**Statement of Cassandra Moseley, Ph.D.**

**Ecosystem Workforce Program**

**Institute for a Sustainable Environment**

**University of Oregon**

**To the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee**

**Regarding Investments in Clean Energy and Natural Resources Projects
and Programs to Create Green Jobs and to Stimulate the Economy**

December 10, 2008

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:

Thank you for the opportunity to speak before you today about the
critical issue of how the public land management agencies can use green
job development to stimulate the economy today and create the foundation
for a strong, sustainable economy in the long term.

I am on the faculty of the University of Oregon, where I direct the
Ecosystem Workforce Program in the Institute for a Sustainable
Environment. The Ecosystem Workforce Program (EWP) was founded in 1994
to help retrain displaced forest workers and build a green economy in
the Pacific Northwest. Today, EWP seeks to build ecological health,
economic vitality, and democratic governance in rural natural resource
communities in the American West. It is a partner in the Rural Voices
for Conservation Coalition, which promotes balanced conservation-based
approaches to the ecological and economic problems facing the West.

Today, I want to argue that the restoration and maintenance of our
nation's forests and grasslands, acceleration of wood-based energy
development, and the greening of federal facilities offer significant
opportunities to stimulate the economy in the short term by providing
jobs in regions and sectors that are likely to be hit particularly hard
by this deep recession. With \$8.5 billion, the Forest Service and
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) estimate that, together, they could
create approximately 127,000 direct jobs over the next one to three
years.[^1]

In addition, by making these investments today, we can create the
foundation for a sustainable economy, in which our public lands and
rural communities play a vital role in providing our nation with a wide
array of ecosystem services ranging from carbon sequestration, clean air
and clean water to wood products and renewable energy.

# Economic and Environmental Challenges

It is clear that we are in a severe recession, which economist Nouriel
Roubini predicted in October would last at least two years, with some
risk of it lasting a decade.[^2] We need a large infusion of government
spending to stimulate the economy to dampen the effects of the rapidly
contracting economy on families, businesses, and communities and to
prevent a prolonged (e.g. decade-long) recession. It is critical that
Congress act now by focusing on spending that can employ workers
quickly.

Despite the constant barrage of news stories about the economy, there
has been much less news about how the economic crisis is impacting rural
America. Even before this current economic crisis, rural America faced
significant economic challenges. Over 90% of the nation's 200 poorest
counties are rural. Now, in the rural West, conditions are deteriorating
rapidly. For example, sfrom October 2006 to 2008, Oregon lost 17 percent
of its wood products manufacturing jobs and logging jobs, most of them
in the last 12 months.[^3] Unemployment rates in many Western and
Southern rural counties are above 9 percent.[^4]

In addition to the rapidly worsening economic situation, we are facing a
longer-term decline in the conditions of our public lands. For more than
a decade, the budgets of the land management agencies have been flat or
declining while fire suppression costs have increased dramatically.[^5]
This budget squeeze has meant that the land management agencies have
fallen farther and farther behind in addressing problems such as fire
hazard, the spread of noxious weeds, degraded wetlands and wildlife
habitat, and decaying roads, trails, and recreation sites. Today, we
face expensive wildfires, growing risk of road failure, and reduced
capacity to provide a wide variety of ecosystem services. If we are to
create green jobs today and build the foundation of a sustainable
economy long into the future, we must address the conditions of our
nation's forests and grasslands.

Moreover, the United States needs to rapidly reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and increase carbon sequestration. The federal land management
agencies, as the managers of vast amount of carbon, must play a central
role in reducing emissions, increasing sequestration, and restoring and
maintaining ecological resilience in the face of climate change.

# Green Jobs Today, Long-Term Benefits 

There are three strategies that the Forest Service and BLM could use to
create significant number of jobs immediately while investing in the
long-term economic future of America. These strategies are: restoration
and stewardship of our nation's forests, grasslands, and rivers;
sustainable wood-based energy development; and the greening of federal
facilities.

*Land stewardship--* There are broad-reaching and diverse activities
that the land management agencies could pursue to create jobs in the
short term, including fire hazard reduction, restoration of watersheds
and wetlands, road decommissioning and maintenance, wood bridge repair
and construction, wildlife habit improvements, control of noxious weeds
and invasive species, range restoration, remediation of orphaned wells,
abandoned mine reclamation, trail and recreation site maintenance,
wildlife surveys, and the planting and maintaining of riparian and urban
trees.

