S. HRG. 115–130 

FEDERAL PAYMENTS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS 

PROVIDED THROUGH THE SECURE RURAL 

SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY SELF-DETERMINATION ACT AND THE PAYMENT IN LIEU OF 

TAXES PROGRAMS AND THE NEED TO PROVIDE GREATER FISCAL CERTAINTY FOR RESOURCE-DEPENDENT COMMUNITIES WITH TAXEXEMPT FEDERAL LANDS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE 

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MAY 2, 2017 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
FEDERAL PAYMENTS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PROVIDED THROUGH THE SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS 

NITIES WITH TAX-EXEMPT FEDERAL LANDS AND THE NEED TO PROVIDE GREATER FISCAL CERTAINTY FOR RESOURCE-DEPENDENT COMMUAND COMMUNITY SELF-DETERMINATION ACT AND THE PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES PROGRAMS 
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

26–071 2018

S. HRG. 115–130 

FEDERAL PAYMENTS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS 

PROVIDED THROUGH THE SECURE RURAL 

SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY SELF-DETERMINATION ACT AND THE PAYMENT IN LIEU OF 

TAXES PROGRAMS AND THE NEED TO PROVIDE GREATER FISCAL CERTAINTY FOR RESOURCE-DEPENDENT COMMUNITIES WITH TAXEXEMPT FEDERAL LANDS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE 

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MAY 2, 2017 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MIKE LEE, Utah 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

CORY GARDNER, Colorado 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

LUTHER STRANGE, Alabama 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia 

MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine 

TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois 

CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada 

COLIN HAYES, Staff Director 

PATRICK J. MCCORMICK III, Chief Counsel 

LUCY MURFITT, Senior Counsel and Public Lands & Natural Resources Policy Director 

MICHELLE LANE, Professional Staff Member 

ANGELA BECKER-DIPPMANN, Democratic Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Democratic Chief Counsel 

BRYAN PETIT, Democratic Senior Professional Staff Member 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Page 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from Alaska .................. 1 

Cantwell, Hon. Maria, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from Washington .................................................................................................................... 6 

WITNESSES 

Ferriter, Olivia Barton, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Budget, Finance, Performance and Acquisition, U.S. Department of the Interior ............................ 9 

Casamassa, Glenn, Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest System, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture .................................................................................. 14 

Landis, Hon. David, Mayor, Ketchikan Gateway Borough, Alaska .................... 21 

Cruickshank, Hon. Gordon, Commissioner, Valley County, Idaho ...................... 26 

Manus, Hon. Mike, Commissioner, Pend Oreille County, Washington ............... 34 

Haggerty, Mark, Headwaters Economics ............................................................... 50 

Whitney, Hon. Mark, Commissioner, Beaver County, Utah, and President, 

Utah Association of Counties on behalf of the National Association of Counties ......................................................................................................................... 111 

ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED 

Apache County (Arizona) Board of Supervisors: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 489 

Casamassa, Glenn: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 14 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 16 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 146 

Cantwell, Hon. Maria: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 6 

Cochise County (Arizona) Board of Supervisors: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 491 

County Supervisors Association of Arizona: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 493 

Craig City (Alaska) School District: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 494 

Cruickshank, Hon. Gordon: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 26 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 28 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 465 

Ferriter, Olivia Barton: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 9 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 11 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 145 

Gila County (Arizona) Board of Supervisors: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 496 

Haggerty, Mark: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 50 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 52 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 473 

Heller, Hon. Dean: 

Statement for the Record ................................................................................. 4 

Jefferson County (Washington) Board of County Commissioners: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 498 
Page

IV 

Johnson, Hon. Buster: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 503 

Landis, Hon. David: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 21 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 23 

Manus, Hon. Mike: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 34 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 36 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 470 

Miller, Hon. Stephen: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 504 

Mohave County (Arizona) Board of Supervisors—District 1: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 505 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 1 

National Association of Counties: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 507 

National Education Association: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 509 

National Governors Association: 

Press Release dated 4/26/2017 entitled ‘‘Governors to Congress: Restore 

Rural Funding in Continuing Resolution’’ .................................................. 510 

Navajo County (Arizona) Board of Supervisors: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 512 

Petersburg Borough, Alaska: 

Statement for the Record ................................................................................. 513 

Sanders, Hon. Bernard: 

Statement for the Record ................................................................................. 515 

SERRC: 

Board of Directors Resolution No.: 2017–01 for the Record .......................... 516 

Smith, Hon. Jack: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 517 

Stevenson-Carson School District (Washington): 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 518 

Sustainable Forest Action Coalition: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 520 

Western Governors’ Association: 

Policy Resolution 2017–03: Tax-Exempt Federal Lands and Secure Rural 

Schools for the Record .................................................................................. 522 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 525 

Whitney, Hon. Mark: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 111 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 113 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 487 

Yavapai County (Arizona) Board of Supervisors: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 527 

Yuma County (Arizona) Board of Supervisors: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 528 
(1) 

FEDERAL PAYMENTS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PROVIDED THROUGH THE SECURE 

RURAL SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY SELFDETERMINATION ACT AND THE PAYMENT 

IN LIEU OF TAXES PROGRAMS AND THE 

NEED TO PROVIDE GREATER FISCAL CERTAINTY FOR RESOURCE-DEPENDENT COMMUNITIES WITH TAX-EXEMPT FEDERAL 

LANDS 

TUESDAY, MAY 2, 2017 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m. in Room 

SD–366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Lisa Murkowski, 

Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

The CHAIRMAN. Good morning, everyone. The Committee will 

come to order. 

We are here today to examine two important, federal payment 

programs, Secure Rural Schools and Payment in Lieu of Taxes, affectionately known as SRS and PILT. 

From a broader perspective, we are also here to consider what 

Congress can do to provide greater fiscal certainty in resource dependent communities with tax exempt federal lands. This is an 

issue that hits home for many of us, certainly my colleagues from 

Oregon, Washington, and Idaho. I think you see the interest reflected here on the Committee. 

In Alaska, the Forest Service controls approximately 22 million 

acres of land, including 17 million acres in the Southeastern region 

which is the area that Mayor Landis, from the Ketchikan Gateway 

Borough, represents. There is not a lot of private land in that region, and I talk about that a lot. There is about 190,000 acres. So 

think about that. You have 190,000 acres of private land, a fraction 

of what is within the borough. Again, you have 17 million acres of 

land that the Forest Service controls there in Southeast. It makes 

it pretty tough to find where a tax base is. 
2 

Alaska is a resource dependent state. Our communities rely on 

the Federal Government to be a good neighbor and partner to support jobs and economic opportunity on federal lands. 

In the Tongass, that relationship used to be largely focused on 

timber production. It created good paying jobs to support families, 

and it generated income that could be shared with communities to 

provide essential services such as schools. Yet today we are barely 

cutting any trees in our Nation’s largest national forest, just three 

million board feet last year. Our remaining mills are hanging on 

by a thread, and so are so many of the people who work at them. 

When the Federal Government fails to be that good neighbor, 

fails to be that partner, and we are not allowed to develop our resources, our rural communities suffer. We lose jobs, we lose revenues, and we become more and more dependent on federal programs like SRS and PILT to make up the difference. 

For example, Petersburg City School District in Petersburg, 

which is a small community in Southeast Alaska. They received 

about $550,000 last year from Secure Rural Schools, equal to nearly one-third of the Borough’s contribution to its $8.3 million budget. 

According to the Superintendent, the loss of these funds puts libraries, counselors, music and art programs, and all of the extracurricular programs at risk. 

Further north in the South Central area in the Chugach School 

District, SRS funding represented 3.9 percent of the annual budget 

for the 2016 school year, but six percent as a percentage of teaching staff. 

The bottom line is that this really translates directly to teaching 

jobs in many of the schools in my state. 

And Alaska’s story is not unique. Boroughs, counties, and parishes around the country with large swaths of federal lands face 

real challenges to developing sustainable economies. Many communities that were once reliant on timber production have seen little 

income behind the mills that shuttered. Reducing timber production has not been particularly good for the health of our forests either. It has created a wildfire problem of epic proportions across 

much of the West, with over 40 percent of the National Forest System in need of some kind of hazardous fuel reduction treatment. 

I am not going to suggest this morning that we turn back the 

clock, that we are going to see the days when I was a young person 

in Southeast and the timber industry was really booming. But I 

think we recognize we cannot have the status quo continue. Instead, I think that Congress must act, for the health of our forests 

and for the survival of our rural communities. 

First, we have to work together in the short-term to continue 

both the SRS and PILT programs. The testimony that we will hear 

this morning will demonstrate why that is critical, but I think we 

also need to find a better way in the long-term. 

We need to pick up where we left off with respect to wildfire and 

forest management reform that Senator Cantwell and I were working on. In the last Congress, this Committee did some pretty good 

work in this area. We wrote the type of policy that will help provide the jobs and economic activity our rural and our forested communities so desperately need. 
3 

We also need to do more to gain access to our federal lands for 

sustainable economic development. This should include opportunities for states and counties to partner with the Federal Government to manage those lands. We have seen a lot of doors close over 

the years, but hopefully in a new Administration, it is time to start 

opening some of these back up again. 

Finally, if we are going to retain federal lands in federal ownership, we need to be creative in thinking about and funding payments for tax-exempt lands. That includes taking a good, hard look 

at ideas like a permanent Natural Resources Trust and other options for revenue sharing, because the annual scramble that goes 

on around here to find funding does not provide the certainty or 

the stability that our rural communities need to provide services to 

their people. 

I know that every member of this Committee is visited by people 

who come around once a year, truly pleading with us, to give them 

some certainly with regards to their SRS and PILT funding. I feel 

for those rural communities. I see the effects of federal failures 

every time I am traveling in Southeast. I also look at the policies, 

and I know we can do better. 

That is why we are here this morning, why I am looking forward 

to hearing from our witnesses about what we need to do to make 

our federal lands work better for our communities and why today 

is not just another oversight hearing but hopefully the start of a 

longer-term effort to do better by the people who live in rural 

America. 

Senator Heller has asked me to submit a statement in support 

of the PILT program for the record, which I will do now, unless 

there are any objections. So we will include that. 

[The information referred to follows:] 
4 

SENATOR DEAN HELLER STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD 

SENATE ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES HEARING TO EXAMINE FEDERAL 

PAYMENTS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVIDED THROUGH THE SECURE RURAL 

SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY SELF DETERMINATION ACT AND THE PAYMENT IN 

LIEU OF TAXES PROGRAM AND THE NEED TO PROVIDE GREATER FISCAL 

CERTAINTY FOR RESOURCE-DEPENDENT COMMUNITIES WITH TAX EXEMPT 

FEDERAL LANDS. 

TUESDAY MAY 2201710:00 AM SD 366 

Chaim1an Murkowski and Ranking Member Cantwell, thank you for holding this hearing today. 

I also want to thank all of the witnesses for being here today. I appreciate the opportunity to 

discuss the Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PIL T) program and the important role it plays in rural 

states like Nevada. 

Today, witnesses from across the West will have the ability to testify and discuss the muchneeded benefits of the PILT program to rural communities. 

As a Westerner and a Nevadan, 1 strongly support this program and have seen first-hand the 

benefits it has provided in communities across my state. 

I stand ready to partner with you and this committee to permanently authorize and fund the PILT 

program in order to bring much-needed certainty for our rural counties. 

As you know, the President's topline budget request for Fiscal Year 2018 calls for a reduction in 

PIL T funding that "is in line with average funding for PIL T over the past decade." While I 

support the Administration's desire to tighten our fiscal belt, any discussions to change this 

policy should start with Congress, and I commend the Chair and Ranking Member for holding 

this hearing today. 

Hearing from local stakeholders, including Mayors, County Commissioners, and representatives 

from local agencies, will only further underscore the importance of the PILT program to states 

like Nevada and Alaska. 

Approximately 85 percent of my state's lands are managed by the federal government, and most 

of that land falls under the purview of the Department of the Interior. Local governments across 

Nevada are saddled with the responsibility of providing vital public services, such as law 

enforcement and infrastructure maintenance, across large swaths of federal land. 

Given Nevada's expansive federal estate, the PIL T program makes it possible for local 

governments to maintain these services in lieu of the ability to economically develop and tax 

federal land. In fact, all of Nevada's counties are burdened with management activities on 

federal lands-and the P1L T program has properly reimbursed all 17 of Nevada's counties for 

this important work. 
5 

l cannot underscore how vitally important this program is to my state, and l believe Nevada has 

been a good steward of this funding. 

I recognize that some of my colleagues may question the need for this program or may even 

want to reconsider the program altogether, but I would like to invite them to visit Nevada. 

ln states like mine where the federal government owns the majority of the land, this is not just a 

program but an obligation on the behalf of the federal government in exchange for the land that 

they use at a loss to the taxpayer. 

Communities across Nevada rely on this funding in order to provide public services on land that 

is owned by the federal government. 

This program has been used by communities in my state to invest in local infrastructure, support 

nutrition programs, and ensure that the bills are paid on time. 

This is why I support permanently authorizing and funding the PIL T program. In the 113111 

Congress, I was proud to team up with my colleagues to support bipartisan legislation (S. 1913) 

that would do just that. 

I appreciate your attentiveness to this issue, and l stand ready to work with this Committee to 

ensure our local governments are treated fairly by the federal government by ensuring the longterm viability of the PIL T program. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR DEAN HELLER 
6 

The CHAIRMAN. I will now turn to Senator Cantwell for her comments this morning. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for 

holding this important hearing. 

I also want to thank all of the Washingtonians that are in the 

audience, but especially our witness, Commissioner Manus, from 

Pend Oreille County. Thank you so much for being here. 

And obviously, my colleague from Oregon, who has been a stalwart on this issue. 

The task before us is difficult. For us to extend the Secure Rural 

Schools programs, the House, the Senate and the White House all 

must, ultimately, support the extension. 

Unfortunately, some of our colleagues in the House do not understand the importance of Secure Rural Schools program, and the 

President’s budget did not seem to understand the importance of 

this. We are going to have to work harder. 

That is why I am joining my colleagues, Senator Wyden and Senator Hatch, tomorrow in introducing a bill to reauthorize the now 

expired Secure Rural Schools program. 

Look at the amount of federal land in the West compared with 

the East. There is a large amount of federal land in the West. We 

are more impacted by Secure Rural Schools and PILT than counties in the East. 

By example, Speaker Ryan, I think has something like 14 acres 

of federal land that is in his Congressional District. Okanogan 

County in the State of Washington contains 1.6 million acres. 

Therein lies the huge disconnect. 

President Trump also seems to not understand that we need the 

SRS and PILT programs, that the impact that they have on local 

governments and communities across the West is so important to 

address. These two programs are what pays for schools, roads and 

emergency services in our rural communities. 

So I can’t imagine why the budget blueprint that he released basically would cut PILT payments by $76 million, 17 percent. And 

unlike every one of the eight budget proposals that President 

Obama submitted, the Trump budget contained no proposal to extend the SRS program. 

Local governments depend on these programs to function, and we 

need to have these programs now and give certainty to our local 

governments. 

Through PILT alone, the counties in Washington receive over 

$20 million, and I want them to receive at least that much again 

this year. Counties have already suffered this year from the ceasing of the payments under the Secure Rural Schools program. In 

2016, under SRS, Forest Service payments to Washington counties 

totaled $17 million. This year, now that SRS is not in place, the 

Forest Service payment to those communities totaled just $2 million. 

Commissioner Manus, from Pend Oreille, will talk about how 

that reduction in funding has forced Pend Oreille County to give 

back almost $3 million in grants for the county road system be-
7 

cause they could no longer provide the required 10 percent match. 

So thank you for traveling here to tell those stories. 

You can see that we are completely out of room at the witness 

table, and that is because every one of these communities has a 

similar story. 

Many communities in Washington, like in Okanogan or Chelan 

County, Whatcom County, and Skamania County, are all impacted 

by this. 

Karen Douglas is also here today from Stevenson, Washington, 

which I just visited recently. Her job is the Superintendent of the 

Stevenson Carson School District that is in Skamania County. 

Now, bear in mind, Skamania County is 80 percent federal land, 

and almost all of the rest of the county is owned by the state or 

a couple of timber mills. So only two percent of Skamania County 

can be developed or is taxable. 

When 80 percent of your land is federal and only two percent is 

taxable, the government has to chip in for the community services 

and has to fund the local government agencies that we have come 

to expect, whether that’s 911 or ambulance services, police for visitors to our national forest, support for the federal employees who 

work in our national forest and their families, or roads for people 

to come and move around these wonderful lands. 

A previous Commissioner from Skamania testified at our last 

hearing on Secure Rural Schools, but I think it is worth repeating 

some of Skamania County’s story. 

In Skamania County, Secure Rural Schools payments represented more than 15 percent of their county budget. These payments pay the salaries of more than half of the 65 employees for 

the county. I can’t imagine having your annual budget and not 

knowing whether you are going to have funding to continue to have 

the workforce in your community. 

Karen’s budget, in particular, has dropped more than 30 percent 

in the last six years because of our reduction in county payments. 

With the discontinuation of Secure Rural Schools this year, her 

budget dropped another 12 percent. Last week the community 

failed to pass a levy to make up the shortfall, so Karen had to 

begin laying off more employees. The middle school has already 

been eliminated. The school for those with alternative learning 

needs has been closed. And now, all sports programs, art classes, 

extracurricular activities and counselors have been completely 

eliminated. 

So yes, I just have to say the President has not supported this 

and our House colleagues, who do not understand it, have not supported SRS. They have to understand how our Western states are 

impacted by this. 

I believe that providing a base level of funding for our counties 

and schools and encouraging forest jobs and forest management are 

both things that we need to do. Obviously these things link between the two historically, but I think holding one hostage for the 

other is not the right idea. What we need to do is give these counties the tools that they need to continue to support the resources 

that we want, if we want people to live in these communities. 

So I look forward to working with my colleagues on this. Again, 

I thank all the witnesses for being here today, and I thank my col-
8 

league from Oregon for his leadership in helping us find sources of 

revenue on this and being such a champion. 

I look forward to hearing the testimony and getting some solutions for this issue as soon as possible so our communities can continue to make plans for their future. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Cantwell. 

I appreciate how your statement has laid out the real life impact 

for families and for communities. I think we see this, and we feel 

it in the West. As I look around our Committee here, I wish we had 

more of our colleagues who are not from the West, who perhaps do 

not understand the significant impact. 

I, too, want to give a further shout out to your efforts, Senator 

Wyden. You have been aggressive, diligent and dogged on this for 

years. I look forward to also supporting the efforts that you are 

making with Senator Hatch and Senator Cantwell in the Finance 

Committee. I have been told by Senator Hatch that he is committed to making sure that we have got that offset coming out of 

the Finance Committee, but I look forward to really trying to take 

some of the stress out of this on an annual basis for these communities and these families. So just thank you for that. 

I would like to turn to our witnesses. As Senator Cantwell has 

acknowledged, we have a very full panel. We could have filled up 

the room with the people who wanted to speak here. 

We are joined this morning by Olivia Barton Ferriter? 

Ms. FERRITER. Ferriter. 

The CHAIRMAN. Ferriter, who is the Deputy Assistant Secretary 

for Budget, Finance, Performance and Acquisition at the U.S. Department of the Interior. 

Mr. Glenn Casamassa, who is the Associate Deputy Chief for the 

U.S. Forest Service at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Thank 

you for being here. 

I mentioned Mayor David Landis, who is the Mayor of the Ketchikan Gateway Borough. Thank you for traveling a long way to be 

here this morning and providing your testimony. 

I have heard great things from my colleague, Senator Risch, 

about our next panelist, the Honorable Gordon Cruickshank, who 

is the Commissioner of Valley County, Idaho. Thank you for joining 

us this morning. 

The Honorable Mike Manus, who Senator Cantwell has noted, is 

a County Commissioner at Pend Oreille County in Washington 

State. 

Mr. Mark Haggerty, who is with Headwaters Economics. 

The panel will be rounded out from a fellow Utahan from Senator Lee’s state, the Honorable Mark Whitney, who is President of 

Utah’s Association of Counties, on behalf of the National Association of Counties. 

It is a distinguished panel. 

Senator Risch. 

Senator RISCH. Senator Cantwell, did you want to tell her about 

Pend Oreille or did you want me to? 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. I think you just did. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator RISCH. No offense. 
9 

The CHAIRMAN. Pend Oreille? 

Senator RISCH. Yes, well, that is the American version. 

The CHAIRMAN. Alright, thank you. 

[Laughter.] 

Pend Oreille, I stand corrected, proudly. 

Senator RISCH. It is like people calling Boise, Boyzee. There is no 

z in Boise. 

The CHAIRMAN. We will be the Committee of correct pronunciation. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator CANTWELL. Yes, well, I am sure you can lay some Alaska 

terms on us, and we will have a lot of trouble. 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. I think the Hawaiians tripped us up once, Senator Wyden, if you will recall that one. 

Let’s begin the panel with Ms. Ferriter. I would ask that you try 

to keep your comments to five minutes. Your full statements will 

be included as part of the record. 

Please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF OLIVIA BARTON FERRITER, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR BUDGET, FINANCE, PERFORMANCE 

AND ACQUISITION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Ms. FERRITER. Good morning, Chairman Murkowski, Ranking 

Member Cantwell, and members of the Committee. Thank you for 

inviting me here today on behalf of the Department of the Interior. 

The Payment In Lieu of Taxes program represents an important 

way in which the Federal Government can be a good neighbor to 

local communities. As you know, the PILT program makes payments to local governments to help compensate for their loss of 

property taxes due to having non-taxable, federal lands within 

their boundaries. Counties have the flexibility to use PILT payments for any governmental purpose depending on the laws of the 

individual states. The funds are often used to pay for essential 

services, such as firefighting, police protection, public schools, roads 

and search and rescue operations. And I have to say, having these 

services adjacent to our lands, our parks, our refuges, our public 

lands, is also very helpful for the Department. 

The Department of the Interior has distributed more than $7.5 

billion in PILT payments to counties since the program began in 

1977. 

In 2016, PILT payments of $452 million went to more than 1,900 

counties throughout the Nation. We use a formula provided in law 

that’s based on acreage, population and prior year revenue payments. The acreage amounts and population rates are adjusted 

each year for inflation. 

In formulating the payment, we coordinate across Interior’s Bureaus with the Forest Service and other federal agencies to ensure 

we have the accurate acreage data on which to base the payment. 

We also seek input from the states on the amounts of prior year 

revenue payments and those that are retained by the counties. 

We are audited annually on this data. We keep the counties informed of changes, and we post information about the payments 

publicly to ensure transparency. 
10 

From Fiscal Year 2008 to Fiscal Year 2012, the full funding for 

the PILT program was provided under a mandatory authorization. 

After that, full funding was provided through one year extensions 

in FY2013 and FY2014. In FY2015, the program received a combination of mandatory and discretionary approps. And in 2016, discretionary funding was appropriated for the program. 

Now in FY2017, Congress is again appropriating discretionary 

funding for the PILT program. The Department currently is preparing the necessary calculations to issue payments for the FY2017 

PILT program to the counties by June 30th. 

This concludes my oral statement. You have my full statement 

for the record, and I’ll be happy to answer any questions. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Ferriter follows:] 
11 

STATEMENT OF OLIVIA HARTON FERRITER 

DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR 

.BUDGET, FINANCE, PERFORMANCE AND ACQUISITION 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

.BEFORE THE 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, 

ON THE 

PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES (PILT) PROGRAM. 

AND THE 

SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY SELF-DETERMINATION ACT 

(SRS) PROGRAM. 

MAY 2, 2017 

Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, and members of the Committee, I am pleased 

to have the opportunity to testify today on the Department of the Interior's Payments in Lieu of 

Taxes (P[L T) Program and the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) Program. 

Payments In Lieu of Taxes (PILT) 

The Payment In Lieu of Taxes (PlL T) Act (P. L. 94-565) was passed by Congress in 1976 to 

provide payments to local governments in counties where certain Federal lands are located 

within their boundaries. PIL Tis based on the concept that these local governments incur costs 

associated with maintaining infrastructure on Federal lands within their boundaries but are 

unable to collect taxes on these lands; thus, they need to be compensated for these losses in tax 

revenues. The payments are made to local governments in lieu of tax revenues and to 

supplement other Federal land receipts shared with local governments. The Department has 

distributed more than $7.5 billion dollars in PILT payments since these payments began in 1977. 

We know counties and other local jurisdictions rely on PlLT payments to support critically 

important services and programs. Counties have the flexibility to use PILT payments for any 

governmental purpose, depending on laws of individual States. Funds are often used to pay for 

essential services such as firefighting and police protection, construction of public schools and 

roads, and search-and-rescue operations. 

The annual P[L T payments to local governments are computed based on the formula contained 

in the law, which considers the number of acres of Federal entitlement land within each county 

or jurisdiction, the population, and prior year revenue payments made to the jurisdiction. PILT 

payments are in addition to other Federal revenues (such as oil and gas leasing, livestock 

grazing, and timber harvesting) the Federal Government transfers to the states. 

Federal entitlement lands include lands within the National Forest and National Park systems, 

those managed by the Bureau of Land Management, those affected by U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation water resources development projects, and certain other 
12 

Federal lands. The formula for calculating PIL T payments considers the amount of certain 

Federal land payments received by the county or local jurisdiction in the preceding year. These 

payments are made from Federal revenue generating programs (such as receipts from mineral 

leasing, livestock grazing, and timber harvesting) the Federal Government transfers to the 

counties using formulas in laws such as the Mineral Leasing Act. 

From FY 2008- FY 2012, full funding for the PILT program was provided under a mandatory 

authorization. Full funding was provided through one-year extensions in FY 2013 and FY 2014. 

In FY 2015, the program received a combination of mandatory and discretionary appropriations 

and in FY 2016, discretionary funding was appropriated for the program. The FY 2016 

payments totaled $451.6 million and were distributed in June 2016, to more than 1,900 local 

government units (mostly counties) in 49 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, 

and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The Department cun·ently is preparing the necessary calculations to 

issue payments for the FY 20 17 PIL T program. 

Secure Rural Schools 

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program in 

concert with the U.S. Forest Service. The BLM administers the SRS payments as amended (P.L. 

106-393) for nearly 2.4 million acres ofBLM-managed public lands located in 18 western 

Oregon counties, known as the "O&C counties." The Department of the Interior defers to the 

U.S. Forest Service to discuss matters regarding activities on their lands. 

O&C County Payments 

The Secure Rural Schools Act built upon the foundation laid in 1937 with the Revested Oregon 

and California Railroad Act (O&C Act) and in 1939 with the Reconveyed Coos Bay Wagon 

Road Grant Lands Act (CBWR Act). Under the O&C Act, the 18 O&C counties receive yearly 

payments equal to 50-75 percent of receipts from timber harvested on public lands in these 

counties. 

Starting in 1991, payments to O&C counties from timber harvest dropped significantly. 

Congress enacted "safety net payments" to stabilize income flow to timber-dependent counties in 

1994 (P.L. 103-66). Subsequently, in 2000, Congress originally enacted the Secure Rural 

Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (SRS) that allowed O&C counties to elect to 

receive a payment equal to the average of the payments they received under the O&C and 

CBWR Acts in the three years of highest payments between 1986 and 1999 in lieu of their 

payments under the O&C and CBWR Acts. Over time, the formula for calculating SRS 

payments has changed several times. Under SRS, the states received funds to be distributed 

directly to the counties (Title I), and elected how to allocate the remaining funds between Title II 

projects (administered by the BLM), Title III projects (administered by the counties), or returned 

to the Treasury. 

Most recently, in April2015, SRS was reauthorized as a part of the Medicare Access and CHW 

Reauthorization Act of2015 (Public Law 114-10) but the SRS payments have ended. The new 

language in the reauthorization of the SRS extension locked in the allocation elections made by 

counties for Fiscal Year 2013 for two fiscal years. The deadline to initiate a Title II or Title III 
13 

project was extended to September 30, 2017, and the deadline to obligate Title ll or Title Ill 

funds was extended to September 30, 2018. 

We understand the importance of the SRS funds to western Oregon counties in support of county 

projects and local schools. For FY 2015, BLM provided approximately $35.6 million in SRS 

funds to O&C counties. Of this amount, nearly $3 million was available under SRS Title ll. 

These funds are used to implement special restoration projects on Federal lands approved by 

resource advisory committees. 

Over the years, SRS projects have provided trail maintenance, culvert replacement or removal, 

soil improvement, vegetation/density management, wildfire hazard reduction, stream channel 

enhancement, control of noxious and exotic weeds, and opportunities for youth training and 

employment. 

In January 2017, BLM distributed over $19 million in timber harvest receipt payments under the 

O&C and CBWR Acts to 18 counties in western Oregon. These payments follow a fornmla 

established in the O&C Act and the CBWR Act, both of which authorize timber receipt-based 

payments to western Oregon counties, and both of which remain in effect and have been 

reinstated following the expiration of the Secure Rural Schools and Community SelfDetermination Act. 

Payments required by the O&C Act and CBWR Acts are essential to O&C counties and help 

offset county timber and tax revenue not generated by federally- managed forests. The counties 

use these funds for county services such as law enforcement, road maintenance, health services, 

schools, libraries, and other county services. 

Conclusion 

The Administration is interested in ensuring that the Federal government can fulfill its role of 

being a good neighbor to local communities. The Administration recognizes these payments are 

important to local governments, sometimes comprising a significant portion of their operating 

budgets. Local governments use these funds for critical functions such as local search and rescue 

operations, road maintenance, law enforcement, schools, and emergency services. These 

expenditures often support the activities of tourists and other visitors who recreate on Federal 

lands. The Department will work to continue to ensure efficient and effective management of 

these programs. 

Madam Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. l would be pleased to answer any 

questions that you or the other Members may have. 
14 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you so very much. 

Mr. Casamassa. 

STATEMENT OF GLENN CASAMASSA, ASSOCIATE DEPUTY 

CHIEF, NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

AGRICULTURE 

Mr. CASAMASSA. Chair Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, 

members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me to speak 

with you this morning regarding the Forest Service Administration 

of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination 

Act, otherwise known as the Secure Rural Schools program. 

For more than 15 years the program has led to substantial investments in our rural communities and offered a forum for the 

public to participate collaboratively in the selection of projects on 

national forests while supporting local economies. The Forest Service has a long history of administering programs to compensate 

communities in or near our national forests. 

Soon after the foundation of the modern Forest Service and the 

National Forest System, Congress enacted the 1908 Act, or what is 

commonly known as the 25 Percent Act, to compensate local governments for the tax-exempt status of the national forests. In the 

late 1980’s a decline in receipts, particularly a significant drop in 

timber sales in Western states, led to reduced payments. 

Payments to states fluctuated from year to year. The unpredictable—unpredictability of payments created hardships and uncertainty for local governments who were trying to budget for schools 

and other essential services in the community. The decline in timber sales and corresponding reductions in the 25 percent payment 

was particularly acute in Northern California, Oregon and Washington. 

To address this concern, Congress provided safety net payments 

to counties in the states from 1994 to 2003. The safety net payments were enhanced payments structured to decline annually and 

intended to help the counties transition to the reduced 25 percent. 

Nearing the end of the program Congress opted to create a new 

program, Secure Rural Schools, in 2000 and expanded beyond 

Northern California and the Pacific Northwest. Under Secure 

Rural Schools a county could elect to continue to receive its share 

of the state’s 25 percent payments or choose to receive a share of 

the state’s full payment amount which was a stabilized amount 

that would decline over time. It was not based on annual receipts. 

From 2005 through 2016, the Forest Service distributed $3.78 

billion under Title I of Secure Rural Schools. 

Secure Rural Schools also allowed for the local citizens to advise 

the Forest Service through participation in Resource Advisory 

Committees on the development of projects of mutual interest that 

would benefit the local economy and improve the health of our forests. 

From 2005 through 2016 approximately $412 million was allocated for projects that maintained existing infrastructure and enhanced the health of forest ecosystems, known as Title II. 

Finally, SRS supplied funding for essential public services beyond schools and public roads. Since 2008, counties could elect to 

use a portion of that funding to support activities under the 
15 

Firewise Community program, request reimbursement for emergency services on national forests or prepare a community wildlife—wildfire protection plan. 

From 2005 through 2016, over $270 million was allocated to the 

type of activities under Title III of SRS. Congress has reauthorized 

SRS multiple times over the last 15 years with the last reauthorization occurring in 2015 for two years. In 2016, the Forest Service 

made a final distribution of approximately $270 million in funding 

to 41 states and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. 

