committees rejected the request both years. In its
deliberations over the next farm bill, Congress might address the structure and
financing of programs to prevent and control invasive species on federal, state, and
private forests.
Economic Diversity. The economies of many rural communities have
evolved around the use — finding, extracting, processing, and selling — of natural
resources. In some of these areas, one resource (e.g., timber, minerals, livestock) has
traditionally dominated the local economy, but the economies of such areas can be
devastated when that resource is depleted or when its markets are depressed
(permanently or even temporarily). Many communities have sought approaches to
diversifying their economies, to mitigate the travails that can occur when a dominant
economic sector is depressed. The National Forest-Dependent Rural Communities
Economic Diversification Act of 1990 was enacted in §§2372-2379 of the 1990 farm
bill to authorize forestry and economic diversification technical assistance to
“economically disadvantaged” rural communities. Under the title Economic Action
Program
, funding rose from $14 million in FY1996 to $54 million in FY2001, but
has declined since, and President Bush has proposed terminating the program in
several budget requests. In its deliberations over the next farm bill, Congress may
consider ways to perpetuate economic assistance programs for traditional wood
products-dependent communities, either as a continued FS program or as part of
other USDA rural assistance programs. (See CRS Report RL31837, An Overview of
USDA Rural Development Programs
, by Tadlock Cowan.)
Markets for “Ecosystem Services”. Forests provide a broad array of
environmental services — clean air and water, wildlife habitats, pleasant scenery, and
more — for which private landowners are generally not compensated, because these
services are typically not bought and sold in a marketplace. A variety of interests
have examined the possibilities of finding ways to compensate landowners for
continuing to provide ecosystem services.5 This is akin to the “green payments”
proposals that would reward farmers who provide environmental benefits through
their farm management practices. Such “green payments” for forest landowners’
ecosystem services might be discussed in the congressional deliberations over the
next farm bill.
4 (...continued)
space. See [http://www.fs.fed.us/projects/four-threats].
5 American Forests, the Southern Environmental Law Center, and others held a workshop
to discuss landowner compensation for ecosystem services provided in Washington, DC, on
May 18-20, 2005.

CRS-5
The Administration’s 2007 Forestry Proposal
The Administration’s 2007 farm bill proposes four new forestry programs: (1)
comprehensive statewide forest planning; (2) competitive landscape-scale forestry
grants; (3) a 10-year, $150 million forest wood-to-energy technology development
program; and (4) financial and technical assistance to communities for acquiring,
planning for, and conserving community forests. The Administration’s proposal did
not include reauthorizing FLEP, or creating an new landowner assistance program.
Landowner Assistance. USDA has provided assistance to private forest
landowners for more than a century, since before the FS was established. The current
financial assistance program is the Forest Land Enhancement Program (FLEP). This
program replaced the Forestry Incentives Program (FIP, created in the Cooperative
Forestry Assistance Act of 1978) and the Stewardship Incentives Program (SIP,
created in the 1990 farm bill). FLEP was enacted in the 2002 farm bill with
mandatory funding of $100 million over the six-year life of the law. The promise of
mandatory spending, however, has not been fulfilled. The FS released $20.0 million
for FLEP in FY2003, and borrowed $50 million of the total to pay for firefighting in
the 2003 fire season. The FY2004 Interior appropriations act6 repaid nearly $9.9
million, leaving a balance of $39.9 million. In the FY2005 budget request, the
President requested that the remaining funds be cancelled (not released for
expenditure by the FS). The balance of FLEP funding was cancelled, pursuant to FS
Administrative Provisions in P.L. 108-447, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of
2005, and the borrowed funds were not repaid. Budget authority (prior to
cancellation) was $9.2 million for FY2004, $15.0 million for FY2005, and $5.4
million for FY2006.7 Of the $100 million “guaranteed” for FLEP in the 2002 farm
bill, only $49.5 million will have been spent, with $40.1 million borrowed and not
repaid, and $10.4 million cancelled. The Administration is proposing to neither
renew FLEP nor replace it with an alternative private forest landowner financial
assistance program. It is unclear whether this lack of private landowner assistance
reflects a conclusion that past programs have been ineffective.
Comprehensive Statewide Planning. The Administration is proposing
a new program of financial and technical assistance to state forestry agencies to
develop and implement Statewide Forest Resource Assessments and Plans to address
the increasing public demand for forest products and amenities, pressure on
landowners to convert forests to other uses, and risk from wildfire. It is unclear
whether a national direction for statewide forest planning provides the flexibility to
address diverse forests across the United States such as those in Iowa and those in
Florida. The proposal also raises the question of whether the various state forestry
organizations are unable or unwilling to undertake statewide forest planning without
federal direction and oversight. Whether statewide forest planning, together with
other forestry farm bill proposals, would be more effective at providing for the
growth in demand for forest products and amenities than a direct landowner
assistance program, such as FLEP, is unknown. Finally, funding for this new
6 FS programs have been funded in the annual Interior appropriations acts since 1955.
7 Personal communication with Joe Norrell, USDA Forest Service, Office of Program and
Budget, Washington, DC, on October 27, 2006.