Several billion dollars per agency is a major commitment, and yet it
would only begin to address the ecological and infrastructure needs of
the public land management agencies. One 2002 Forest Service and
Department of Interior team estimated, for example, that the agencies
may need at least \$1.4 billion in additional funds annually to make
significant inroads into reducing ecological and community risks to
wildfire.[^6] Similarly, the Forest Service alone has close to an \$8
billion road maintenance backlog.[^7]

In addition to the immediate jobs benefits, investments in land
stewardship would help maintain the business capacity to care for our
nation's forests and grasslands in the long term. Moreover, significant
investments in fire hazard reduction in places that are at most risk to
wildfire could create significant cost savings to the government and
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Two recent studies in the Southwest
find net benefits from fuels reduction in the range of \$240 to \$1,400
per acre in reduced suppression costs and avoided losses.[^8] Similarly,
a recent study estimates that fire hazard reduction can reduce net
carbon emissions from forests by as much as 98 percent.[^9] Other kinds
of restoration can also create considerable long-term economic benefits;
river and road restoration, for example, increase commercial and tribal
fisheries and reduce risks to drinking water supplies.

*Wood-based energy development*---In addition to conducting fire hazard
reduction, we need to develop businesses and markets that can use the
woody material that is the byproducts of these treatments to create
heat, electricity, and value-added wood products. By expanding the
existing Forest Service woody biomass grants program, we could create
jobs in the short term conducting feasibility studies and constructing
wood heat and co-generation facilities. More significantly, these
investments can help lower the costs of fuels reduction treatments over
time. They would also reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and increase
our use of renewable energy. In addition, conversion to wood heat can
create substantial cost savings for schools, hospitals and other public
buildings, thereby saving public dollars. For example, a small high
school in Enterprise, Oregon, recently-installed a wood heat boiler that
is expected generate annual savings equivalent to maintaining 4-8
percent of their teaching staff[^10]

*Greening facilities*--Land management agencies could invest significant
funds in greening their facilities. They have a stock of aging buildings
that could be upgraded to reduce their carbon footprint through
weatherization, conversion of heating, cooling, and electrical systems
to wood or other renewable energy sources, and installation of
energy-efficient lighting. In addition to providing jobs via contracting
and job training programs, this strategy would have critical long-term
benefits including reduced greenhouse gas emissions reduction and costs
to the taxpayers.

# Jobs Estimates

The Forest Service estimates that it could spend \$5.5 billion over the
next one to three years on land stewardship, wood-based energy
development, and the greening of its facilities and could create as many
as 90,000 jobs.[^11] Similarly, the BLM estimates that it could spend
roughly \$3.0 billion over the next two and a half years, creating over
37,000 direct jobs and nearly 22,600 indirect and induced jobs
performing a wide variety of landscape restoration and stewardship
activities.[^12]

There is little empirical research or analysis about the costs of
creating one full time equivalent restoration or stewardship job. Part
of the challenge of creating accurate jobs estimates is the huge
diversity of activities involved in restoration and stewardship.
However, assuming Service Contract Act wage rates, it seems reasonable
to assume that restoration-based green jobs costs between \$60,000 and
\$150,000 per direct full time equivalent job, depending on the type of
work.

It is easy to get caught up in the numbers game of predicting how many
jobs a particular initiative would provide. It is tempting to assume
that more jobs are necessarily better. However, it is important to keep
the issue of job quality[^13] in mind. More jobs per billion dollars
often means that these jobs are lower paid. Although low wage jobs may
be appropriate for youth entering the workforce for the first time,
these sorts of jobs will not help keep children and families fed,
clothed, and in their homes. More important than the exact number of
jobs that will be created, what is essential, is that this stimulus
package provide jobs for working people and families who will spend the
money they earn on essentials, creating a significant multiplier
effect.[^14]

Regardless of the exact cost per job, public lands steward, greening of
public lands facilities, and wood-based energy development all fit the
bill. While extremely varied in types of activities, they will all
employ large numbers of working people in activities that will have
lasting effects by building the foundation of a green economy and
reducing government expenses in the future.