With that reauthorization of Secure Rural Schools, the Forest 

Service reverted to distributing payments for the 2017 payment 

under the 1908 Act. The payments distributed to the states in 

March totaled $54 million. This is roughly 80 percent less than the 

prior year’s payments under the Secure Rural Schools program. 

For over a decade the Secure Rural Schools program has successfully supported communities and allowed for the development of 

important, collaborative, working relations between the Forest 

Service and members of the communities. We recognize the availability of these payments has a profound and significant effect on 

the budgets of local governments and their ability to provide services to the public. 

We also understand the importance of continuing to collaborate 

with the members of communities on important natural resource 

issues. As such, the Forest Service remains committed to working 

with the Committee and our partners to collectively advance a cohesive strategy that will support opportunities to work with and invest in communities around their national forests. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. I’m happy to answer any questions you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Casamassa follows:] 
16 

TESTIMONY OF GLENN CASAMASSA 

ASSOCIATE DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

FOREST SERVICE 

BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

MAY 2, 2017 

CONCERNING 

"Federal payments to local governments provided through the Secure Rural Schools and 

Community Self Determination Act (SRS) and the Payment in Lien of Taxes (PILT) 

program and the need to provide greater fiscal certainty for resource-dependent 

communities with tax-exempt feden\llands. 

Madam Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to present the 

views of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regarding the Secure Rural Schools and 

Community Self-Determination Act of2000 (the "Secure Rural Schools Act"), as amended and 

reauthorized most recently in 2015 by P.L. 114-10. Although some receipts for Payment In Lieu 

of Taxes (PILT) payments are generated on National Forest System (NFS) lands, management of 

the PILT program is the responsibility of the Department of the Interior (DOI), and we defer to 

their testimony for discussion of matters regarding PILT payments. 

Overview 

Since 1908, when Congress enacted what is commonly known as the Twenty Five Percent Fund 

Act (16 U.S. C. 500) to compensate local governments for the tax-exempt status of the national 

forests, the Forest Service has shared 25 percent of gross receipts from national forests with 

states. The "25 percent payments" were distributed to the states for the benefit of public schools 

and public roads in the counties in which national forests are located. The allocation of the funds 

between schools and roads varies according to state laws. The receipts, on which the 25 percent 

payments are based, are derived from timber sales, recreation special use fees, grazing fees, other 

land use fees, and mineral extraction. 

In the late 1980s, the 25 percent payments began to decline significantly and fluctuate widely. 

This was largely the result of a significant decline in timber sales, particularly in western states. 

The declines and fluctuations created hardships for local officials charged with providing 

services to communities in and near the national forests. 

The decline in timber sales, and corresponding reduction in the 25 percent payments, was 

particularly acute in northern California, Oregon, and Washington. This decline resulted from 

several factors, including habitat conservation work for the Northern Spotted Owl's habitat, 

Page 1 of5 
17 

changing public perceptions about clearcutting and timber sales on public lands, along with 

timber market changes that produced steep declines in the value of cut timber from U.S. forests. 

To address this concern, Congress provided "safety net payments" to counties in California, 

Oregon, and Washington for fiscal years 1994 to 2003. The safety net payments were structured 

to decline annually and intended to help the counties transition to the reduced amount of the 25 

percent payments. 

Before the safety net payments expired, Congress enacted the Secure Rural Schools Act (P.L. 

I 06-393). It provided the option of decoupling the payments from receipts, by authorizing 

enhanced, stabilized payments to states for fiscal years 2000 through 2006. The Secure Rural 

Schools Act provided eligible counties with two options: A county could elect to continue to 

receive its share of the state's 25 percent payment, which fluctuated based on receipts. As a 

second option, the county could elect to receive a share of the state's "full payment amount", 

which was a stabilized amount. A county that elected to receive a share of the state's full 

payment amount was required to allocate 15 to 20 percent of its share of the payment to Title II 

(special projects on federal lands) or to Title III (county projects), or to return that amount to the 

Treasury. Title II funds could only be spent on projects benefiting national forests. Resource 

Advisory Committees (RACs), comprised of broad citizen representation, would recommend 

eligible projects for this funding. As part of the initial implementation of the Act, the Forest 

Service established 55 RACs; by 2016 there were 115 RACs across the country. The remainder 

of the county's share of the payment (80 to 85 percent) was required to be spent for Title I 

purposes (for public schools and roads). 

Congress appropriated payments to states for fiscal year 2007. In October 2008, Congress 

amended and reauthorized payments under the Secure Rural Schools Act for fiscal years 2008 

through 2011. Congress also reauthorized payments for fiscal years 2012, 2013, and 2014 

through 2015. With a few notable exceptions, the Secure Rural Schools Act reauthorizations 

mirror the statute enacted in 2000. The primary change made in 2008, however, resulted in a 

new formula for the stabilized state payment, which included a ramp-down of funding each year. 

In addition, the 2008 reauthorization amended the Twenty-Five Percent Fund Act to reduce 

fluctuations in 25 percent payments. Payments under this authority are now calculated by taking 

25 percent of the rolling average of the seven most recent fiscal year's gross receipts. 

In 2013, approximately 73 counties elected to receive a share of the state's 25 percent payment 

(based on receipts), and roughly 674 counties opted to receive a share of the state payment under 

the Secure Rural Schools Act. Altogether, the Forest Service made payments to 41 states and 

Puerto Rico to benefit more than 747 counties, boroughs, townships, and municipalities. 

We appreciate the essential role Congress played in reauthorizing the Secure Rural Schools Act 

for 15 years. The Act was last reauthorized for two years by section 524 of P.L. 114-10, and 

signed into law on April16, 2015. In 2016, approximately $272 million in funding was 

distributed, benefiting 41 states and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico in support oflocal 

schools and roads and for other purposes (total 2015 funding was approximately $285 million). 

Due to the fact that the Secure Rural Schools Act was not reauthorized after September 30,2016, 

the Twenty Five Percent Fund Act formula was used to calculate payments for the 2016 receipts 

Page 2 ofS 
18 

year, resulting in $54 million in payments distributed in March 2017, which is 80 percent less 

than the 2015 SRS payments distributed last year. 

Components of the Secure Rural School Act 

The Secure Rural Schools Act includes three principal titles. The U.S. Forest Service defers to 

the Department of the Interior for Secure Rural Schools' activities undertaken by that Agency. 

Title 1-Secnre Payments for States and Counties Containing Federal Land 

Title I of the Secure Rural Schools Act, as reauthorized in 2008, provided the new formula for 

the state payment for fiscal years 2008 through 2015. The 2015 reauthorization under P.L. 114-

10 lasted for two fiscal years, providing SRS payments in fiscal years 2015 and 2016. The 

Secure Rural Schools Act directed that the majority of the state payment be used to help fund 

county schools and roads. This portion of the payment was commonly referred to as the Title I 

payment and averaged about 85 percent of the total state payments to date. For fiscal years 2005 

through 2016, Title I funds totaled approximately $3.78 billion. 

An eligible county's adjusted share of the state payment was determined by a calculation 

involving multiple factors including acres of national forest in a county, the county's annual per 

capita personal income, and the average of the three highest 25 percent payments made during 

fiscal years 1986 through 1999. The formula reduced the total payments to all states by 5 

percent of the preceding year beginning with the payment for fiscal year 2012. 

Title li-Special Projects on Federal Land 

Prior to the reauthorization in 2015, eligible counties had the option to allocate part of their share 

of the state payment to Title II for projects that maintain existing infrastructure or enhance the 

health of ecosystems on national forests, while supporting local economies. Pursuant to the 

reauthorization in P.L. 114-10, prior elections carried forward for the two-year reauthorization. 

Title II provided for the establishment ofRACs to review and recommend projects to forest 

supervisors. The Secure Rural Schools Act as reauthorized added to the duties of the committees 

and expanded the interests represented by members. 

Title II projects provided employment in rural communities and an opportunity for local citizens 

to advise the Forest Service on projects of mutual interest that benefit the environment and the 

local economy. These projects enhanced forest ecosystems; restored and improved the health of 

the land and water quality; and protected, restored and enhanced fish and wildlife habitat. 

Examples of Title II projects included maintenance or decommissioning of roads, trails, and 

infrastructure; improvement of soil productivity; stream and watershed restoration; control of 

noxious and exotic weeds; and re-establishment of native species. For fiscal years 2005 through 

2016, Title II funds totaled approximately $412 million for projects recommended in more than 

300 counties. 

Page3of5 
19 

Title Ill-County Funds 

Funds allocated by a county under Title III may be used by counties on county projects. Title III 

initially had six authorized uses: search and rescue, community service work camps, easement 

purchases, forest related educational opportunities, fire prevention and county planning, as well 

as community forestry. When the Secure Rural Schools Act was reauthorized in 2008, Congress 

limited the use of Title III funds to three authorized uses: activities under the Firewise 

Communities program, reimbursement for emergency services on national forests, and 

preparation of community wildfire protection plans. As it was reauthorized, Title III directed 

each participating county to certify annually that Title III funds were used for authorized 

purposes. For fiscal years 2005 through 2016, Title III funds totaled over $270 million. 

Additional Revenue Sharing and Payment Programs 

Along with the payments to states under the Secure Rural Schools Act, the Forest Service shares 

25 percent of net revenues from minerals receipts, grazing, and other uses of the national 

grasslands in the payments to counties program under the Bankhead Jones Fann Tenant Act, (7 

U.S.C. 1010-1012). Payments to counties go to approximately 70 counties in 17 states, and 

totaled about $13.6 million in 2017. There are also payments made under special acts including 

those in Arkansas for Smoky Quartz (Public Law 1 00-446), in Minnesota related to the 

Boundary Waters Canoe Area (16 U.S.C. 577) and in Washington for the Quinault Special 

Management Area (Public Law 100-638). 

Under the Secure Rural Schools Act, the Forest Service coordinated with the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) which administered additional payments to certain counties in western 

Oregon under the Secure Rural Schools Act. National forests are also included in the eligible 

federal lands for which DOl administers the PILT program. 

2017 Payments to States under the Twenty Five Percent Fund Act 

As previously mentioned, without Congressional reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools 

Act, the Forest Service reverted to making payments to states under the Twenty Five Percent 

Fund Act for the 2017 payment year. The Forest Service processed a payment to each state on or 

about March 7, 2017. As noted, these payments, totaling approximately $54 million, were 80 

percent less than the prior year's payments under the Secure Rural Schools program. 

Conclusion 

The Secure Rural Schools Act provided more than fifteen years of payments to eligible states 

and counties to help fund public schools and public roads. In addition, the Secure Rural Schools 

Act, particularly the Title II projects, provided employment in rural communities, created a 

forum for community interests to participate collaboratively in the selection of natural resource 

projects on the national forests, and assisted in community wildfire protection planning. 

Page 4 of5 
20 

If and when the Secure Rural Schools Act is reauthorized, we look forward to exploring potential 

changes to the administrative provisions implementing the Act, including the lengthy RAC 

member nomination process, in order to enhance community involvement and program delivery 

under Title II. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss this program with the Committee. The 

Secure Rural Schools program has successfully strengthened rural economies and developed 

important collaborative working relationships between the Forest Service and partners. 

I would be happy to answer any questions you may have. 

Page 5 of5 
21 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Casamassa. 

Mayor Landis, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID LANDIS, MAYOR, KETCHIKAN 

GATEWAY BOROUGH, ALASKA 

Mr. LANDIS. Thank you for that welcome and good morning, 

Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell and members of 

the Committee. 

For the record, my name is David Landis, Mayor of the Ketchikan Gateway Borough in Alaska. 

Let me tell you a little bit about the place where the Chairman 

was born and where I spent most of the last 45 years. The Borough 

was formed 54 years ago. Our population center of about 14,000 

citizens live on an island with no road connections to anywhere. 

Our land area is very large and difficult to reach. 

The Borough has a broad range of responsibilities. You’ve seen 

these in my written testimony. Some of them, though, are public 

education, transportation, land use planning, fire protection and 

EMS and many other functions. 

So, nationwide nearly 28 percent of the land in the United States 

is owned by the Federal Government. In our Borough, however, it 

is 96.7 percent. And I know the Chairman has mentioned this to 

this Committee several times in the past, but I’m going to repeat 

it again—96.7 percent of all lands within the Ketchikan Gateway 

Borough are owned by the Federal Government. All told, the federal land within our boundaries is larger than the entire state of 

Connecticut. 

That’s not all. In addition to this extensive federal ownership, almost three percent of the Borough’s land is owned by other tax exempt organizations. This means that over 99.5 percent of the land 

in the Borough is categorically exempted from property taxes, leaving less than one half of one percent of the land subject to taxation. 

That’s why some have called us the poster child for these issues. 

I’m sure it’s obvious that these circumstances create major challenges in terms of developing and maintaining an economy and 

funding local public services. 

Let me go back in history a little bit for about 90 years, beginning with the creation of the Tongass National Forest in 1907. 

Residents of Ketchikan have been blessed with the ability to utilize, in responsible and sustainable ways, the abundant natural resources surrounding us, primarily the forest. That ended in the 

1990’s with shifts in federal land-use policies which were forced 

upon us and prevented us from utilizing nearly all of the lands in 

our region. 

As a result, Chairman Murkowski, the economic foundation upon 

which the Borough was built on has disintegrated. Fortunately the 

Federal Government provided SRS payments and PILT payments 

to provide modest, but very important, measures of compensation 

for the tax-exempt status of over three million acres of land within 

the Borough; however, these critical federal support programs have 

eroded considerably, more than 30 percent in the past eight years 

alone. We understand that these two programs face real threats to 

further reductions. And again, that’s not all. 
22 

The tremendous difficulties in funding local services with this 

lopsided land ownership structure is compounded by the fact that 

the State of Alaska is presently experiencing the greatest fiscal 

challenges in its history due to low oil prices and the effects on 

state revenue. While our state officials have struggled to solve 

Alaska’s fiscal crisis, we’ve seen ever higher costs being pushed 

onto boroughs and cities by the State of Alaska, making our financial struggles worse yet. 

The citizens of the Borough support solutions, though. These may 

include a revitalization of the timber industry through creation of 

a state forest, such as what our representative has proposed, or a 

multi-year funding stream for SRS and PILT programs or others 

that the Committee may be aware of. In our view, Congress cannot 

continue to stop reasonable and responsible use of federal lands 

while reducing the funding designated to offset the tax-exempt status of those lands. 

Given the circumstances that I’ve outlined here today, the SRS 

program which has existed in some form for more than a century 

and PILT which has existed for four decades are truly vital to 

maintaining essential public services in the Ketchikan Gateway 

Borough. 

These programs recognize that the inability of local governments 

to collect property taxes on federally-owned lands has a significant 

financial impact on municipal governments such as ours. So I implore you to recognize that these programs have stood the test of 

time and are more critical now than ever. 

Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify before the 

Committee this morning. If you have any questions, I would be 

happy to answer them and follow up with any questions for the 

record. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Landis follows:] 
23 

TESTIMONY OF DAVID LANDIS, 

MAYOR OF THE KETCHIKAN GATEWAY BOROUGH 

BEFORE THE UNITED STATES SENATE 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

THE NEED TO PROVIDE GREATER FISCAL CERTAINTY 

FOR RESOURCE-DEPENDENT COMMUNITIES 

WITH TAX-EXEMPT FEDERAL LANDS 

MAY 2, 2017 

Madam Chair Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, and Members of the Senate Committee 

on Energy and Natural Resources: For the record, my name is David Landis, I am the Mayor of 

the Ketchikan Gateway Borough in Alaska. 

Boroughs in Alaska are unlike boroughs in other states which you may be familiar with. 

Organized boroughs in Alaska are municipal corporations- they are equivalent to a higher form 

of county government. 

The Ketchikan Gateway Borough has existed for more than a half-century. It has a broad range 

of significant responsibilities including: 

• public education (K-12); 

• tax assessment and collection; 

• public transportation (airport, ferries, and buses); 

• fire protection and emergency medical services; 

• utilities (water, sewer, and solid waste); 

• libraries; 

• parks and recreation; 

• animal control; 

• land use regulation, planning, and platting; 

• road maintenance; 

• docks; and 

• economic development. 

Nationwide, nearly 28 percent of the land in our great country is owned by the federal 

government. However, there is federal ownership of 96.7 percent of all lands within the 

corporate boundaries of our Borough. Because that figure is so astounding, it warrants repeating: 

96.7 percent of all lands within the Ketchikan Gateway Borough are owned by the federal 

government. All told, the federal land within our boundaries comprises an area larger than the 

entire state of Connecticut. 

Beyond the extensive federal ownership, almost 3 percent of the land in the Borough is owned 

by other tax-exempt entities (e.g., State of Alaska, Native corporations, local governments, and 

non-profit corporations). Thus, over ninety-nine and a half percent of the land in the Borough is 
24 

exempt from property taxes. This leaves a less than one-half of one percent of the land within 

the Ketchikan Gateway Borough which is subject to taxation. 

Clearly, those circumstances can create significant challenges in terms of developing and 

maintaining an economy and funding local public services. 

For 90 years-- beginning with the creation of the Tongass National Forest in 1907 --residents of 

Ketchikan have been blessed with the ability to utilize, in a responsible and sustainable manner, 

the abundant natural resources which surround us. That ended in the mid-1990s with significant 

shifts in federal land-use policies which were forced upon us and prevented us from utilizing 

nearly all of the lands within our region. 

As a result, the foundation upon which the Ketchikan Gateway Borough was formed has 

crumbled. Fortunately, the federal government has sustained Secure Rural Schools funding and 

PlL T payments to provide a modest, but important, measure of compensation for the tax-exempt 

status of 96.7 percent of lands within the Borough. 

The Ketchikan Gateway Borough dedicates its Secure Rural Schools funding to help pay the cost 

of educating the 2,285 students served by the Borough's schools. PlLT funding is efficiently 

utilized for other critical Borough services outlined earlier. 

However, that critical federal support has eroded significantly- more than 30 percent-- in the 

past eight years alone. These two programs face real threats of further significant reductions. 

Continued reductions in program funding are untenable. At the same time, Borough residents 

acknowledge the need for fiscal reform at the federal level. 

The citizens of the Ketchikan Gateway Borough support solutions. These may include a revival 

of the timber industry through creation of a State forest (e.g., Representative Don Young's 2-

million-acre allocation proposal) or a multi-year stream for SRS and PILT funding programs. In 

our view, Congress cannot continue the current course of preventing reasonable and responsible 

use of federal lands while compensating organized boroughs and counties significantly less and 

less for the tax-exempt status of those lands. 

The severe challenges that land ownership in the Borough present in terms of funding local 

services are compounded by the fact that the State of Alaska is presently experiencing the 

greatest fiscal challenge in its history. 

While our State officials have struggled to resolve the State of Alaska's own fiscal crisis, I have 

witnessed ever higher costs pushed onto the Ketchikan Gateway Borough by the State of Alaska. 

Again, the same is happening at the federal level with regard to SRS and PILT funding, and 

other beneficial federal programs. 

Given the circumstances which I have outlined here today, the Secure Rural Schools and 

Community Self Determination Act program- which has existed in some form for more than a 

century-- and the Federal Payments In Lieu of Taxes program- which has been around for more 

than four decades -- are truly vital to maintaining essential public services in the Ketchikan 

2 
25 

Gateway Borough. The federal funds received under PlLT and the SSRS Program are a critical 

offset to our losses in property taxes due to the significant federal lands within the boundaries of 

the Ketchikan Gateway Borough. These programs recognize that the inability of local 

governments to collect property taxes on federally-owned land have a significant financial 

impact on municipal governments such as the Ketchikan Gateway Borough. 

I implore you to recognize that these federal programs have stood the test of time and are more 

critical now than ever. The federal government must not turn its back to the boroughs and 

counties within its 50 great states- not now not ever. 

Madam Chair, thank you for the opportunity to testify before the Committee this morning. If 

you have questions, I will do my best to answer them now. Tfl cannot answer them this 

morning, 1 will follow up as quickly as possible. 

3 
26 

The CHAIRMAN. Mayor, we appreciate you being here and your 

testimony this morning. 

Commissioner Cruickshank, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF HON. GORDON CRUICKSHANK, 

COMMISSIONER, VALLEY COUNTY, IDAHO 

Mr. CRUICKSHANK. Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member 

Cantwell and distinguished members of the Committee, thank you 

for holding today’s hearing examining federal payments to public 

land counties and for inviting me to tell my home county’s story. 

My name is Gordon Cruickshank and I’m a lifelong resident and 

County Commissioner in Valley County, Idaho. Previously I worked 

for the Valley County road department. We have a population of 

nearly 10,000 residents. Valley County totals nearly 2.4 million 

acres and is 88 percent federally administered. 

Since the advent of our federal land system, Congress has 

worked to provide revenue sources so counties can carry their governing missions forward, and most notably, through the Payment 

in Lieu of Taxes and Secure Rural Schools programs. Counties appreciate the full PILT funding included in the Fiscal Year 2017 

Omnibus bill. We ask for reauthorization of SRS to ensure federal 

public land counties receive the funding they need. 

Under PILT, the Federal Government provides a payment to 

counties with significant federal lands to make up for lost property 

tax revenue. Valley County received nearly $750,000 from PILT 

last year. Valley County uses PILT funding to support law enforcement on Forest Service lands, wages for county employees and 

other county departmental operations. We are pleased to see full 

PILT funding in the Fiscal Year 2017 Omnibus bill. 

Counties are eager to partner with congressional leaders on a 

long-term funding solution for PILT. After federal timber production dropped in the 1990’s, communities like mine faced constant 

budget shortfalls forcing us to reduce public services. 

In response, Congress established the Secure Rural Schools program to provide payments to counties impacted by decreased timber production. Today, over nine million schoolchildren rely on SRS 

to keep teachers in their classrooms and counties need SRS funds 

to meet their governing missions. 

In 2015, Valley County received $1.8 million from SRS. SRS was 

designed to temporarily support counties and schools until timber 

production increased and sustainable revenue was again produced. 

Unfortunately, the consistent decline in timber harvest continues. 

America’s counties support reauthorizing SRS to serve as a 

bridge to a future where timber receipts will provide them a stable 

revenue stream. Without SRS reauthorization, Valley County will 

receive a mere $114,000 in the 1908 Act payments this year, a 94 

percent cut. 

This year our county attempted to purchase crushed rock for 

road construction. We initially budgeted $300,000 but found it 

would cost almost $800,000. Previously, SRS funds would have allowed us to proceed, but today we do not have the extra money. 

Furthermore, if Congress does not reauthorize SRS, the PILT 

calculation changes. SRS funds would not be deducted from the 

PILT formula forcing PILT alone to cover more federal acreage, 
27 

leading to dramatically reduced payments. While Valley County’s 

PILT payment would have increased by $235,000 without the 2015 

reauthorization, we would still need to find $1.5 million to make 

up a difference from SRS expiring, a near impossible task with 

such a small base. 

Years ago, Central Idaho had four major sawmills and one small 

sawmill. Today, only one sawmill remains open. This caused Central Idaho many good paying jobs, but also contributed to the declining health of our forests and the catastrophic fires we see too 

often throughout the West. These fires make it impossible for land 

management agencies to meet their core missions due to fire borrowing, the practice of pulling money from ongoing projects to fight 

wildfires. 

In 2015, $700 million was pulled from forest management for 

firefighting. Congress must act to permanently solve fire borrowing. 

Counties have proven they are a willing, innovative partner to 

change the way our national forests are managed. Idaho counties 

developed a pilot project, known as the Community Forest Trust. 

The goal, ultimately, is to designate specific federal forest lands 

within Idaho as a Community Forest Trust that would be managed 

in trust for local counties. The Idaho Department of Lands would 

manage the forest lands while the Federal Government retained 

ownership. Legislation to establish the Community Forest Trust 

pilot project passed the U.S. House of Representatives in 2013. We 

can work together on environmentally sound forest management 

solutions to reduce the threat of wildfire and produce new revenues 

for counties. 

Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, thank you for 

inviting me to testify. We are happy to partner with the Committee 

on legislation to continue full funding of PILT, to reauthorize the 

Secure Rural Schools program until our national forests become 

productive. 

We hope the Committee works to address both fire borrowing 

and forest management practices in the 115th Congress as well. 

With the decline in timber harvests, reduction of SRS payments 

and the ever growing threat of catastrophic wildfire, something 

must be done to protect counties. We stand ready to assist. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Cruickshank follows:] 
28 

ASSOCIATION NATIONAL N~Co 

gr·coUNTIES 

STATEMENT OF 

THE HONORABLE GORDON CRUICKSHANK 

COMMISSIONER 

VALLEY COUNTY, IDAHO 

BEFORE THE 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

"HEARING TO EXAMINE FEDERAL PAYMENTS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PROVIDED 

THROUGH THE SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY SELF DETERMINATION 

ACT AND THE PAYMENT IN LiEU OF TAXES PROGRAM" 

MAY 2, 2017 

Commissioner Gordon Cmickshank, before the Senate Committee on Energy and }./atural Resources 

1 
29 

Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell and distinguished members ofthe 

Committee, thank you for holding today's hearing examining federal payments to local 

governments provided through the Secure Rural Schools and Self Determination Act and the 

Payments in Lieu of Taxes program, and for inviting me to appear today to tell my home 

county's story. 

My name is Gordon Cruickshank and I am a lifelong resident and county commissioner in Valley 

County, Idaho. Prior to becoming a commissioner, I worked for the Valley County Road 

Department for sixteen years with the last ten of those years as the Road Superintendent. 

Valley County is located in central Idaho. The county seat is Cascade, which is located 

approximately 80 miles north of our state capital, Boise. Valley County maintains over 7SO miles 

of roadways including access routes into the National Forest. Our county has a population of 

9,862 full time residents. Valley County is 2,3S4,048 total acres and only 221,1S1 acres, less 

than 10 percent, is privately owned. 

Since the advent of our federal lands system, counties with significant portions of untaxable 

public lands have struggled to make up revenue shortfalls. Congress has partnered in various 

ways to provide revenue sources so counties can carry their governing missions forward. The 

most prominent programs ofthe modern era are of course, the PILT and SRS programs. 

As Congress develops appropriations legislation for FY 2017, counties strongly encourage 

Congress to keep the PILTand SRS programs in mind, and ensure that federal public lands 

counties across the United States receive the full funding they need. As you consider the need 

to support the fiscal stability of public lands and federal forest counties, I'd like to leave you 

with four key points: 

1. Counties that contain tax-exempt federal public lands within their boundaries rely on 

long-term, predictable funding for the Payments in Lieu of Taxes program to ensure 

fiscal stability and provide numerous key public services for our residents; 

2. Counties support better federal forest management policies, and are willing to partner 

with all levels of government to come up with innovative solutions, one of which I will 

highlight later in my testimony. However, until needed land management changes are 

implemented, Congress must maintain its commitment to rural counties by 

reauthorizing the Secure Rural Schools program. 

3. Due to the current funding formulas for PILT and SRS, the two programs are closely 

intertwined. If Congress fails to reauthorize SRS, many counties could face drastic cuts 

to their PILT payments. 

4. Forest management practices cannot change unless Congress finds a permanent 

solution to the problem of fire-borrowing, which hamstrings land agencies by forcing 

them to pull funds from management accounts to fight catastrophic wildfire. 

Commissioner Gordon Cruickshank, before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

2 
30 

Payments in Lieu of Taxes 

Perhaps the most prominent program in the partnership between Congress and county 

governments is the Payments in Lieu of Taxes program. This program provides counties with 

significant amounts of federal land with a payment to make up for lost property tax revenue. 

1900 counties and other political subdivisions in 49 states receive PILT funding to help pay for 

general county government services, including law enforcement, search and rescue efforts, and 

the upcoming of local parks. 

In FY2016, PILTwas fully funded at $452 million. For FY2017, the U.S. Department of the 

Interior requested some $480 million. As Congress considers an omnibus package, I would urge 

the Committee to keep in mind that under the Continuing Resolution passed in December 

2016, PILTwill be funded at only around 90% of the full funding request. 

Valley County, Idaho received $746,520 in PILT payments in FY2016. Valley County historically 

used PILT funding to support Law Enforcement on Forest Service Lands, purchased patrol 

vehicles for the Sheriff's Office, wages for Valley County employees and other operations and 

maintenance of county departments to provide services to the residents. Since the PILT 

payments are in question we have made the decision to only use PILT funding for one time 

purchases as the payments are not certain. 

Counties are eager to partner with leadership in both parties on both sides of the Capitol to 

support full funding of PILT and give public lands counties greater assurance that these funds will 

be available in the long-term. 

Secure Rural Schools 

From the turn of the 201

h century to the late 1980s, timber harvests on federal lands produced 

a dependable funding base for county governments through 25 percent revenue sharing for 

timber receipts under the 1908 Act. After federal timber production dropped drastically in the 

1990s, communities like mine found themselves in constant budget shortfalls, forcing local 

governments to reduce public services. 

In response, Congress passed the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act. 

The SRS program provided consistent payments to counties negatively impacted by decreased 

timber production. Nationally, over 9 million schoolchildren rely on SRS payments to their local 

schools to keep teachers in their classrooms, purchase advanced learning technologies, or just 

to keep the lights on during the school day. SRS put missing dollars into road maintenance and 

in our classrooms. In FY2015, Valley County received $1.8 million from SRS. 

SRS was designed to be a temporary program to support counties until timber production 

increased, and the 25 percent payments could provide sustainable revenue. Instead of opening 

our federal forest lands to production, we have seen a consistent decline in timber harvests, 

while Congress reauthorizes SRS every year or so. 

Commissioner Gordon ( 'nlickshank, bC!_/Ore the Senate Committee on Energv and Satural Resources 

3 
31 

While counties would prefer to rely on more timber production and 25 percent payments, we 

realize that SRS must be a part of the equation until industry returns to our areas. Now that SRS 

has expired once again, counties are faced with the reality ofthe drastic cuts to revenue if 

Congress does not reauthorize it. 

America's counties support a reauthorization of SRS to serve as a bridge to a future where timber 

receipts will provide a strong revenue stream to local governments. We support forest 

management reforms, such as those passed by the House of Representatives in the 1141

h 

Congress, but it will take several years for those reforms to attract the timber industry back to 

our national forests. It is imperative that Congress reauthorize SRS, and guarantee rural counties 

receive the funds they need to continue to maintain roads and educate students in our schools. 

Impact of SRS lapse on Valley County and Idaho 

In 2015, Valley County received $1.8 million from the U.S. Forest Service under SRS. This year, 

we are due for $114,662 in 1908 Act payments, a mere 6 percent of what we received in 

FY2015. Statewide, idaho is taking a 90.6 percent cut. 1 

This is unsustainable for Valley County and Idaho. This year our county was interested in 

purchasing crushed rock material for road construction and maintenance. We initially budgeted 

$300,000 for this project, but found it would cost almost $800,000. In past years, the reliable 

stream of SRS funds would have allowed us to proceed. Unfortunately, Valley County does not 

have the extra $500,000 needed to make this happen. Now, our roads will fall into further 

disrepair as we delay maintenance and construction needs. 

Additionally, the Valley County Road Department has not filled vacant positions and has 

reduced its workforce by 30 percent. While there have been opportunities for my county to 

compete for infrastructure grants, many grants have matching fund requirements. Matching 

those funds up front takes away from the general operations fund and limits the delivery of 

other critical county services related to road maintenance. 

The situation gets even worse because if Congress does not reauthorize SRS, the PILT 

calculation changes overnight. SRS funds would not be deducted in the PILT formula. This would 

be a disaster for the vast majority of public lands counties. 

Valley County finds itself in similar but different situation from Beaver County, Utah. Without 

the most recent SRS reauthorization, our PILT payment would have increased by $235,000. 

However, that would not make up for the $1.5 million hole we would have in our budget 

without SRS funds. 

Statewide, Idaho would lose a staggering $21.1 million without SRS, $20.9 million of which 

would come directly from SRS cuts with another $200,000 lost from the reshuffling of PILT 

1 National Association of Counties. NACo County Explorer. Retrieved from http://explorer.naco.org/# 

Commissioner Gordon Cnlichhank, before the Senate Committee on Energy and ,\'atural Resources 

4 
32 

dollars. More schoolteachers, road crews, and first responders will get pink slips if Congress 

does not act. 

Current land management practices fail to meet the needs of our public lands and 

communities 

SRS was designed to be a bridge program to support county governments until the economic 

base ofthe counties stabilized, and revenues were produced within individual counties. The 

federal government has failed rural counties on both counts: SRS has now lapsed, and timber 

harvests have not increased on public lands. 

