**FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS**

** **

**Q: What is Congressman Baird's Forest Emergency Recovery and Research
Act (HR 4200) all about?**

** **

A: The Forest Recovery bill, introduced by Oregon Congressman Greg
Walden and Congressman Baird, would provide our federal land managers
with the tools and resources they need to complete a swift and thorough
review of forest conditions after a hurricane, wildfire, or other
catastrophic event.

 

The bill allows land managers to decide how best to respond.  These
decisions will involve restoration and replanting to bring healthy
forests back quickly, and the evaluation of the area for possible
research projects.  If land managers decide to salvage some of the
downed wood, the bill would enable them to do so in an expeditious and
environmentally sound manner, and then replant the land with a diverse
mix of plants, trees, and brush.   

 

**Q: Do both Democrats and Republicans support this bill?**

 

A: Yes, this bill is supported by Members of Congress from both
parties. 

 

**Q: How does the OSU study I've heard about relate to Congressman
Baird's Forest Recovery bill?**

 

A: Comparing the OSU study to the Forest Recovery bill is like comparing
apples to oranges.  The OSU study examines the effects of post-fire
logging two years after the Biscuit Fire.  The Forest Recovery bill that
Congressmen Baird and Walden introduced would only allow logging 90 days
after a fire to minimize environmental impact and maximize economic
benefit.

 

**Q: Why is it important to conduct salvage logging so soon after a
fire, hurricane, or other catastrophic event?**

 

A: It is important to expedite logging because:

 

> •         Downed wood begins to lose its usefulness and value as soon
> as it is uprooted
>
> •         It is better to log before new seedlings have a chance to
> sprout
>
> •         Post-fire downed wood actually poses additional fire risks;
> re-burned forests create an environment that would take decades to
> support new growth

-   Post-fire logging can create much needed revenue to help pay for
    other restoration activities (replanting and salmon habitat
    protection, for example)

 

**Q: Why are forest recovery projects delayed?**

 

A: Appeals and litigation hold up hundreds of restoration projects on
public lands each year.  The Forest Emergency Recovery and Research Act
uses the same administrative appeals process as the overwhelmingly
bipartisan Healthy Forests Restoration Act, which includes
pre-decisional appeals during the project planning process.  This
pre-decisional appeals process provides critical information from the
public and concerned groups to the agencies at the beginning of the
planning process, creating an environment of collaboration to help the
agency make better decisions.

 

**Q: Why has Congressman Baird decided to co-sponsor and support the
Forest Emergency Research and Recovery Act?**

** **

A: Congressman Baird believes this bill is good policy.  We all use wood
-- lots of it, and that wood has to come from somewhere.  Congressman
Baird believes it is better to utilize dead and dying timber in an
environmentally responsible manner rather than clear cut green forests. 

 

This bill will also create jobs and stimulate the economy.  Many people
in Congressman Baird's district are employed by the timber industry. 
These are living wage jobs that people rely on to provide for their
families.  The never-ending salvage logging litigation cycle has a
direct impact on these employees and their families.   

 

Congressman Baird believes this bill is a common sense way to maximize
both economic benefit and environmental protections.       

 

**Q: How does Congressman Baird's Forest Recovery bill differ from the
1995 salvage rider?**

 

A: The Forest Recovery bill is much different than the salvage rider.  

 

For starters, the salvage rider was attached as a must-pass rider to the
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations and Rescissions Act (P.L.104-19)
in 1995.  The Forest Recovery bill is a stand alone bill that must
sustain the full scrutiny of public hearings, congressional hearings,
and a full votes in both the House and Senate before it can become law. 

 

The salvage rider waived environmental laws (National Environmental
Policy Act, Federal Land Policy and Management Act, etc.), and overrode
court injunctions, restraining orders and decisions.  The Forest
Recovery bill requires thorough environmental review, including full
evaluation of the environmental effect of a catastrophic event recovery
project and how those effects will be minimized and mitigated in the
short-term to promote quick recovery, restoration and reforestation in
the long-term.  Public notice, appeals and judicial review are required
using the exact same process as required in the overwhelmingly
bipartisan Healthy Forests Restoration Act.  Furthermore, the agencies
are required to work with state and local governments, Indian tribes,
land-grant universities and interested persons in the development of
projects.

 

The salvage rider expedited green sales contracts.  The Forest Recovery
bill specifically limits salvage to trees that are "down, dead, broken,
severely root sprung, which mortality is highly probable in five years,
or that are required to be removed for worker or public safety."  The
bill stipulates that habitat snags will remain, as will other material
to diminish erosion and restore habitat.

 

**Q: Does Congressman Baird's Forest Recovery bill ignore science?**

 

**A:** Congressman Baird is a Ph.D. trained scientist and Member of the
House Science Committee who values the scientific process.  He has taken
a number of potentially career-ending votes in order to protect
scientific integrity.  He has stated all along that peer-reviewed
scientific research is a crucial element of salvage logging policy.

 

The Forest Recovery bill would actually increase the amount of
peer-reviewed scientific research conducted on salvage logging and made
that information available to the public, federal land managers, and
policy makers.  The bill stipulates that post-catastrophic federal
forest recovery projects must be based on peer-reviewed science.

 

**Q: Post-catastrophic logging requires that roads be built, will those
roads be temporary?**

 

A:  Permanent roads are strictly prohibited in the Forest Emergency
Recovery and Research Act.  For the first time in federal stature, any
temporary roads created in the restoration process must be removed upon
completion of the project at the expense of the harvester. 

Additionally, timber removal is limited to trees that are down, dead,
broken or severely root sprung, where mortality is highly probable
within five years of the event or where removal is necessary for worker
or public safety.