National Forest System Management:
Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for
Congress
Katie Hoover
Analyst in Natural Resources Policy
January 29, 2015
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R43872
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
Summary
The 193 million acres of the National Forest System (NFS) comprise 154 national forests, 20
national grasslands, and several other federal land designations. Management of the NFS is one of
the three principal responsibilities of the Forest Service (FS), an agency within the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA). The other two principal responsibilities are providing
assistance to nonfederal forest owners and conducting forestry research. Most NFS lands are
concentrated in the western United States, although the FS administers more federal land in the
East than all other federal agencies combined.
The original forest reserves were established to improve and protect federal forests and
watersheds and provide a source of timber. Today, the statutory mission of the NFS is to provide a
variety of uses and values—timber production, watershed management, livestock grazing, energy
and mineral development, outdoor recreation, fish and wildlife habitat management, and
wilderness—without impairing the productivity of the land. Although there is not a statutory
mandate to do so, many of the uses and services available on NFS lands generate revenue. The
revenue may be used to offset agency costs, shared with the local communities containing the
NFS lands, or returned to the Treasury. Growing demands for the various uses, values, and
services have led to conflicts over the location and timing of activities.
In FY2015, the FS received $1.5 billion to fund NFS management, nearly 30% of the $5.1 billion
the agency received in discretionary appropriations. The NFS account includes several
subaccounts, programs, and activities, many of which reflect the different ways in which national
forests are used. These uses include activities related to recreation and wilderness, grazing,
wildlife and fish habitat management, forest products and timber sales, and energy and minerals
management. However, in FY2012, Congress authorized a pilot budget structure that
consolidated several of the budget line items for three FS regions. The FS asserts that the budget
flexibility provided in this Integrated Resources Restoration (IRR) program will facilitate various
land and resource management objectives across the NFS. A report on the pilot’s effectiveness is
due to Congress in FY2015.
Reducing the risk and expense of catastrophic wildfires on NFS lands has been a major focus of
Congress, the FS, and the public. Reducing the risk of catastrophic wildfires involves land and
resource management activities to restore the resilience and resistance of the forest ecosystem,
such as reducing accumulated levels of biomass (which fuels fires) through timber sales,
stewardship contracts, or prescribed burns. Many are also concerned about the cost of wildfires.
Although wildfire management is funded separately from NFS management, some are concerned
about the rising proportion of fire suppression costs on the rest of the FS budget. In FY2006,
wildfire management activities accounted for 44% of the agency’s total discretionary
appropriations; in FY2015, the $2.6 billion appropriated to wildfire management is 52% of the
agency’s total discretionary appropriation.
This report provides an overview of the history and management of the NFS, including a
discussion of the statutory framework for making land management plans and decisions as well as
for acquiring or disposing of system lands. The report also discusses the multiple uses of the NFS
and the revenue generated by those activities, appropriations to manage the NFS, and wildfire
management issues and costs. It concludes with a discussion of the issues that Congress often
debates regarding national forest management.
Congressional Research Service
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
Contents
Background ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Organization..................................................................................................................................... 2
Management of the National Forest System .................................................................................... 4
Overview and Land Management Planning .............................................................................. 4
Planning Regulations........................................................................................................... 5
National Forest System Uses ..................................................................................................... 6
Timber ................................................................................................................................. 8
Recreation ........................................................................................................................... 9
Fish and Wildlife Habitat .................................................................................................. 10
Range ................................................................................................................................. 10
Watersheds ........................................................................................................................ 11
Wilderness and Other Special Land Designations ............................................................ 11
Other Uses ......................................................................................................................... 12
Wildfire .................................................................................................................................... 12
NFS Appropriations ....................................................................................................................... 13
Integrated Resources Restoration Budget Line Item Pilot ...................................................... 16
Wildland Fire Management Appropriations ............................................................................ 16
NFS Land Ownership: Designation, Acquisition, and Disposal .................................................... 17
Issues for Congress ........................................................................................................................ 18
Figures
Figure 1. Map of the National Forest System .................................................................................. 4
Figure 2. FS Revenue by Type, FY2013 .......................................................................................... 8
Figure 3. FS Harvest Volume and Value, FY1940-FY2014 ............................................................. 9
Tables
Table 1. The National Forest System ............................................................................................... 3
Table 2. FS Revenue, FY2009-FY2013 ........................................................................................... 7
Table 3. NFS Appropriations, FY2011-FY2015 ............................................................................ 15
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 20
Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................... 20
Congressional Research Service
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
he National Forest System (NFS) is administered by the Forest Service (FS) in the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA). The NFS is comprised of national forests, national
Tgrasslands, and various other designations. Although 87% of NFS lands are in the West,
the FS administers more federal land in the East than all other federal agencies combined. NFS
lands are administered for sustained yields of multiple uses, including outdoor recreation
(camping, hiking, hunting, sightseeing, etc.), livestock grazing, timber harvesting, watershed
protection, and fish and wildlife habitats.
Ownership and use of the national forests—and federal lands more generally—have stirred
controversy for decades. Conflicting public values concerning the national forests raise many
questions and issues: how managers should balance conflicting uses, whether Congress should
designate specially protected areas, and when and how the FS should collect and distribute fees
for land and resource uses, among others. Congress continues to examine these questions through
legislative proposals, program oversight, and annual appropriations.
Background
In 1891, Congress granted the President the authority (now repealed) to establish forest reserves
from the public domain.1 Six years later, Congress stated that the forest reserves were
to improve and protect the forest within the reservation, or for the purpose of securing favorable
conditions of water flows, and to furnish a continuous supply of timber for the use and necessities
of the citizens of the United States.2
Initially, the reserves were administered by the Division of Forestry in the Department of the
Interior’s General Land Office. In 1905, this division was combined with the USDA Bureau of
Forestry (renamed the Forest Service), and the administration of the 56 million acres of forest
reserves (renamed national forests in 1907)3 was transferred to the new agency within the
Department of Agriculture.4 NFS management is still one of the three principal FS
responsibilities. The other two principal responsibilities are providing assistance programs to
nonfederal forest owners and conducting forestry research programs.5
In 1906 and 1907, President Theodore Roosevelt more than doubled the acreage of the forest
reserves. In response, Congress limited the authority of the President to add to the system in
certain states in 1907.6 In 1910, Congress continued the limitation, but then in 1911, Congress
1 Public domain lands consist of lands ceded by the original states or obtained from a foreign sovereign through
purchase, treaty, or other means (e.g., the Louisiana Purchase in 1803). Public domain lands may be governed by
different laws than acquired federal lands, which were obtained from individuals or states.