Historically, federal timber receipts generated from the National Forests provided critical 

funding necessary to maintain our county roadways and to support our local education 

systems. In years past, the West Central region of Idaho had four major sawmills and one small 

sawmill. As timber harvests declined in the 1990's and into the 2000's, many mills closed their 

doors, taking with them many local jobs and leaving Idaho's West Central region economically 

imperiled. Today, only one sawmill remains and at times it has been questioned whether the 

mill would remain open. More generally, since 1990, there has been an 80 percent reduction in 

timber harvesting across all federal lands in the United States.2 On the ground, this has 

translated into the closure of many sawmills and other related businesses along with the 

elimination of many local jobs in Idaho and across the U.S economy. 

In addition to job losses, forest health has declined dramatically over the past few decades. 

Wildfires burn hotter and faster, and consume far more acres than in years past, placing our 

forest communities in harm's way through increased wildfire risk. The current conditions of our 

public lands contribute to catastrophic wildfires and are a direct result of land mismanagement 

by the federal government. In 2015, multiple wildfires in Idaho burned over 750,000 acres, 3 

destroying critical Sage Grouse habitat, grazing acres for livestock, and over 80 homes. 

Catastrophic wildfire impacts all Americans by increasing insurance costs, polluting the air, and 

forever altering our landscapes. These fires also make it increasingly difficult for land 

management agencies to meet their core missions, due to fire-borrowing, the necessary 

practice of pulling money from management accounts, and using it to fight costly, disastrous 

wildfires. In FY2015, more than 10 million acres of federal land went up in smoke, requiring 

agencies to take $700 million from management to use to fight fires. This is environmentally 

and fiscally unsustainable. Counties believe that Congress should act to permanently solve fireborrowing. 

Counties have proven they are a willing, innovative partner with the federal government to 

change the way our national forests are managed. 

2 U.S. Forest Service. (2013). Forest Management: Cut and Sold Reports. Retrieved from 

http://www.fs.fed.us/forestmanagement/products/sold-harvest/cut-sold.shtml 

3 Incident Information System. (2015, October 14). Current Incidents. Retrieved from http://inciweb.nwcg.gov/ 

Commissioner Gordon Cn.tick<;hank, b~fore the Senate Committee on EnerK}' and Natural Resources 

5 
33 

In Idaho, Valley County and four other counties developed a pilot project concept to better 

manage Idaho's national forests, known as the Community Forest Trust. The Community Forest 

Trust concept is offered as a long-term solution to meeting the federal government's 

obligations to counties and communities with federal lands inside their borders. The goal 

ultimately is for the U.S. Congress to designate specific federal forest lands within Idaho as a 

Community Forest Trust that would be managed in trust for local counties and communities. 

Professional management oft he Community Forest would be provided by the state's 

professional land management agency, the Idaho Department of Lands, for the legislatively 

defined purposes of supporting county governments and providing sustainable forest 

stewardship. The Community Forest Trust lands would remain the property of the United States 

government but would be managed in trust for county governments under environmental laws 

as they apply to state lands. Elected representatives from the federal land counties would be 

appointed by the Governor to a Community Forest Board that would ultimately be responsible 

for land management decisions. Management costs would be deducted from the revenue 

earned from land management activities and paid back to the Idaho Department of Lands. 

Legislation to establish the Community Forest Trust pilot project passed the U.S. House of 

Representatives twice. County leaders, including myself, worked with staff in Congressman Raul 

Labrador's office to draft the text of the bill, the Self-Sufficient Community Lands Act, which 

passed the U.S. House of Representatives as part of a larger forest management bill in the 1131

h 

Congress.4 Idaho's counties would like to see this legislation signed into law, as we are ready to 

roll up our sleeves, and get to work improving forest health and local economies. 

With the decline in timber harvests, reduction of SRS payments, and the ever-growing threat of 

catastrophic wildfire looming over our communities, something must be done to protect 

counties. We believe we can work with our respective states and the federal government on 

creative, environmentally sound forest management solutions that reduce the threat of 

wildfire, and produce new revenues for counties-a win-win situation. All we need are willing 

partners who will follow through. 

Conclusion 

Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, thank you for inviting me to share a little bit 

about Valley County with the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee. We are happy to 

partner with the Committee on legislation to fully fund the Payments in Lieu of Taxes program 

and reauthorize the Secure Rural Schools program as a temporary mechanism to protect county 

budgets until our national forests once again become productive, and can contribute the 

necessary receipts to support essential public services. We also hope the Committee works to 

address both fire-borrowing and federal land management practices in the 1151

h Congress. We 

are counting on you to make the necessary changes to protect both our landscapes and 

budgets. County leaders stand ready to assist. 

4 Library of Congress (2017). Text of H.R. 1526. Retrieved from https://www.congress.gov/bill/113thcongress/house-bill/1526/text 

Commissioner Gordon c--:ruickshank, before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

6 
34 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Cruickshank. We do agree something must be done. 

Let’s go to Commissioner Manus. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE MANUS, COMMISSIONER, 

PEND OREILLE COUNTY, WASHINGTON 

Mr. MANUS. Good morning, Chairman Murkowski, Ranking 

Member Cantwell and members of the Committee. 

My name is Mike Manus. I’m a County Commissioner from Pend 

Oreille County, Washington State, home of 530 acres of the Colville 

National Forest and a portion of the Idaho Panhandle National 

Forest. That is 58 percent of our total land mass in the county. 

As a small rural county of 13,000 people, we have survived on 

our ability to use our natural resources as a form of employment, 

recreation and tourism due to the sheer beauty they provide. Now 

those same beautiful forests are a detriment attributed to being 

poorly managed and are at risk of severe fire. 

As a board member of the Washington State Association of Counties, WSAC, I am grateful to the Committee for this opportunity to 

share my views on behalf of the Evergreen Forest County group in 

Washington State and National Forest Counties and Schools Coalition. Losing SRS is hurting us in many ways. First, the county road department has two grants totaling $2.7 million, requiring a $316,000 match. It would be a travesty for our 

county to refuse these grants and repay the money already spent 

on design but that’s where we’re at. 

In 2015, Pend Oreille County endured several large wildfires, all 

started naturally, on U.S. Forest System land. The county employees were stretched because of these fires. There was no compensation to cover lost revenues to businesses and tourism came to a 

halt. I specifically want to thank Senator Cantwell’s unwavering efforts to help Pend Oreille County recover from this tragedy and for 

her work to reform fire borrowing. 

Senators, our population growth is stagnant and our economy is 

flat. We have one of the highest unemployment rates in Washington State at nine percent. Our poverty continues to climb. 

Schools and counties are constantly reminded that SRS was meant 

to be temporary as each local economy diversified itself into mini 

silicon valleys divorced of the historic reality of timber-based economies. That hasn’t happened. 

In Congress today there has developed among some a twisted 

logic that if counties are deprived of SRS payments, somehow that 

will motivate Congress to enact new active management and the 

fire borrowing reform bill. In fact, it’s the schoolchildren in rural 

counties who suffer from such thinking. We need a long-term, active forest management, fire borrowing reform bill passed soon. But 

please, do not hold schools and counties hostage in the meantime. 

By way of background, the State of Washington, following Wisconsin’s amazing success, has just signed an agreement with the 

Forest Service to implement Good Neighbor Authority. Washington’s DNR produces 500 percent more timber revenue on one quarter of the land base of that held by the U.S. Forest Service. 

I declare it is schoolchildren and county services that suffer because of Congress’ failure to pass SRS, active national forest man-
35 

agement and fire borrowing reform legislation. Until Congress acts 

to put in place those legislative solutions, counties must have SRS 

payments continue for at least five to ten years, just to see if the 

reforms, once passed, work and stabilize national forest dependent 

economies. 

We must first see if the private sector will invest in new sawmills and infrastructure. Congress should create a sliding scale. As 

revenues from timber harvest increase to sustainable levels, only 

then should SRS be reduced and ultimately eliminated. 

Congress caused this problem. Congress can solve this problem. 

We should no longer be used as pawns in a House/Senate chess 

game that leaves us guessing about whether SRS funding from one 

year to the next will be available. 

There is a ticking time bomb members of this Committee must 

be aware of. If SRS goes and is no longer calculated as a prior year 

payment deduction under the PILT formula, the Congressional Research Service has told us Pacific Northwest timber counties will 

be entitled to receive full PILT payments. That increase will not 

come close to offsetting the loss from SRS payments, but it will be 

taken away from those intermountain west counties in need of 

SRS. 

There will be a seismic shift in the way PILT payments are made 

if Congress fails to extend SRS. It will be a lose/lose proposition as 

new PILT funds heading toward the timber counties fail to remotely come close to existing SRS payments and as desert and 

prairie counties and Alaska’s non-forest boroughs lose 20 percent 

or more of existing PILT payments. No one will escape the carnage. 

One last point involves change to the SRS Title II and Title III 

funds as currently administered. I offered in my written testimony 

specific ways to change this. 

I look forward to working with you to pass legislation that will 

enhance our national forests, prevent catastrophic wildfires and secure permanent PILT funding and funds to bridge the gap for the 

interim for SRS. 

We all need your support to protect our environment, enhance 

our economy, educate our youth, to build our roads and assist our 

emergency responders. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Manus follows:] 
36 

Statement 

By Mike Manus, County Commissioner 

Pend Oreille County, Washington 

Before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee 

Tuesday, May 2, 2017 

Good Morning, Chair Murkowski, Ranking member Cantwell, and members of 

the committee. 

My name is Mike Manus. I am a County Commissioner from Pend Oreille 

County, Washington, home to 530,394 Acres of the Colville National Forest 

and Panhandle National Forest. Pend Oreille County is 58% owned by the 

federal government. As a small rural county of 13,150 people we have 

survived on our ability to use our natural resources as a form of employment, 

recreation and tourism due to the sheer beauty they provide. Now, those 

same beautiful forests are a detriment attributed to the fact they are not 

managed and we face severe fire risk each year. 

As a Board Member for the Washington State Association of Counties (WSAC), 

I am grateful to the Committee for this opportunity to share my views on 

behalf of the Evergreen Forest County Group in Washington state and National 

Forest Counties and Schools Coalition. 

Before making specific comments and recommendations to the Committee, I 

want to share what is actually happening in my county and surrounding 

timber counties because of Congress's failure to reliably fund SRS payments. 

For the 2016 Secure Rural Schools distribution, our county had budgeted 

$375,879 to be received in early 2017. Since Congress did not reauthorize the 

SRS Act, the Forest Service reverted to the 1908 Act (referred to as the 25% 

payments) which allocated $75,221.39, to the Pend Oreille County Road 

Department. This $300,000 plus short-fall was allocated in our 2017 budget 

to act as match for one State grant worth $2,087,000 ($208, 700 match) & one 
37 

Federal grant of $650,000 ($108,000 match); both grants were obtained to 

provide infrastructure improvements to our County Road system. Without 

the match, any funds that we have already received from those grants must be 

repaid, as the grants must be declined and turned back to the granting agency. 

This is a travesty to our county, as we have worked for years to establish a 

method to fund these two projects; now we are required to refuse the funding 

and pay back the monies already spent on design. 

In 2015, Pend Oreille County had several large wildfires burning within our 

borders, all starting from natural causes on USFS Land. The County Road 

Department, Emergency Management, Sheriff's Department and GIS 

Department spent many hours and weeks providing assistance by closing 

roads, providing signage, maintaining roads and staging areas, attending 

meetings and working with incident command to provide maps and 

information about the area. Conservative costs to our Public Works 

Department alone were $56,932. We worked with FEMA to obtain 

reimbursement of those costs; the County received $27,816 to cover roughly 

half the expenses to road damage. There was no compensation to cover lost 

revenues attributed to business and tourism interruption. Our community 

members suffered personal losses because of inability to work due to mill and 

business closures caused by the fires. Tourism came to a halt due to heavy 

smoke and my constituents became ill with respiratory problems. I 

specifically want to call attention to Senator Cantwell's unwavering efforts to 

help Pend Oreille County recover from this tragedy and for her work to reform 

fire borrowing. Thank you Senator! 

The Northwest has experienced heavy winter snowfall and record amount of 

moisture this spring. Our County Engineer said the burn scar from the 2015 

Tower fire, part of the Kaniksu Complex Fire, undoubtedly played a major part 

in the near failure of one of our main arterial bridges. When all the rain and 

heavy run off we have received, metthe burn scar/erosion from the burn, we 

suffered the near failure of a bridge on our main north-south corridor, Leclerc 

Road. The Mill Creek Bridge experienced such heavy drainage that the water 

was unable to pass under the bridge and while looking for a new way through, 
38 

the water formed a new channel and undermined the road approach to the 

bridge. Emergency measures saved the bridge, at that time, but major repairs 

and future replacement will be necessary. Costs are estimated to be $750,000 

to $1.2 million depending on the level of repair and size of the replacement 

necessary. This road is a major route to the National Forest. 

A few more impacts worthy of mention because of lost SRS funding: 

• Elimination of preservation on local access roads to USFS lands 

• Reduction of calcium chloride program (base stabilization & dust control) 

• Not replacing lost, stolen, damaged road signs, barricades, cones, etc. Stock 

is below prudent levels 

• We will be stretching the service life of major vehicles 

• We will not be replacing staff as they leave and no seasonal employees will 

be hired. We will likely have a layoff of employees in the coming year. 

Pend Oreille County has a 2017 Budget for the General Fund of only 

$10,820,571 of which we received total tax revenues in 2016 of $5,832,408. 

This compares to total tax revenues for 2012 of$5,715,011 or a 2% increase 

in 5 years. Our expenses, in the same period, have increased 30%. It doesn't 

take a rocket scientist to figure this one out. Our population growth is 

stagnant and our economy is flat. We have one of the highest unemployment 

rates in Washington State at 8.9%. Our poverty continues to climb and is 

currently at 21.5% of our residents live below the poverty line and 33.1 o/o of 

our youth live in poverty. We constantly struggle to bring new jobs to our 

community with minimal success. 

These are just a few of the problems we face in our county attributed to the 

loss of the SRS funding. Our neighboring counties all face similar problems 

and I'm sure some are even more severe than what we face in Pend Oreille 

County. Our neighbors to the east, in Idaho, and to the west, in other 

Washington Counties, have had even more severe fire damage than we 
39 

experienced. The reduction in SRS funding to these communities potentially 

provides a much larger impact than the one felt in our own county. 

Specifically, I want to address three key points: 

1)Secure Rural Schools (SRS) funding; 2) Active National Forest 

management and fire borrowing; & perhaps most significantly, 3) 

Payment in Lieu of Taxes {PILT) including the significant relationship 

between SRS payments and the PILT formula. 

1) SRS came about in the year 2000 after Congress decided that the drop in 

National Forest timber production from 12 billion board feet in 1990 to 2 

billion board feet in the year 2000 had wreaked enough havoc on rural 

economies as 25,000 timber workers nationwide were thrown out of work 

and there had to be a stabilizing force introduced to stop the bleeding. 

Schools and counties are constantly reminded that SRS was meant to be 

temporary as each local economy diversified itself into mini silicon valleys, 

divorced of the historic reality of timber-based economies. After 6 years came 

and went, not only had rural economies not diversified away from 

dependence on National Forests but the forests themselves were starting to 

deteriorate as management ceased. After 10 more years of SRS payments 

through 2015, it has become clear that Congress has failed to grasp just how 

bad the impacts from non-management has become. Between 2010 and 2016 

unmanaged National Forests across the country exploded into catastrophic 

wildfires and the Forest Service's operating budget jumped to a point where 

70 percent of the funds Congress appropriated to the Forest Service were 

redirected simply to fight fires, not to manage. 

2) Active Management & Fire Borrowing Reforms, In the Congress today, 

there has developed among some, a twisted logic that if counties are deprived 

ofSRS payments, somehow that will motivate the Congress (through pressure 

from home) to enact a new active management and fire borrowing reform bill 

and thus all will be well. In fact, Senators, it is the school children and rural 

counties who suffer from such thinking. 
40 

National Forest County School and County officials do want a long-term active 

Forest management/fire borrowing reform bill passed soon and we strongly 

support your efforts to reform the Forest Service, but please do not hold 

schools and counties hostage in the meantime. 

By way of background, the State of Washington, following Wisconsin's 

amazing success, has just signed an agreement with the Forest Service to 

implement Good Neighbor Authority in Washington State. I want to share 

with the Committee the successful track record of accomplishment achieved 

by the State ofWashington's Department of Natural Resources (DNR) over the 

past several years and contrast it with the record of the Forest Service. 

DNR has administrative responsibility over 2.1 million acres ofland trusts and 

provides for a fiscally responsible continued yield program of sustainable tree 

harvests. 

In 2011, state trust lands yielded a harvest of 560 million board feet (MMBF) 

of timber, which generated $220 million in revenue. By contrast, National 

Forest lands in Washington state yielded 129 million board feet (MMBF) 

generating revenue of only $638 thousand on 9.3 million Acres or one fifth of 

what the state produced on a quarter of the land base. 

Incredibly, the state produces 500% more actual timber revenue on less than 

one quarter of the land base of that held by the U.S. Forest Service. 

This comparison is even more striking when you look at the relative dollars 

generated per board foot; that is $308 per MBF on state land vs. $5.00 per MBF 

on Forest Service Land. 

Most telling of all: The entire U.S. National Forest system consists of 

193,000,000 acres and in 2011 produced a paltry $180,000,000 of revenue for 

taxpayers. This is less than $1 per acre of revenue to the Federal Treasurywhen potentially these forests across America could produce thousands of 

dollars per acre for taxpayers. 

So, on behalf of the school districts and counties across the country, I want to 

again declare it is the school children and county services that suffer because 
41 

of Congress's failure to pass active National Forest management and fire 

borrowing reform legislation and SRS funding! Until Congress acts to put in 

place those legislative solutions, counties must have SRS payments continue 

for at least five to 10 more years just to see if the reforms, once passed, actually 

work and stabilize National Forest dependent local economies. We must first 

see if the private sector, because of the reforms, will invest in new saw mills 

and other infrastructure and only then should SRS payments be phased out. 

Congress should create a sliding scale ... as revenues from timber harvests 

increase back toward historical levels, then and only then should SRS be 

reduced and ultimately ended. Congress caused this problem. Congress can 

solve this problem. Schools and counties should no longer be used as pawns 

in a House-Senate Chess game that leaves us guessing about whether SRS 

funding from one year to the next will be available. 

3) PILT. The PILT formula is written so that prior year payments from timber, 

mining, grazing and a dozen other sources are deducted so that PIL T 

payments can be calculated. During the entire 41-year history of the PIL T 

program, forest receipts, first from the 25% fund and then after the year 2000, 

from a combination of 25% fund forest receipts and SRS payments have 

always been deducted from National Forest Counties' PIL T payments. Since 

most of those counties are located in the Pacific Northwest, those counties 

have always received lower PIL T payments because of the prior year payment 

deduction. The beneficiaries of those PlL T funds not paid to large timber 

producing National Forest counties have been the desert and prairie counties, 

primarily in the Intermountain west. States like Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, 

Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and my home state of Washington. 

Some of us have been shouting this fact from the rooftops for the past 15 years 

because as long as PIL T funds are appropriated there is a fixed amount of 

money available for counties. If SRS goes away and is no longer a prior year 

payment deduction, the Congressional Research Service has told us that 

Pacific Northwest counties will, for the first time be entitled to receive their 

full PIL T payment. That increase will not come close to offsetting the loss of 
42 

SRS payments but it will be taken from those very desert and prairie counties 

in the Intermountain west. CRS says that reduction of PIL T in desert and 

prairie counties will likely exceed 20% of current PILT payments. So, there 

will, Madam Chair, be a seismic shift in the way PIL T payments are made if 

Congress fails to extend SRS payments. It will be a lose-lose proposition as 

new PIL T funds in the Pacific Northwest timber counties fail to remotely come 

close to existing SRS payments and as desert and Prairie lose 20% or more of 

existing PILT payments. CRS says that Alaska's Burroughs will get hit as well. 

No one will escape the carnage ifSRS dies prematurely. 

One last point involves changes to the way SRS is administered. SRS Title II 

and Title III funds as currently administered need significant improvement.. 

It has taken Commissioner Kiss, Pend Oreille County, four years to be appointed 

to the Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) during which time there was not a 

quorum to even hold meetings. RAC money should be controlled locally for local 

projects on the National Forest. I have no problem with an advisory committee 

and feel it is the right way to have the RAC funds administered, however a member 

from two counties away from ours has no idea what the most important needs of 

our funds are. Local control for good decisions with an advisory board of varied 

political and environmental interests can be accomplished best at home. 

Here are specific recommendations that nearly all counties with whom I have 

spoken agree with: 

Subject: Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination 

(SRS) Act 

Key Issue: Recommendations for improvements to provisions of the 

SRSAct 

Background on current status of the SRS Act: 

• Without Congressional reauthorization of the SRS Act, the Forest Service has had 

to revert to making payments to States under the 1908 Act (16 US.C. 500), 

commonly called the 25% payments, for fiscal year 2016 (2017 payment year). 
43 

Nationally these payments are 80% less than last year's payments under the SRS 

Act. 

Many rural counties depended heavily on SRS payments for schools, roads, and 

other activities. Without these payments, local counties would be forced to 

reduce teacher and road personnel, or find alternative sources of funding. In 

addition, SRS provided critical funding for emergency services, the Firewise 

program, and community driven restoration projects that enhanced resources on 

national forests. 

General SRS Act provisions that could be improved if the SRS Act is reauthorized: 

A long-term reauthorization without annual reductions in funding would provide 

financial stability to communities that rely on the SRS Act funds, as opposed to 

recent one or two-year reauthorizations that included annual reductions in 

funding. 

Remove the economically unviable merchantable timber contracting pilot 

provision, 

Traditional Timber Sales, Good Neighbor Authority Sales and Stewardship Sales 

should all have the 25% payment to counties to expedite the time in which 

counties no longer need SRS funds. 

Provisions related to County Funds (SRS Act title HI) tbat could be improved: 

Clarify that title III funds (County funds) should remain available for obligation 

by counties until expended, and not be subject to later collection by the Federal 

Government. 

Re-open elections for counties that choose to change elections between titles II 

and Ill. 

Clarify that title lll funds can be used to fund emergency response vehicles or 

aircraft but only in the amount attributable to the use of such vehicles for other 

allowable title III uses. 

Provisions related to Resource Advisory Committees (SRS Act title II) that could be 

improved: 

The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S. C. App) should not apply to RACs. 

Eliminate the six-year service limitation for RAC members. Most RACs in Rural 

areas need these people to serve longer terms. If FACA cannot be amended 

directly, simply allow longer service as necessary. 

Title 2/3 election (split) 

The original and every succeeding re-authorization and extension (except 

the last one) allows the county to determine the split of title 2/3 funding 

(within sideboards of designated categories of projects and the maximum 

of 7% (of total payment) in Title 3). This split often varied depending on 

quality of projects presented and program needs. The last extension 

locked in the existing split. The language might be better if it didn't sayre-
44 

open, but something like maintain the local flexibility to determine the 

election as the original act or something similar. This is important 

because the last year split (2013) that the 2014 and 2015 were locked into 

was an abnormal year. The locked in split is specifically impacting the 

ability to fund search and rescue and fire prevention planning. 

• The Chief of the Forest Service or, as designated by the Chief, a Regional 

Forester should be allowed to appoint members of SRS Act Resource Advisory 

Committees (RACs). 

• Clarify that title[] funds (RAC funds) should remain available for obligation until 

expended. 

• RACs should be comprised of at least 9 but not more than 15 members. 

• RAC community of interests represented should include at least 3 but not more 

than 5 persons. 

• Members of a RAC should reside within the State or in a county outside of the 

State adjacent to the area in which the committee has jurisdiction. 

Chair Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell and the Senate Committee, 

thank you for the opportunity to share Pend Oreille County's story. I look 

forward to working with you to pass legislation that will enhance our National 

Forests and secure permanent PIL T funding, better management of our 

forests to prevent catastrophic wild fires and a program for SRS to bridge the 

gap in the interim. All my county residents need your support to protect their 

environment, enhance the economy, educate our youth, build our roads and 

assist our emergency responders. 

Secure Rural Schools and Communities Act-Remembering the History 

The President of the United States was given the authority to create Forest Reserves in 1891. 

In the next six years over 40 million acres of forestland was placed in Forest Reserves. Across 

the west, rural county commissioners and school leaders expressed grave concerns over the 
45 

withdrawal of large blocks of land from settlement, economic developmen~ and taxation 

within their counties. Many communities were also highly dependent on these lands for 

grazing, timber, and water. Rural public concern was growing about: 

a] the purpose of these lands and how they would be managed; and 

b) the economic impacts oflocking up these lands- especially the impacts on roads 

and schools. 

In 1897, Congress finally specified that the Forest Reserves would be used for three purposes: 

1. Improve and protect the forests in the Reserve. 

2. Secure favorable conditions of water flows. 

3. Furnish a continual supply of timber for the use and necessities of citizens of the 

United States. 

In 1905, the Forest Reserves were renamed the U.S. National Forests and the U.S. Forest 

Service was founded to manage the lands. Presidents continued to set aside more lands by 

proclamation and the concerns and oppositions of rural county commissioners and school 

superintendents continued to grow. By the mid 1900's over 153 million acres had been set 

aside as National Forests. 

President Theodore Roosevelt and Gifford Pinchot, Chief of the Forest Service were so 

concerned that rural county opposition would politically compromise the future of the U.S. 

National Forests, that they proposed a new concept- revenue sharing. In 1908 Congress 

approved a bill that specified that 25% of all revenues raised on National Forests would be 

sent to counties which contained these forests to be used for county roads and public schools. 

For over 100 years, this 1908 revenue sharing act has provided critical revenues for rural 

counties and schools. 

"The Compact" 

It is Important to remember that these funds are to mitigate for the removal of these lands from 

economic development and settlement- in order to form our National Forest system. This was 

a compact with the rural citizens of America to make possible the establishment of our National 

Forests. 

From 1908 until the late 1980's this "Revenue Sharing" system worked well for forest 

counties and schools by providing a steady and significant income stream. By the late 1980's 

national environmental laws and aggressive environmental organizations caused most 

national forests to discontinue or drastically cut grazing, timber management, and mining. 

As a result, U.S. Forest Service revenues declined vety rapidly as did the 25% Forest Revenue 

receipts to counties and schools. By 1998 these revenues had declined by over 70%. 
46 

The Secure Rural Schools and Communities Act (SRS) 

In December 2000 the Secure Rural Schools and Communities Act was signed into law. This 

bill provided Title I payments to counties (for roads) and to public schools, it also provided 

payments to counties to invest in Title ll Forest Improvement Projects on National Forests 

and Title Ill for specific projects and programs in counties. The Act also authorized the 

counties to create, in cooperation with the USFS, collaborative Resource Advisory 

Committees. This Act was enormously successful in that it restored county and school 

revenues to their 1980's and early 90's levels, resulting in restoration of public services and 

school programs. The 62 Resource Advisory Committees completed over 4000 projects on 

National Forest lands without a single lawsuit or appeaL The original SRS authorization 

expired in September 2006. 

2007- A one year extension ofSRS was approved 

2008- A four-year extension was approved with a new funding formula and a 10 percent 

reduction each year. 

Texas was included in a small group of"transition states" which were allowed to use 

the old formula through 2010 and begin using the new formula with FY 2011. 

2012 A one year extension was approved with a 5 percent reduction in funding from 

2011. 

2013- Another one year extension was approved with an additional 5 percent reduction in 

funding. 

2015- A two year extension was approved for FY 2014-2015 with additional 5 percent 

reduction each year. 

2016 The authorization has expired and Congressional action is needed to extend it 

2017 The authorization has still expired and Congressional action is needed to 

extend it. 
47 

$1,200,000.00 

$1,000,000.00 

$800,000.00 

$600,000.00 

$400,000.00 

$200,000.00 

$0.00 

0 

SRS/PILT FUNDS to PEND ORElllE COUNTY 

2005-2016 

~SRS FUNDS ~PilT FUNDS 
48 

YEA!! 

2005 

200§ 

2oo:; 

200~ 

200~! 

20H.! 

201:! 

201l 

20I:; 

20l;f. 

201ir. 

TOTAL '!'!it~ 

70.00% 

60.00% 

50.00% 

40.00% 

30.00% 

20.00% 

10.00% 

0.00% 

PEND OREILLE COUNTY- VOLUME OF HARVESTED TREES 2005-2015 

Thousand Board Feet- DN R data 

COMPARISON of land Percentage to Timber Harvest Percentage 

Comparison of Land %to Timber Harvest% 

.. 

State lands Federal lands Tribal -lands Private land 

~%of Land 1m% of Timber harvest 

:~.;L ;t~~;i 

·~;.:~,.~;:;r;;' 

·~~r.=,:f.;:l! ;!· 

.. ,.r,;,.:z·:~:~. 

·~·!:!,.:.:.ij.~ 

Other --(Local govt) 
49 

2017 PEND OREillE GENERAl FUND REVENUE BUDGET 

Beginning fund Balance $860,000 

Taxes $3,400,288 

licenses & Permits $191,700 

:Grants & Entitlements $3,493,937 

, PllT $960,839 

:Charges for Goods & Services $1,208,947 

Fines & Penalties $197,220 

Miscellaneous Revenues $307,640 

!Other Financing sources $200,000 

TOTAl2017 REVENUE BUDGET $10,820,571 

Pend Oreille County General Fund 2016 Property Tax & PILT 

PEND OREILLE COUNTY 

!APPROXIMATE ACRES of 

'FEDERAL LAND 

2017 AVERAGE FOREST 

LAND VALUE PER ACRE TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE 

r 

I 
50 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Commissioner. 

Mr. Haggerty, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF MARK HAGGERTY, HEADWATERS ECONOMICS 

Mr. HAGGERTY. Thank you, Chairman Murkowski, Ranking 

Member Cantwell and members of the Committee. I’m pleased to 

join you today to discuss the need to provide greater fiscal certainty 

to counties with federal lands. 

I want to use my time today to describe an idea that could offer 

greater fiscal certainty to local governments: building an endowment for counties and their schools by creating a permanent trust 

funded with commercial receipts from federal lands. Such an endowment would fund a long-term reauthorization of Secure Rural 

Schools and Community Self-Determination Act. 

While SRS has funded critical rural infrastructure and services 

for 15 years, it has become clear that asking Congress to reauthorize SRS annually without a long-term funding plan in place is an 

untenable position. Annual revenue sharing payments are permanently authorized but relying on increased timber harvest is not a 

solution by itself that improves fiscal certainty and would fall short 

of keeping most counties whole with respect to SRS. 

Creating a permanent trust combines these two approaches to 

create a permanent and stable funding source and ensure predictable and rising payments to counties year over year. A key difference between the permanent trust model and annual revenue 

sharing is that a trust stabilizes revenues over time insulating 

counties from uncertainty and inequity associated with annual revenue sharing payments. Continuing SRS payments would keep 

counties whole and the endowment would lower the cost of SRS 

each year until congressional funding is no longer necessary. 

Permanent funds are commonly used by states across the West 

that have a fiduciary responsibility to manage state lands to generate revenue for schools. Alaska, Louisiana, Texas, Wyoming and 

others have trust funds with a combined value of more than $100 

billion. 

The Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management are also essentially being asked to manage federal lands to generate revenue 

for local governments, including schools. A permanent trust could 

be the right approach for these lands too. 

There’s a growing body of research and experience that suggests 

becoming too reliant on uncertain revenue from natural resources 

can, over time, expose rural counties to greater risk of fiscal crisis. 

For example, Clearwater County, Idaho, where I visited last 

week, is working to retain regional mill capacity and skilled workers to do needed forest restoration and maintain a viable commercial logging industry. And they’re working to diversify their economy. 

Declining school enrollment and budget cuts have jeopardized 

the gifted and talented programs, shop, art and music classes and 

the school district is now on a four-day week and cannot support 

all day kindergarten. Losing SRS and less than full funding for 

PILT would require deeper cuts. 

The cuts are looming as the county, like others across the U.S., 

are being asked to take on increasing responsibilities, including in 
51 

coordinating economic development activities. Attracting and retaining families and businesses in rural communities will become 

increasingly difficult without good schools, road infrastructure and 

quality services. 

The current system of county payments is broken. The annual 

battle of appropriations needs to end and counties deserve predictable and stable payments. A new permanent trust at the federal 

level that would remake the fiscal relationship between federal 

lands and counties could resolve these issues. 

If a permanent trust is established, receipts would be deposited 

into the trust instead of being shared with counties on an annual 

basis. The principle balance of the trust would be held in perpetuity and invested to earn income. An independent entity, such 

as the National Forest Foundation, could establish and manage the 

permanent trust with oversight from Congress and the Administration. At the end of each fiscal year, a distribution would be credited 

to the U.S. Treasury to offset the cost of authorized appropriations 

while a portion of the distribution could also be sent forward to 

counties annually. 