CRS-6
planning effort is uncertain, when the Administration is proposing to cut FY2008
forest stewardship funding (for financial and technical assistance to states) by 41%.
Landscape-Scale Competitive Grant Program. The Administration’s
proposal includes a new landscape-scale forestry competitive grant program “to
develop innovative solutions that address local forest management issues; develop
local nontraditional forest product markets; and stimulate local economies through
creation of value-added forest product industries.” The Administration identifies as
significant problems the aging of family forest landowners and the potential
fragmentation of forests over the next two decades. Thus, the proposal would create
a program that “would ensure a comprehensive, coordinated approach to forest
management and would ensure collaboration across ownership and jurisdictional
boundaries.” However, many aspects of the proposal are unclear, such as:
! how “landscapes” would be defined for the grants;
! the proportion of the landowners or lands that would need to be
involved for a landscape to be eligible for a grant;
! whether landowners, including governmental entities, could be
convinced or coerced to cooperate;
! why the program is related to landscapes and landowners, since the
goal is to foster nontraditional markets and value-added industries;
and
! how the landscape grant proposals would be assessed and compared;
that is, what criteria would be used to make the grants competitive.
Forest Wood for Energy. The Administration is proposing a new 10-year,
$150 million wood-to-energy program to accelerate development and use of new
technologies to use the substantial amounts of low-grade woody biomass that degrade
forest health and exacerbate wildfire risks and are of little commercial value. The
proposal does not identify the program goals, and does not describe whether the focus
would be on converting woody biomass to cellulosic ethanol or burning woody
biomass to produce electricity. While the proposal seems to emphasize technological
solutions, other factors — capital costs, infrastructure, collection and hauling
opportunities, etc. — might be critical for improved utilization of low-value woody
biomass for energy. It is unclear whether this proposal, or other programs, could
address these other factors.
Community Forests Working Lands Program. The Administration’s
2007 farm bill proposes a community forests working lands program to provide
communities with the financial assistance to acquire and conserve forests and the
technical assistance to plan for the use and conservation of those forests. This
program would particularly address the problem of producing goods and services
from forests at the urban fringe. However, it is unclear how this proposed program
differs from the existing Forest Legacy Program. The proposal also does not address
the question of the federal role and responsibility in funding and otherwise assisting
communities in acquiring and conserving local forestlands. Finally, some might
question whether the proposed community forests program, and the proposed
competitive landscape-scale grant program (discussed above) move away from
private forestland ownership and individual decision-making toward communal
forest ownership and management.

CRS-7
The Farm, Nutrition, and Bioenergy Act of 2007
On July 27, 2007, the House passed the 2007 farm bill, the Farm, Nutrition, and
Bioenergy Act of 2007 (H.R. 2419). It contains a forestry title (Title VIII) and two
woody biomass programs in the bioenergy title, while woody biomass and forest
practices are included in a wide array of other energy and conservation programs.
The forestry title sets priorities for national private forest conservation, requires
statewide assessments and strategies for forest resources, creates a new Forest
Resource Coordinating Committee, and directs competitive allocation for some state
assistance funding while allowing competitive allocation for funding innovative
projects. The bill would reauthorize three forestry programs through 2012. The bill
also includes an Emergency Forest Restoration Program to provide assistance for
restoration efforts for forests damaged by natural factors. Finally, the forestry title
provides a competitive grant program to Hispanic-serving institutions to increase
diversity in forestry and related fields.
One significant aspect of the House-passed bill is the lack of a private forest
landowner assistance program, consistent with the Administration’s proposal. This
would mark the first time since the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act was enacted
in 1978 that no such forest landowner financial aid program is authorized.
Forestry practices and woody biomass are addressed elsewhere in the 2007 farm
bill, as well. Many of the existing and proposed conservation programs include
forestry practices as applicable conservation activities that qualify for cost-share
assistance. (For more information on agriculture conservation programs, see CRS
Report RL33556, Soil and Water Conservation: An Overview and CRS Report
RL34060, Conservation and the 2007 Farm Bill, both by Jeffrey A. Zinn.) Also,
many of the existing and proposed bioenergy programs include woody biomass as a
possible feedstock. (For more information on agriculture bioenergy, see CRS Report
RL32712, Agriculture-Based Renewable Energy Production, by Randy Schnepf.)
These programs that include forest-related activities, but are not focused primarily
on these activities, are not included in this report.
National Priorities. The House-passed 2007 farm bill establishes a new set
of national priorities for federal assistance for private forest conservation. It adds a
new subsection to §2 of the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978:
(c) Priorities — In allocating funds appropriated or otherwise made available
under this Act, the Secretary shall focus on the following national private forest
conservation priorities, notwithstanding other priorities specified elsewhere in
this Act:
(1) Conserving and managing working forest landscapes for multiple values
and uses.
(2) Protecting forests from threats, including wildfire, hurricane, tornado,
windstorm, snow or ice storm, flooding, drought, invasive species, or insect or
disease outbreak, and restoring appropriate forest types in response to such
threats.
(3) Enhancing public benefits from private forests, including air and water
quality, soil conservation, biological diversity, carbon storage, forest products,
forestry-related jobs, production of renewable energy, wildlife and wildlife
habitat, and recreation.