2 Organic Administration Act, Act of June 4, 1897 (16 U.S.C. 473).
3 Act of March 4, 1907 (P.L. 59-242 as amended, 16 U.S.C. 499).
4 The Transfer Act, Act of February 1, 1905 (P.L. 58-33, 16 U.S.C. 472, 554).
5 The second principal FS program continues the original role of the Bureau of Forestry: to provide forestry assistance
to states and nonindustrial private forest owners. The authorities for assistance programs were consolidated and
clarified in the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978. Forestry research is the third principal FS program.
Congress first authorized forestry research in 1928 “to insure adequate supplies of timber and other forest productsâ€;
the research authorities were streamlined by the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Research Act of 1978. For
more information, see CRS Report RL31065, Forestry Assistance Programs.
6 Act of March 4, 1907 (P.L. 59-242 as amended, 16 U.S.C. 499). The act limited the presidential authority to establish
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
1
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
passed the Weeks Act7 to authorize additions to the NFS through the purchase of private lands.
Presidential authority to proclaim new national forests was terminated in 1976.8 Under the Weeks
Act and other authorities, the system has continued to grow slowly, from 154 million acres in
1919 to 193 million acres in 2014.9 This growth has resulted from purchases and donations of
private land and from land transfers, primarily from the BLM.
Organization
The NFS includes 154 national forests with 188.4 million acres (97.6% of the system), 20
national grasslands with 3.8 million acres (2.0%), and 108 other areas—such as land utilization
projects, purchase units, and research and experimental areas—with 0.9 million acres (0.5%).10
Each national forest unit (which may consist of one or more national forests) is administered by a
forest supervisor. The NFS units are arranged into nine administrative regions, each headed by a
regional forester. The nine regional foresters report to the NFS deputy chief, who reports to the
chief of the Forest Service. The chief has traditionally been a career employee of the agency. The
chief reports to the USDA Secretary through the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and
Environment.
The NFS regions are often referred to by number rather than by name. Table 1 identifies the
number, states encompassed, and acreage for each of the regions. NFS lands are concentrated in
the seven western FS regions (see Figure 1). Inholdings, shown in Table 1, are lands (primarily
private) within the designated boundaries of the national forests (and other NFS units) that are not
administered by the FS. Inholdings sometimes pose difficulties for FS land management, because
the agency does not regulate their development and use, which may be incompatible with desired
uses of the federal lands, and constraints on access across inholdings may limit access to some
federal lands. Many private landowners, however, object to the idea of possible federal
restrictions on the use of their lands and especially to unfettered public access across their lands.11
(...continued)
national forests in Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, and Wyoming. Roosevelt proclaimed additional
reserves after it was enacted but before he signed it into law.
7 Act of March 1, 1911 (P.L. 61-435 as amended, 16 U.S.C. 480).
8 Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, Act of October 21, 1976 (P.L. 94-579, 43 U.S.C. §§1701 et seq.).
9 U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Land Areas Report (LAR)—as of September 30, 2014, Table 1,
http://www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/lar/LAR2014/lar2014index.html.
10 Ibid.
11 Under the Weeks Act, FS has the authority to purchase inholdings, and FS does have a policy of acquiring inholdings
to improve management efficiencies Forest Service, FY2015 Budget Justification, pp. 7-3, http://www.fs.fed.us/about-
agency/budget-performance.
Congressional Research Service
2
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
Table 1. The National Forest System
Forest Service
National Forest
Region
States Containing NFS Lands
System Acreagea
Region Name
No. States
Federal
Inholdings
Total
Northern
1
ID, MT, ND
25,548,143
2,594,038
28,142,181
Rocky Mountain
2
CO, NE, SD, WY
22,050,572
2,550,885
24,601,457
Southwestern 3 AZ,
NM
20,641,639
1,636,465
22,278,104
Intermountain
4
ID, NV, UT, WY
31,884,646
2,358,776
34,243,422
Pacific Southwest
5
CA
20,168,296
3,473,987
23,642,283
Pacific Northwest 6
OR, WA
24,968,956
3,024,200
27,993,156
Southern
8
AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, LA, MS, NC, OK, PR, SC, TN, TX, VA
13,399,987
12,101,037
25,501,024
Eastern
9
IL, IN, ME, MI, MN, MO, NH, NY, OH, PA, VT, WI, WV
12,237,633 10,006,681
22,169,804
Alaska 10
AK
22,237,633
1,244,328
23,481,961
National Forest System
193,062,995
38,990,397
232,053,392
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Land Areas of the National Forest System, (LAR)—as
of September 30, 2014, Tables 1 and 2, http://www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/lar/LAR2014/lar2014index.html.
Notes: In 1966, Region 7 (the Lake States Region) was merged with Region 9 (the Northeastern Region) to
form the current Eastern Region. Although this merger left 9 regions, the numbering sequence skips 7 and ends
with 10, as shown in the table.
a. Federal is federally owned land managed by the FS. Inholdings are private and other government lands within
NFS boundaries that are not administered or regulated by the FS.
Congressional Research Service
3
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
Figure 1. Map of the National Forest System
Source: Prepared by CRS from data available from FS Geodata Clearinghouse, http://www.data.fs.usda/gov/
geodata/edw/datasets.php.
Management of the National Forest System
Overview and Land Management Planning
The management goals for the national forests were articulated in Section 1 of the Multiple-Use
Sustained-Yield Act of 1960,12 which states:
It is the policy of the Congress that the national forests are established and shall be administered
for outdoor recreation, range, timber, watershed, and wildlife and fish purposes. The purposes of
this Act are declared to be supplemental to, but not in derogation of, the purposes for which the
national forests were established as set forth in the Act of June 4, 1897.... The establishment and
maintenance of areas as wilderness are consistent with the purposes and provisions of this Act.