How permanently or how quickly a permanent trust could replace annual revenue sharing payments and SRS would depend on 

how much is invested into the trust every year. How long the principle balance is invested before it starts making distributions and 

Congress could also make a one-time appropriation up front to capitalize the trust. 

Had Congress established a trust in 2000, today it would be 

worth $1.2 to $1.5 billion. It would be able to make annual distributions equal to or greater than current levels of annual commercial receipts. In other words, counties would already be better 

off with predictable and stable distributions from a trust that 

match or exceed current revenue sharing payments. 

I look forward to continued discussions. And I’m happy to answer 

any questions that you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Haggerty follows:] 
52 

Headwaters Economics 

Testimony ofMarkHaggerty, Headwaters Economics 

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Hearing on Secure Rural 

School and Community Self-Determination Act and Payments in Lieu of Taxes 

May2, 2017 

Thank you Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, and members of the Committee. 

am pleased to join you today to discuss the Secure Rural Schools and Community SelfDetermination Act (SRS) and Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PTLT) programs. 

I work at Headwaters Economics, an independent, nonprofit research group based in Montana. 

We work to improve community development and land management decisions in the West 

As an economic geographer, my primary research and policy interest is in understanding why 

some counties that have federal lands and natural resources seem to do better than others. 

Working closely with county commissioners and collaborative groups, I appreciate the 

importance of federal county payments in shaping local government budgets and rural economic 

development opportunities. 

I want to use my time to describe a potential solution for county payments: building an 

endowment for public land counties by investing commercial receipts into a newly established 

permanent trust fund. Such an endowment would fund a long-term reauthorization of SRSeventually eliminating the need for appropriations altogether-and would guarantee all counties 

predictable, fair, and rising payments year over year. 

It has become clear that asking Congress to reauthorize and appropriate funds for SRS and PILT 

each year without a funding plan in place is an untenable position for counties. An endowment 

offers a long-term funding solution. 

A permanent trust funded by commercial receipts could benefit from increased revenue from 

federal lands, but it would stabilize these revenue streams over time and ensure all counties fair 

payments even in years and in places where generating historic levels of receipts isn't possible. 

Before describing how an endowment would work and the ingredients for its success, I want to 

provide important context, including: the current budget proposals for PILT and SRS and their 

implications for counties; the economic contributions of federal lands in a changing economy; 

the important role of natural resource fiscal policy in local government budgets and economic 

development; and the limitations of revenue sharing payments as a solution to ensuring 

predictable and fair compensation to local governments for tax-exempt federal lands. 

Current Budget Proposals Would Significantly Reduce Payments to Local Governments 

May 2, 2017, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Hearing on Pll T and SRS Reauthorization. 
53 

Headwaters Economics 

Headwaters Economics recently generated projected payments for every county in the US. based 

on the most recent Forest Service 25 percent revenue sharing payments, Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) O&C 50 percent revenue sharing payments, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Refuge Revenue Sharing (RRS) payments, and a projection ofPILT for FY 2017 with the 

funding level capped at the most recent 10-year average ofPILT payments. These projections are 

included as Attachment A. 

Our projections show that if SRS is not reauthorized and if the Administration's recent budget 

proposal to limit PIL T to the ten-year average is accepted by Congress, federal payments to 

counties will decline by 43 percent nationally. The hardest hit counties, primarily rural counties 

with large shares of federal lands, could see payments decline by more than 90 percent. 

For example, I was in Central Idaho last week meeting with county commissioners, timber 

industry and agency employees, staff of environmental NGOs and others that are part of the 

Clearwater Basin Collaborative. The Collaborative set aside half a day to discuss the 

implications oflosing SRS and PILT funding, and what solutions might be available. 

We heard from Idaho County that it stands to lose $7 million, nearly 90 percent of the county's 

payment. Clearwater County could lose more than half its payment (57%), a decline of more 

than $1.1 million. 

Declines Will Harm Rural Counties Already Struggling Economically and Fiscally 

The potential sharp decline in payments comes at a time when rural counties across the U.S. like 

Idaho and Clearwater Counties are still struggling to recover from the Great Recession. The two 

counties together lost population between 20 ll and 2015 (the latest year for which data are 

available) and have more than 500 fewer jobs in 2015 compared to 2007 before the start of the 

Great Recession. 

It should be noted that not all counties with tax-exempt lands are struggling. Cities and some 

parts of the rural West connected to them by convenient air travel are growing, attracting people 

and businesses choosing to locate near federal lands. Places like Bozeman, Montana, where I live 

are grappling with rapid growth. 

Still, some rural counties are not capturing these economic opportunities in part because of 

limitations they face in attracting high-wage services jobs being created in the new economy in 

places like Bozeman. 

Further, rural areas have seen a decline in manufacturing and natural resource sector jobs, and 

largely stagnant wages. These declines stem from productivity gains (fewer workers are required 

in plants, mills and in the forest), increased competition and trade, and continued uncertainty in 

commodity markets. It is in these rural communities where the impact of declining SRS and 

PILT payments will be felt most acutely. 

May 2, 2017, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Hearing on Pll T and SRS Reauthorization. 2 
54 

Headwaters Economics 

There are opportunities in these rural communities, and we recently profiled gains in rural 

manufacturing. However 

County Payments Support Rural Services Critical to Economic Development 

Rural areas struggling economically also often face a declining tax base, reduced school 

enrollments and signit!cant challenges in raising local levies and fees, in part due to 

constitutional and regulatory limits at the state level on local revenue and spending authority. 

Local governments also are being asked to take on increasing responsibilities, including a 

growing role for counties in providing social services and coordinating economic development in 

addition to more traditional local government operations including public safety, education, 

roads, and infrastructure responsibilities. 

More and more, counties and the services they provide are central to local and regional economic 

stability and growth. For example, good schools are central to attracting and retaining families 

and businesses in rural counties and education is correlated with higher wages and better 

employment opportunities for individuals. 

Declining enrollment at Clearwater County, Idaho's schools and reduced budgets have 

jeopardized gifted and talented programs, shop, art, and music classes that are sometimes cut and 

are constantly threatened from limited budgets. The school district is now on a four-day week 

and cannot support day-long kindergarten classes. Losing SRS would require deeper cuts. 

The county is working to retain and attract families and businesses, but this becomes 

increasingly difficult without good schools and other services. 

Increasing Active Management on Federal Lands Will Not Replace SRS and PILT 

Idaho and Clearwater Counties also are working collaboratively to address critical forest health 

challenges and trying to retain mill capacity and skilled workers to do the work. There is broad 

agreement among members of the Collaborative on many of these issues, and success stories are 

increasing. 

Despite need and opportunity to increase the pace and scale of restoration activities, including 

timber harvest, active management is not a solution to county payments. Most projects on the 

national forests are conducted using stewardship contracts that allow receipts to be retained 

locally and reinvested in additional work on the forest. Even if stewardship receipts are made 

eligible for revenue sharing or if these projects are converted to commercial sales, receipts would 

not approach recent levels of SRS. Annual revenue sharing payments also would expose counties 

to volatility in commodity markets and continued political and legal uncertainty over time. 

This is true in a large number of timber dependent counties where receipts are unlikely to return 

to historic levels. Last year, I travelled to California to attend the Rural County Representatives 

May 2., 2017, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Hearing on Pll T and SRS Reauthorization. 3 
55 

Headwaters Economics 

of California (RCRC) annual meeting. RCRC champions policies on behalf of California's rural 

counties which face the same forest health, economic development, and fiscal challenges as their 

peers across the U.S. These counties in California, like Idaho, are concerned about the loss of 

SRS and PILT funding 

Sierra County, California, for example, lost population and employment between 2000 and 2015. 

Historically mining and timber-dependent, the county is too remote to capture the high-wage 

high-tech jobs being created in the state's metro regions. The county also has lost its mill 

capacity, skilled workforce, and other infrastructure that would facilitate large annual 

commercial timber harvests. 

Supervisor Lee Adams and his peers have closely watched discussions about reforming the 

process to harvest timber off National Forest lands, which, in turn, would boost payments to 

counties and schools. Supervisor Adams welcomes and encourages such reforms. But federal 

policymakers need to be aware that in Sierra County-and it can be assumed in a great number 

of California's forested counties-reverting back to 25 percent payments will not sustain local 

schools and road budgets. Even if the federal government finds a way to increase the pace and 

scale of forest management activity, Supervisor Adams worries the regulatory climate in 

California likely would not allow it to happen in Sierra County and many other rural California 

counties. 

Building an Endowment to Benefit Rural Counties and Their Schools 

Building an endowment to fund federal land payments to counties and schools by establishing a 

permanent trust offers a solution to these difficult issues related to county payments. 

First, it offers a long-term funding solution that over time pays for permanent extensions of SRS. 

This hearing and recent letters from Congress, governors, and counties to the Administration 

indicate broad support for extending these programs while a longer-term funding solution is 

developed. Building an endowment would accomplish that goal. 

A permanent trust would utilize commercial receipts as the funding mechanism for county 

payments. A key difference between the permanent trust model and annual revenue sharing is 

that a permanent trust stabilizes these revenue streams over time, insulating counties from the 

uncertainty of annual revenue sharing payments. 

For counties like Sierra County, California where increasing receipts to historic levels is 

unlikely, SRS is needed to provide fair and equitable compensation for non-taxable federal lands. 

For Idaho and Clearwater Counties, Idaho, extending SRS provides the predictability and 

flexibility for the counties to continue to work collaboratively on forest management reform with 

all the tools and creative leasing and partnership opportunities available to them. SRS payments 

mitigate the financial risks associated with national recessions and uncertain commodity markets. 

May 2, 2017, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Hearing on PILT and SRS Reauthorization. 4 
56 

Headwaters Economics 

For example, had Congress established a permanent tmst in 2000 along with SRS, today it would 

be worth $1.2 billion and would be able to make annual distributions equal to or greater than 

current levels of annual commercial receipts. In other words, counties would already be better off 

with predictable and stable distributions from a tmst that match or exceed current revenue 

sharing payments. 

Permanent trusts are common among U.S. states that have timber, coal, oil and gas resources on 

state lands. For example, Alaska, Louisiana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, and 

Wyoming have state land royalty and severance tax trust funds with a combined value of more 

than $100 billion. 

Currently, commercial receipts generated on federal lands are either shared directly with counties 

or are deposited in the U.S. Treasury to pay the first portion of appropriated programs. 

If a permanent trust is established, receipts would instead be directed to the permanent trust and 

the principal balance would be invested to earn income. Congress also could make discretionary 

allocations to the permanent trust. For example, Congress could make a one-time deposit to 

capitalize the permanent trust up front or identify additional sources of commercial receipts that 

could be deposited into the permanent trust on a recurring basis. 

For a permanent trust to work, the principal balance must be protected in perpetuity. One 

possible solution is to have in independent entity with a fiduciary responsibility to counties and 

the U.S. Treasury manage the permanent trust. Legislation establishing a permanent trust would 

require that the entity with fiduciary responsibility to counties manages the trust principal for the 

interest of the beneficiaries; that the management strategy ensures the preservation of the trust 

principal; and the trust is managed to provide a predictable source of revenue to the beneficiaries. 

Congress and the Administration (for example through the office of the inspector generals of the 

Agriculture and Interior departments) would have to provide oversight. 

In order to keep counties whole in the interim period while the endowment is growing, Congress 

must extend appropriations. Extending appropriations for SRS at current (2015) levels and 

investing receipts into a permanent trust would increase the cost of county payments to the U.S. 

treasury in the short term. The minimum level of appropriations required to establish a 

permanent trust is an amount equal to the value of receipts invested into the permanent trust each 

year so that counties are at least held whole with regard to current levels of revenue sharing 

payments. Congress will need to determine the funding level that is possible and appropriate. 

If appropriations fall below the most recent levels of SRS (20 15) and the authorized PILT 

payment, counties will receive lower payments in the short term. The existing PILT formula, 

with less than full funding, would also have the unintended effect of redistributing payments 

from rural counties to metropolitan counties. Metro counties would experience payment declines 

of 39 percent on average while non-metro counties would experience declines of 46 percent on 

average. 

May 2, 2017, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Hearing on PILT and SRS Reauthorization. 5 
57 

Headwaters Economics 

Essentially, rural counties most dependent on payments would bear the brunt of declines. The 

challenge, if appropriations levels are to fall, is to create a county payment system that does not 

overcompensate relatively wealthy urban and resort areas, and recognizes the relative importance 

ofPTL Tin other counties where the compensation from federal lands can be a significant 

contributor to local governments and services they provide. 

!flower funding levels (or no funding for SRS) are appropriated, Congress may consider 

reforming the PIL T formula to reverse the urban bias and prioritize the allocation of lower 

funding levels to mral counties. Headwaters Economics has explored this idea, and a white paper 

describing possible reforms are included as Attachment B. 

Conclusion 

Finding a long-term solution to forest health, rural economic development, and county payments 

is critical and demands creativity and persistence. 

Building an endowment from natural resource wealth is a well-established, transparent solution 

to the challenge of providing stable and predictable payments from natural resources on public 

and private land. A new permanent tmst at the federal level would reshape the fiscal relationship 

between federal, states, and local governments. The benefits of permanent and increasing 

payments without the need for permanent appropriations make it an idea worth exploring. 

I look forward to continued discussions and I am happy to answer any questions you may have. 

Mark Haggerty 

Headwaters Economics 

( 406) 5 70-5626 

mark@headwaterseconomi cs. org 

https :1 /headwaterseconomi cs.org/ 

May 21 2017, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Hearing on Pll T and SRS Reauthorization. 6 
58 

Testimony of Mark Haggerty Attachment A: Estimated County Payments for FY 2017 

27-Apr-17 

Since 1908, the federal government has made payments to state and local governments that compensate 

for the non-taxable status of public lands. In 201S, these payments totaled about $77S million for three of 

the largest programs-the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (SRS), National 

Wildlife Refuge Revenue Sharing payments (RRS), and Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILl). 

Headwaters Economics recently generated projected payments for every county in the U.S. based on the 

most recent Forest Service 25 percent revenue sharing payments, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) O&C 

SO percent revenue sharing payments, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Refuge Revenue Sharing (RRS) 

payments, and a projection of PILl for FY 2017 with the funding level capped at the most recent 10-year 

average of PILl payments. 

Our projections show that if SRS is not reauthorized and if the Administration's recent budget proposal to 

limit PILl to the ten-year average is accepted by Congress, federal payments to counties will decline by 43 

percent nationally. The hardest hit counties, primarily rural counties with large shares offederallands, 

could see payments decline by more than 90 percent. 

The maps and table below display our estimates of payments for FY 2017 and the change in payments fro 

FY 201S. 

Map 1: Estimated Change in Forest Service, BLM O&C, USFWS RRS, and PILl Payments, 

FY 2015 to FY 2017 
59 

Map 1: Estimated Change in Forest Service, BLM O&C, USFWS RRS, and PILT Payments, Alaska, 