# Getting it Done

Clearly, one central consideration has to be whether the federal land
management agencies can spend this money quickly---much of it in the
next several months, and all of it in the next few years. There are a
number of factors in place that suggest that they can do this.

First, all of the activities proposed here can be accomplished using
existing authorities and programs. Although spending these funds
effectively will require the focus and coordination at all levels, the
agencies will not need to develop new rules, regulations, or programs.

Second, it will be critical for the Office of Management and Budget, the
departments, and agencies budget staff to work without delay to transfer
funds and spending authority to field units. While traditional
allocation processes often take months, simply by prioritizing fast
action on stimulus funds, the process could move much more quickly.

Third, the agencies will have to prioritize projects with complete
environmental analysis or limited analysis requirements, at least
initially. However, the agencies appear to have a reasonable shelf stock
of restoration and stewardship projects for the first year. For example,
the Forest Service estimates that it has 5 million acres of NEPA-ready
fire hazard reduction projects.

Fourth, the land management agencies have a wide array of implementation
tools that can get money to the businesses and workers quickly. The land
management agencies should spend the bulk of the funds via service
contracts, stewardship contracts, and cooperative agreements, which they
can offer and award relatively quickly. To do so, however, they will
probably need to increase contract and agreements staffing to write new
and amend existing contracts and agreements.

In addition, the agencies have significant capacity to hire temporary
and seasonal employees and use the Economic Action Program, AmeriCorps,
Youth Conservation Corps, and Jobs Corps to combine job training with
stewardship activities. Appropriately mixed with service and stewardship
contracts and agreements, these programs can train young workers and get
projects done quickly. The Forest Service estimates, for example, that
they would create 5,000-7,000 jobs using these sorts of training
programs. If this training done in partnership with local community
organizations, as was done in the Jobs in the Woods and Hire the Fisher
programs, the economic effects would be greatly enhanced.

# Summary Recommendations

1\. **Act immediately to provide economic stimulus in the range of \$2.0
billion to \$3.5 billion per agency** for Forest Service and the BLM, to
remain available until September 30, 2010. The focus of spending should
be on building a rural green economy. Priority activities should
include:

A.  Restoration and stewardship activities that will provide green jobs
    immediately and long-term benefits of improved ecosystem services,
    sustainable economic development, and reduced costs to the
    government.

B.  Actions that will benefit segments of society that are likely to be
    hardest hit by the recession and are most dependent on public lands,
    especially those workers and businesses that live and work in
    isolated, rural public lands communities who are not likely to
    benefit from the larger economic stimulus package.

C.  Expansion of the Forest Service grants programs that support the
    development of woody biomass utilization, including for renewable
    heat and power.

D.  Projects that have the potential to reduce green house gas
    emissions, sequester carbon, or increase ecological resilience to
    climate change. Land management activities could include, for
    example, fire hazard reduction, urban and riparian tree planting,
    and range restoration. Facilities improvements could include, for
    example weatherizing buildings and replacing aging heating and
    cooling systems with more efficient wood heat boilers, solar panel
    insulation, and energy efficient equipment and lighting.

E.  A wide range of forest, watershed, wildlife and fisheries
    restoration projects that are NEPA-ready now or could be NEPA-ready
    within a year.

F.  Land stewardship activities that require little or no NEPA analysis,
    such as plant, wildlife, cultural resource surveys, and boundary
    line delineation, and other technical activities.

G.  A wide range of recreation, trails, and roads projects that would
    reduce risk of catastrophic road failures and reduce stream
    sedimentation, which are NEPA-ready now or could be NEPA-ready
    within a year.

H.  Increasing the number of contracting officers and agreements
    coordinators to help award contracts and agreements more quickly.

I.  Funding for the Department of Labor and the land management agencies
    to increase oversight of contractors to ensure that they comply with
    safety and labor laws, especially in the areas of thinning and
    reforestation.

2\. **Address basic needs**. Over the coming months, more families will
struggle to meet basic needs such as food and heat. Ensure that
communities surrounded by public lands have adequate access to fire wood
and non-timber forest products for subsistence use. This may require
temporarily increasing the staffing to set up designate sale areas,
process permits, and ensure that resources are managed sustainably.