The act directs land and resource management of the national forests for the combination of uses
that best meets the needs of the American people. Management of the resources is to be
12 Act of June 12, 1960, P.L. 86-517, 16 U.S.C. 528-531.
Congressional Research Service
4
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
coordinated for multiple use—considering the relative values of the various resources but not
necessarily maximizing dollar returns nor requiring that any one particular area be managed for
all or even most uses. The act also calls for sustained yield—a high level of resource outputs
maintained in perpetuity but without impairing the productivity of the land. Other statutes that
apply to all federal agencies—such as the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)13
and the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA)14—as well as other FS-specific statutes, also
apply.15
FS planning and management are guided primarily by the Forest and Rangeland Renewable
Resources Planning Act of 1974 (RPA),16 and the National Forest Management Act of 1976
(NFMA).17 Together, these laws encourage foresight in the use of the nation’s forest resources
and establish a long-range planning process for the management of the NFS. RPA assessments are
published approximately every ten years and the assessments report the status and trends of the
renewable resources on all forests and rangelands.
Planning Regulations
NFMA requires that the FS prepare a comprehensive land and resource management plan for each
NFS unit, coordinated with the national RPA planning process. Plans must be revised every 10 to
15 years to address changing conditions, management goals, and public use. The plans must use
an interdisciplinary approach, including economic analysis and the identification of costs and
benefits of all resource uses. The plans must also be developed and revised with public
involvement and must be prepared in accordance with NEPA. Regulations (often called the
planning rules) to establish the procedures to develop, amend, and revise plans were issued in
1979 and then revised in 1982, 2000, 2005, 2008, and 2012. Since the Clinton Administration
began debating the regulations in the 1990s, each successive presidential administration has
revised the planning rule at least once, and several regulations have been overturned by the
courts.
The Clinton Administration’s 2000 regulations (“2000 planning ruleâ€)18 would have increased
emphasis on ecological sustainability during the forest planning process. The George W. Bush
Administration delayed implementation of the Clinton regulations three times out of concerns
about implementation and the emphasis on biological sustainability and then replaced them
before they went into effect. The Bush Administration promulgated final rules in 2005 (“2005
planning ruleâ€)19 to balance ecological sustainability with economic and social considerations.
The rules would have also exempted NFMA plans from NEPA and ESA. Interests successfully
challenged the 2005 planning rule, arguing that the new rules reduced environmental protection
without adequate public comment and ESA consideration.20 The Administration reissued the 2005
13 P.L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. §§4321-4347.
14 P.L. 93-205, 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544.
15 For a list of laws under which the FS operates, see the agency’s website at http://www.fs.fed.us/publications/laws/
selected-laws.pdf and http://www.fs.fed.us/publications/laws/new-laws-since-selected-laws.pdf. Access to FS
directives, manuals, and handbooks is at http://www.fs.fed.us/im/directives/.
16 P.L. 93-378, 16 U.S.C. §§1600 et seq.
17 P.L. 94-588; 16 U.S.C. §1601 et al.
18 65 Federal Register 67514 (November 9, 2000).
19 70 Federal Register 1022 (January 5, 2005).
20 Citizens for Better Forestry v. USDA, 481 F.Supp. 2d 1059 (N.D.Cal., 2007).
Congressional Research Service
5
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
rule as a proposed rule to provide for the court-ordered public comment and issued new final
rules in April 2008.21 The court also invalidated the 2008 planning rule for violating NEPA and
ESA,22 after which the FS reverted back to using 1982 procedures.
The Obama Administration promulgated final planning regulations in 2012 (2012 planning
rule).23 The 2012 planning rule establishes an adaptive, three-phase planning framework to
emphasize ecological sustainability, landscape-scale restoration, and science-based decisions
informed by public values. Plans are to also account for the potential impacts of climate change.
Logging, ranching, and off-highway vehicle groups have filed several lawsuits challenging the
ecological sustainability provisions in the 2012 planning rule, among others.
The FS has developed 125 plans to guide the management of the 154 national forests and 20
national grasslands in the NFS.24 As of FY2014, 60 plans have been revised, and 33 units were in
the processing of revising their plans. Of those in process, 17 are using the 1982 procedures under
the 2000 planning rule to conduct the revisions; the others are using the procedures established in
the 2012 planning rule.
National Forest System Uses
As noted above, NFS lands are administered for sustained yields of multiple uses, including
outdoor recreation, range (livestock grazing), timber, watershed, wildlife and fish purposes;
wilderness, which was added as a use in 1964;25 and mineral extraction, as well as other uses and
services. The various uses of NFS lands are to be balanced in the “combination that will best meet
the needs of the American people†with the “harmonious and coordinated management of the
various resources, each with the other ... in perpetuity of a high-level annual or regular periodic
output ... without impairment of the productivity of the land.â€26
Although not a stated statutory purpose of the national forests, many of the uses and services of
the national forests generate revenue. This revenue may be used to offset agency costs, shared
with the communities containing the national forests, or deposited into the General Treasury,
depending on the use, location, and varying statutory requirements. In FY2013, the FS generated
a total of $223.6 million (see Figure 2).27 Table 2 lists the revenue generated by type for the last
five fiscal years.
21 73 Federal Register 21467 (April 21, 2008).
22 Citizens for Better Forestry v. USDA, 632 F.Supp. 2d 968 (N.D.Cal., 2009).
23 77 Federal Register 21260 (April 9, 2012).
24 Forest Service, FY2015 Budget Justification, pp. 5-33, http://www.fs.fed.us/about-agency/budget-performance.
25 The Wilderness Act of 1964, P.L. 88-577, Section 4; 16 U.S.C. §529.
26 16 U.S.C. §531.
27 Forest Service, All Service Receipts: Receipts Summary Report, FY2013, ASR-04.
Congressional Research Service
6
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
Table 2. FS Revenue, FY2009-FY2013
(dollars in millions)
FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013
Recreation
$50.2 $53.3 $56.8 $55.1 $61.4
KV
$45.7 $44.1 $52.5 $54.8 $49.4
Timber
$15.9 $17.2 $27.2 $26.1 $32.0
Salvage
$22.9 $22.1 $26.0 $24.1 $28.6
Land
Use
$14.8 $16.3 $18.8 $20.9 $18.0
Power
$5.3 $8.3 $24.2 $13.3 $8.0
Grazing
$5.3 $5.2 $5.2 $5.1
$4.8
Minerals
$1.4 $0.9 $0.7 $2.0 $1.9
Other
$20.9 $19.0 $24.8 $23.0 $19.6
Total
$182.3 $186.4 $236.2 $224.4 $223.6
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, All Service Receipts (ASR), Final Forest Statement of
Receipts (ASR-13-2).