FY 2015 to FY 2017 

• 

Estimated Change in Forest Service, BLM O&C, USFWS RRS, and PILT Payments, 

FY 2015 to FY 2017 

Baldwin County $324,110 

Barbour County $42,437 

Bibb County $211,998 

Calhoun County $102,825 

Chambers County $16,943 

Cherokee County $27,558 

Chilton County $88,593 

Choctaw County $13,186 

Clarke County $4,994 

Clay County $226,507 

Cleburne County $352,695 

$22,487 

$28,278 

$152,317 

$55,287 

$11,262 

$19,251 

$57,264 

$8,694 

$3,390 

$167,039 

$247,277 

-93% 

-33% 

-28% 

-46% 

-34% 

-30% 

-35% 

-34% 

-32% 

-26% 

-30% 
60 

Coffee County $103 $69 -34% 

Colbert County $6,775 $4,503 -34% 

Conecuh County $0 $0 

Coosa County $375 $250 -33% 

Covington County $200,361 $187,678 -6% 

Dallas County $9,207 $6,300 -32% 

DeKalb County $12,704 $8,444 -34% 

Elmore County $2,672 $1,777 -34% 

Escambia County $112,268 $99,810 -11% 

Etowah County $0 $0 

Franklin County $4,524 $2,971 -34% 

Greene County $26,754 $17,783 -34% 

Hale County $95,300 $74,328 -22% 

Henry County $14,677 $9,756 -34% 

Houston County $900 $598 -34% 

Jackson County $1,662 $532 -68% 

Jefferson County $299 $0 -100% 

Lamar County $462 $237 -49% 

Lauderdale County $6,342 $2,452 -61% 

Lawrence County $340,206 $205,488 -40% 

Lee County $0 $0 

Limestone County $9,464 $0 -100% 

Lowndes County $28,522 $18,958 -34% 

Macon County $46,206 $41,780 -10% 

Madison County $14,314 $0 -100% 

Marengo County $3,604 $2,619 -27% 

Marshall County $103 $69 -34% 

Mobile County $26,983 $14,727 -45% 

Monroe County $6,241 $4,148 -34% 

Montgomery County $1,999 $1,329 -34% 

Morgan County $16,995 $0 -100% 

Perry County $126,839 $82,075 -35% 

Pickens County $13,207 $8,778 -34% 

Randolph County $273 $182 -34% 

Russell County $5,826 $3,872 -34% 

Shelby County $103 $0 -100% 

St. Clair County $207 $0 -100% 

Sumter County $20,282 $13,481 -34% 

Talladega County $176,780 $116,119 -34% 

Tallapoosa County $5,250 $3,490 -34% 

Tuscaloosa County $45,236 $32,138 -29% 

Washington County $1,300 $864 -34% 

Wilcox County $9,546 $6,345 -34% 

Winston County $343,014 $204,746 -40% 

Alaska Aleutians East Borough $559,084 $389,091 -30% 

Aleutians West Census Area $977,542 $649,550 -34% 

Anchorage Municipality $737,544 $495,592 -33% 
61 

Bethel Census Area $1,793,608 $1,191,804 -34% 

Bristol Bay Borough $163,073 $108,252 -34% 

Denali Borough $324,807 $222,065 -32% 

Dillingham Census Area $870,123 $576,606 -34% 

Fairbanks North Star Borough $439,367 $291,940 -34% 

Haines Borough $522,093 $324,711 -38% 

Hoonah-Angoon Census Area $373,171 $240,676 -36% 

Juneau City and Borough $2,793,585 $1,856,193 -34% 

Kenai Peninsula Borough $3,483,768 $2,327,881 -33% 

Ketchikan Gateway Borough $2,300,877 $1,088,759 -53% 

Kodiak Island Borough $1,700,538 $1,002,966 -41% 

Kusi!vak Census Area $1,138,900 $756,782 -34% 

Lake and Peninsula Borough $296,480 $188,541 -36% 

Matanuska-Susitna Borough $3,480,455 $2,321,348 -33% 

Nome Census Area $1,217,521 $808,982 -34% 

North Slope Borough $1,222,287 $809,132 -34% 

Northwest Arctic Borough $1,139,287 $756,791 -34% 

Petersburg Borough $1,343,941 $404,279 -70% 

Prince of Wales-Hyder Census Area $977,542 $649,550 -34% 

Sitka City and Borough $1,313,807 $840,419 -36% 

Skagway Municipality $172,084 $123,494 -28% 

Southeast Fairbanks Census Area $1,073,810 $713,521 -34% 

Valdez-Cordova Census Area $1,217,521 $794,438 -35% 

Wrangell City and Borough $1,517,076 $317,801 -79% 

Yakutat City and Borough $855,129 $107,567 -87% 

Yukon-Koyukuk Census Area $977,542 $649,550 -34% 

Arizona Apache County $2,668,863 $1,218,213 -54% 

Cochise County $2,581,960 $1,621,264 -37% 

Coconino County $5,118,715 $2,653,242 -48% 

Gila County $5,149,484 $2,580,596 -50% 

Graham County $3,328,708 $1,943,583 -42% 

Greenlee County $1,627,828 $838,770 -48% 

La Paz County $1,945,470 $1,282,891 -34% 

Maricopa County $3,484,733 $2,415,554 -31% 

Mohave County $3,485,988 $2,312,558 -34% 

Navajo County $2,629,654 $1,067,828 -59% 

Pima County $3,654,347 $2,365,508 -35% 

Pinal County $1,624,366 $1,095,531 -33% 

Santa Cruz County $1,572,107 $803,241 -49% 

Yavapai County $5,569,712 $2,627,192 -53% 

Yuma County $3,479,594 $2,312,197 -34% 

Arkansas Arkansas County $139,467 $11,932 -91% 

Ashley County $72,104 $5,493 -92% 

Baxter County $353,838 $244,117 -31% 

Benton County $109,010 $75,966 -30% 

Boone County $35,534 $23,619 -34% 

Bradley County $32,083 $0 -100% 
62 

Calhoun County $0 $0 

Carroll County $21,076 $14,283 -32% 

Chico! County $1,166 $775 -33% 

Clark County $46,280 $30,762 -34% 

Clay County $7,229 $767 -89% 

Cleburne County $75,230 $51,780 -31% 

Cleveland County $0 $137 

Columbia County $0 $217 

Conway County $9,314 $7,627 -18% 

Craighead County $7,204 $4,747 -34% 

Crawford County $342,099 $219,344 -36% 

Crittenden County $22,636 $0 -100% 

Cross County $103 $69 -34% 

Dallas County $103 $69 -34% 

Desha County $57,937 $6,902 -88% 

Faulkner County $622 $332 -47% 

Franklin County $464,134 $294,814 -36% 

Fulton County $12,315 $6,059 -51% 

Garland County $522,787 $409,510 -22% 

Greene County $1,126 $2,603 131% 

Hempstead County $13,411 $8,914 -34% 

Hot Spring County $33,897 $22,697 -33% 

Howard County $42,677 $28,439 -33% 

Independence County $207 $137 -34% 

Izard County $103 $206 99% 

Jackson County $6,653 $1,592 -76% 

Jefferson County $9,040 $6,009 -34% 

Johnson County $847,716 $482,773 -43% 

Lafayette County $2,653 $1,832 -31% 

Lawrence County $184 $4,089 2119% 

Lee County $62,230 $53,699 -14% 

Lincoln County $0 $65 

Little River County $42,969 $28,525 -34% 

Logan County $422,513 $293,889 -30% 

Madison County $167,881 $124,912 -26% 

Marion County $194,192 $131,229 -32% 

Mississippi County $31,700 $15,777 -50% 

Monroe County $162,438 $19,739 -88% 

Montgomery County $1,780,079 $982,602 -45% 

Nevada County $0 $0 

Newton County $984,458 $574,080 -42% 

Ouachita County $284 $189 -33% 

Perry County $460,798 $279,402 -39% 

Phillips County $76,660 $50,794 -34% 

Pike County $93,979 $65,322 -30% 

Poinsett County $18,847 $12,525 -34% 

Polk County $1,012,648 $577,478 -43% 
63 

Pope County $764,522 $505,905 -34% 

Prairie County $28,890 $5,092 -82% 

Pulaski County $4,554 $3,027 -34% 

Randolph County $620 $412 -34% 

Saline County $244,780 $165,393 -32% 

Scott County $1,786,336 $1,031,184 -42% 

Searcy County $198,549 $122,463 -38% 

Sebastian County $131,660 $102,466 -22% 

Sevier County $114,889 $33,111 -71% 

Sharp County $0 $69 

St Francis County $2,078 $27,408 1219% 

Stone County $263,277 $157,216 -40% 

Union County $51,307 $1,146 -98% 

Van Buren County $126,054 $96,272 -24% 

Washington County $86,995 $61,744 -29% 

White County $39,152 $0 -100% 

Woodruff County $56,540 $28,112 -50% 

Yell County $1,004,228 $647,475 -36% 

California Alameda County $140,260 $1,492 -99% 

Alpine County $613,349 $327,084 -47% 

Amador County $347,842 $284,053 -18% 

Butte County $643,716 $329,428 -49% 

Calaveras County $422,436 $289,696 -31% 

Colusa County $448,959 $188,215 -58% 

Contra Costa County $10,633 $3,919 -63% 

Del Norte County $1,933,945 $808,733 -58% 

El Dorado County $2,337,604 $1,796,675 -23% 

Fresno County $4,104,524 $2,732,560 -33% 

Glenn County $822,859 $402,941 -51% 

Humboldt County $1,782,936 $880,467 -51% 

Imperial County $3,370,272 $2,227,734 -34% 

lnyo County $2,268,075 $1,660,969 -27% 

Kern County $2,927,035 $1,922,324 -34% 

Kings County $22,147 $14,677 -34% 

Lake County $601,550 $269,635 -55% 

Lassen County $3,609,172 $2,077,208 -42% 

Los Angeles County $2,802,594 $2,708,199 -3% 

Madera County $1,557,902 $1,066,592 -32% 

Marin County $210,736 $135,097 -36% 

Mariposa County $1,454,754 $987,388 -32% 

Mendocino County $936,794 $526,675 -44% 

Merced County $160,813 $60,678 -62% 

Modoc County $2,218,973 $896,381 -60% 

Mono County $1,732,710 $1,487,453 -14% 

Monterey County $900,981 $629,830 -30% 

Napa County $155,351 $103,215 -34% 

Nevada County $731,755 $462,368 -37% 
64 

Orange County $211,275 $213,049 1% 

Placer County $1,433,347 $935,701 -35% 

Plumas County $3,814,661 $1,726,345 -55% 

Riverside County $3,720,582 $2,671,206 -28% 

Sacramento County $48,130 $16,494 -66% 

San Benito County $261,492 $174,403 -33% 

San Bernardino County $3,751,004 $2,764,053 -26% 

San Diego County $1,669,590 $1,421,160 -15% 

San Francisco County $5,869 $3,901 -34% 

San Joaquin County $6,141 $3,836 -38% 

San Luis Obispo County $1,149,694 $775,814 -33% 

San Mateo County $52,347 $10,644 -80% 

Santa Barbara County $1,898,813 $1,309,403 -31% 

Santa Clara County $73,970 $3,078 -96% 

Santa Cruz County $20,140 $10,041 -50% 

Shasta County $3,469,820 $2,067,652 -40% 

Sierra County $1,018,863 $549,938 -46% 

Siskiyou County $5,404,117 $2,684,349 -50% 

Solano County $18,730 $9,874 -47% 

Sonoma County $17,654 $5,282 -70% 

Stanislaus County $54,401 $5,632 -90% 

Sutter County $32,376 $1 -100% 

Tehama County $1,725,611 $880,418 -49% 

Trinity County $4,173,044 $1,125,459 -73% 

Tulare County $3,743,537 $2,538,597 -32% 

Tuolumne County $3,409,270 $2,280,415 -33% 

Ventura County $1,552,329 $1,074,462 -31% 

Yolo County $80,369 $53,417 -34% 

Yuba County $171,625 $103,143 -40% 

Colorado Adams County $395,827 $1,348 -100% 

Alamosa County $236,929 $136,443 -42% 

Arapahoe County $1,681 $1,109 -34% 

Archuleta County $1,409,248 $775,974 -45% 

Baca County $503,028 $334,609 -33% 

Bent County $39,209 $35,951 -8% 

Boulder County $370,860 $250,835 -32% 

Chaffee County $1,663,864 $899,772 -46% 

Clear Creek County $628,899 $599,164 -5% 

Conejos County $1,542,075 $784,075 -49% 

Costilla County $1,894 $681 -64% 

Crowley County $9,609 $6,501 -32% 

Custer County $519,877 $312,944 -40% 

Delta County $407,998 $490,794 20% 

Dolores County $384,366 $131,790 -66% 

Douglas County $312,936 $225,031 -28% 

Eagle County $2,834,122 $2,098,305 -26% 

El Paso County $244,393 $163,412 -33% 
65 

Fremont County $1,226,867 $757,931 -38% 

Garfield County $3,364,933 $2,556,237 -24% 

Gilpin County $123,751 $100,562 -19% 

Grand County $2,036,693 $2,111,937 4% 

Gunnison County $1,624,582 $1,069,980 -34% 

Hinsdale County $551,438 $153,784 -72% 

Huerfano County $610,130 $372,893 -39% 

Jackson County $493,046 $197,295 -60% 

Jefferson County $119,885 $102,672 -14% 

Kiowa County $22,565 $16,549 -27% 

La Plata County $805,938 $451,034 -44% 

Lake County $595,174 $304,099 -49% 

Larimer County $2,060,840 $1,296,221 -37% 

Las Ani mas County $609,280 $427,759 -30% 

Lincoln County $3,180 $1,666 -48% 

Logan County $0 $0 

Mesa County $3,840,423 $2,513,584 -35% 

Mineral County $353,825 $130,024 -63% 

Moffat County $649,656 $516,914 -20% 

Montezuma County $417,935 $140,035 -66% 

Montrose County $2,579,994 $1,703,075 -34% 

Morgan County $1,174 $774 -34% 

Otero County $428,202 $284,120 -34% 

Ouray County $454,909 $296,467 -35% 

Park County $2,095,094 $1,218,777 -42% 

Pitkin County $1,869,944 $1,496,572 -20% 

Prowers County $157 $103 -34% 

Pueblo County $164,148 $103,196 -37% 

Rio Blanco County $849,939 $642,089 -24% 

Rio Grande County $1,050,899 $595,633 -43% 

Routt County $1,784,795 $958,570 -46% 

Saguache County $2,073,365 $769,240 -63% 

San Juan County $291,076 $98,936 -66% 

San Miguel County $1,031,896 $747,617 -28% 

Sedgwick County $314 $0 -100% 

Summit County $1,121,170 $1,164,499 4% 

Teller County $307,210 $236,288 -23% 

Washington County $290 $191 -34% 

Weld County $218,404 $47,393 -78% 

Yuma County $2,722 $1,795 -34% 

Connecticut Fairfield County $24,393 $513 -98% 

Litchfield County $18,341 $12,188 -34% 

Middlesex County $9,161 $98 -99% 

New Haven County $8,293 $816 -90% 

New London County $1,303 $32 -98% 

Tolland County $4,453 $2,960 -34% 

Windham County $6,114 $4,064 -34% 
66 

Delaware Kent County $50,308 $142 -100% 

New Castle County $77,877 $51,477 -34% 

Sussex County $40,229 $557 -99% 

District of Columbia District of Columbia 

Florida Baker County $436,711 $251,433 -42% 

Bay County $1,489 $1,360 -9% 

Bradford County $18 $18 1% 

Brevard County $277,299 $45,083 -84% 

Broward County $0 $0 

Calhoun County $3,091 $1,677 -46% 

Charlotte County $0 $0 

Citrus County $49,607 $626 -99% 

Collier County $1,485,649 $879,687 -41% 

Columbia County $385,021 $246,088 -36% 

DeSoto County $0 $0 

Dixie County $174,451 $0 -100% 

Duval County $22,770 $14,125 -38% 

Escambia County $5,637 $3,747 -34% 

Flagler County $0 $0 

Franklin County $235,537 $45,657 -81% 

Gadsden County $160 $106 -34% 

Glades County $661 $439 -34% 

Gulf County $1,050 $698 -34% 

Hamilton County $1,579 $1,142 -28% 

Hendry County $0 $0 

Hernando County $12,953 $0 -100% 

Highlands County $7,232 $0 -100% 

Hillsborough County $846 $562 -33% 

Indian Rlver County $37,881 $101 -100% 

Jackson County $42,508 $28,434 -33% 

Jefferson County $53,102 $0 -100% 

Lake County $273,238 $233,346 -15% 

Lee County $59,236 $92,023 55% 

Leon County $323,745 $209,196 -35% 

Levy County $148,935 $787 -99% 

Liberty County $1,079,047 $551,394 -49% 

Madlson County $72 $0 -100% 

Manatee County $158 $105 -34% 

Marion County $1,063,934 $765,464 -28% 

Martin County $236,268 $377 -100% 

Miami-Dade County $892,650 $593,342 -34% 

Monroe County $1,526,743 $780,033 -49% 

Nassau County $0 $0 

Okaloosa County $10,476 $6,837 -35% 

Okeechobee County $0 $0 

Osceola County $428 $285 -34% 

Palm Beach County $22,715 $0 -100% 
67 

Pinellas County $31 $0 -100% 

Polk County $2,507 $223 -91% 

Putnam County $105,951 $65,137 -39% 

Santa Rosa County $3,825 $2,548 -33% 

Seminole County $1,590 $1,384 -13% 

St. Johns County $518 $345 -34% 

St. Lucie County $470 $312 -34% 

Suwannee County $0 $0 

Taylor County $4,854 $0 -100% 

Volusia County $119,739 $29,723 -75% 

Wakulla County $978,206 $341,224 -65% 

Walton County $0 $278 

Georgia Banks County $3,063 $1,824 -40% 

Bartow County $40,720 $27,066 -34% 

Bibb County $7,797 $1,173 -85% 

Burke County $20,759 $13,798 -34% 

Butts County $203 $130 -36% 

Camden County $51,688 $33,512 -35% 

Catoosa County $10,325 $6,859 -34% 

Charlton County $235,016 $0 -100% 

Chatham County $140,270 $1,065 -99% 

Chattahoochee County $1,274 $847 -33% 

Chattooga County $63,617 $35,710 -44% 

Cherokee County $45,475 $30,227 -34% 

Clarke County $4 $0 -100% 

Clay County $38,805 $25,794 -34% 

Clinch County $36,565 $0 -100% 

Cobb County $23,310 $15,225 -35% 

Colquitt County $494 $0 -100% 

Columbia County $49,903 $33,169 -34% 

Cook County $0 $0 

Coweta County $0 $0 

Dade County $1,713 $1,139 -34% 

Davvson County $28,524 $17,573 -38% 

Decatur County $53,243 $35,390 -34% 

Douglas County $0 $0 

Early County $1,545 $885 -43% 

Effingham County $13,926 $0 -100% 

Elbert County $70,792 $47,055 -34% 

Emanuel County $459 $0 -100% 

Fannin County $352,622 $193,806 -45% 

Floyd County $21,710 $12,201 -44% 

Forsyth County $48,233 $32,601 -32% 

Franklin County $7,269 $4,831 -34% 

Fulton County $6,216 $3,645 -41% 

Gilmer County $200,850 $112,185 -44% 

Glynn County $2,113 $1,404 -34% 
68 

Gordon County $26,429 $14,938 -43% 

Greene County $89,493 $56,095 -37% 

Gwinnett County $7,477 $4,970 -34% 

Habersham County $133,775 $71,684 -46% 

Hall County $84,130 $55,916 -34% 

Harris County $0 $0 

Hart County $51,733 $34,387 -34% 

Heard County $24,463 $16,261 -34% 

Jasper County $157,787 $78,930 -50% 

Jones County $250,989 $99,925 -60% 

Lanier County $6,291 $0 -100% 

Lincoln County $136,031 $90,417 -34% 

Lumpkin County $183,324 $106,049 -42% 

Macon County $1,125 $748 -34% 

McDuffie County $36,834 $24,483 -34% 

Mcintosh County $168,135 $0 -100% 

Meriwether County $384 $0 -100% 

Miller County $629 $0 -100% 

Monroe County $782 $526 -33% 

Morgan County $1,169 $741 -37% 

Murray County $193,938 $101,388 -48% 

Oconee County $441 $346 -22% 

Oglethorpe County $16,458 $8,441 -49% 

Putnam County $146,678 $81,252 -45% 

Quitman County $16,773 $11,148 -34% 

Rabun County $459,702 $273,187 -41% 

Richmond County $134 $89 -33% 

Screven County $9,231 $6,136 -34% 

Seminole County $40,374 $26,836 -34% 

Stephens County $83,931 $49,722 -41% 

Stewart County $8,334 $5,539 -34% 

Sumter County $263 $175 -34% 

Tattnall County $320 $0 -100% 

Towns County $203,421 $105,638 -48% 

Troup County $102,325 $68,014 -34% 

Twiggs County $5,690 $0 -100% 

Union County $309,442 $179,922 -42% 

Walker County $70,788 $37,636 -47% 

Ware County $231,298 $0 -100% 

Warren County $330 $220 -34% 

White County $141,367 $77,695 -45% 

Whitfield County $36,936 $21,549 -42% 

Wilkes County $20,936 $13,916 -34% 

Hawaii Hawaii County $373,982 $211,850 -43% 

Honolulu County $53,149 $3,773 -93% 

Kauai County $25,201 $0 -100% 

Maui County $30,008 $17,211 -43% 
69 

Idaho Ada County $771,228 $509,832 -34% 

Adams County $951,055 $460,300 -52% 

Bannock County $629,772 $380,136 -40% 

Bear Lake County $813,110 $556,249 -32% 

Benewah County $166,536 $92,469 -44% 

Bingham County $774,609 $514,792 -34% 

Blaine County $1,992,465 $1,407,263 -29% 

Boise County $1,632,816 $778,847 -52% 

Bonner County $1,620,015 $987,603 -39% 

Bonneville County $1,653,740 $1,059,852 -36% 

Boundary County $1,640,822 $1,041,897 -37% 

Butte County $597,183 $311,312 -48% 

Camas County $548,408 $174,833 -68% 

Canyon County $52,068 $32,650 -37% 

Caribou County $702,145 $430,771 -39% 

Cassia County $2,400,186 $1,527,776 -36% 

Clark County $949,389 $128,837 -86% 

Clearwater County $1,983,878 $861,530 -57% 

Custer County $2,048,144 $557,287 -73% 

Elmore County $3,440,148 $1,600,969 -53% 

Franklin County $437,110 $284,439 -35% 

Fremont County $1,639,457 $998,596 -39% 

Gem County $379,082 $231,616 -39% 

Gooding County $651,839 $431,116 -34% 

Idaho County $8,526,709 $1,409,280 -83% 

Jefferson County $502,702 $325,322 -35% 

Jerome County $252,682 $167,940 -34% 

Kootenai County $1,142,472 $465,335 -59% 

Latah County $486,519 $214,446 -56% 

Lemhi County $2,897,823 $793,590 -73% 

Lewis County $7,955 $5,285 -34% 

Lincoln County $869,604 $577,820 -34% 

Madison County $200,155 $111,436 -44% 

Minidoka County $461,592 $306,813 -34% 

Nez Perce County $83,521 $54,931 -34% 

Oneida County $786,856 $492,480 -37% 

Owyhee County $1,305,060 $867,158 -34% 

Payette County $161,676 $15,398 -90% 

Power County $797,399 $508,877 -36% 

Shoshone County $3,107,257 $1,261,420 -59% 

Teton County $306,416 $172,464 -44% 

Twin Falls County $1,743,269 $1,109,705 -36% 

Valley County $2,694,876 $917,339 -66% 

Washington County $936,018 $584,755 -38% 

Illinois Adams County $27,276 $18,130 -34% 

Alexander County $79,434 $47,912 -40% 

Bond County $2,338 $1,554 -34% 
70 

Brown County $0 $0 

Bureau County $153 $101 -34% 

Calhoun County $52,347 $31,020 -41% 

Carroll County $31,781 $18,610 -41% 

Cass County $4,254 $89 -98% 

Clinton County $64,911 $43,145 -34% 

Cook County $358 $238 -34% 

Fayette County $29,180 $19,395 -34% 

Franklin County $48,617 $32,315 -34% 

Fulton County $12,352 $0 -100% 

Gallatin County $29,828 $20,217 -32% 

Greene County $1,127 $0 -100% 

Grundy County $392 $261 -33% 

Hardin County $73,254 $49,649 -32% 

Henderson County $7,639 $5,078 -34% 

Jackson County $136,108 $87,895 -35% 

Jefferson County $52,815 $35,105 -34% 

Jersey County $13,848 $9,204 -34% 

Jo Daviess County $25,302 $12,573 -50% 

Johnson County $69,827 $31,997 -54% 

Kane County 

LaSalle County $275 $218 -21% 

Macon County $0 $0 

Madison County $10,418 $6,925 -34% 

Marshall County $3,427 $0 -100% 

Mason County $10,328 $0 -100% 

Massac County $7,127 $4,831 -32% 

Mercer County $11,648 $7,637 -34% 

Monroe County $175 $0 -100% 

Morgan County $8,603 $0 -100% 

Moultrie County $44,842 $29,806 -34% 

Ogle County $0 $0 

Peoria County $0 $0 

Pike County $28,971 $10,421 -64% 

Pope County $238,153 $161,433 -32% 

Pulaski County $28,864 $427 -99% 

Randolph County $10,590 $743 -93% 

Rock Island County $16,416 $10,680 -35% 

Saline County $37,003 $25,080 -32% 

Sangamon County $348 $232 -34% 

Shelby County $43,749 $29,079 -34% 

Tazewell County $2,972 $1,976 -34% 

Union County $111,458 $68,286 -39% 

Whiteside County $8,563 $5,260 -39% 

Will County $236,912 $245,653 4% 

Williamson County $140,843 $91,435 -35% 

Indiana Brown County $62,557 $45,553 -27% 
71 

Clark County $330 $220 -34% 

Crawford County $67,909 $51,951 -23% 

Dearborn County $0 $0 

Dubois County $18,095 $12,149 -33% 

Floyd County $0 $0 

Franklin County $23,945 $15,916 -34% 

Gibson County $12,593 $712 -94% 

Grant County $4,020 $2,672 -34% 

Harrison County $0 $0 

Huntington County $39,308 $26,128 -34% 

Jackson County $83,430 $45,306 -46% 

Jefferson County $0 $0 

Jennings County $19,036 $0 -100% 

Knox County $0 $0 

Lake County $8,980 $5,235 -42% 

LaPorte County $1,382 $919 -34% 

Lawrence County $32,626 $26,418 -19% 

Martin County $18,529 $15,566 -16% 

Miami County $4,154 $2,761 -34% 

Monroe County $85,667 $61,723 -28% 

Ohio County $0 $0 

Orange County $109,138 $79,989 -27% 

Owen County $11,009 $7,317 -34% 

Parke County $9,496 $6,312 -34% 

Perry County $143,366 $113,333 -21% 

Pike County $11,999 $1,293 -89% 

Porter County $20,557 $13,669 -34% 

Posey County $7,889 $5,244 -34% 

Putnam County $7,839 $5,210 -34% 

Ripley County $0 $0 

Spencer County $173 $115 -34% 

Switzerland County $0 $245 

Union County $27,760 $18,452 -34% 

Vanderburgh County $134 $89 -33% 

Wabash County $40,353 $26,822 -34% 

Warren County $0 $0 

Warrick County $268 $178 -34% 

Wells County $3,357 $2,231 -34% 

Iowa Allamakee County $31,424 $11,388 -64% 

Appanoose County $66,314 $44,078 -34% 

Benton County $2,099 $206 -90% 

Boone County $20,430 $11,727 -43%. 