CRS-8
Thus, forestry assistance is to conserve working forests, protect and restore forests,
and enhance public benefits from private forests.
Statewide Assessments. The House-passed farm bill would require each
state to conduct a statewide assessment of forest resource conditions, trends, and
threats to receive federal forestry assistance funds. Each state also must prepare a
strategy for addressing the identified threats, along with a description of programs
and resources available for addressing the threats. The states have two years to
prepare the initial assessment and strategy, with annual updates for the strategy and
updates as needed for the assessment, and coordinate with specified agencies and
groups. The Secretary may use up to $10 million of appropriated forestry assistance
funds to assist states with their assessments and strategies.
Forest Resource Coordinating Committee. The House-passed bill
establishes a new Forest Resource Coordinating Committee, composed of the heads
of four USDA agencies (and chaired by the Chief of the Forest Service) and
representatives of state agencies, academia, and interest groups. The Committee is
to provide coordination and direction to the USDA agencies and to coordinate with
state agencies, focused on achieving the national priorities identified above.
Competitive Funding. The House-passed bill requires that the Secretary
allocate a portion of funds available under the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act
of 1978 on a competitive basis. The portion to be competitively allocated is “to be
determined by the Secretary,” in consultation with the Forest Resource Coordinating
Committee.
The bill also allows the Secretary to competitively allocate up to 5% of
cooperative assistance funding for “innovative national, regional, or local education,
outreach, or technology transfer projects” that contribute substantially to achieving
the national priorities. These projects require a 50% matching contribution.
Reauthorizations. The House-passed 2007 farm bill reauthorizes, through
2012, the Office of International Forestry, under §2405(d) of the Global Climate
Change Prevention Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. §6704(d)), and the Rural Revitalization
Technologies Program, under §2371(d)(2) of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation,
and Trade Act of 1990 (the 1990 farm bill; 7 U.S.C. §6601(d)(2)).
The bill also extends and modifies funding for Healthy Forest Reserves. These
reserves were authorized through 2008 in the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of
2003 (16 U.S.C. §§6571-6578). The extension requires the Secretary to provide $10
million annually for the program from the Commodity Credit Corporation for
FY2008-FY2012.
Emergency Reforestation. The House-passed 2007 farm bill adds an
Emergency Forest Restoration Program to an existing Emergency Conservation
Program under Title IV of the Agricultural Credit Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. §§2201-
2205). The original program focused on emergency protection and rehabilitation to
wind- or water-eroded agricultural lands. The expanded program provides up to 75%
of the costs (up to $50,000 annually) for landowners to rehabilitate or restore their

CRS-9
forest lands damaged by storms, fires, drought, invasive species, or insects or
diseases.
Hispanic-Serving Institutions. The House-passed farm bill authorizes a
program of competitive grants for undergraduate scholarships to recruit, retain, and
train Hispanics and other under-represented groups in forestry and related fields. The
program is authorized through 2012 at “such sums as may be necessary....”
Woody Biomass Energy. The bioeneregy title of the House-passed 2007
farm bill includes two provisions, both numbered §9019, to expand the use of woody
biomass in energy production. The first §9019 adds a new §9018 to Title IX of the
Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (the 2002 farm bill; 7 U.S.C.
§§8101 et seq.). This section creates a competitive research-and-development grant
program for using woody biomass, with priorities for low-value biomass, wood
biorefineries, wood-derived transportation fuels, and improved yield from energy
plantations. Mandatory funding is provided at $15 million annually through 2012
from the Commodity Credit Corporation.
The other §9019 creates a Community Wood Energy Program. This creates a
grant program for state and local governments to acquire wood energy systems for
public buildings and to develop and implement a community wood energy plan. The
state or local government is required to match the federal grant. The program is
permanently authorized at “such sums as may be necessary....”