Notes: Data are provided in current dollars. Timber revenue is amounts collected for the sale of timber and
certain other forest products. Grazing revenue is amounts collected for grazing fees in the national forests, with
both the eastern and western grazing fees combined. Land use revenue is amounts col ected for land uses except
power, minerals, or recreational uses. Recreation revenue is amounts collected for all types of recreation,
including user fees col ected under the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (P.L. 108-447, as amended).
Power revenue is amounts col ected for uses authorized by FS permits or easements for al types of power-
generating projects and power transmission line rights-of-way. Minerals revenue is amounts collected from the
sale of minerals (including quartz crystals) and permit fees. It includes mineral lease and permit fees collected by
DOI on acquired lands having national forest status but does not include any mineral revenue derived from
National Forest System land that was established from the public domain. KV revenue is collections authorized
under the Knutson-Vandenberg Act of June 9, 1930, from timber sale purchasers for sale area improvement
work and reforestation. Salvage sale revenue is derived from payments for salvageable material used to facilitate
the timely removal of damaged timber. “Other†revenue includes road credits and deposits made by timber sale
contract purchasers, and deposits to the Timber Sale Pipeline Restoration Fund, which is derived from certain
timber sale revenues.
Congressional Research Service
7
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
Figure 2. FS Revenue by Type, FY2013
Minerals, 1%
Other, 9%
Grazing, 2%
Recreation, 27%
Power, 4%
Land Use, 8%
Salvage, 13%
KV, 22%
Timber, 14%
Source: Prepared by CRS with data from U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, All Service Receipts
(ASR), Final Forest Statement of Receipts (ASR-13-2).
Note: See Table 2 notes for a description of the revenue categories.
Timber
One of the first uses of the early forest reserves was to “furnish a continuous supply of timber.â€28
The first chief of the FS, Gifford Pinchot, initially believed the agency could eventually become
self-supporting through the production of timber, although he eventually abandoned the idea.29
However, FS timber sales and revenue generation were negligible until the 1950s, when the post–
World War II housing boom, combined with declining competition from private timber sales, led
to increasing NFS timber sales (see Figure 3). For many years after, the FS was a major provider
of timber for the wood products industry, generally selling between 10 billion and 12 billion
board feet of timber annually (about 20%-25% of total U.S. wood supply).30 Since the 1990s, FS
timber sales have fallen, totaling around 2 billion board feet—less than a quarter of the historic
level—annually since 1999. The decline in harvest levels is likely attributable to a multitude of
factors, including (but not limited to) changing legislative directives and related forest
management policies and practices—such as increased planning and procedural requirements—as
well as changing market dynamics for wood products, public preferences, and litigation.31
28 Organic Administration Act, Act of June 4, 1897, 16 U.S.C. 473.
29 Harold K. Steen, The U.S. Forest Service: A History (University of Washington Press, 1976), p. 91.
30 The revenue generated from the production of timber still remained less than the cost of NFS management.
31 A CRS memorandum on Forest Service harvest levels is available from the author upon request.
Congressional Research Service
8
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
Figure 3. FS Harvest Volume and Value, FY1940-FY2014
(2013 dol ars)
Source: CRS. FY1977-FY2014 data: U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Forest Cut and Sold
Reports, http://www.fs.fed.us/forestmanagement/products/sold-harvest/cut-sold.shtml. FY1940-FY1976 data: U.S.
Forest Service legislative affairs office.
The FS is increasingly using timber harvests as a tool to achieve various land and resource
management objectives or in the context of larger restoration objectives—such as enhancing
ecosystem or watershed conditions—in addition to timber production. For example, the FS has
permanent authority32 to enter into stewardship contracts—contracts with private parties for
stewardship activities (e.g., thinning to reduce potential wildfire fuels) that include commercial
timber to offset some of the stewardship costs. The FS may also harvest trees damaged or killed
in fires or other disturbance events—called salvage harvesting—in part to facilitate forest
restoration and recovery and also to capture some of the economic value of the federal resources
and generate revenue to fund other restoration activities.
Recreation
Outdoor recreation is one of the most popular uses of the national forests. The FS reports that
there are nearly 160 million annual recreational visits for activities such as hunting, fishing,
wildlife viewing, hiking, camping, skiing, snowboarding, horseback riding, and more.33 Private
companies also provide additional recreational opportunities on the national forests through
recreation special use authorizations for downhill ski resorts, campgrounds, resorts, marinas,
recreational events, outfitters, and guides.
32 Stewardship contracting was first authorized on a temporary basis in 1999, extended several times, and then
permanently authorized by the Agricultural Act of 2014 (2014 farm bill, P.L. 113-79, Title VIII).
33 Forest Service, FY2015 Budget Justification, pp. 5-5, http://www.fs.fed.us/about-agency/budget-performance.
Congressional Research Service
9
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
Some recreation uses, such as the use of off-highway vehicles and snowmobiles in the national
forests, have generated controversy.34 In 2004, the FS chief identified unmanaged recreation—
"increasing use of the national forests for outdoor activities ...including the use of off-highway
vehiclesâ€â€”as one of the four major threats to the ecological integrity of NFS lands.35 In response,
the agency has been conducting a travel management planning process to designate which
national forest roads and trails are available for motorized use and prohibiting their use outside
the designated system.
Recreation on NFS lands also generates the most revenue for the FS. In FY2013, recreation
receipts totaled $61.4 million (27% of the total revenue generated).36 In 2004, the Federal Lands
Recreation Enhancement Act37 established a recreation fee program for the FS (and the other
federal land management agencies). The program was set to expire in 2014 but was extended
until September 30, 2016.38 The act authorizes different kinds of fees, outlines criteria for
establishing fees, prohibits certain fees, and allows the FS to use collections without further
appropriation. While Congress sought to make the actual users pay fees, some users object to fees
for national forest recreation, arguing that the fees amount to paying twice (once through
taxation) to support the agency. Congress may consider allowing the recreation fee program to
sunset or may consider extending the program again, with or without modifications.
Fish and Wildlife Habitat
The NFS contains important fish and wildlife habitats as well as botanically significant resources,
which contribute ecological, recreational, economic, and cultural benefits to the nation. These
resources include fishable streams, lakes, wetlands, and wildlife—such as elk, bighorn sheep, and
wild turkey—which are enjoyed by a variety of recreational users. In addition, the NFS contains
over 400 species of plants and animals listed as threatened or endangered and 3,500 that have
been designated as sensitive and require special management.