Buena Vista County $541 $94 -83% 

Cedar County $467 $310 -34% 

Cerro Gordo County $14,133 $3,698 -74% 

Clay County $5,737 $1,346 -77% 

Clayton County $22,422 $7,345 -67% 
72 

Clinton County $21,153 $12,983 -39% 

Dallas County $8,143 $5,412 -34% 

Des Moines County $9,360 $6,222 -34% 

Dickinson County $35,198 $8,655 -75% 

Dubuque County $6,269 $3,778 -40% 

Emmet County $11,585 $3,077 -73% 

Fremont County $14,791 $10,708 -28% 

Greene County $8,861 $1,540 -83% 

Guthrie County $2,068 $412 -80% 

Hancock County $4,156 $1,092 -74% 

Harrison County $17,120 $758 -96% 

Iowa County $9,249 $1,020 -89% 

Jackson County $29,149 $14,694 -50% 

Jasper County $37,127 $144 -100% 

Johnson County $62,914 $41,817 -34% 

Kossuth County $26,223 $4,875 -81% 

Lee County $0 $0 

Louisa County $37,346 $17,490 -53% 

Lucas County $11,806 $7,847 -34% 

Marion County $102,376 $68,048 -34% 

Mills County $9,420 $6,628 -30% 

Monona County $1,721 $1,144 -34% 

Monroe County $237 $158 -33% 

Muscatine County $4,371 $2,905 -34% 

Palo Alto County $3,814 $995 -74% 

Pocahontas County $4,854 $889 -82% 

Polk County $66,983 $34,229 -49% 

Pottawattamie County $3,659 $0 -100% 

Poweshiek County $0 $0 

Sac County $6,908 $1,270 -82% 

Scott County $7,378 $4,713 -36% 

Story County $459 $305 -33% 

Tam a County $3,504 $364 -90% 

Warren County $14,340 $9,531 -34% 

Wayne County $9,129 $6,067 -34% 

Winnebago County $4,608 $1,519 -67% 

Winneshiek County $1,157 $0 -100% 

Woodbury County $1,127 $749 -34% 

Worth County $6,516 $2,028 -69% 

Wright County $31,905 $2,704 -92% 

Kansas Atchison County $9,569 $6,360 -34% 

Butler County $42,337 $28,141 -34% 

Chase County $0 $0 

Chautauqua County $2,854 $1,897 -34% 

Cheyenne County 

Clay County $46,272 $30,756 -34% 

Coffey County $68,687 $45,655 -34% 
73 

Co'Mey County $4,262 $2,833 -34% 

Dickinson County $3,844 $2,555 -34% 

Doniphan County $4,357 $3,167 -27% 

Douglas County $52,766 $35,073 -34% 

Ellis County $0 $0 

Ellsworth County $54,555 $36,261 -34% 

Geary County $62,531 $41,564 -34% 

Greenwood County $48,621 $32,317 -34% 

Jefferson County $101,374 $67,381 -34% 

Jewell County $18,197 $12,095 -34% 

Johnson County $303 $201 -34% 

Kingman County $3,026 $2,012 -34% 

Labette County $6,571 $4,368 -34% 

Leavenworth County $1,349 $897 -34% 

Lincoln County $2,239 $1,489 -34% 

Linn County $17,211 $2,786 -84% 

Lyon County $13,609 $9,046 -34% 

Marion County $31,189 $20,731 -34% 

Marshall County $15,601 $10,370 -34% 

Miami County $33,504 $22,269 -34% 

Mitchell County $63,736 $42,364 -34% 

Montgomery County $52,960 $35,201 -34% 

Morris County $15,422 $10,252 -34% 

Morton County $37,783 $24,924 -34% 

Norton County $21,172 $14,072 -34% 

Osage County $86,812 $57,202 -34% 

Osborne County $8,134 $5,407 -34% 

Pawnee County $1,040 $691 -34% 

Phillips County $29,448 $19,574 -34% 

Pottawatomie County $37,067 $24,638 -34% 

Reno County $39,337 $25,153 -36% 

Republic County $0 $0 

Rice County $1,648 $3 -100% 

Riley County $35,204 $23,400 -34% 

Rooks County $18,539 $12,323 -34% 

Russell County $53,994 $35,889 -34% 

Sedgwick County $4,291 $1,768 -59% 

Shawnee County $5,085 $3,380 -34% 

Smith County $0 $0 

Stafford County $38,110 $94 -100% 

Stevens County $337 $222 -34% 

Trego County $39,023 $25,938 -34% 

Wilson County $0 $0 

Woodson County $12,567 $8,353 -34% 

Kentucky Adair County $40,692 $27,371 -33% 

Allen County $19,134 $12,623 -34% 

Anderson County $5,921 $3,936 -34% 
74 

Ballard County $5,459 $3,629 -34% 

Barren County $35,114 $23,437 -33% 

Bath County $65,948 $39,022 -41% 

Bell County $12,975 $8,624 -34% 

Boone County $0 $0 

Bracken County $242 $161 -33% 

Breckinridge County $13,058 $8,698 -33% 

Butler County $0 $0 

Calloway County $454 $302 -33% 

Campbell County $0 $0 

Carroll County $0 $0 

Carter County $24,801 $16,485 -34% 

Clark County $0 $0 

Clay County $252,295 $146,246 -42% 

Clinton County $34,327 $22,816 -34% 

Crittenden County $0 $0 

Cumberland County $10,377 $6,897 -34% 

Daviess County $0 $0 

Edmonson County $120,930 $80,380 -34% 

Elliott County $18,878 $12,548 -34% 

Estill County $16,825 $10,637 -37% 

Floyd County $31,386 $20,862 -34% 

Franklin County $0 $0 

Fulton County $8,178 $147,898 1708% 

Gallatin County $604 $401 -34% 

Garrard County $0 $0 

Graves County $248 $0 -100% 

Grayson County $24,406 $16,250 -33% 

Greenup County $593 $394 -34% 

Hancock County $379 $252 -33% 

Hardin County $287 $190 -34% 

Harlan County $9,838 $6,244 -37% 

Hart County $21,634 $14,372 -34% 

Henderson County $2,414 $1,605 -34% 

Henry County $0 $0 

Jackson County $178,902 $112,989 -37% 

Jefferson County $2,990 $1,988 -34% 

Jessamine County $0 $0 

Johnson County $29,995 $19,937 -34% 

Knott County $12,408 $6,676 -46% 

Knox County $308 $174 -43% 

Larue County $890 $592 -34% 

Laurel County $196,972 $120,464 -39% 

Lawrence County $49,327 $32,773 -34% 

Lee County $29,680 $16,145 -46% 

Leslie County $177,828 $106,119 -40% 

Letcher County $2,368 $1,401 -41% 
75 

Lewis County $1,706 $0 -100% 

Uv!ngston County $8,796 $5,589 -36% 

Lyon County $193,688 $106,750 -45% 

Madison County $1 $0 -89% 

Marshall County $22,145 $0 -100% 

Martin County $0 $0 

McCracken County $10,916 $0 -100% 

McCreary County $633,392 $329,432 -48% 

Mclean County $0 $0 

Meade County $0 $0 

Menifee County $131,362 $88,988 -32% 

Mercer County $0 $0 

Morgan County $72,805 $38,424 -47% 

Muhlenberg County $0 $0 

Nelson County $790 $525 -34% 

Ohio County $0 $0 

Owsley County $53,055 $31,485 -41% 

Perry County $12,080 $7,978 -34% 

Pike County $40,876 $27,097 -34% 

Powell County $48,183 $29,810 -38% 

Pulaski County $170,903 $114,537 -33% 

Rockcastle County $55,007 $32,881 -40% 

Rowan County $197,222 $120,466 -39% 

Russell County $97,882 $65,061 -34% 

Spencer County $32,113 $21,345 -34% 

Taylor County $41,834 $27,807 -34% 

Trigg County $264.570 $151,939 -43% 

Union County $11,473 $7,626 -34% 

Warren County $119 $79 -34% 

Wayne County $75,487 $49,858 -34% 

Whitley County $141,935 $86,523 -39% 

Wolfe County $56,530 $31,321 -45% 

Woodford County $0 $0 

Louisiana Acadia Parish $0 $0 

Ascension Parish $0 $0 

Avoyelles Parish $44,217 $144 -100% 

Bienville Parish $593 $0 -100% 

Bossier Parish $80,589 $53,192 -34% 

Caddo Parish $6,748 $4,486 -34% 

Calcasieu Parish $370 $245 -34% 

Caldwell Parish $2,198 $1,461 -34% 

Cameron Parish $88,219 $7,536 -91% 

Catahoula Parish $13,084 $1,110 -92% 

Claiborne Parish $87,472 $80,049 -8% 

Concordia Parish $71,514 $29,755 -58% 

De Soto Parish $4,287 $269 -94% 

East Baton Rouge Parish $1,640 $1,091 -34% 
76 

East Carroll Parish $126 $189 51% 

Evangeline Parish $935 $72 -92% 

Franklin Parish $2,876 $1,659 -42% 

Grant Parish $636,867 $581,410 -9% 

Iberia Parish $6,891 $4,666 -32% 

lberville Parish $35,761 $17,723 -50% 

Jefferson Davis Parish $20 $3 -85% 

Jefferson Parish $32,820 $21,815 -34% 

Lafayette Parish $125 $82 -34% 

Lafourche Parish $777 $516 -34% 

LaSalle Parish $8,395 $271 -97% 

Livingston Parish $1,669 $0 -100% 

Madison Parish $154,468 $99,165 -36% 

Morehouse Parish $42,435 $7,362 -83% 

Natchitoches Parish $554,584 $525,371 -5% 

Orleans Parish $18,175 $1,588 -91% 

Ouachita Parish $26,558 $5,882 -78% 

Plaquemines Parish $46,938 $330,427 604% 

Pointe Coupee Parish $8,008 $5,539 -31% 

Rapides Parish $384,646 $410,696 7% 

Red River Parish $6,239 $561 -91% 

Richland Parish $1,219 $2,590 112% 

St. Bernard Parish $22,820 $15,168 -34% 

St. Charles Parish $19,858 $13,337 -33% 

St. James Parish $0 $0 

St. John the Baptist Parish $119 $0 -100% 

St. Landry Parish $45,868 $30,171 -34% 

St. Martin Parish $18,748 $8,329 -56% 

St. Mary Parish $14,990 $4,927 -67% 

St. Tammany Parish $68,968 $0 -100% 

Tangipahoa Parish $0 $0 

T ensas Parish $46,774 $29,310 -37% 

Terrebonne Parish $3,341 $110 -97% 

Union Parish $48,861 $0 -100% 

Vermilion Parish $1,307 $806 -38% 

Vernon Parish $343,092 $344,971 1% 

Washington Parish $662 $0 -100% 

Webster Parish $67,416 $63,270 -6% 

West Baton Rouge Parish $230 $153 -34% 

West Carroll Parish $0 $0 

West Feliciana Parish $11,104 $1,605 -86% 

Winn Parish $477,785 $449,377 -6% 

Maine Aroostook County $4,237 $0 -100% 

Cumberland County $3,766 $0 -100% 

Franklin County $18,867 $12,541 -34% 

Hancock County $164,605 $94,424 A3% 

Kennebec County $450 $0 -100% 
77 

Knox County $18,084 $4,911 -73% 

Lincoln County $2,176 $0 -100% 

Oxford County $145,224 $120,689 -17% 

Penobscot County $3,954 $0 -100% 

Piscataquis County $36,063 $23,971 -34% 

Sagadahoc County $809 $0 -100% 

Somerset County $13,228 $8,792 -34% 

Waldo County $421 $0 -100% 

Washington County $57,836 $48 -100% 

York County $38,606 $7,442 -81% 

Maryland Allegany County $7,881 $5,227 -34% 

Anne Arundel County $7,322 $741 -90% 

Baltimore city 

Baltimore County $278 $185 -33% 

Cecil County $6,450 $4,037 -37% 

Charles County $3,904 $3,593 -8% 

Dorchester County $49,004 $1,440 -97% 

Frederick County $24,648 $16,384 -34% 

Garrett County $6,103 $2,339 -62% 

Harford County $1,055 $0 -100% 

Kent County $28,793 $0 -100% 

Montgomery County $6,687 $4,445 -34% 

Prince George's County $162,456 $6,796 -96% 

Queen Anne's County $0 $0 

Somerset County $3,586 $0 -100% 

St. Mary's County 

Talbot County $0 $0 

Washington County $20,717 $13,770 -34% 

Wicomico County $0 $0 

Worcester County $18,926 $12,580 -34% 

Massachusetts Barnstable County $87,822 $37,702 -57% 

Berkshire County $13,940 $8,885 -36% 

Bristol County $17,078 $0 -100% 

Dukes County $4,763 $0 -100% 

Essex County $83,776 $24 -100% 

Franklin County $2,273 $1 -100% 

Hampden County $14,107 $5,579 -60% 

Hampshire County $17,341 $4,559 -74% 

Middlesex County $139,191 $2,006 -99% 

Nantucket County $4,531 $0 -100% 

Norfolk County $6,691 $4,448 -34% 

Plymouth County $4,872 $0 -100% 

Suffolk County $0 $0 

Worcester County $33,606 $12,105 -64% 

Michigan Alcona County $220,098 $198,695 -10% 

Alger County $538,098 $382,178 -29% 

Allegan County $1 $0 -68% 
78 

Alpena County $802 $0 -100% 

Antrim County $484 $0 -100% 

Arenac County $1,662 $0 -100% 

Baraga County $147,629 $99,457 -33% 

Barry County $1,445 $4 -100% 

Bay County $0 $0 

Benzie County $22,619 $15,028 -34% 

Berrien County $0 $0 

Branch County $0 $0 

Calhoun County $0 $0 

Cass County $0 $0 

Charlevoix County $2,599 $0 -100% 

Cheboygan County $36 $34 -6% 

Chippewa County $697,952 $521,513 -25% 

Clare County $3,866 $0 -100% 

Crawford County $131,926 $90,357 -32% 

Delta County $669,778 $572,279 -15% 

Genesee County $0 $3 

Gogebic County $984,957 $673,092 -32% 

Grand Traverse County $0 $1 

Houghton County $425,858 $342,720 -20% 

Iasco County $243,771 $214,530 -12% 

Iron County $497,470 $398,196 -20% 

Jackson County $1,461 $0 -100% 

Kalkaska County $244 $0 -100% 

Kent County $0 $0 -54% 

Keweenaw County $339,086 $226,359 -33% 

Lake County $228,044 $171,870 -25% 

Leelanau County $121,415 $83,246 -31% 

Lenawee County $507 $41 -92% 

Mackinac County $268,345 $263,885 -2% 

Manistee County $241,075 $136,822 -43% 

Marquette County $62,784 $46,693 -26% 

Mason County $136,579 $101,752 -25% 

Mecosta County $8,600 $4,160 -52% 

Monroe County $5,430 $0 -100% 

Montcalm County $6,938 $3,747 -46% 

Montmorency County $108 $0 -100% 

Muskegon County $34,175 $24,974 -27% 

Newaygo County $300,062 $160,708 -46% 

Oakland County $0 $0 

Oceana County $102,408 $77,706 -24% 

Ogemaw County $39,218 $27,625 -30% 

Ontonagon County $907,124 $622,313 -31% 

Oscoda County $373,916 $278,315 -26% 

Otsego County $2 $2 -13% 

Ottawa County $0 $0 
79 

Presque Isle County $1,797 $0 -100% 

Roscommon County $137 $0 -100% 

Saginaw County $35,042 $0 -100% 

Schoolcraft County $381,357 $302,143 -21% 

St Clair County $0 $0 

Van Buren County $306 $0 -100% 

Washtenaw County $1,333 $0 -100% 

Wayne County $13,212 $2,046 -85% 

Wexford County $263,456 $134,514 -49% 

Minnesota Aitkin County $26,730 $2,133 -92% 

Anoka County $0 $0 

Becker County $106,544 $1,825 -98% 

Beltrami County $212,938 $183,873 -14% 

Benton County 

Big Stone County $48,681 $2,956 -94% 

Blue Earth County $8,550 $0 -100% 

Brown County $0 $0 

Carlton County 

Carver County $25,301 $0 -100% 

Cass County $903,131 $841,596 -7% 

Chippewa County $1,641 $399 -76% 

Chisago County $6,406 $4,258 -34% 

Clay County $20,815 $1,147 -94% 

Clearwater County 

Cook County $2,754,053 $2,613,693 -5% 

Cottonwood County $11,305 $141 -99% 

Crow Wing County $2,737 $725 -73% 

Dakota County $9,700 $2,070 -79% 

Dodge County $0 $0 

Douglas County $57,302 $0 -100% 

Faribault County $6,043 $37 -99% 

Fillmore County 

Freeborn County $7,772 $93 -99% 

Goodhue County $9,487 $6,306 -34% 

Grant County $49,773 $0 -100% 

Hennepin County $38,230 $86 -100% 

Houston County $35,040 $6,213 -82% 

Hubbard County $0 $355 

Isanti County $0 $0 

Itasca County $1,017,156 $897,055 -12% 

Jackson County $15,449 $203 -99% 

Kandiyohi County $62,905 $874 -99% 

Koochiching County $12,377 $8,166 -34% 

Lac qui Parle County $40,463 $8,279 -80% 

Lake County $3,360,389 $3,372,195 0% 

Lake of the Woods County $11,927 $7,928 -34% 

LeSueur County $3,464 $0 -100% 
80 

Lincoln County $10,586 $176 -98% 

Lyon County $7,923 $224 -97% 

Mahnomen County $11,074 $600 -95% 

Marshall County $32,098 $0 -100% 

Martin County $1,772 $14 -99% 

Mcleod County $11,346 $109 -99% 

Meeker County $20,134 $306 -98% 

Mille Lacs County $0 $0 

Morrison County $6,625 $0 -100% 

Mower County $170 $4 -98% 

Murray County $11,735 $111 -99% 

Nicollet County 

Nobles County $4,994 $26 -99% 

Norman County $3,634 $148 -96% 

Otter Tail County $73,009 $3,521 -95% 

Pennington County 

Pine County $5,299 $3,522 -34% 

Pipestone County $767 $509 -34% 

Polk County $16,914 $408 -98% 

Pope County $43,604 $2,480 -94% 

Ramsey County $1,539 $104 -93% 

Red Lake County 

Redwood County 

Renville County $12,054 $289 -98% 

Rice County $2,815 $0 -100% 

Rock County $4,716 $0 -100% 

Roseau County 

Scott County $23,605 $0 -100% 

Sherburne County $112,035 $4,099 -96% 

Sibley County $5,569 $0 -100% 

St. Louis County $2,528,541 $3,136,414 24% 

Stearns County $32,015 $586 -98% 

Steele County $7,274 $0 -100% 

Stevens County $30,445 $1,800 -94% 

Swift County $20,851 $1,806 -91% 

Todd County $2,339 $49 -98% 

Traverse County $15,293 $1,698 -89% 

Wabasha County $18,299 $9,220 -50% 

Wadena County $0 $0 

Waseca County $1,408 $0 -100% 

Washington County $4,032 $2,680 -34% 

Watonwan County $269 $2 -99% 

Wilkin County $8,260 $0 -100% 

Winona County $15,568 $7,515 -52% 

Wright County $0 $0 

Yellow Medicine County $4,197 $199 -95% 

Mississippi Adams County $100,364 $52,877 -47% 
81 

Alcorn County $119 $79 -34% 

Amite County $222,571 $121,716 -45% 

Attala County $6,357 $4,225 -34% 

Benton County $237,607 $130,235 -45% 

Bolivar County $30,065 $10,274 -66% 

Calhoun County $42,371 $28,164 -34% 

Carroll County $0 $0 

Chickasaw County $105,443 $67,297 -36% 

Choctaw County $55,592 $31,420 -43% 

Claiborne County $4,383 $4,282 -2% 

Clay County $8,710 $5,789 -34% 

Coahoma County 

Copiah County $50,275 $25,321 -50% 

Covington County $105 $70 -33% 

DeSoto County $45,379 $30,163 -34% 

Forrest County $162,585 $138,184 -15% 

Franklin County $703,704 $329,018 -53% 

George County $43,431 $30,608 -30% 

Greene County $213,432 $90,568 -58% 

Grenada County $121,000 $78,504 -35% 

Hancock County $0 $0 

Harrison County $226,406 $172,867 -24% 

Hinds County $2,937 $1,952 -34% 

Holmes County $78,842 $1,624 -98% 

Humphreys County $17,048 $7,527 -56% 

lssaquena County $32,895 $21,865 -34% 

ltawamba County $54,175 $36,009 -34% 

Jackson County $182,782 $124,120 -32% 

Jasper County $71,351 $44,895 -37% 

Jefferson County $58,782 $31,975 -46% 

Jefferson Davis County $0 $0 

Jones County $103,936 $89,642 -14% 

Kemper County $954 $765 -20% 

Lafayette County $309,598 $202,285 -35% 

Lamar County $460 $297 -35% 

Lauderdale County $27,310 $18,358 -33% 

Leake County $4,213 $2,800 -34% 

Lee County $6,325 $3,905 -38% 

Lefiore County $20,007 $4,358 -78% 

Lincoln County $43,642 $26,901 -38% 

Lowndes County $20,444 $13,589 -34% 

Madison County $8,411 $5,591 -34% 

Marshall County $144,118 $84,440 -41% 

Monroe County $61,046 $40,576 -34% 

Montgomery County $103 $206 99% 

Neshoba County $34,523 $11,610 -66% 

Newton County $16,164 $9,753 -40% 
82 

Noxubee County $54,101 $69 -100% 

Oktibbeha County $72,999 $293 -100% 

Panola County $72,390 $48,116 -34% 

Pearl River County $32,667 $11,708 -64% 

Perry County $865,736 $443,695 -49% 

Pike County $388 $69 -82% 

Pontotoc County $3,374 $1,981 -41% 

Prentiss County $13,854 $9,209 -34% 

Quitman County $7,075 $146 -98% 

Rankin County $0 $87 

Scott County $489,313 $221,023 -55% 

Sharkey County $256,034 $178,532 -30% 

Smith County $342,646 $188,245 -45% 

Stone County $212,137 $127,763 -40% 

Sunflower County $2,270 $0 -100% 

Tallahatchie County $19,038 $538 -97% 

Tate County $50,098 $33,300 -34% 

Tippah County $38,401 $22,698 -41% 

Tishomingo County $70,166 $46,638 -34% 

Tunica County $7,614 $5,061 -34% 

Union County $34,888 $19,634 -44% 

Warren County $7,606 $6,683 -12% 

Washington County $56,593 $10,643 -81% 

Wayne County $269,681 $245,429 -9% 

Webster County $170 $113 -33% 

Wilkinson County $213,134 $76,876 -64% 

Winston County $193,260 $72,344 -63% 

Yalobusha County $233,234 $144,974 -38% 

Yazoo County $86,600 $25,897 -70% 

Missouri Andrew County $659 $165 -75% 

Atchison County $15,877 $10,629 -33% 

Barry County $198,370 $148,330 -25% 

Bates County $1,240 $860 -31% 

Benton County $148,415 $98,646 -34% 

Bollinger County $6,285 $4,088 -35% 

Boone County $14,829 $11,064 -25% 

Buchanan County $470 $312 -34% 

Butler County $155,770 $110,358 -29% 

Caldwell County $0 $0 

Callaway County $39,101 $30,470 -22% 

Carroll County $2,255 $1,499 -34% 

Carter County $357,143 $231,178 -35% 

Cedar County $69,357 $46,139 -33% 

Chariton County $28,121 $22,491 -20% 

Christian County $174,660 $125,585 -28% 

Clark County $7,020 $156 -98% 

Clay County $32,193 $21,398 -34% 
83 

Clinton County $19,415 $12,904 -34% 

Cole County $214 $142 -33% 

Cooper County $14,455 $7,189 -50% 

Crawford County $165,084 $118,955 -28% 

Dade County $66,905 $44,470 -34% 

Dallas County $0 $0 

Daviess County $1,380 $238 -83% 

Dent County $279,657 $180,607 -35% 

Douglas County $170,441 $98,698 -42% 

Dunklin County $1,775 $1,180 -34% 

Franklin County $2,299 $1,166 -49% 

Gasconade County $0 $0 

Gentry County $344 $0 -100% 

Greene County $3,106 $2,065 -34% 

Grundy County $0 $0 

Henry County $156,313 $103,913 -34% 

Hickory County $53,153 $35,330 -34% 

Holt County $35,410 $13,748 -61% 

Howard County $4,153 $0 -100% 

Howell County $168,527 $121,657 -28% 

Iron County $343,676 $234,657 -32% 

Jackson County $21,137 $12,911 -39% 

Jefferson County $4,158 $0 -100% 

Laclede County $108,856 $73,089 -33% 

Lafayette County $10,709 $2,517 -76% 

Lawrence County $115 $0 -100% 

Lewis County $2,247 $1,459 -35% 

Lincoln County $7,299 $4,851 -34% 

Macon County $19,546 $12,992 -34% 

Madison County $172,830 $126,532 -27% 

Marion County $5,741 $3,816 -34% 

Miller County 

Mississippi County $12,787 $8,729 -32% 

Moniteau County $3,944 $2,125 -46% 

Monroe County $96,533 $64,164 -34% 

Montgomery County $1,401 $931 -34% 

Morgan County 

New Madrid County $270 $180 -33% 

Newton County $1,684 $412 -76% 

Oregon County $436,615 $254,232 -42% 

Osage County $3,663 $499 -86% 

Ozark County $219,473 $127,270 -42% 

Pemiscot County $0 $0 

Perry County $1,124 $0 -100% 

Phelps County $212,486 $151,809 -29% 

Pike County $32,258 $6,204 -81% 

Platte County $1,994 $1,326 -34% 
84 

Polk County $27,240 $18,106 -34% 

Pulaski County $123,855 $92,067 -26% 

Ralls County $39,025 $25,939 -34% 

Ray County $1,836 $0 -100% 

Reynolds County $395,487 $244,472 -38% 

Ripley County $334,005 $238,172 -29% 

Saline County $7,971 $1,619 -80% 

Shannon County $448,517 $254,863 -43% 

Shelby County $1,393 $586 -58% 

St. Charles County $24,738 $16,442 -34% 

St. Clair County $106,724 $71,117 -33% 

St Francois County $2,659 $1,651 -38% 

St. Louis city $0 

St. Louis County $3,461 $1,206 -65% 

Ste. Genevieve County $33,939 $31,368 -8% 

Stoddard County $16,227 $1,349 -92% 

Stone County $138,467 $93,301 -33% 

Taney County $278,847 $196,836 -29% 

Texas County $191,058 $117,791 -38% 

Vernon County $0 $0 

Washington County $332,144 $198,448 -40% 

Wayne County $471,882 $288,862 -39% 

Wright County $30,576 $17,147 -44% 

Montana Beaverhead County $1,896,593 $856,721 -55% 

Big Horn County $15,096 $9,958 -34% 

Blaine County $803,255 $567,013 -29% 

Broadwater County $782,485 $540,726 -31% 

Carbon County $919,183 $679,784 -26% 

Carter County $239,728 $142,267 -41% 

Cascade County $593,654 $382,814 -36% 

Chouteau County $398,383 $256,062 -36% 

Custer County $856,922 $564,357 -34% 

Daniels County $407 $0 -100% 

Dawson County $23,304 $15,372 -34% 

Deer Lodge County $644,423 $387,819 -40% 

Fallon County $42,228 $27,856 -34% 

Fergus County $1,271,324 $826,954 -35% 

Flathead County $4,178,391 $2,619,235 -37% 

Gallatin County $2,060,104 $1,349,986 -34% 

Garfield County $230,797 $157,622 -32% 

Glacier County $1,044,886 $687,082 -34% 

Golden Valley County $86,108 $55,033 -36% 

Granite County $863,132 $438,420 -49% 

Hill County $98,206 $71,944 -27% 

Jefferson County $1,458,426 $982,894 -33% 

Judith Basin County $384,470 $245,693 -36% 

Lake County $494,970 $334,355 -32% 
85 

Lewis and Clark County $3,107,421 $2,004,414 -35% 

Liberty County $75,579 $51,710 -32% 

Lincoln County $5,078,549 $1,721,591 -66% 

Madison County $1,261,763 $812,309 -36% 

McCone County $256,942 $185,891 -28% 

Meagher County $513,547 $252,843 -51% 

Mineral County $1,145,490 $553,590 -52% 

Missoula County $2,508,310 $1,578,801 -37% 

Musselshell County $180,353 $122,639 -32% 

Park County $1,888,724 $1,210,867 -36% 

Petroleum County $92,477 $58,256 -37% 

Phillips County $521,084 $341,468 -34% 

Pondera County $303,314 $189,336 -38% 

Powder River County $506,083 $169,662 -66% 

Powell County $1,335,838 $816,858 -39% 

Prairie County $156,484 $103,224 -34% 

Ravalli County $3,225,692 $1,948,708 -40% 

Richland County $19,749 $13,028 -34% 

Roosevelt County $3,290 $1,585 -52% 

Rosebud County $206,646 $85,877 -58% 

Sanders County $2,348,290 $1,114,148 -53% 

Sheridan County $24,709 $9,791 -60% 

Sliver Bow County $657,055 $420,150 -36% 

Stillwater County $531,959 $358,031 -33% 

Sweet Grass County $629,029 $457,534 -27% 

Teton County $788,372 $499,924 -37% 

Toole County $54,813 $46,736 -15% 

Treasure County $272 $180 -34% 

Valley County $1,112,261 $730,613 -34% 

Wheatland County $183,811 $116,700 -37% 

Wibaux County $9,836 $6,488 -34% 

Yellowstone County $201,192 $131,530 -35% 

Nebraska Adams County $3,056 $254 -92% 

Blaine County $19,204 $19,497 2% 

Boyd County $23 $0 -100% 

Brown County $2,003 $1,182 -41% 

Burt County $5,075 $3,373 -34% 

Cass County $6,279 $4,174 -34% 

Cedar County $8,988 $5,975 -34% 

Chase County $14,474 $9,620 -34% 

Cherry County $368,189 $256,737 -30% 

Clay County $40,627 $4,314 -89% 

Cuming County $159 $22 -86% 

Custer County $0 $0 

Dakota County $2,074 $1,379 -34% 

Dawes County $158,441 $113,032 -29% 

Dixon County $0 $0 
86 

Dodge County $672 $109 -84% 

Douglas County $7,789 $5,177 -34% 

Fillmore County $13,392 $2,248 -83% 

Franklin County $7,764 $3,569 -54% 

Frontier County $36,091 $23,989 -34% 

Furnas County $3,620 $2,406 -34% 

Gage County $467 $310 -34% 

Garden County $16,542 $5,934 -64% 

Garfield County $5,348 $3,555 -34% 

Gasper County $3,864 $933 -76% 

Greeley County $3,145 $2,090 -34% 

Hall County $3,495 $417 -88% 

Hamilton County $4,194 $720 -83% 

Harlan County $78,898 $52,443 -34% 

Hayes County $0 $0 

Hitchcock County $20,794 $13,822 -34% 

Holt County $751 $498 -34% 

Hooker County $511 $339 -34% 

Howard County $2,862 $1,902 -34% 

Kearney County $7,939 $1,847 -77% 

Knox County $38,501 $25,591 -34% 

Lancaster County $19,192 $12,757 -34% 

Loup County $24,215 $16,096 -34% 

McPherson County $0 $0 

Merrick County $0 $0 

Morrill County $675 $467 -31% 

Nance County $998 $664 -34% 

Nemaha County $8,878 $5,901 -34% 

Nuckolls County $2,317 $1,540 -34% 

Otoe County $4,644 $3,087 -34% 

Phelps County $13,216 $2,953 -78% 

Red Willow County $3,279 $2,180 -34% 

Richardson County $0 $707 

Rock County $1,479 $253 -83% 

Saline County $113 $39 -66% 

Sarpy County $3,057 $2,032 -34% 

Scotts Bluff County $26,717 $17,732 -34% 

Seward County $4,454 $1,471 -67% 

Sheridan County $338 $225 -34% 

Sherman County $0 $0 

Sioux County $222,383 $151,591 -32% 

Thomas County $74,499 $87,461 17% 

Thurston County $1,145 $761 -34% 

Valley County $10,725 $7,129 -34% 

Washington County $40,687 $0 -100% 

Webster County $3,014 $2,003 -34% 

York County $3,364 $839 -75% 
87 

Nevada Carson City $130,587 $75,107 -42% 

Churchill County $2,221,223 $1,462,950 -34% 

Clark County $3,556,612 $2,337,699 -34% 

Douglas County $685,064 $450,699 -34% 

Elko County $3,506,213 $2,341,047 -33% 

Esmeralda County $178,433 $133,698 -25% 

Eureka County $500,901 $245,626 -51% 

Humboldt County $1,899,513 $1,150,665 -39% 

Lander County $1,108,963 $674,930 -39% 

Lincoln County $926,474 $578,942 -38% 

Lyon County $2,420,627 $1,498,064 -38% 

Mineral County $1,066,007 $575,721 -46% 

Nye County $5,036,608 $2,271,626 -55% 

Pershing County $1,073,810 $713,521 -34% 

Storey County $37,405 $24,862 -34% 

Washoe County $3,510,734 $2,322,477 -34% 

White Pine County $1,767,284 $829,436 -53% 

New Hampshire Belknap County $2,994 $1,991 -34% 

Carroll County $461,422 $326,488 -29% 

Cheshire County $6,557 $4,359 -34% 

Coos County $855,265 $524,985 -39% 

Grafton County $1,040,164 $736,564 -29% 

Hillsborough County $38,203 $4,212 -89% 

Merrimack County $36,640 $23,947 -35% 

Rockingham County $20,542 $0 -100% 

Sullivan County $9,557 $328 -97% 

New Jersey Atlantic County $29,437 $77 -100% 

Burlington County $2,697 $10 -100% 

Camden County $370 $245 -34% 

Cape May County $38,925 $989 -97% 

Cumberland County $0 $0 

Essex County $0 $0 

Gloucester County $412 $274 -33% 

Hudson County $242 $161 -33% 

Middlesex County $0 $0 

Monmouth County $4,577 $3,042 -34% 

Morris County $234,897 $2,094 -99% 

Ocean County $54,205 $168 -100% 

Passaic County $0 $0 

Salem County $15,375 $7,329 -52% 

Somerset County $485 $322 -34% 

Sussex County $78,337 $43,629 -44% 

Warren County $23,927 $15,904 -34% 

New Mexico Bernalillo County $267,150 $163,471 -39% 

Catron County $3,269,455 $506,047 -85% 

Chaves County $3,126,662 $2,063,819 -34% 

Cibola County $2,388,941 $1,386,143 -42% 
88 

Colfax County $227,128 $134,822 -41% 

De Baca County $109,145 $72,321 -34% 

Do H'·a Ana County $3,049,660 $2,025,956 -34% 

Eddy County $3,476,852 $2,304,483 -34% 

Grant County $2,890,219 $1,688,884 -42% 

Guadalupe County $160,265 $106,175 -34% 

Harding County $120,274 $77,987 -35% 

Hidalgo County $818,199 $522,421 -36% 

Lea County $1,083,648 $719,831 -34% 

Lincoln County $2,040,334 $1,297,961 -36% 

Los Alamos County $95,591 $63,529 -34% 

Luna County $1,913,039 $1,270,745 -34% 

McKinley County $1,322,793 $728,477 -45% 

Mora County $355,458 $209,251 -41% 

Otero County $3,728,846 $2,343,014 -37% 

Quay County $4,634 $3,079 -34% 

Rio Arriba County $4,048,489 $2,250,155 -44% 

Roosevelt County $27,751 $18,380 -34% 

San Juan County $2,213,574 $1,470,519 -34% 

San Miguel County $1,259,865 $712,684 -43% 

Sandoval County $2,710,175 $1,587,293 -41% 

Santa Fe County $827,195 $548,679 -34% 

Sierra County $1,589,497 $869,359 -45% 

Socorro County $2,185,818 $1,205,368 -45% 

Taos County $2,242,664 $1,362,929 -39% 

Torrance County $552,134 $294,567 -47% 

Union County $151,704 $100,211 -34% 

Valencia County $101,501 $61,783 -39% 

New York Albany County $0 $0 

Allegany County $0 $0 

Broome County $7,494 $4,982 -34% 

Cattaraugus County $5,954 $3,958 -34% 

Cayuga County $672 $0 -100% 

Chenango County $0 $0 

Columbia County $113 $75 -33% 

Cortland County $4,528 $2,860 -37% 

Delaware County $1,522 $1,012 -34% 

Dutchess County $32,593 $21,567 -34% 

Erie County $454 $302 -33% 

Franklin County $48 $364 665% 

Genesee County $13,554 $0 -100% 

Greene County $575 $382 -34% 

Lewis County $60 $0 -100% 

Livingston County $6,399 $4,253 -34% 

Nassau County $5,799 $163 -97% 

New York County $45,996 $0 -100% 

Oneida County $0 $0 
89 

Onondaga County $0 $0 

Orange County $8,262 $4,704 -43% 

Orleans County $11,960 $0 -100% 

Putnam County $7,538 $3,949 -48% 

Rensselaer County $0 $0 

Saratoga County $3,734 $2,481 -34% 

Schuyler County $28,972 $20,265 -30% 

Seneca County $22,106 $9,727 -56% 

St. Lawrence County $407 $0 -100% 

Steuben County $3,136 $1,888 -40% 

Suffolk County $254,277 $4,555 -98% 

Sullivan County $0 $0 

Tioga County $0 $0 

Ulster County $3,406 $0 -100% 

Washington County $183 $122 -34% 

Wayne County $5,862 $0 -100% 

Westchester County $0 $0 

Wyoming County $3,462 $2,301 -34% 

North Carolina Alleghany County $17,145 $10,527 -39% 

Anson County $36,567 $37,433 2% 

Ashe County $5,104 $3,417 -33% 

Avery County $123,133 $59,189 -52% 

Beaufort County $0 $0 

Bertie County $49,884 $0 -100% 

Bladen County $170 $113 -33% 

Brunsvvick County $3,885 $2,583 -34% 

Buncombe County $111,539 $61,614 -45% 

Burke County $197,487 $97,079 -51% 

Caldwell County $193,899 $91,329 -53% 

Camden County $9,292 $442 -95% 

Carteret County $223,639 $141,882 -37% 

Chatham County $100,257 $66,639 -34% 

Cherokee County $383,778 $195,060 -49% 

Chowan County $2,571 $0 -100% 

Clay County $275,259 $139,380 -49% 

Craven County $239,450 $159,442 -33% 

Currituck County $44,938 $5,652 -87% 

Dare County $262,976 $36,096 -86% 

Davidson County $3,771 $2,505 -34% 

Durham County $50,114 $33,301 -34% 

Gates County $8,385 $0 -100% 

Graham County $497,224 $238,142 -52% 

Granville County $22,647 $15,053 -34% 

Guilford County $6,975 $5,755 -17% 

Haywood County $421,747 $240,183 -43% 

Henderson County $69,622 $36,707 -47% 

Hyde County $112,994 $4,476 -96% 
90 

Jackson County $311,952 $160,844 -48% 

Jones County $139,406 $93,088 -33% 

Macon County $527,361 $304,034 -42% 

Madison County $155,744 $105,129 -32% 

McDowell County $268,409 $129,890 -52% 

Mitchell County $80,232 $38,225 -52% 

Montgomery County $166,713 $105,764 -37% 

Nash County $142 $0 -100% 

New Hanover County $0 $0 

Orange County $232 $309 33% 

Pamlico County $0 $0 

Pasquotank County $2,071 $0 -100% 

Pender County $230 $153 -34% 

Randolph County $40,487 $25,475 -37% 

Richmond County $4,509 $4,616 2% 

Sampson County $331 $0 -100% 

Surry County $2,484 $1,651 -34% 

Swain County $657,096 $420,783 -36% 

Transylvania County $324,773 $173,108 -47% 

Tyrrell County $45,726 $0 -100% 

Vance County $56,817 $37,765 -34% 

Wake County $51,796 $34,428 -34% 

Warren County $4,672 $3,106 -34% 

Washington County $14,323 $0 -100% 

Watauga County $24,736 $16,141 -35% 

Wilkes County $26,293 $17,471 -34% 

Yancey County $159,882 $74,669 -53% 

North Dakota Adams County $103 $69 -34% 

Barnes County $25,301 $10,622 -58% 

Benson County $15,732 $6,803 -57% 

Billings County $120,280 $79,342 -34% 

Bottineau County $25,267 $1,453 -94% 

Bowman County $14,418 $9,511 -34% 

Burke County $18,776 $4,739 -75% 

Burleigh County $48,993 $26,195 -47% 

Cass County $6,833 $0 -100% 

Cavalier County $19,716 $4,022 -80% 

Dickey County $16,076 $3,950 -75% 

Divide County $7,978 $2,753 -65% 

Dunn County $29,727 $19,109 -36% 

Eddy County $6,329 $1,024 -84% 

Emmons County $83,556 $54,538 -35% 

Foster County $1,358 $119 -91% 

Golden Valley County $31,826 $21,071 -34% 

Grand Forks County $12,110 $2,758 -77% 

Grant County $22,366 $14,816 -34% 

Griggs County $7,247 $3,102 -57% 
91 

Hettinger County $1,981 $2,193 11% 

Kidder County $13,604 $4,858 -64% 

La Moure County $10,553 $1,549 -85% 

Logan County $9,720 $4,914 -49% 

McHenry County $43,872 $8,392 -81% 

Mcintosh County $15,049 $5,822 -61% 

McKenzie County $213,880 $141,085 -34% 

Mclean County $412,567 $272,503 -34% 

Mercer County $19,208 $12,670 -34% 

Morton County $34,002 $22,600 -34% 

Mountrail County $33,459 $58,603 75% 

Nelson County $2,820 $365 -87% 

Oliver County $0 $0 

Pembina County $8,282 $232 -97% 

Pierce County $18,740 $13,026 -30% 

Ramsey County $26,664 $1,616 -94% 

Ransom County $115,082 $64,874 -44% 

Renville County $14,716 $5,107 -65% 

Richland County $84,748 $43,006 -49% 

Rolette County $6,142 $3,431 -44% 

Sargent County $41,749 $825 -98% 

Sheridan County $82,680 $55,410 -33% 

Sioux County $81,940 $53,809 -34% 

Slope County $50,899 $33,772 -34% 

Stark County $1,623 $1,071 -34% 

Steele County $350 $233 -33% 

Stutsman County $58,491 $29,518 -50% 

Towner County $7,458 $745 -90% 

Trail! County $1,040 $0 -100% 

Walsh County $4,865 $978 -80% 

Ward County $13,487 $5,824 -57% 

Wells County $30,467 $14,316 -53% 

Williams County $23,474 $12,817 -45% 

Ohio Adams County $0 $0 

Ashland County $670 $446 -33% 

Athens County $43,267 $37,677 -13% 

Belmont County $0 $0 

Brown County $180 $120 -33% 

Carroll County $495 $329 -34% 

Clark County $10,986 $7,288 -34% 

Clermont County $27,465 $18,255 -34% 

Clinton County $3,736 $2,483 -34% 

Coshocton County $831 $552 -34% 

Cuyahoga County $6,692 $4,448 -34% 

Delaware County $37,416 $24,869 -34% 

Fayette C au nty $6,737 $4,478 -34% 

Gallia County $43,605 $36,338 -17% 
92 

Greene County $3,262 $2,271 -30% 

Guernsey County $336 $223 -34% 

Hamilton County $3,421 $2,274 -34% 

Harrison County $1,231 $950 -23% 

Highland County $18,401 $12,231 -34% 

Hocking County $56,876 $51,057 -10% 

Jackson County $3,560 $3,280 -8% 

Jefferson County $178 $120 -33% 

Knox County $3,127 $2,078 -34% 

Lake County $0 $0 

Lawrence County $182,792 $148,524 -19% 

Licking County $3,101 $2,061 -34% 

Lucas County $34,029 $1,046 -97% 

Madison County $540 $358 -34% 

Mahoning County $4,244 $2,821 -34% 

Marion County $3,749 $2,492 -34% 

Meigs County $670 $446 -33% 

Monroe County $61.874 $48,231 -22% 

Montgomery County $0 $0 

Morgan County $6,702 $6,857 2% 

Morrow County $787 $523 -34% 

Muskingum County $17,505 $11,859 -32% 

Noble County $1,479 $1,426 -4% 

Ottawa County $21,746 $1,840 -92% 

Perry County $41,798 $44,197 6% 

Pickaway County $11,360 $7,551 -34% 

Portage County $25,593 $17,012 -34% 

Richland County $0 $0 

Ross County $8,164 $5,378 -34% 

Scioto County $26,856 $23,118 -14% 

Stark County $5,637 $3,747 -34% 

Summit County $35,886 $26,489 -26% 

Trumbull County $41,622 $27,666 -34% 

Tuscarawas County $2,190 $1,543 -30% 

Vinton County $3,834 $3,349 -13% 

Warren County $2,887 $13,590 371% 

Washington County $141,507 $77,901 -45% 

Wayne County $0 $0 

Wood County $0 $0 

Oklahoma Adair County $2,382 $0 -100% 

Alfalfa County $80,113 $55,857 -30% 

Atoka County $78,473 $52,160 -34% 

Beaver County 

Beckham County $0 $0 

Blaine County $24,860 $16,525 -34% 

Bryan County $72,387 $48,114 -34% 

Caddo County $22,451 $14,923 -34% 
93 

Canadian County $417 $278 -33% 

Cherokee County $88,471 $58,805 -34% 

Choctaw County $86,974 $57,810 -34% 

Cimarron County $40,385 $26,843 -34% 

Cleveland County $33,137 $22,026 -34% 

Coal County $0 $0 

Comanche County $158,569 $108,315 -32% 

Cotton County $12,741 $8,468 -34% 

Creek County $61,604 $40,948 -34% 

Custer County $39,346 $26,138 -34% 

Delaware County $2,808 $0 -100% 

Dewey County $23,927 $15,904 -34% 

Ellis County $212 $141 -34% 

Garvin County $0 $0 

Grady County $0 $0 

Greer County $9,631 $6,402 -34% 

Harmon County $0 $0 

Harper County 

Haskell County $86,345 $57,392 -34% 

Jackson County $6,349 $4,220 -34% 

Jefferson County $27,438 $18,238 -34% 

Johnston County $70,869 $46,899 -34% 

Kay County $100,160 $67,007 -33% 

Kingfisher County 

Kiowa County $44,335 $29,470 -34% 

Latimer County $16,515 $10,977 -34% 

Le Flore County $863,733 $678,277 -21% 

Lincoln County 