3\. **Prohibit guest workers from employment on contracts using economic
stimulus funds.** Inviting guest workers into the country to perform
these activities would likely reduce the stimulating effect, as wages
may be spent abroad. If contractors cannot find domestic workers to
perform particular activities, these activities should be included in
job training programs.

4\. **Halt administrative actions that would worsen economic conditions
in rural and other distressed areas.** The Forest Service has been
selling buildings, consolidating units, and moving staff away from rural
areas over the past 15 years. Continuing these activities is not
appropriate in this economic climate. The Forest Service and DOI should,
for example, place a moratorium on the sale of buildings so as to not
further depress commercial building prices and forego the consolidation
or relocation of units or staff that would lead to a net transfer of
federal personnel out of rural or other economically distressed areas.

[^1]: "Green Jobs: Economic Stimulus through Training and Land
    Restoration, United States Forest Service", Memorandum from Doug
    Crandall, USDA Forest Service to Scott Miller, U.S. Senate Energy
    and Natural Resources, December 2, 2008; "BLM - Potential Economic
    Stimulus Projects within a 2.5 year timeframe", December 8, 2008.

[^2]: Nuriel Roubini, Written Testimony, Hearing on Faltering Economic
    Growth and the Need for Economic Stimulus, the Joint Economic
    Committee, U.S. Congress, October 30, 2008.

[^3]: Oregon Employment Department, Current Employment Statistics,
    <http://www.qualityinfo.org/olmisj/CES>, accessed 12-3-2008.

[^4]: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Local Area Unemployment Statistics,
    Unemployment Rates by County, October 2007-September 2008,
    <http://www.bls.gov/lau/maps/twmcort.pdf>, accessed 12-7-08.
    <http://www.qualityinfo.org/olmisj/AllRates>, accessed 12-7-08.

[^5]: ^?^ USDA Forest Service, Agency Transition Document, November 5,
    2008.

[^6]: GAO, Wildland Fire Management: Important Progress Has Been Made,
    but Challenges Remain to Completing a Cohesive Strategy, GAO-05-147,
    January 2005.

[^7]: USDA, Forest Service, *Fiscal Year 2005 Forest Service Budget
    Justification,* sec. 10, p. 33, 2004.

[^8]: C. Larry Mason, et al., "Investments in Fuel Removal to Avoid
    Forest Fires Result in Substantial Benefits." *Journal of Forestry,*
    104(1):27-31, 2006. See also, Gary Snider, P.J. Daughtery, and D.
    Wood, "The Irrationality of Continued fire Suppression: And Avoided
    Cost Analysis of Fire Hazard Reduction Treatments Versus No
    Treatment," *Journal of Forestry,* 104(8):431-7, 2006.

[^9]: Matthew D. Hurteau, George W. Koch, and Bruce A. Hungate, "Carbon
    Protection and Fire Risk Reduction: Toward a Full Accounting of
    Forest Carbon Offsets," *Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment,*
    6(9):493-498, 2008; Matthew D. Hurteau and Malcolm North, "Fuel
    treatment Effects on Tree-Based Forest Carbon Storage and Emissions
    under Modeled Wildfire Scenarios, *Frontiers in Ecology and the
    Environment,* 7, 2009.

[^10]: Resource Innovations, *Wood Heat Solutions: A Community Guild to
    Biomass Thermal Projects,* 2008. Nils Christoffersen, Wallowa
    Resources and Enterprise School Board, Personal Communication,
    12-8-08.

[^11]: "Green Jobs: Economic Stimulus through Training and Land
    Restoration, United States Forest Service", Memorandum from Doug
    Crandall, USDA Forest Service to Scott Miller, U.S. Senate Energy
    and Natural Resources, December 2, 2008.

[^12]: Bureau of Land Management, "BLM - Potential Economic Stimulus
    Projects within a 2.5 year timeframe", December 8, 2008.

[^13]: The Ecosystem Workforce Program defines a quality job as one that
    provides family-supporting wages and compensation, a safe and health
    workplace, long duration employment, structured training,
    opportunity for advancement, and the ability to work close to home.

[^14]: Rubini, Written Testimony.