Range
The FS issues permits and leases for grazing private livestock on approximately 90 million acres
of NFS lands. Permits and leases generally cover a 10-year period and may be renewed. Further,
expired permits and leases may be automatically renewed through FY2015 while the agencies
process a backlog of permits and leases needing evaluation.39
Fees are charged under a formula established by law in 1978, then continued indefinitely through
an executive order issued by President Reagan in 1986.40 The FS charges a grazing fee of $1.35
34 See CRS Report R42920, Motorized Recreation on Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service Lands.
35 Forest Service, “Four Threats,†updated October 30, 2006, http://www.fs.fed.us/projects/four-threats/.
36 Forest Service, All Service Receipts: Receipts Summary Report, FY2013, ASR-04.
37 P.L. 108-447.
38 P.L. 113-46 extended the program through December 8,2015 and P.L. 113-235 extended the program through
September 30, 2016.
39 P.L. 113-76, §411.
40 Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978, P.L. 95-514, 43 U.S.C. §§1901, 1905. Executive Order 12548, 51
Federal Register 5985, February 19, 1986.
Congressional Research Service
10
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
per head month.41 This is the minimum fee established under current law. Grazing levels have
generally declined very slowly over the past several decades. BLM lands provide more grazing
than do the national forests, and the BLM typically leads federal efforts on grazing
management.42
Watersheds
Protecting watershed health was one of the original purposes of the national forests. This includes
the management of surface and groundwater resources as well as water uses and rights on NFS
lands. Nearly one-fifth of the nation’s water originates on NFS lands.43 In addition, watersheds
support ecological services such as productive soils, biological diversity, and fish and wildlife
habitat, including spawning and rearing habitat for sport and commercial fish species.
Watersheds also provide flood control benefits. The FS established the Watershed Condition
Framework to assess and prioritize the conditions of the 15,000 watersheds containing significant
portions of NFS lands. The initial assessment, completed in FY2011, classified the conditions of
52% of the watersheds as good, 45% as fair, and 4% as poor.44 In FY2012, the FS developed
watershed action plans to guide restoration activities and improve the condition class of priority
watersheds. Twelve watersheds improved their condition class in FY2013. Other watershed
restoration activities include decommissioning roads and restoring or enhancing stream habitat.
Wilderness and Other Special Land Designations
Congress has also provided management direction within the NFS by creating special
designations for certain areas. Some of these designations—wilderness areas,45 wild and scenic
rivers,46 and national trails—are part of larger management systems affecting several federal land
management agencies.47
The NFS also includes several other types of land designations. The NFS contains many national
game refuges and wildlife preserves, national recreation areas and scenic areas, national
monuments, and other congressionally designated areas.48 Resource development and use is
generally more restricted in these specially designated areas than on general NFS lands, and
specific guidance is typically provided with each designation.
Finally, management to preserve or develop FS roadless areas (areas that have been reviewed for
wilderness designation but have not been designated as wilderness by Congress) continues to be
41 The BLM charges the same fee. Head month is one month’s use and occupancy of the range by one animal.
42 For more information, see CRS Report RS21232, Grazing Fees: Overview and Issues.
43 Forest Service, “Watershed, Fish, Wildlife, Air and Rare Plants,†http://www.fs.fed.us/biology/watershed/#focus.
44 Forest Service, FY2015 Budget Justification, pp. 5-5, http://www.fs.fed.us/about-agency/budget-performance.
45 For more information, see CRS Report RL31447, Wilderness: Overview and Statistics.
46 For more information, see CRS Report R42614, The National Wild and Scenic Rivers System: A Brief Overview.
47 For more information, see CRS Report R43429, Federal Lands and Natural Resources: Overview and Selected
Issues for the 113th Congress.
48 Forest Service, Land Areas of the National Forest System, as of September 30, 2014, Tables 10-12 and 15-26,
http://www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/lar/LAR2014/lar2014index.html. For more information, see CRS Report R41285,
Congressionally Designated Special Management Areas in the National Forest System.
Congressional Research Service
11
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
controversial.49 Questions persist over the extent FS should manage to protect the wilderness
characteristics of the approximately 58.5 million acres of roadless areas by prohibiting or
permitting certain uses to occur. In 2001, President Clinton proposed a new rule to prohibit most
road construction and timber harvesting in these areas. President George W. Bush delayed
implementation of the Clinton rule and proposed an alternative policy. Both were heavily
litigated; however, the Clinton roadless rule remains intact after the Supreme Court refused to
review a lower court’s decisions in 2012.50
Other Uses
NFS lands are also used for other purposes and services supporting national policies and federal
land laws, such as electricity transmission, telecommunication sites, and commercial filming. The
use of the national forests for such activities (and various recreation programs) is permitted
through special use authorizations (SUAs). SUAs establish the terms and conditions for the use of
the NFS lands.
Much of the NFS is open to mineral and energy resource exploration and development.51 Oil,
natural gas, and coal exploration and production is governed by the Mineral Lands Leasing Act of
1920,52 which also requires the BLM to manage the subsurface rights to virtually all federal lands,
including NFS lands. Approximately 5 million acres underlying NFS lands are currently leased
for oil, gas, coal, and geothermal operations.53 There are an estimated 19,000 federal and private
oil and gas wells on NFS lands, and coal produced from NFS land accounted for 25% of nation’s
coal production. The FS also administers approximately 160,000 mining claims. Receipts and
royalties generated for energy and mineral activities are collected by the Office of Natural
Resources Revenue.
Renewable energy projects—such as solar and wind projects—are allowed on NFS lands,
generally through a right-of-way SUA. Although FS has not approved any SUAs for solar
projects to date, the agency did approve a utility-scale wind power facility SUA in 2012.
However, implementation of the project to construct and operate a 15-turbine facility on the
Green Mountain National Forest is pending the outcome of ongoing litigation.70
Wildfire
Since 2000, much of the focus of discussions and legislative proposals on FS management has
been on the risk of catastrophic wildfires, especially in the intermountain West. Several recent fire
seasons were, by most standards, among the worst since 1960.54 Many believe these fires reflect
degraded forest ecological conditions derived from excessive accumulations of biomass—dead
and dying trees, heavy undergrowth, and dense stands of small trees, also called fuels—
exacerbated by drought and climate change and by the increasing numbers of homes in the
wildland-urban interface (i.e., wildlands near communities threatened by potential wildfire
49 See CRS Report RL30647, National Forest System (NFS) Roadless Area Initiatives.
50 Wyoming v. Department of Agriculture, 133 S.Ct. 417 (2012).
51 For more information, see CRS Report R40806, Energy Projects on Federal Lands: Leasing and Authorization.
52 30 U.S.C. §181 et seq.