Logan County $0 $0 

Love County $47,031 $31,261 -34% 

Major County $503 $334 -34% 

Marshall County $152,903 $101,632 -34% 

Mayes County $52,928 $35,181 -34% 

McCurtain County $526,438 $459,460 -13% 

Mcintosh County $210,788 $140,113 -34% 

Murray County $24,639 $16,377 -34% 

Muskogee County $58,096 $38,616 -34% 

Noble County $0 $0 

Nowata County $55,890 $37,149 -34% 

Oklahoma County $14,025 $9,322 -34% 

Okmulgee County $17,318 $7,218 -58% 

Osage County $168,703 $112,134 -34% 

Ottawa County $239 $0 -100% 

Pawnee County $43,190 $28,707 -34% 

Payne County $0 $0 

Pittsburg County $157,741 $104,848 -34% 

Pottawatomie County $0 $0 
94 

Pushmataha County $66,588 $44,259 -34% 

Roger Mills County $11,304 $7,457 -34% 

Rogers County $80,697 $53,638 -34% 

Sequoyah County $82,147 $55,446 -33% 

Stephens County $15,700 $10,435 -34% 

Texas County $34,361 $22,839 -34% 

Tillman County $857 $569 -34% 

Tulsa County $7,647 $5,083 -34% 

Wagoner County $122,375 $81,340 -34% 

Washington County $35,098 $23,329 -34% 

Washita County $103 $69 -34% 

Woods County $160 $106 -34% 

Woodward County $21,051 $13,992 -34% 

Oregon Baker County $1,925,605 $1,160,214 -40% 

Benton County $1,091,297 $672,185 -38% 

Clackamas County $3,113,261 $2,473,566 -21% 

Clatsop County $24,907 $7,419 -70% 

Columbia County $721,041 $406,127 -44% 

Coos County $3,105,574 $1,558,044 -50% 

Crook County $2,357,070 $1,400,961 -41% 

Curry County $3,784,531 $2,015,571 -47% 

Deschutes County $3,635,392 $2,737,933 -25% 

Douglas County $18,836,757 $8,044,800 -57% 

Gilliam County $89,196 $59,323 -33% 

Grant County $4,974,149 $913,692 -82% 

Harney County $2,881,660 $786,949 -73% 

Hood River County $884,731 $496,992 -44% 

Jackson County $8,100,970 $5,093,425 -37% 

Jefferson County $922,039 $596,235 -35% 

Josephine County $7,172,127 $3,593,198 -50% 

Klamath County $9,537,464 $3,284,550 -66% 

Lake County $3,670,850 $988,715 -73% 

Lane County $16,246,008 $6,584,329 -59% 

Lincoln County $1,898,186 $563,878 -70% 

Linn County $5,460,023 $1,951,224 -64% 

Malheur County $2,403,680 $1,590,612 -34% 

Marion County $2,105,007 $859,457 -59% 

Morrow County $448,451 $287,450 -36% 

Multnomah County $475,418 $401,185 -16% 

Polk County $976,372 $478,580 -51% 

Sherman County $137,095 $91,775 -33% 

Tillamook County $1,165,003 $429,736 -63% 

Umatilla County $1,102,467 $801,464 -27% 

Union County $1,885,125 $1,148,929 -39% 

Wallowa County $1,477,642 $783,259 -47% 

Wasco County $1,013,262 $608,122 -40% 

Washington County $191,397 $142,436 -26% 
95 

Wheeler County $737,648 $190,035 -74% 

Yamhill County $540,475 $260,681 -52% 

Pennsylvania Adams County $34,058 $18,865 -45% 

Allegheny County $155 $103 -34% 

Armstrong County $9,092 $6,043 -34% 

Beaver County $196 $0 -100% 

Bedford County $0 $0 

Berks County $19,533 $12,983 -34% 

Blair County $1,974 $1,312 -34% 

Bucks County $0 $0 

Cambria County $1,732 $1,151 -34% 

Carbon County $13,395 $8,904 -34% 

Centre County $19,484 $12,951 -34% 

Chester County $1,274 $847 -33% 

Clearfield County $7,031 $4,673 -34% 

Clinton County $3,715 $2,183 -41% 

Crawford County $23,913 $2,960 -88% 

Cumberland County $9,640 $6,405 -34% 

Dauphin County $2,905 $1,931 -34% 

Delaware County $26,125 $7,573 -71% 

Elk County $537,968 $556,454 3% 

Erie County $415 $276 -33% 

Fayette County $6,746 $4,484 -34% 

Forest County $1,363,352 $598,734 -56% 

Franklin County $2,333 $1,236 -47% 

Greene County $158 $105 -34% 

Huntingdon County $71,780 $47,648 -34% 

Indiana County $17,732 $11,786 -34% 

Jefferson County $0 $0 

Lackawanna County $782 $520 -34% 

Lebanon County $2,272 $1,511 -34% 

Lehigh County $1,027 $683 -34% 

Luzerne County $3,003 $1,996 -34% 

McKean County $650,615 $673,115 3% 

Mercer County $24,510 $16,291 -34% 

Monroe County $21,377 $16,349 -24% 

Montgomery County $8,369 $959 -89% 

Northampton County $4,445 $2,955 -34% 

Perry County $0 $0 

Philadelphia County $6,027 $895 -85% 

Pike County $44,958 $29,856 -34% 

Schuylkill County $1,837 $1,221 -34% 

Somerset County $9,452 $6,195 -34% 

Susquehanna County $1,285 $854 -34% 

Tioga County $23,939 $15,839 -34% 

Warren County $708,745 $732,753 3% 

Washington County $150 $0 -100% 
96 

Wayne County $1,891 $1,257 -34% 

Westmoreland County $15,088 $10,109 -33% 

York County $4,282 $2,847 -34% 

Rhode Island Newport County $5,950 $0 -100% 

Providence County $0 $0 

Washington County $105,950 $0 -100% 

South Carolina Abbeville County $122,385 $142,633 17% 

Aiken County $837 $3 -100% 

Anderson County $84,437 $56,125 -34% 

Beaufort County $38,561 $8,396 -78% 

Berkeley County $575,475 $428,247 -26% 

Charleston County $387,180 $171,558 -56% 

Cherokee County $5,334 $3,545 -34% 

Chester County $57,274 $50,782 -11% 

Chesterfield County $196,326 $170,218 -13% 

Clarendon County $37,581 $0 -100% 

Colleton County $11,477 $6,286 -45% 

Edgefield County $142,826 $139,106 -3% 

Fairfield County $44,538 $48,171 8% 

Georgetown County $22,011 $473 -98% 

Greenwood County $40,278 $49,244 22% 

Hampton County $2,046 $1,128 -45% 

Harry County $36,976 $161 -100% 

Jasper County $35,657 $839 -98% 

Laurens County $91,086 $91,116 0% 

Marlboro County $648 $741 14% 

McCormick County $217,817 $285,909 31% 

Newberry County $204,130 $256,286 26% 

Oconee County $266,189 $423,328 59% 

Orangeburg County $1,807 $0 -100% 

Pickens County $7,194 $9,562 33% 

Richland County $64,533 $42,341 -34% 

Saluda County $19,251 $19,570 2% 

Union County $291,429 $273,926 -6% 

Williamsburg County $2 $0 -86% 

York County $6,524 $4,337 -34% 

South Dakota Aurora County $19,810 $0 -100% 

Beadle County $29,321 $3,737 -87% 

Bennett County $16,732 $2,547 -85% 

Bon Homme County $32,665 $18,934 -42% 

Brookings County $26,080 $0 -100% 

Brown County $42,803 $5,382 -87% 

Brule County $26,331 $15,221 -42% 

Buffalo County $32,643 $20,767 -36% 

Butte County $413,607 $274,918 -34% 

Campbell County $49,380 $31,554 -36% 

Charles Mix County $71,106 $43,213 -39% 
97 

Clark County $11,787 $165 -99% 

Clay County $1,641 $955 -42% 

Codington County $16,397 $0 -100% 

Corson County $183,275 $121,820 -34% 

Custer County $1,208,189 $914,067 -24% 

Davison County $1,117 $0 -100% 

Day County $20,566 $21,244 3% 

Deuel County $11,841 $0 -100% 

Dewey County $203,159 $135,037 -34% 

Douglas County $0 

Edmunds County $18,268 $0 -100% 

Fall River County $763,279 $518,973 -32% 

Faulk County $8,629 $0 -100% 

Grant County $0 

Gregory County $47,077 $30,537 -35% 

Haakon County $9,786 $6,505 -34% 

Hamlin County $12,731 $0 -100% 

Hand County $7,614 $1,823 -76% 

Hanson County $6,090 $0 -100% 

Harding County $212,865 $150,347 -29% 

Hughes County $86,346 $56,698 -34% 

Hutchinson County $4,471 $0 -100% 

Hyde County $8,369 $3,985 -52% 

Jackson County $280,401 $186,378 -34% 

Jerauld County $4,857 $818 -83% 

Jones County $50,681 $33,687 -34% 

Kingsbury County $23,898 $0 -100% 

Lake County $34,298 $0 -100% 

Lawrence County $868,756 $681,898 -22% 

Lincoln County $0 

Lyman County $234,230 $155,689 -34% 

Marshall County $25,221 $0 -100% 

McCook County $21,869 $0 -100% 

McPherson County $22,468 $274 -99% 

Meade County $235,434 $173,160 -26% 

Miner County $4,606 $69 -99% 

Minnehaha County $35,625 $0 -100% 

Moody County $21,387 $0 -100% 

Oglala Lakota County $5,103 $3,392 -34% 

Pennington County $2,072,763 $1,468,155 -29% 

Perkins County $369,146 $245,365 -34% 

Potter County $35,944 $22,410 -38% 

Roberts County $12,876 $938 -93% 

Sanborn County $401 $39 -90% 

Spink County $9,436 $1,266 -87% 

Stanley County $240,964 $160,165 -34% 

Sully County $78,309 $51,963 -34% 
98 

Tripp County $412 $274 -33% 

Turner County $7,701 $0 -100% 

Union County $454 $0 -100% 

Walworth County $44,592 $28,227 -37% 

Yankton County $8,037 $4,004 -50% 

Ziebach County $4,518 $3,003 -34% 

Tennessee Blount County $250,800 $166,702 -34% 

Carter County $217,757 $167,337 -23% 

Cheatham County $11,193 $7,439 -34% 

Claiborne County $9,819 $6,525 -34% 

Clay County $70,503 $46,863 -34% 

Cocke County $201,499 $139,369 -31% 

Crockett County 

Davidson County $45,187 $30,034 -34% 

Decatur County $1,466 $2,522 72% 

DeKalb County $91,041 $60,518 -34% 

Dickson County $3,609 $2,399 -34% 

Dyer County $439 $0 -100% 

Fentress County $65,429 $43,483 -34% 

Franklin County $0 $0 

Gibson County 

Greene County $100,702 $82,424 -18% 

Hamilton County $5,523 $3,672 -34% 

Hardeman County $0 $0 

Hardin County $15,368 $10,075 -34% 

Haywood County $39,476 $0 -100% 

Hickman County $1,919 $1,276 -34% 

Humphreys County $2,158 $569 -74% 

Jackson County $46,939 $31,199 -34% 

Johnson County $117,529 $103,300 -12% 

Lake County $6,796 $0 -100% 

Lauderdale County $86,037 $0 -100% 

Lawrence County $1,710 $1,137 -34% 

Lewis County $8,086 $5,374 -34% 

Maury County $370 $245 -34% 

McMinn County $9,174 $7,373 -20% 

Monroe County $390,627 $296,682 -24% 

Montgomery County $1,855 $1,233 -34% 

Morgan County $9,811 $6,522 -34% 

Obion County $2,687 $40,817 1419% 

Overton County $5,964 $3,965 -34% 

Pickett County $46,794 $31,103 -34% 

Polk County $352,469 $294,912 -16% 

Putnam County $5,593 $3,718 -34% 

Rutherford County $42,875 $28,655 -33% 

Scott County $140,869 $93,519 -34% 

Sevier County $321,595 $213,752 -34% 
99 

Shelby County $358 $238 -34% 

Smith County $22,508 $14,961 -34% 

Stewart County $234,613 $150,520 -36% 

Sullivan County $99,046 $74,940 -24% 

Sumner County $27,365 $18,190 -34% 

Tipton County $16,685 $185 -99% 

Trousdale County $7,856 $5,222 -34% 

Unicoi County $156,835 $119,629 -24% 

Warren County $386 $663 72% 

Washington County $44,085 $33,182 -25% 

Wayne County $7,111 $4,726 -34% 

Weakley County $204 $135 -33% 

White County $2,652 $1,763 -34% 

Williamson County $0 $0 

Wilson County $30,372 $20,188 -34% 

Texas Anderson County $544 $0 -100% 

Angelina County $275,800 $164,279 -40% 

Aransas County $117,157 $1,401 -99% 

Austin County $2,241 $0 -100% 

Bailey County $2,879 $0 -100% 

Bell County $101,280 $67,319 -34% 

Bexar County $14,329 $9,419 -34% 

Blanco County $214 $142 -33% 

Bosque County $39,342 $26,150 -34% 

Bowie County $141,353 $93,829 -34% 

Brazoria County $127,276 $23,168 -82% 

Brewster County $1,195,650 $794,438 -34% 

Burleson County $33,161 $21,599 -35% 

Burnet County $47,643 $0 -100% 

Calhoun County $69,274 $1,710 -98% 

Cameron County $161,652 $7,930 -95% 

Camp County $2,606 $1,732 -34% 

Carson County $0 $0 

Cass County $89,367 $59,400 -34% 

Chambers County $70,753 $25,442 -64% 

Cherokee County $5 $0 -100% 

Coleman County $7,766 $5,162 -34% 

Collin County $96,463 $64,118 -34% 

Colorado County $12,467 $0 -100% 

Comal County $28,335 $18,835 -34% 

Comanche County $23,244 $15,449 -34% 

Cooke County $70,413 $46,741 -34% 

Coryell County $2,588 $1,720 -34% 

Culberson County $154,670 $102,807 -34% 

Dallam County $199,604 $132,674 -34% 

Dallas County $25,016 $16,627 -34% 

Delta County $95,133 $31,628 -67% 
100 

Denton County $203,549 $135,296 -34% 

Dickens County $104 $0 -100% 

El Paso County $142 $94 -33% 

Ellis County $23,124 $15,370 -34% 

Fannin County $42,387 $28,599 -33% 

Foard County $28,675 $19,059 -34% 

Fort Bend County $8,096 $2,488 -69% 

Galveston County $14,876 $9,387 -37% 

Gillespie County $1,519 $1,010 -34% 

Gray County $3,398 $337 -90% 

Grayson County $148,618 $97,829 -34% 

Hale County $257 $0 -100% 

Hardeman County $2,113 $1,404 -34% 

Hardin County $161,812 $102,626 -37% 

Harris County $63,984 $42,529 -34% 

Harrison County $32,160 $4,032 -87% 

Hays County $10,107 $0 -100% 

Hemphill County $210 $139 -34% 

Hidalgo County $104,590 $0 -100% 

Hill County $104,384 $68,988 -34% 

Hockley County $0 $0 

Hopkins County $33,631 $22,353 -34% 

Houston County $435,443 $220,487 -49% 

Hudspeth County $70,873 $47,105 -34% 

Hutchinson County $26,287 $17,473 -34% 

Jackson County $0 $0 

Jasper County $161,242 $102,117 -37% 

Jeff Davis County $7,588 $5,012 -34% 

Jefferson County $55,067 $14,033 -75% 

Johnson County $1,337 $888 -34% 

Kenedy County $71,676 $46,239 -35% 

King County $0 $0 

Kleberg County $60,302 $40,082 -34% 

Knox County $10,132 $6,734 -34% 

Lamar County $61,477 $40,783 -34% 

Lee County $17,910 $11,905 -34% 

Liberty County $46,701 $8,693 -81% 

Live Oak County $42,242 $28,078 -34% 

Lubbock County $0 $0 

Marion County $60,019 $39,893 -34% 

Matagorda County $28,513 $13,671 -52% 

Mclennan County $30,679 $20,392 -34% 

McMullen County $46,716 $31,051 -34% 

Montague County $1,315 $0 -100% 

Montgomery County $65,906 $121,684 85% 

Moore County $28,783 $19,131 -34% 

Morris County $39,856 $26,491 -34% 
101 

Nacogdoches County $81,035 $48,938 -40% 

Navarro County $22,674 $15,070 -34% 

Newton County $10,945 $4,226 -61% 

Nueces County $2,196 $1,459 -34% 

Ochiltree County $0 $0 

Orange County $57,146 $25,204 -56% 

Polk County $60,631 $37,128 -39% 

Potter County $92,693 $61,612 -34% 

Randall County $5,355 $30 -99% 

Refugio County $1,429 $0 -100% 

Sabine County $427,961 $240,076 -44% 

San Augustine County $330,478 $192,239 -42% 

San Jacinto County $215,657 $156,760 -27% 

San Patricio County $125 $82 -34% 

Shelby County $200,608 $143,525 -28% 

Starr County $49,596 $0 -100% 

Swisher County $0 $0 

Tarrant County $44,685 $29,702 -34% 

Titus County $870 $578 -34% 

Tom Green County $68,987 $45,854 -34% 

Travis County $120,115 $0 -100% 

Trinity County $368,690 $158,593 -57% 

Tyler County $69,140 $45,252 -35% 

Upshur County $7,851 $5,218 -34% 

Uvalde County $459 $0 -100% 

Val Verde County $147,813 $98,249 -34% 

Walker County $287,347 $141,573 -51% 

Washington County $25,821 $17,163 -34% 

Willacy County $56,261 $8,780 -84% 

Williamson County $58,979 $32,459 -45% 

Wise County $7,303 $4,817 -34% 

Utah Beaver County $1,084,122 $667,263 -38% 

Box Elder County $3,255,899 $2,083,549 -36% 

Cache County $1,097,080 $602,963 -45% 

Carbon County $1 '140,949 $749,575 -34% 

Daggett County $254,133 $142,805 -44% 

Davis County $114,326 $77,312 -32% 

Duchesne County $2,489,098 $1,328,231 -47% 

Emery County $1,544,273 $880,597 -43% 

Garfield County $2,064,308 $652,694 -68% 

Grand County $1,201,823 $798,064 -34% 

Iron County $3,624,598 $2,149,247 -41% 

Juab County $1,354,440 $825,659 -39% 

Kane County $1,197,545 $722,291 -40% 

Millard County $1,840,684 $998,288 -46% 

Morgan County $45,254 $32,307 -29% 

Piute County $597,848 $196,426 -67% 
102 

Rich County $441,701 $286,417 -35% 

Salt Lake County $290,918 $200,619 -31% 

San Juan County $2,463,242 $1,068,706 -57% 

Sanpete County $2,028,884 $944,036 -53% 

Sevier County $2,884,114 $1,414,879 -51% 

Summit County $1,532,178 $1,070,704 -30% 

Tooele County $3,687,255 $2,360,536 -36% 

Uintah County $3,247,570 $1,997,068 -39% 

Utah County $2,287,427 $1,240,398 -46% 

Wasatch County $1,505,315 $855,460 -43% 

Washington County $3,483,080 $1,994,821 -43% 

Wayne County $689,222 $330,647 -52% 

Weber County $209,437 $142,564 -32% 

Vermont Addison County $305,452 $193,051 -37% 

Bennington County $503,825 $339,239 -33% 

Essex County $21,149 $9,349 -56% 

Franklin County $4,667 $9,336 100% 

Orange County $2,520 $1,675 -34% 

Orleans County $2,291 $650 -72% 

Rutland County $250,557 $171,796 -31% 

Washington County $22,685 $15,093 -33% 

Windham County $120,535 $81,290 -33% 

Windsor County $107,209 $70,511 -34% 

Virginia Accomack County $118,233 $18,304 -85% 

Albemarle County $38,021 $25,272 -34% 

Alleghany County $401,649 $267,326 -33% 

Amherst County $120,289 $92,243 -23% 

Appomattox County $4,352 $2,893 -34% 

Arlington County $0 $0 

Augusta County $511,508 $383,032 -25% 

Bath County $414,813 $327,752 -21% 

Bedford County 

Bland County $205,186 $142,756 -30% 

Botetourt County $220,956 $158,910 -28% 

Bristol city 

Brunswick County 

Buchanan County $0 $0 

Caroline County $1,795 $82 -95% 

Carroll County $28,827 $19,928 -31% 

Charles City County $1,223 $0 -100% 

Charlotte County $8,904 $5,918 -34% 

Chesapeake city $38,898 $4,335 -89% 

Chesterfield County $5,519 $0 -100% 

Clarke County $5,967 $3,967 -34% 

Craig County $319,365 $218,742 -32% 

Dickenson County $37,678 $30,607 -19% 

Dinwiddie County $879 $585 -33% 
103 

Essex County $3,483 $0 -100% 

Fairfax city 

Fairfax County $44,068 $4,080 -91% 

Fauquier County $2,647 $1,759 -34% 

Floyd County $10,353 $6,882 -34% 

Franklin County $18,233 $12,119 -34% 

Frederick County $6,712 $10,398 55% 

Fredericksburg city $2,162 $1,415 -35% 

Giles County $238,434 $124,788 -48% 

Gloucester County $0 $0 

Grayson County $62,609 $63,104 1% 

Greene County $42,440 $28,210 -34% 

Halifax County $43,021 $28,596 -34% 

Hanover County $10,021 $7,562 -25% 

Henrico County $7,825 $5,179 -34% 

Henry County $3,412 $2,267 -34% 

Highland County $119,655 $105,453 -12% 

Hopewell city $0 $0 

James City County $7,511 $4,992 -34% 

King George County $3,472 $0 -100% 

Lee County $27,152 $33,869 25% 

Loudoun County $3,201 $2,128 -34% 

Louisa County $0 $0 

Madison County $85,419 $56,776 -34% 

Mecklenburg County $125,946 $99,760 -21% 

Montgomery County $48,405 $36,151 -25% 

Nelson County $63,390 $46,290 -27% 

Newport News city $0 $0 

Norfolk city $0 $0 

Northampton County $28,152 $81 -100% 

Nottoway County 

Orange County $14,891 $9,836 -34% 

Page County $173,033 $118,361 -32% 

Patrick County $20,719 $13,770 -34% 

Petersburg city $2,172 $1,444 -34% 

Portsmouth city $0 $0 

Prince George County $31,568 $887 -97% 

Prince William County $70,369 $34,623 -51% 

Pulaski County $50,139 $35,738 -29% 

Rappahannock County $81,943 $54,466 -34% 

Richmond County $8,492 $0 -100% 

Roanoke County $21,775 $14,626 -33% 

Rockbridge County $169,602 $124,613 -27% 

Rockingham County $453,890 $327,276 -28% 

Scott County $88,040 $63,355 -28% 

Shenandoah County $191,695 $141,272 -26% 

Smyth County $203,881 $140,928 -31% 
104 

Southampton County $0 $0 

Spotsylvania County $17,145 $14,696 -14% 

Stafford County $5,842 $3,882 -34% 

Suffolk city $20,320 $0 -100% 

Surry County $336 $223 -34% 

Tazewell County $28,387 $19,870 -30% 

Virginia Beach city $87,446 $799 -99% 

Warren County $52,871 $36,248 -31% 

Washington County $54,538 $41,999 -23% 

Westmoreland County $3,047 $943 -69% 

Williamsburg city $167 $111 -33% 

Wise County $94,481 $59,325 -37% 

Wythe County $137,503 $108,496 -21% 

York County $12,846 $6,794 -47% 

Washington Adams County $60,622 $36,018 -41% 

Asotin County $219,729 $133,669 -39% 

Benton County $109,578 $68,557 -37% 

Chelan County $4,175,359 $2,491,890 -40% 

Clallam County $1,905,087 $1,012,286 -47% 

Clark County $33,302 $2,759 -92% 

Columbia County $532,844 $313,822 -41% 

Cowlitz County $157,052 $65,294 -58% 

Douglas County $151,355 $101,155 -33% 

Ferry County $1,585,151 $811,114 -49% 

Franklin County $164,847 $109,487 -34% 

Garfield County $337,224 $193,845 -43% 

Grant County $727,092 $480,442 -34% 

Grays Harbor County $583,236 $298,338 -49% 

Island County $1,961 $1,288 -34% 

Jefferson County $2,502,729 $1,361,572 -46% 

King County $1,024,742 $781,057 -24% 

Kittitas County $1,640,164 $933,156 -43% 

Klickitat County $192,673 $87,116 -55% 

Lewis County $2,153,861 $967,794 -55% 

Lincoln County $230,232 $152,978 -34% 

Mason County $600,851 $320,932 -47% 

Okanogan County $4,167,314 $2,288,315 -45% 

Pacific County $77,994 $4,436 -94% 

Pend Oreille County $1,868,518 $1,039,635 -44% 

Pierce County $1,007,273 $642,891 -36% 

San Juan County $7,700 $5,171 -33% 

Skagit County $1,651,769 $993,972 -40% 

Skamania County $4,185,881 $1,142,373 -73% 

Snohomish County $2,056,746 $1,203,439 -41% 

Spokane County $56,116 $3,517 -94% 

Stevens County $1,076,099 $495,229 -54% 

Thurston County $18,430 $1,325 -93% 
105 

Wahkiakum County $15,267 $0 -100% 

Walla Walla County $64,400 $20,062 -69% 

Whatcom County $2,805,962 $1,609,012 -43% 

Whitman County $55,557 $36,611 -34% 

Yakima County $1,983,048 $1,140,352 -42% 

West Virginia Barbour County $1,386 $919 -34% 

Braxton County $67,635 $44,956 -34% 

Brooke County $79 $0 -100% 

Cabell County $5,797 $3,853 -34% 

Fayette County $102,995 $62,478 -39% 

Grant County $78,016 $41,169 -47% 

Greenbrier County $447,106 $217,013 -51% 

Hampshire County $13,971 $6,438 -54% 

Hancock County $0 $0 

Hardy County $220,474 $97,493 -56% 

Jackson County $1,358 $0 -100% 

Jefferson County $17,721 $4,423 -75% 

Kanawha County $857 $569 -34% 

Lewis County $52,686 $35,020 -34% 

Logan County $255 $0 -100% 

Marion County $575 $382 -34% 

Marshall County $359 $0 -100% 

Mason County $2,973 $1,792 -40% 

McDowell County $0 $0 

Mercer County $380 $201 -47% 

Mineral County $9,081 $6,036 -34% 

Mingo County $9,084 $6,038 -34% 

Monongalia County $232 $154 -33% 

Monroe County $87,081 $38,846 -55% 

Morgan County $297 $197 -34% 

Nicholas County $138,239 $69,805 -50% 

Ohio County $569 $146 -74% 

Pendleton County $439,666 $260,873 -41% 

Pleasants County $4,003 $77 -98% 

Pocahontas County $1,334,585 $624,412 -53% 

Preston County $17,243 $7,884 -54% 

Putnam County $1,053 $703 -33% 

Raleigh County $34,860 $23,170 -34% 

Randolph County $908,277 $407,805 -55% 

Summers County $61,249 $40,711 -34% 

Taylor County $5,813 $3,864 -34% 

Tucker County $501,197 $205,121 -59% 

Tyler County $1,552 $0 -100% 

Wayne County $92,926 $61,767 -34% 

Webster County $349,593 $132,138 -62% 

Wetzel County $401 $74 -82% 

Wood County $10,553 $304 -97% 
106 

Wyoming County $39,915 $26,531 -34% 

Wisconsin Adams County $1,951 $475 -76% 

Ashland County $706,362 $442,668 -37% 

Barron County $0 $0 

Bayfield County $827,451 $570,420 -31% 

Brown County $0 $0 

Buffalo County $35,400 $11,105 -69% 

Burnett County $15,096 $10,032 -34% 

Calumet County $0 $0 

Chippewa County $111 $74 -34% 

Clark County $113 $77 -32% 

Columbia County $24,049 $686 -97% 

Crawford County $26,447 $2,455 -91% 

Dane County $29,395 $298 -99% 

Dodge County $69,793 $2,009 -97% 

Door County $2,265 $827 -64% 

Douglas County $3,432 $2,286 -33% 

Dunn County $5,457 $530 -90% 

Eau Claire County $0 $0 

Florence County $234,173 $177,080 -24% 

Fond du Lac County $9,136 $68 -99% 

Forest County $1,252,726 $856,929 -32% 

Grant County $29,588 $14,301 -52% 

Green County $0 $0 

Green Lake County $0 $0 

Iowa County $945 $226 -76% 

Iron County $0 $0 

Jackson County $0 $94 

Jefferson County $1,730 $4 -100% 

Juneau County $109,527 $18,649 -83% 

Kenosha County $0 $0 

Kewaunee County $0 $0 

La Crosse County $59,656 $15,870 -73% 

Langlade County $107,850 $79,125 -27% 

Lincoln County $0 $0 

Manitowoc County $1,277 $0 -100% 

Marathon County $0 $0 

Marinette County $186 $247 33% 

Marquette County $4,882 $0 -100% 

Menominee County $0 $0 

Milwaukee County $0 $0 

Monroe County $137,930 $91,619 -34% 

Oconto County $424,809 $320,887 -24% 

Oneida County $36,340 $27,245 -25% 

Outagamie County $145 $0 -100% 

Ozaukee County $5,328 $0 -100% 

Pepin County $234 $153 -35% 
107 

Pierce County $2,664 $1,771 -34% 

Polk County $12,886 $5,794 -55% 

Portage County $0 $96 

Price County $472,787 $324,340 -31% 

Racine County $0 $0 

Rock County $3,117 $0 -100% 

Rusk County $0 $245 

Sauk County $2,045 $168 -92% 

Sawyer County $426,912 $295,791 -31% 

Shawano County $485 $0 -100% 

Sheboygan County $3,996 $0 -100% 

St. Croix County $31,577 $3,911 -88% 

Taylor County $310,398 $196,908 -37% 

Trempealeau County $13,887 $586 -96% 

Vernon County $22,742 $10,885 -52% 

Vilas County $161,381 $124,085 -23% 

Walworth County $0 $0 

Washburn County $11,153 $7,641 -31% 

Washington County $0 $0 

Waukesha County $0 $0 

Waupaca County $0 $0 

Waushara County $1,148 $0 -100% 

Winnebago County $10,377 $0 -100% 

Wood County $268 $181 -32% 

Wyoming Albany County $1,800,992 $1,337,429 -26% 

Big Horn County $1,426,336 $976,853 -32% 

Campbell County $686,793 $464,435 -32% 

Carbon County $1,657,022 $1,396,166 -16% 

Converse County $716,963 $513,175 -28% 

Crook County $857,294 $698,154 -19% 

Fremont County $3,250,484 $2,187,048 -33% 

Goshen County $70,467 $46,839 -34% 

Hot Springs County $847,263 $559,985 -34% 

Johnson County $1,167,907 $846,693 -28% 

Laramie County $24,531 $16,305 -34% 

Lincoln County $1,922,297 $1,317,080 -31% 

Natrona County $3,479,520 $2,314,924 -33% 

Niobrara County $321,733 $213,945 -34% 

Park County $2,687,368 $1,808,011 -33% 

Platte County $274,712 $183,105 -33% 

Sheridan County $1,135,988 $814,812 -28% 

Sublette County $1,408,815 $934,621 -34% 

Sweetwater County $3,367,852 $2,229,748 -34% 

Teton County $2,477,070 $1,693,633 -32% 

Uinta County $1,469,285 $985,757 -33% 

Washakie County $1,140,989 $762,533 -33% 

Weston County $373,583 $266,063 -29% 
108 

R~>:,.li7inn the Potential of PIL T: 

How Combining SRS & PIL T Can Benefit Counties, Target 

Economic Assistance, and Save Federal Dollars HEAC>WATERS 

ECONOMICS Headwaters Economics 1 UPDATED March 2013 

Summary 

If the expired Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (SRS) is not reauthorized, 

many counties, especially rural ones, will face significant revenue shortfalls, harming local school, road, 

and county budgets, and limiting options for economic development. 

We propose a single payment that combines SRS, revenue sharing, and Payments in Lieu of Taxes 

(PILT). This single payment approach has three goals: pro,1ding fair and predictable payments to 

counties, targeting payments to where they have the most economic benefit, and reducing the need for 

federal appropriations over time. 

To achieve these goals, the proposal maintains the decoupling between county payments and volatile 

commodity receipts by extending federal appropriations, adjusting for economic performance and 

opportunity, and raising the population limit in PILT based on the presence of protected public lands. 

Taken together, these reforms help ensure that rural counties maintain sustainable payment levels, even if 

future appropriations decline. 

Three Reform Principles: 

Pro'" de fair and stable compensation by 

maintaining the decoupling between payments 

and commodity receipts. 

Target payments to where they have more 

economic benefit. 

Reduce the cost to federal taxpayers. 

How a Single Payment Might Work: 

Eliminate agency-based payments in favor of 

a single payment program. 

Adjust the PIL T formula based on historic 

payments and economic needs, and raises the 

population limit based on acres of protected 

public lands. 

Outcomes: 

100% 

80% 

60% 

40% 

20% 

0% 

Shifting Payments from Urban to Rural 

Counties 

Current Single·Payment Proposal 

A single payment plan avoids lower and more uncertain payments that will occur if federal appropriations 

are not extended. It also targets payments using criteria and incentives that reflect the changing economic 

importance of public lands. In doing so, it provides room to increase public land revenue and lower 

appropriations while supporting collaborative efforts aimed at balancing timber supply with recreation, 

restoration, and conservation goals on public lands. 

Realizing the Potentia! of SRS and PILT Headwaters Economics! March 2013 
109 

A National View-Shifting Payments to Rural Counties 

With SRS expired and the current PILT formula in effect, the balance of payments will shift from rural 

counties to urban counties as total appropriations and payment levels decline. This is because SRS, 

particularly reforms in 2008, attempted to address economic needs and changing economic opportunities 

by directing higher payments to largely rural counties with relatively poor economic perfom1ance. By 

comparison, the PIL T formula preferences counties with larger populations, which also tend to have 

higher levels of income and larger, more diverse economies. 

This situation can be avoided by combining the reforms in the SRS formula with a single PIL T payment. 

The single PIL T payment would: 

1. Combine SRS and revenue sharing payments into a new PIL T formula. 

2. Provide stable and predictable payments by maintaining the decoupling between county distributions 

and the ftmding source. 

3. Benefit rural counties by raising the population cap based on acres of protected public lands. 

4. Target payments to counties that have the greatest economic needs. 

These reforms direct payments to rural counties where payments play the largest role in supporting rural 

economic opportunity. Table 1 compares the single payment proposal with current and estimated 

payments. The single payment proposal reflects the new PIL T formula and a reduction of about $45 

million from FY 20 ll payment amounts. 

Table 1: National comparison of current SRS and PIL T, estimated revenue sharing 

payments, and a Single Payment proposal. 

$214.9 $238.7 $317.4 $771.0 

28% 31% 41% 

SRS Expires {Estimated Revenue Sharing $158.0 $162.6 $202.2 $522.8 

and PILT FY 2011) 30% 31% 39% 

Single Payment $137.0 $213.7 $372.3 $726.0 

19% 30% 51% 

The map that follows shows how county-by-county distributions of a single payment change from FY 

20 ll payment distributions. For example, payments are shifted away from metropolitan areas, including 

the Puget Sotmd metropolitan region in Washington, the Wasatch Front in Utah, and Phoenix and Tucson 

in Arizona to rural areas in central Idaho, southern Utah, and coastal Oregon, among others. 

Contact: 

Mark Haggerty, 406-570-5626, mark@headwaterseconomics.org. 

All County Payments Research: See the Headwaters Economics web page for the latest research and 

analysis: http://headwaterseconomics.org/land/cow1ty-payments-research/. Headwaters Economics is 

an independent, nonprofit research group that assists the public and elected officials in making informed 

choices about land management and community development decisions in the West, 

http://11eadwaterseconomics.org/. 

Realizlng the Potential of SRS and PILT Headwaters Economics 1 March 2013 
Change in County Payments with Single Payment Reforms 

$1K to $250K 

-$1M to -$SOOK $250K to $500K -$500K to -$250K l!llll!i!B $500K to $1M -$250K to -$1K IJilll8 $1M to $5.2M -$1K to $1K No Payment 

c:::J. Metropolitan County 120 00 0 t2t1MIIffll ru-t___j 

"' f:j 

L 

I 

! 

':J 

0: 

n 

c 

ro 

gl 

U) 

'0 

ro 

1' 

2 

(f 

5 

c 

& 
111 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Haggerty. 

And last, we will turn to Mr. Whitney, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARK WHITNEY, COMMISSIONER, BEAVER COUNTY, UTAH, AND PRESIDENT, UTAH ASSOCIATION 

OF COUNTIES ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION 

OF COUNTIES 

Mr. WHITNEY. Thank you and good morning, Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell and members of the Committee. Thank you for holding today’s timely hearing to examine 

federal payments to local governments provided through the Secure 

Rural Schools and Payments in Lieu of Taxes programs and for inviting me to testify today on behalf of the National Association of 

Counties. 

My name is Mark Whitney, and I serve on the Beaver County, 

Utah Board of County Commissioners. I’m also the current President of the Utah Association of Counties. And I have personally 

seen, first-hand, the challenges public lands and federal forest 

counties face as we seek to provide a residence with essential services in the face of strict revenue and budgetary constraints. 

Beaver County has a population of approximately 6,700 people 

and spans an area of over 1.6 million acres, nearly 1.3 million acres 

or more than 77 percent is owned by the Federal Government. 

And my county is not alone. Sixty-two percent of counties nationwide have federal land within our boundaries and federal policies 

have direct impact on our communities. There are two key programs that assist federal lands counties to provide services, not 

only to residents and visitors of the federal land, but also to provide services on that land. 

For over 40 years, PILT has assisted counties to offset losses in 

tax revenues due to the presence of substantial acreage of federal 

land in our jurisdictions. Since we cannot tax the property values 

or products derived from federal lands, these payments are critical 

to support essential government services mandated by law like first 

responders and emergency services, transportation infrastructure, 

law enforcement, education and health care in nearly 2,000 counties. 

Nearly 78 percent of Beaver County is eligible for PILT. Last 

year for nearly 1.3 million acres of PILT and entitlement land 

within our county’s borders, the Interior Department paid us about 

75 cents per acre. Overall PILT funding accounts for approximately 

ten percent of our county’s annual budget. 

Moving forward we continue to urge leadership on both sides of 

the aisle to develop a fully responsible, long-term and sustainable 

legislative solution to fully fund PILT and eliminate the ongoing 

funding uncertainty currently facing public lands counties. 

The Secure Rural Schools program is equally critical to us and 

aids over 700 counties, parishes and boroughs and over 4,000 

school districts affected by the decline in revenue from timber harvest on federal lands. These payments help ensure the students receive education services and that we can maintain our roads and 

bridges and provide emergency services for our citizens. If SRS is 

not immediately reauthorized we will again be forced to make drastic cuts to the services on which our residents rely. 
112 

For example, only three percent of the land in, my neighbor to 

the south, Garfield County is taxable. That is not a large enough 

tax base to sustain the services the residents need. SRS is an indispensable component of meeting those needs. Without SRS counties 

and school districts are forced to lay off staff, reduce services and 

make drastic cuts that weaken our communities. 

And do not forget that PILT and SRS are intertwined. If Congress does not reauthorize SRS, counties receiving PILT could face 

reduced payments because a previous year’s SRS would no longer 

be deducted under the PILT formula. For Utah alone, our PILT 

payment would be reduced by 25 percent. For my county, it would 

mean almost a 40 percent cut. Counties urge you to reauthorize 

SRS as you work to reform forest management. 

And finally, I cannot stress enough, we need a stronger federal 

partner when it comes to management of our nation’s federal forests. The health of our forests continues to decline, fire risk is increasing, and without treatment of active management useable 

timber is quickly declining. 

Counties need full coordination with our federal partners to improve the health of our forests, increase the economic well-being of 

our communities and mitigate the risk of fires. 

Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to 

share Beaver County’s story. We look forward to working with you 

to develop and pass legislation to fully fund PILT and reauthorize 

SRS now. 

Thank you again. I welcome any questions y’all have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Whitney follows:] 
113 

ASSOCIATION NATIONAL N~Co 

if COUNTIES 

Written statement of 

The Honorable Mark Whitney 

Commissioner, Beaver County, Utah 

On behalf of the National Association of Counties 

"Hearing to Examine Federal Payments to Local Governments Provided 

Through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act 

and the Payment in Lieu of Taxes Program" 

Before the 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 2, 2017 

Washington, D.C. 

1 
114 

Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell and distinguished members of the Committee, thank 

you for holding today's hearing examining federal payments to local governments provided through the 

Secure Rural Schools and Self Determination Act and the Payments in Lieu of Taxes program, and for 

inviting me to testify today on behalf of the National Association of Counties (NACo) and the nation's 

3,069 counties. 