53 Forest Service, FY2015 Budget Justification, pp. 5-56, http://www.fs.fed.us/about-agency/budget-performance.
54 See CRS Report R43077, Wildfire Management: Federal Funding and Related Statistics.
Congressional Research Service
12
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
conflagrations).55 These observers advocate rapid action to improve forest resilience, including
prescribed burning, thinning, and salvaging dead and dying trees, to protect NFS forests and
nearby private lands and homes.56 Critics counter that authorities to reduce fuel levels are
adequate, treatments that remove commercial timber degrade forest health and waste taxpayer
dollars, and expedited processes for treatments are a device to reduce public oversight of
commercial timber harvesting.57
NFS Appropriations
The FS receives both discretionary and mandatory appropriations.58 Although it is an agency
within the USDA, the FS receives its discretionary appropriations through Title III of regular
Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations bills.59 Annual mandatory
appropriations are provided under existing authorizing statutes. Laws authorizing mandatory
appropriations allow the FS to spend money without further action by Congress, and the budget
authority for several of these mandatory spending accounts is dependent on revenue generated by
activities on the national forests. In FY2015, the FS received $5.79 billion in total funding, of
which $5.06 billion (87%) was discretionary funds and $731.00 million (13%) was mandatory
funds.60
Management of the NFS is primarily funded as one of the FS’s main discretionary accounts.61
However, several of the mandatory accounts also fund NFS activities, although this report focuses
on discretionary appropriations. The NFS account averaged approximately 30% of the FS
discretionary appropriations over the last five years. FS budget requests and Interior
Appropriations Subcommittee documents typically allocate monies in each account among
various subaccounts and, in some cases, among specific programs and activities. The FS further
allocates its appropriations—at the account, subaccount, and program activity levels—among the
nine FS regions, five research stations, two service centers and laboratories, and the national
headquarters office in Washington, D.C. Once the funds have been allocated to the regions and
programs, the money is then further allocated to each national forest. This can make analyzing
appropriations by region or by forest challenging.
55 See CRS Report RS21880, Wildfire Protection in the Wildland-Urban Interface.
56 See for example, Debra Kahn, “House GOP bill would speed timber sales from Rim Fire,†Environment & Energy
Daily, October 1, 2013.H.R. 3188 from the 113th Congress.
57 Ibid.
58 See CRS Report R42388, The Congressional Appropriations Process: An Introduction.
59 The FS has received additional discretionary monies through supplemental appropriations bills. In addition, Congress
has used continuing appropriations resolutions to maintain funding for the agency when regular appropriations bills
have not been enacted before the start of the fiscal year and, in some cases, to provide full-year funding. See CRS
Report R43417, Forest Service Appropriations, FY2010-FY2014: In Brief; and CRS Report R43617, Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations.
60 FS discretionary figures reflect supplemental appropriations made for wildfire management purposes. Discretionary
figures are from detailed funding tables prepared by the House Committee on Appropriations. Mandatory figures were
derived from the FS FY2015 Budget Justification.
61 The other main FS discretionary accounts include Forest and Rangeland Research, State and Private Forestry, Capital
Improvement and Maintenance, Land Acquisition, Wildland Fire Management, and several other relatively smaller
accounts.
Congressional Research Service
13
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
The NFS account includes several subaccounts, programs, and activities, many of which reflect
the different ways the national forests are used. The largest subaccount is Forest Products, which
generally receives slightly more than 20% of the NFS appropriation and funds the Timber Sale
program.
The NFS subaccounts generally include the following (listed in the order they generally appear in
congressional appropriations documents):62
• Land Management Planning funds the development, maintenance, and revision
of the forest plans (FY2015: $37.8 million, 3% of NFS).
• Inventory and Monitoring funds the acquisition, analysis, and storage of data that
support planning and other programs, such as restoration activities, climate
change impact evaluations, and watershed condition assessments (FY2015:
$151.0 million, 10% of NFS).
• Recreation, Heritage, and Wilderness funds activities related to the management
of recreation opportunities on the NFS, administering recreation special use
authorizations, supporting the protection of heritage resources, and protection of
designated wilderness areas and wild and scenic rivers (FY2015: $261.7 million,
18% of NFS).
• Grazing Management funds the administration of livestock grazing use permits
on the NFS and implementing environmental reviews of all FS grazing
allotments as statutorily mandated63 (FY2015: 55.4 million, 4% of NFS).
• Forest Products funds activities to analyze, prepare, offer, award, and administer
timber sales, stewardship contracts, and special forest products permits on NFS
lands (FY2015: $339.1 million, 23% of NFS).
• Vegetation and Watershed Management funds restoration-related management
activities to improve forest and rangeland conditions, fish and wildlife habitat,
water quality, quantity, and timing of stream flows, among others (FY2015:
$184.7 million, 12% of NFS).
• Wildlife and Fish Habitat Management funds activities to restore, recover, and
maintain wildlife and fish—particularly rare animal and plant species—and their
habitats on NFS lands (FY2015: $140.5 million, 9% of NFS).
• Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program Fund (CFLRP),
authorized in 2009,64 funds 23 landscape-scale restoration projects for 10 years in
priority landscapes (FY2015: $40.0 million, 3% of NFS).
• Minerals and Geology Management funds the administration of mineral
operations on NFS lands, management and mitigation of abandoned mine lands,
management of geologic resources and hazards, and management of
62 This list reflects the main subaccounts as of the FY2015 appropriation but does not include the Valles Caldera
National Preserve subaccount which received $3.4 in FY2015, or less than 1% of the NFS appropriation. Congress has
restructured the subaccounts in the past and may do so in the future, sometimes at the request of the agency, so this list
may or may not reflect the same subaccounts in future appropriations.
63 Rescissions Act of 1995, P.L. 104-14 §504.
64 Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-11, Title IV).
Congressional Research Service
14
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
environmental compliance and restoration related to mineral activities (FY2015:
$76.4 million, 5% of NFS).
• Landownership Management provides funds for the basic land management or
real estate activities necessary to support all NFS programs, such as granting
special use authorizations for energy transmission corridors and processing land
exchanges (FY2015: $77.7 million, 5% of NFS).
• Law Enforcement Operations responds to emergencies, investigates illegal
activities (such as illegal drug activities), and conducts crime prevention
activities on NFS lands (FY2015: $126.7 million, 8% of NFS).
Table 3 provides appropriations data for the NFS subaccounts over the last five fiscal years.
Table 3. NFS Appropriations, FY2011-FY2015
(dollars in millions)
FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015
Land
Management
Planning
$45.0 $39.9 $37.2 $37.8 $37.8
Inventory
and
Monitoring
$167.2 $161.7 $150.7 $151.0 $151.0
Recreation, Heritage, and Wilderness
$281.6
$281.2
$261.9
$261.7
$261.7
Grazing
Management
$49.7 $55.4 $51.6 $55.4 $55.4
Forest
Products
$336.0 $335.5 $318.3 $339.1 $339.1
Vegetation and Watershed Management
$184.3
$184.0
$172.2
$184.7
$184.7
Wildlife and Fish Habitat Management
$140.3
$140.0
$130.9
$140.5
$140.5
CFLRPa
$15.0 $39.9 $37.9 $40.0 $40.0
Minerals
and
Geology
Management
$83.6 $83.4 $77.7 $76.4 $76.4
Landownership
Management
$91.8 $85.7 $79.9 $77.7 $77.7
Law
Enforcement
Operations
$144.3 $143.8 $134.0 $126.7 $126.7
Otherb
$3.4 $3.4 $3.2 $5.4 $3.4
Total
$1,542.2 $1,554.1 $1,455.3 $1,496.3 $1,494.3
Source: CRS. Data compiled from detailed funding tables prepared by the House Committee on
Appropriations.
Notes: Data are presented in current dollars.
a. The CFLRP Fund first received appropriations in FY2011.
b. Other includes appropriations for the Valles Caldera National Preserve each year and Restoration
Partnerships in FY2014.
Congressional Research Service
15
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
Integrated Resources Restoration Budget Line Item Pilot65
The FS proposed a new budget structure for the NFS account by combining its restoration-
focused work into one budget line item, Integrated Resources Restoration (IRR), in FY2011. The
FS argued that the current budgeting policy constrained multiple use management, because
management activities are often hard to categorize, and they provide benefits for a variety of
programs. The IRR proposal combined the forest products, wildlife and fish habitat management,
vegetation and watershed management, and CFLRP subaccounts into one budget line item.
Congress did not enact the FY2011 proposal. The IRR request was repeated in FY2012.66
Congress authorized up to $68 million transferred from other NFS subaccounts to implement the
IRR as a pilot program in FY2012.67 The pilot was authorized to be conducted in three regions (1,
3, and 4). While the committee report stated that the “proof of concept†pilot should occur for at
least three years, the FY2012 law did not specify a sunset date for the pilot.68 Implementation of
the authority and program began late in FY2012.
Congress has continued to authorize the transfer of funds to implement the pilot IRR program for
FY2014 and FY2015. In FY2015, the FS is due to report to Congress the status of the program in
the pilot regions. Congress may consider implementing the IRR across the NFS, continuing the
IRR in the three pilot regions, discontinuing the pilot, or implementing other proposals to modify
the NFS discretionary account structure. IRR proponents—notably, the FS—assert that the
increased budgetary flexibility facilitates integrated land and resource management objectives to
reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire and improve forest resistance and resiliency to disturbance
events. IRR critics, however, are concerned that the increased budgetary flexibility will lead to
decreased congressional oversight over NFS management decisions.
Wildland Fire Management Appropriations
The FS receives appropriations to conduct wildfire management activities—preparedness,
suppression, fuel reduction, and site rehabilitation—on NFS lands through two separate
discretionary accounts: the Wildland Fire Management (WFM) account and the FLAME Wildfire
Suppression Reserve Fund.69 Together, WFM and FLAME appropriations have accounted for
approximately half of the FS discretionary appropriation over the past five years (FY2011-
FY2015). FS received $2.6 billion in WFM and FLAME appropriations in FY2015; in FY2014
the agency received a total of $3.1 billion including supplemental and emergency appropriations.
65 Tracy Hancock, a Forest Service employee on a detail assignment to CRS in 2014, made significant contributions to
this section.
66 The FY2012 request added activities from two other FS discretionary accounts: the Legacy Roads and Trails
program from the Capital Improvement and Maintenance account and the Hazardous Fuels Non-Wildland Urban
Interface from the Wildland Fire Management account.
67 P.L. 112-74.
68 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies,
Appropriations Bill, 2012, Report with Dissenting Views to Accompany H.R. 2584, 112th Cong., 1st sess., July 19,
2011, H.Rept. 112-151, pp. 83,88.
69 The FLAME Suppression Reserve Fund was established by the Federal Land Assistance, Management, and
Enhancement Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-88). For more information on wildfire management appropriations, see CRS
Report R43077, Wildfire Management: Federal Funding and Related Statistics.
Congressional Research Service
16
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
Suppression activities generally account for a large portion of the regular WFM appropriation
(including appropriations to the FLAME fund). Two other WFM subaccounts—preparedness and
hazardous fuels—receive the bulk of the remaining WFM funds, although there are also four
relatively smaller research assistance programs also funded through the account. Suppression
activities include all of the work associated with extinguishing or confining fires on NFS lands
and other federal or nonfederal lands under fire protection agreements with the FS. Due to the
emergency nature of fire control activities, the FS is also authorized to transfer money out of
other discretionary accounts if suppression funds become depleted.70 In addition, the FS may also
receive additional funding through emergency or supplemental appropriations if suppression
funds are insufficient to cover continued fire control operational needs.
Congress has been concerned about the cost of WFM generally and suppression activities
specifically.71 Congress has expressed concern about the impact of fire transfers on other NFS
management activities and about the increasing portion of the FS budget going toward
suppression funding. Congress has considered options for financing suppression activities,
including proposals to provide funds outside of statutory and procedural constraints on
discretionary spending.72
NFS Land Ownership: Designation, Acquisition,
and Disposal73
As noted above, in 1891, the President was authorized74 to reserve lands from the public domain
as forest reserves, but this authority was subsequently limited by Congress. However, many
presidential proclamations and executive orders have modified NFS boundaries and changed
names, including establishing new national forests from existing NFS lands. National forests in
the East were generally established between 1910 and 1951. Today, establishing a new national
forest or significantly modifying the boundaries of an existing national forest requires an act of
Congress.
The Secretary of Agriculture has numerous authorities to add lands to the NFS. Often, though, the
acquisitions are restricted to land within or contiguous to the proclaimed exterior boundaries of a
national forest. The first and broadest authority is in the Weeks Act of 1911, which allows the
Secretary to purchase “such forested, cut-over, or denuded lands within the watersheds of
70 Transfer authority is granted in the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies annual appropriations bill,
specifically in the administrative provisions for the FS. The accounts from which funds were transferred have
historically been reimbursed in the following year’s appropriations act.
71 See for example: U.S. Congress, House Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Public Lands and
Environmental Regulation, Oversight Hearing on Wildfire and Forest Management, 113th Cong., 1st sess., July 11,
2013; U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Wildfire Preparedness & Forest Service
2015 Fiscal Year Budget, 113th Cong., July 15, 2014.
72 See for example, H.R. 167, the Wildfire Disaster Funding Act. Several wildfire funding reform bills were introduced
in the 113th Congress, including S. 2593, S. 1875, and H.R. 3992.
73 For more information, see CRS Report RL34273, Federal Land Ownership: Acquisition and Disposal Authorities.
74 16 U.S.C. §471, now repealed.
Congressional Research Service
17
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
navigable streams ... the regulation of the flow of navigable streams or for the production of
timber.â€75
Additional authorities are provided by the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act of 1937,76 which
authorized the Secretary to acquire submarginal lands and lands not suitable for cultivation.
Under this authority, the FS acquired and established the 20 national grasslands and six land
utilization projects that account for 2% of the NFS. Other laws authorize land acquisition for the
national forests, typically in specific areas or for specific purposes. For example, the Secretary is
authorized to acquire access corridors to national forest lands across nonfederal lands.77
The Secretary also has numerous authorities to dispose or convey national forest land out of
federal ownership, all constrained in various ways and seldom used. Often, the authority requires
the federal government to dispose of the land at fair market value. The 1897 Organic Act78 and
the 1911 Weeks Act79 authorize the disposal of land better suited for other uses, such as
agriculture or mining. Other authorities include the following:
• The 1958 Townsites Act80 authorizes the Secretary to transfer up to 640 acres
adjacent to communities in Alaska or the 11 western states for townsites if the
“indigenous community objectives ... outweigh the public objectives and values
which would be served by maintaining such tract in Federal ownership.â€
• The 1983 Small Tracts Act81 authorizes the Secretary to dispose of certain lands
by sale or exchange if they are valued at no more than $150,000 and meet certain
size specifications.
• Congress authorized the FS to transfer up to 80 acres of NFS land for a nominal
cost upon written application of a public school district.82 The lands may revert
back to the federal government, however, if not used for the educational purposes
for which they were acquired.
Issues for Congress
Congress considers many issues regarding NFS management. Current debates tend to focus more
on particular issues that involve land and resource allocation and valuation, such as balancing
increasing demands for commodity and non-commodity uses and services from the national
forests. Simultaneously, public interest in how these resource allocation decisions are made and
the lands are used has increased. NFS management and administration has thus become more
complex and contentious. However, these controversies often derive from questions about the
fundamental management principles of multiple use and sustained yield.
75 Act of March 1, 1911, P.L. 61-435 as amended; 16 U.S.C. §§515 et seq.
76 P.L. 75-210, 7 U.S.C. 1010.
77 Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, P.L. 94-579, 43 U.S.C. §1715(a).
78 Organic Administration Act, Act of June 4, 1897; 16 U.S.C. 473.
79 Act of March 1, 1911 (P.L. 61-435 as amended; 16 U.S.C. §§515 et al).
80 P.L. 85-569, 16 U.S.C. §478a
81 P.L. 97-465, 16 U.S.C. §521
82 16 U.S.C. §479a.
Congressional Research Service
18
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
The meaning and application of the dual concepts of multiple use and sustained yield have been
debated since Congress first authorized the reservation of federal land.83 The debates generally
revolve around questions such as these:
• Is multiple use achieved through adjacent or sequential allowance of single
resource uses or by simultaneous application of several uses?
• Is sustained yield management to provide a regular flow of products for human
use or to assure the maintenance of the biological productivity of the forest
resources?
When these management principles were established, Congress conferred considerable discretion
on the FS to make those decisions. As concerns arose and persisted about the agency’s
interpretation of multiple use and sustained yield, Congress began to restrict that discretion by
enacting legislation specifying that certain uses occur (or not occur) in specified areas.84
However, Congress has not enacted legislation directly addressing the concepts of multiple use or
sustained yield.
Therefore, conflicts arise as users and land managers attempt to balance multiple uses and
services and produce a sustained yield of resources from the national forests. Congress often
considers legislation to prioritize various national forests uses over others or to define or specify
levels of production. For example, Congress has considered legislation to prioritize timber
production over other uses or to specify a certain annual output of timber production.85 In
contrast, Congress has also considered legislation that would prioritize recreation, hunting and
fishing over other uses.86
There are several ongoing concerns regarding wildfire management, including the total federal
costs of wildfire management, the strategies and resources used for wildfire management, and the
impact of wildfire on both the quality of life and the economy of communities surrounding
wildfire activity. Fire control expenditures continue to climb, affecting the implementation of
other programs (and thus affecting national forest uses) through personnel and funds transferred
to fire control. It is unclear when, whether, and how this cost spiral can be contained.
83 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Multiple Use and Sustained Yield: Changing
Philosophies for Federal Land Management, The proceedings and summary of a workshop convened in March 1992,
prepared by Congressional Research Service, 102nd Cong., 2nd sess., December 1992.
84 For example, Congress has established several Special Management Areas in the NFS with specified uses. See CRS
Report R41285, Congressionally Designated Special Management Areas in the National Forest System.
85 See for example, H.R. 1526 from the 113th Congress, which would have established forest revenue areas within the
NFS and specified an annual timber harvest output level.
86 See for example, H.R. 3590 and S. 1996 from the 113th Congress, both of which would have enhanced opportunities
for recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting on federal lands in various ways.
Congressional Research Service
19
National Forest System Management: Overview, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress
Author Contact Information
Katie Hoover
Analyst in Natural Resources Policy
khoover@crs.loc.gov, 7-9008
Acknowledgments
Ross Gorte, retired CRS Specialist in Natural Resources Policy, made important contributions to earlier
versions of this report.
Congressional Research Service
20