My name is Mark Whitney and I have served on the Beaver County, Utah Board of Commissioners for 

twelve years. Prior to my service as a county commissioner, I served on the Milford, Utah City Council 

and the Milford Planning and Zoning Board. Through my years of experience in local government and as 

President of the Utah Association of Counties, and through my involvement with the National 

Association of Counties, I know very well the challenges public lands and federal forest counties face as 

we seek to provide our residents with essential services in the face of strict revenue and budgetary 

constraints. 

I am proud to represent Beaver County which is located in southeastern Utah, stretching from the 

Nevada border in the West into Fishlake National Forest in the East. The county seat is in the city of 

Beaver, which is located roughly 200 miles south of Salt Lake City. Our county has a population of 

roughly 6,354 residents and spans an area of over 1.6 million acres, of which nearly 1.3 million acresmore than 77 percent of our county's land mass-is owned by the federal government. 

Congress plays a key role in guiding the management of the 640 million acres of federal public lands. 

Sixty two percent of counties nationwide have federal land within our boundaries, and federal lands 

policies have a direct impact on the quality of life and economic wellbeing of our local communities and 

the people we serve. 

This testimony will discuss why both the PILT and SRS programs are so important to counties with 

federal land in their jurisdictions and address the current funding situation and requirements for future 

payments. 

The Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) Program 

The PILT program is essential for county governments to provide critical services and we urge 

Congress to provide full mandatory funding. 

For more than 30 years, the PILT program has provided payments to counties and other local 

governments to offset losses in tax revenues due to the presence of substantial acreage of federal land 

in our jurisdictions. 

Since local governments are unable to tax the property values or products derived from federal lands, 

these payments are critical to support essential government services (mandated by law) such as first 

2 
115 

responders and emergency services, transportation infrastructure, law enforcement, education and 

healthcare in nearly 2,000 counties in 49 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the 

U.S. Virgin Islands. 

The vast swaths of untaxable federal land in many of these counties leave a sizable portion of our 

revenues subject to appropriations from Congress. On top of this limited tax base, counties face 

additional limitations on our ability to raise revenue, including state restrictions on our ability to levy or 

raise taxes. In fact, 4S states limit counties' ability to raise revenue. 

Despite these limitations, counties are still required by law to provide services to both our residents and 

to the millions of Americans who visit our public lands every year. While tourism and recreation can be 

beneficial to local economies, counties are left to shoulder the costs for the extra law enforcement, 

infrastructure, search and rescue, and road maintenance requirements that come with it. 

PILT Funding Remains Uncertain 

After the creation of the Payments in Lieu of Taxes program, annual PILT funding levels remained static 

for many years. For nearly two decades, counties watched the value of their PILT receipts drop due to 

inflation. In 1995, an amendment to the PILT formula adjusted annual authorization levels for inflation, 

helping to stabilize the value of these county payments. 

However, today PILT remains a discretionary program that is subject to the annual appropriations 

process, creating a great deal of uncertainty for counties as we work to develop and implement our 

budgets every year. 

In FY 2015, PILT was extended with $70 million in appropriations provided by the FY 2015 National 

Defense Authorization Act and $372 million in appropriations provided by the FY 2015 Consolidated and 

Further Continuing Appropriations Act. Together, the two bills provided full discretionary funding of 

$442 million for PILT in FY 2015. 

Although full funding was provided in FY 2015, for which we and other public lands counties are 

grateful, this piecemeal approach subjected a portion of PILT funds to sequestration, and required NACo 

to advocate for a "technical fix" to ensure the distribution of nearly 10 percent oft he total FY 2015 PILT 

payments were not delayed into 2016. 

For FY 2016, Congress fully funded PILT at $452 million. When the Continuing Resolution was passed in 

December of 2016, funding for the program was extended at that FY 2016 level. However, the U.S. 

Department of the Interior has estimated that $480 million will be necessary to fully fund PILT in FY 

2017. That is $28 million below what the U.S. Department of the Interior has estimated to be necessary 

3 
116 

for this fiscal year, and this decrease in county revenue stands to have a major impact on local 

community services, particularly for those counties in the West and in rural areas. 

PILT matters to Beaver County, Utah 

Nearly 78 percent of Beaver County is PILT eligible land. Last year, for the nearly 1.3 million acres of PILT 

entitlement land within our county's borders, the U.S. Department of the Interior paid Beaver County 

$969,723, or about seventy-five cents per acre. PILT funding accounts for approximately 10 percent of 

our county's annual budget. These PILT dollars are used for everything from bridge and road 

maintenance to fire protection and other emergency services. It is vital that our county receives this 

money to provide county services to residents. 

Should Congress reduce Beaver County's PILT payment, emergency services will the first to suffer. In a 

large, rural county, our first responders often travel great distances to assist residents. If we were forced 

to reduce police, fire, or EMS personnel or cut back on equipment purchases, it will have life and death 

consequences for Beaver County residents. 

Counties need a strong and reliable federal partner to provide budgetary certainty and stability for the 

nation's counties. 

PILT is not only an important element to county funding. The fact that it is indexed to inflation and is 

paid to counties for general purposes is critically important, and assures it retains its character as a 

property tax payment to be utilized for any general fund purpose. 

By fully funding the PILT program, Congress can reaffirm its longstanding commitment to public lands 

counties and provide them with the stability they need as they seek to implement their own balanced 

budgets while continuing to provide essential public services. 

While the U.S Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives may approach legislative solutions for 

funding the PILT program differently, NACo will continue to urge leadership on both sides of the aisle to 

act in a spirit of bipartisan and bicameral cooperation to develop a fiscally responsible, long-term and 

sustainable legislative solution to fully fund PILT in FY 2017 and beyond and eliminate the ongoing 

funding uncertainty currently facing public lands counties. 

The Secure Rural Schools (SRS) Program 

Counties also urge Congress to enact a long-term legislative solution for continued revenue sharing 

payments to forest counties through the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program. 

4 
117 

Without SRS, forest counties nationwide face dramatic budgetary shortfalls. Counties urge Congress to 

renew its long-standing commitment to forest counties through extending SRS as critical transitional 

funding and increasing revenue sharing through active forest management. 

The SRS program, administered by the U.S. Forest Service, aids rural counties and school districts 

affected by the decline in revenue from timber harvests on federal lands. Historically, rural communities 

and schools have relied on a share of receipts from timber harvests to supplement local funding for 

education services and roads. 

To compensate for lost revenue from federal forest ownership, in 1908, Congress and the president 

enacted legislation requiring the U.S. Forest Service to share 25 percent of timber revenues from federal 

forests with the counties in which those forests lie. Historically, forest communities and schools, 

particularly in rural areas, have relied on this share of receipts from timber harvests to supplement local 

funding for education services and roads. 

However, during the 1980s, national policies substantially diminished the revenue-generating activity 

permitted in our nation's forests. The result was a steep decline in timber sales, which in turn decreased 

the revenues that rural counties and school districts received from forest management activities. The 

"25 percent payments" to counties by the U.S. Forest Service were rendered insufficient to cover the 

costs of providing services to residents and public lands visitors. 

In response to this revenue decline, the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act 

was enacted in 2000 (P.L. 106-393) to stabilize payments to counties and to compensate for lost 

revenues, and has been reauthorized on several occasions, most recently for FY2015. In FY 2015 alone, 

SRS provided $278 million to over 700 rural counties, parishes and boroughs across the nation, as well as 

4,000 school districts. These payments helped ensure that students received crucial education services, 

and supported county road maintenance, conservation projects, search and rescue missions and fire 

prevention programs, among other essential services. Unfortunately, Congress has yet to reauthorize 

SRS since the final payments went to county governments in 2016. 

The expiration of SRS will create dramatic budgetary shortfalls for counties if Congress fails to renew this 

long-standing federal obligation to county governments. Enactment of a sustainable long-term program 

to share revenues generated from the management of designated federal lands with forest counties and 

schools will ensure that students receive essential education services and rural communities have 

critical funding for roads, conservation projects, search and rescue missions and fire prevention 

programs. 

The Forest Service is distributing historic "25 percent payments" for this year, but these payments are, 

on average, over 80 percent lower than full payments under the SRS program and are not nearly enough 

5 
118 

to cover the services we provide. If SRS is not quickly reauthorized, to balance our budgets we will again 

be forced to make drastic cuts to the services on which our people rely. 

Impact of SRS lapse on Beaver County and Utah 

In Beaver County specifically, we received $113,814 from the U.S. Forest Service in FY 2015 for SRS. If 

SRS is not reauthorized, we will see a mere $19,026 in 1908 Act payments this year-an 84.4 percent 

decrease. Statewide, Utah will receive almost an 88 percent cut. 

But that is only half the story because PILT and SRS are intertwined due to the PILT funding formula. This 

formula includes in its calculation a reduction for other prior year federal land payments, which includes 

SRS. Therefore, counties that receive SRS funds get a lower PILT payment than they would otherwise be 

entitled to. 

However, if Congress does not reauthorize SRS, many rural counties receiving PILT payments could face 

reduced payments because the previous year's SRS payments would no longer be deducted under the 

PILT formula. This would completely change the PILT funding calculation from the U.S. Department of 

the Interior, leaving the same amount of PILT funds to effectively cover both programs. Counties would 

be fighting for slices of a smaller pie. 

NACo has a mapping tool on the County Explorer section of its website that highlights the negative 

impact of an SRS lapse on PILT payments. Per the NACo County Explorer, based on FY 2014 SRS and 

FY2015 PILT data, had Congress not reauthorized SRS, PILT funds to Beaver County would have 

plummeted by almost $289,000-more than 30 percent of our county's FY 2015 PILT funding. This 30 

percent PILT cut would have coincided with the 84 percent reduction in U.S. Forest Service payments, 

leaving our rural county with a nearly $400,000 hole to fill. Should Congress not reauthorize SRS, 

emergency services and road maintenance are the first items on the chopping block for Beaver County. 

Garfield County, Beaver County's neighbor to the southeast, would face an even more dire situation. 

Since 1996, Garfield County saw its timber and other resource-based productivity plummet. If SRS is not 

reauthorized, Garfield County will see a $1.3 million cut in SRS and PILT payments, leaving their county 

with 16 days worth of funds in its general revenue account. 

To compare statewide numbers, Utah would see a statewide reduction in PILT payments of $6.7 million 

if SRS lapses. Meanwhile, Oregon, the state consistently receiving the lion's share of SRS payments, 

would have a sudden increase in PILT eligible acreage. While the federal government would increase its 

share of PILT payments by $15.4 million, Oregon would still face a drastic $87.2 million cut in SRS funds. 

This comparatively small increase in PILT payments would come directly from states like Utah, but would 

not come close to meeting either state's needs. 

6 
119 

This scenario is unsustainable, and will lead to drastic reductions in all levels of public services. County 

governments and residents will bear the brunt of inaction in Washington, and we will pay for it in lost 

services and laid-off personnel. 

The Importance of Forest Management 

Through my years as a resident and commissioner of a federal forest county, I have developed a deep 

appreciation for forest lands and want to see them maintained in a manner that will keep them healthy 

and productive for generations to come. When the National Forests were created over 100 years ago, 

the Federal Government sold the idea of public ownership of forest lands by promising a steady supply 

of natural resources produced from the forests, especially timber. However, our nation's current federal 

forest management practices are not fulfilling the promises made over a century ago, and in fact are 

endangering the many invaluable resources that our national forests provide. 

The health of our forests continues to decline, fire risk is increasing at an alarming rate and, without 

treatment and active management, usable timber quality is quickly declining to a non-merchantable 

state. In addition, fewer people recreate on public lands that have lost their green beauty, and our 

communities' economic viability is suffering as a direct result. 

This state of affairs is nothing new. The story is the same in many regions across the country, including 

ours in Beaver County. 

Until 1994, western states (Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, 

Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming) experienced wildfires that burned 3 million acres or more 

only once in 1919, and then once again in the 1980s. Since then, these same western states have 

suffered over 5 million acres burned in 2000, over 4 million in 2002, over 6 million in both 2005 and 

2006, over 4 million in 2011, and then over 7 million in 2012. 

To elaborate further, the Waldo Canyon Fire of 2012 in El Paso County, Colorado killed two people, 

burned more than eighteen thousand acres and destroyed 346 homes. On top of this, flooding and 

mudslides soon after ripped through communities in the fire area, claiming additional lives and causing 

significant property damage. During 2015, counties in central Washington lost multiple homes and 

businesses due to wildfire. 

The causes of catastrophic wildfire are multifaceted, including past management practices, population 

growth in the wildland urban interface and record drought. However, one thing is clear: the current 

conditions of our public lands and forests contribute to catastrophic wildfires and are a direct result of 

land mismanagement by the federal government. The status quo of inaction in forest management has 

only exacerbated present forest conditions. 

7 
120 

Is "catastrophic" the new normal for wildfires? My constituents and I refuse to accept that multiple 

homes should be lost each year due to catastrophic wildfires caused by poor land management 

practices. 

It is imperative that counties are given the tools and the flexibility to make informed land management 

decisions at the local level, in full collaboration with our federal partners, to improve the health of our 

federal forests, increase the economic well-being of our communities and mitigate the risk afforest 

fires. Forest management plans-not to mention other land management plans-should provide for 

economic and social sustainability, emphasize multiple use management and commodity production 

and require that federal decisions be made at the most local level of the federal agency. Without active 

management of our forests, forest communities continue to be placed in harm's way through increased 

wildfire risk and decreased economic stability. 

The Issue of Fire Borrowing 

In recent years, wild fires have been on the minds of Americans more than ever. According to the U.S. 

Forest Service (USFS), 58 million acres of National Forest lands are at a high risk for catastrophic 

wildfire-that is more than thirty percent of the 193 million acres in our National Forest System. 

The significant human and economic costs of wildfires cannot be overstated. In 2014, wildfires claimed 

the lives of 10 firefighters and many civilians. As another example, in August 2013, the Rim Fire ignited 

in the Stanislaus National Forest in California. The wildfire burned for more than a year before it was 

declared extinguished in November of 2014. Eleven residences, three commercial buildings, and 98 

outbuildings were destroyed by the fire. 

Tuolumne County, California, where this fire began, initially spent more than $1.4 million in county 

taxpayer dollars to support evacuation efforts, clear roadways and perform hazardous tree removal. 

Every fire occurs within a county, borough or parish and citizens turn to local governments for guidance 

on preparation, response and recovery from these and other disasters. When catastrophes occur, 

county first responders and road crews are tasked with responding to ensure public safety, as well as 

cleaning up and rebuilding after. In performance of these duties, local taxpayers in fire impacted 

communities will ultimately shoulder the burden to the tune of millions of dollars. 

As the risk and occurrence of major fires has increased in our federal forests over the years, the U.S. 

Forest Service and U.S. Department of Interior have often been forced to resort to "fire-borrowing," a 

budgetary practice that occurs when federal agencies divert funds from forest health and fire 

prevention programs to fight wildfires. Historically, the need for transfers of funding from non-fire 

programs to support wildfire suppression efforts has limited the ability of the Department of the Interior 

8 
121 

and U.S. Forest Service to fight wildfires without impacting the budgets of other fire prevention and 

management programs. 

Of equal concern is how the increasing ten-year average for wildfire suppression has augmented this 

funding problem. Longer fire seasons, increasing development in the wildland-urban interface, and 

increased fuel loads all contribute to higher wildfire suppression costs. 

Fire borrowing is not a sustainable solution to addressing our nation's wildfire threats, as the practice 

diverts funds from the very accounts that would prevent such catastrophic fires in the first place. 

The National Association of Counties (NACo) urges Congress to change the method of funding wildfire 

suppression on National Forests and Grasslands by providing access to funding outside ofthe statutory 

discretionary limits for emergency purposes. NACo further proposes that the Forest Service be able to 

access a discretionary disaster cap adjustment after the amount spent on fire suppression exceeds 70 

percent of the 10-year average. This approach allows the agency to invest additional resources in forest 

and rangeland restoration and management, and will drastically reduce the need to resort to fireborrowing during and after catastrophic wildfires. 

As mentioned earlier, the health and condition of our forests nationally is at a critical state, and counties 

like mine across the country are working every day to both protect our natural resources and protect 

their citizens' health, safety and well-being. We hope the Senate can utilize today's hearing to develop 

comprehensive forestry legislation that addresses both the long-term health of our federal forests and 

provides adequate funding for wildfire suppression. It is important we find constructive ways to work 

together to ensure that our forests are healthy and productive and that our local economies can 

continue to thrive. 

Conclusion 

Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, thank you for the opportunity to share Beaver 

County's story with the Committee. We look forward to working with you to develop and pass 

legislation that will continue the historic partnership between the federal government and counties 

through the full funding of the Payments in Lieu of Taxes program and reauthorizing the Secure Rural 

Schools program as a funding bridge to a revenue producing national forest system. 

County residents are depending on you to act to ensure that vital funding is in place for emergency 

personnel, road maintenance, schoolteachers, and other public services. 

9 
122 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Whitney, thank you very much. 

We appreciate all that you have delivered. You clearly laid the 

case for why PILT and SRS are so important to our rural counties, 

whether it is three percent as you suggest in the county neighboring yours, Mr. Whitney, or the one half of one percent that is 

available in terms of a taxable land base. It is pretty tough to dispute the fact that it is hard to squeeze revenues out of these areas 

that are managed by our federal landlords, so to speak. 

I want to ask a quick question of Mr. Casamassa. This relates 

to how we are managing the Tongass. I think we have heard from 

my colleague here in Washington, Senator Cantwell, that you have 

a situation where you are seeing lands that are managed much 

more sustainably and they are able to produce significantly more 

timber revenue than the Forest Service is able to do in a state like 

Alaska, and yet, far less of a land base there. 

Mr. Manus, you had highlighted the fact that Washington has 

been able to use 2.1 million acres to yield a harvest of 560 million 

board feet, generating 220 million board feet in Washington. I 

think Mayor Landis would be envious of that. I know that I am. 

In our state, as I mentioned, we harvested just three million 

board feet last year. Over the last ten years we have averaged 

about 35 million board feet. Again, we are talking about the 

Tongass, which has 17 million acres. You can see why, as Mayor 

Landis suggested, they are looking to different opportunities such 

as the creation of a state forest. 

Why are we having such a hard time here increasing the work 

that could be done within our national forests, both in terms of forest health, because we have heard many members address that 

this morning, as well as the commercial timber production? 

Why aren’t we doing what, most will say, we need to be doing? 

Mr. CASAMASSA. Well, Chairman Murkowski, certainly the Forest 

Service has, to a degree, increased our overall hazard fuel reduction across the landscape over the course of the last decade. We, 

last year alone, offered and sold about 2.9 billion board feet. And 

we continue to look for ways to increase our ability to provide for 

and respond to the needs of the various communities and counties 

that we serve. 

The CHAIRMAN. In terms of what the Forest Service spends to 

prepare and implement a timber sale, why is it so out of alignment? 

I am told that Forest Service spends $100 or more per million 

board feet to prepare and implement a timber sale while a state 

sale, on average, costs only $25 per million board feet. It just does 

not line up here. Why? 

Mr. CASAMASSA. I certainly appreciate that, those comparisons. 

Clearly the states have a different mandate by which they support 

and implement forest management. The Forest Service has a different mandate, has to balance a wider array of resources. 

The CHAIRMAN. But do you think that a discrepancy that is that wide, $100 per million board feet versus $25 per million board feet, 

do you think that justifies that discrepancy? 

You say that the federal mandate is different than the state 

mandate. At the end of the day, what you are doing is you are ensuring for a level of timber harvest. You are doing it in a respon-
123 

sive way, working to meet very clear environmental standards that 

are set. 

I think that whether you are the State of Alaska or the State of 

Washington or the State of Oregon, you want to make sure that 

you have done it responsibly. Does it really make sense to have 

that kind of a differential? 

Mr. CASAMASSA. Well, I think that overall, we are taking a look 

at and we are being a bit more streamlined with our approach to 

how we lay out and do the work associated with cruising and contract preparation for our timber sales. And we are seeing some reductions in the overall prep costs, but clearly, not to the degree 

that, you know, in comparison to what you just provided with respect to the $25 versus $100 of the preparation. 

The CHAIRMAN. It just seems to me that we could learn from 

some of the states in how they are able to manage and manage in 

a way that gives more benefit, ultimately, while at the same time, 

making sure that it is done, harvested responsibly. 

Mr. CASAMASSA. And I think to answer that question, put a finer 

point on the authorities that we have. Good neighbor authority is 

one of those ways that, I think, we continue to collaborate with and 

work with the states to streamline process and be more effective 

in the approach to how we go about offering sales, managing and 

managing national forest system lands. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, we will continue the discussion. 

Senator Cantwell. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

I just wanted to get, if I could, the witnesses on record about 

whether we should fix this SRS problem now, ASAP, and not wait 

for other discussions. 

I find, oftentimes, that SRS gets held hostage to doing two or 

three other things first, and so I just want to understand from the 

witnesses whether they think we should just get this done so that 

we can give counties certainty right now or wait for this to be 

paired with forest management legislation. I actually want to hear 

what everybody has to say. 

Mr. MANUS. Yes, we need to get SRS in the system as soon as 

possible. It’s a detriment to all the counties, school districts, as you 

mentioned, Senator. 

The young lady in the back of me here is from Skamania County. 

The shortfall she’s facing in her school district is intolerable, and 

they need help right now. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. 

Mr. MANUS. We can fix the other issues at another point in time, 

hopefully, in the same session, but on another bill. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. 

Mr. MANUS. Thank you. 

Senator CANTWELL. Other witnesses? 

Mr. Haggerty? Mr. Whitney? Yes? 

Mr. CRUICKSHANK. Yes, thank you for the question, Senator 

Cantwell. 

Most school districts are in the budget process right now. They 

work on a July 1 to June 30th cycle, and I’m constantly receiving 

calls from our school districts saying, where is SRS? You know, 
124 

they’re looking at that so that they’re not having to do those layoffs. 

And for counties with road departments, like ours, right now 

we’re looking at what do we do next year—with a 40 percent cut 

in our budget. 

So, SRS is very important to the schools to have it reauthorized 

immediately and in the short-term. Counties are going to be looking for SRS. 

So, thank you for the question. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. 

Yes, Mr. Whitney? 

Mr. WHITNEY. Thank you for that question, again, Senator Cantwell. 

On behalf of the National Association of Counties and also my 

own county, SRS is so pivotal to the survival of our school districts, 

especially in these rural counties that depend on active forest management, but that management is not really there today. 

So, we have to have a bridge to get to the point in the future 

when we again have active forest management. We have to have 

this funding because these schools, every one of them—my own 

school district included, will suffer if SRS is not funded. There will 

be no music programs; there will be sports programs that are cut 

out; teachers laid off. This has a devastating effect all across the 

country. 

So, thank you. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. 

Thank you for your response. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mayor Landis—he was going to weigh in. 

Mr. LANDIS. Just very briefly, thank you, Senator Cantwell. 

I do believe, also, that it needs to be reauthorized and funded 

quickly and solved quickly. And the reason, specifically, is that the 

funding is going down drastically and looking at a graph where it’s 

steeply declined; and for our SRS funding, it’s $1.7 million down to, 

we project, $750,000 this year. 

I think we need to stick a pin in this and not get used to starving 

and make that the norm. So, before it gets too much more degraded, I think that we should have a solution. 

Thank you. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. 

I thank all the witnesses for that. I tried to leave it off with you, 

Mr. Whitney, because I wasn’t meaning to let Mr. Landis not weigh 

in here. But the issue, I think you said it best, we’ve got to quit 

fooling around with this and acting like it can’t be solved until 

something else is solved when in reality, we need to solve this first 

and then we can get to these other discussions. 

And I am happy to have them. I think that is exactly what the 

Pine pilot is, a strategy that tries to get access to more board feet 

and solve some of our forest fire borrowing problems. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Senator Daines. 

Senator DAINES. Thank you, Chair Murkowski and Ranking 

Member Cantwell, for having this important and timely hearing. 
125 

I hear from Montana counties every year. In fact, at the moment, 

about every hour, about their frustration with the uncertainty that 

is being created with the appropriations process and regarding 

PILT and the Secure Rural Schools program. 

You know, I spent 28 years in the private sector before coming 

up to Congress. It is hard to believe that we are now 7 months into 

the fiscal year of the Federal Government and we have not passed 

all the appropriations bills. 

And I can guarantee you, in about four more months, we will be 

right back here in debate having the drama about CRs, about shutdowns, and so forth here because this institution cannot pass appropriations bills. It is ridiculous, it really is. It is such a broken 

process. 

I worked at Proctor and Gamble for 13 years. I was in the health 

and beauty care business, in the shampoos. This reminds me of 

lather, rinse, repeat, over and over again here in Washington. 

With SRS in particular, since the program has expired, I mean, 

it is ridiculous. This is a program that expired. Our counties are 

counting on it, and this program expired a couple years ago. 

Forest management remains woefully inadequate, and that is 

really the root cause here to get back to proper management of our 

public lands. 

Our counties recently received only a small fraction under the 

previous and historic 25 percent formula compared to what they 

had been receiving under SRS. My county commissioners in Montana—and if you want to talk about what local government is all 

about, I think you look at our county commissioners. They are really the cool face of the decision-making, every pothole, every complaint, comes to those county commissioners. They are true public 

servants. They have told me that this sharp cut will result in layoffs and fewer road and school projects being completed because 

this institution can’t get its act together in Washington, DC. 

Our Montana counties are frustrated with the pace and the scale 

of active forest management. Let’s not forget we have got the problem with SRS and with PILT. But that is, in some ways, a bandaid 

that is covering up the real problem here is what once upon a time 

we used to have active forest management and revenues coming to 

our counties. It is unfair to our counties in rural America to keep 

them in limbo each year in appropriations, while doing nothing to 

improve the management of our federal lands. 

I certainly support reauthorizing SRS. Count me in with both 

feet as supporting it. 

At the same time, it is absolutely paramount that this Committee and this Congress pass strong forest management reform 

legislation that restores active management to our national forests, 

because an actively managed national forest is a healthier forest. 

It reduces wildfire risk. It is better for wildlife habitat. 

I spent a lot of time in the back country. We need to get back 

to active management, and we need to address the chronic litigation from fringe groups which has stopped us in our tracks in Montana so many times. 

Mr. Whitney, you spoke to the need to restore active forest management in your testimony. Can you elaborate on the economic and 
126 

environmental benefits to increasing the pace and the scale of management? 

Mr. WHITNEY. Thank you for that question, Senator Daines. 

Active forest management is so critical. It’s—without the management we risk more forest fires. With the management, we can 

harvest timber, making them healthy forests, making our counties 

vibrant again. 

The rule is, I think, it’s 25 percent of all receipts that come off 

these Forest Service lands on timber harvest go to counties and 

school districts. So, it is pivotal. I can’t express that enough. 

Senator DAINES. Commissioner Manus, I understand that Pend 

Oreille County is concerned about the fringe litigation against the 

collaboratively developed A to Z project in the Colville National 

Forest. Montana knows all too well how fringe litigators can block 

responsible forest management. 

While I know you cannot speak specifically about the active lawsuit, can you talk generally about how litigation needlessly slows 

forest management and undermines the work of collaborative 

groups? 

Mr. MANUS. Thank you for that question, Senator Daines. 

We are involved in litigation currently. The county signed on 

with the Forest Service and with our collaborative group out of 

Spokane, including the Lands Council, in responding to litigation 

to help the A to Z project move forward. Currently, we are scheduled on June 13th to be in the Ninth Circuit Court. Hopefully this 

will end the litigation. So far, we’ve been able to prevail. 

The county signed on with American Forestry Resource Council, 

and the beauty of that program was it didn’t cost us any money. 

They defended us on that litigation. 

We have a collaborative in the Colville National Forest called 

NEWFC, Northeast Washington Forest Coalition, that has worked 

very hard on this timber sale, the A-to-Z, which is a new model 

that we hope to use in the future. It’s a very large timber sale. 

Through that effort the collaborative group came up with a great 

sale, and it was litigated by a group out of Montana that, as far 

as I’m concerned, should not have standing because they weren’t at 

the table when this process was being made. 

Senator DAINES. Most of those litigators are not. 

Mr. MANUS. And that should change. 

Senator DAINES. I agree. 

Thank you. 

Mr. MANUS. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Wyden. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you and 

Senator Cantwell for spearheading this effort. Clearly the sense of 

urgency that we are seeing from the witnesses, Senator Cantwell 

reflected in her question and your comments, is the heart of the 

challenge, the immediate challenge. 

I think what I want to do, because we have all sympathizers here 

from the West, is try to put this in a little bit of context. 

The first question I want to direct to you, Mr. Casamassa. On 

December 23rd of 2014, Forest Service Chief Tidwell, in response 

to my question, said that you would have to have a sixfold increase 

over the current harvest to equal the value of the Secure Rural 
127 

Schools payments receipt. Do you disagree with what the Chief had 

to say then? 

Mr. CASAMASSA. Senator Wyden, no. I think that there is a formula that you could follow that would then look at the receipts, the 

SRS payments, then the difference between the receipts generated 

and the payments and then formulaically calculate to the degree 

necessary that there would have to be an increase. 

Senator WYDEN. My time is a little short. But you do not disagree with what the Chief said? 

Mr. CASAMASSA. No, I do not. 

Senator WYDEN. Colleagues, this, in my view, is the heart of the 

challenge because when I look around this room we all think that 

you have to fight this battle on several fronts. The reason we feel 

so strongly about Secure Rural Schools and the urgency is without 

it, we are not going to keep the doors open in much of rural America. That is what was coming out in the early questions. 

That is why Senator Craig and I wrote this bill in 1999, and I 

am not sure most of the Senate even knew who I was. I had just 

arrived. So it was brand new, but that was the key to keep the 

doors open. 

All of us here support increasing the harvest in a sustainable 

way and that is active management. Okay? So that is kind of tier 

II. And all of us support changing this crazy, absolutely bonkers 

program of funding firefighting that we call ‘‘fire borrowing.’’ 

Senator Crapo and I have had a bill with 200 citizens’ groups. 

I support the efforts our Chair and our Vice Chair, Senator Cantwell, have been involved in. We are all in on the whole agenda but 

the heart of it has got to be keeping the doors open because if you 

do not keep the doors open, everything else goes by the wayside. 

That is what is behind the urgency. 

So I want to make one other substantive point with you, Mr. 

Casamassa. Back over the years, when I was Chair and Senator 

Murkowski was Ranking Member, we talked a lot about it. People 

always say, hey, you know, this thing they did in 1999 was kind 

of a welfare program and it was supposed to phase out. That is not 

accurate. 

From the very get-go, Title II was about county payments but 

also about active management, and Title II funds programs like reducing hazardous forest fuels. That is what keeps communities safe 

is reducing those fuels. That is what Senator Cantwell wants to do 

with that model project. It was about reducing hazardous fuels and 

about the county payments, a safety net portion. 

Mr. Casamassa, could you get us a list of the projects done under 

Title II that address this active management issue, because I cannot tell you how many times people tell me, oh Ron, you did something good back in 1999 and the air was pure and the oxen had 

big heads and, you know, all that. But this is a different day. That 

is not the history of this program. The history of this program was 

to use Title II, in particular, to help communities find common 

ground. You had environmentalist folks, you had timber industry 

people, and they have done so. 

Could you get us a list of the active management programs that 

are funded under Title II? 

Mr. CASAMASSA. Yes, we can, Senator. 
128 

Senator WYDEN. Great. 

Madam Chair, I so appreciate you are doing this now. This is the 

key time window. 

As you know, Senator Cantwell and I are on the Finance Committee. We are deeply committed to working with you and Chairman Hatch in getting a payment kind of process. But so colleagues 

know, this is not one of these deals where they are mutually exclusive, where you do one or the other. We are all in on all of the key 

parts which is active management, keeping the doors open and 

ending this bonkers system of fighting fire borrowing. 

I am over my time, Madam Chair, but thank you. You and I have 

been at this for a lot of years, and I think under the leadership of 

you and Senator Cantwell and all the colleagues here we could put 

this thing to rest now. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank you for that. 

I think it is particularly important and relevant that you speak 

to the history of the program and why it was put in place in the 

first place so that it is well and clearly understood. 

So again, thank you and we look forward to working with you on 

these really urgent issues. 

Senator Risch. 

Senator RISCH. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Thank you for 

holding this hearing. 

Unfortunately, it is all of us talking to each other. Everybody in 

this room knows what the problem is, and it is a really, really serious problem. 

We are fortunate to have the world’s leading authority on SRS 

here. I say that in good humor, but I am serious about that, Senator Wyden. You have been a champion of this. You fly the flag for 

this, and we all sincerely appreciate it. 

What I want to talk about is that it is a solution. And Senator 

Cantwell is absolutely right. These counties need help right now. 

I mean, we need to pass this and it needs to be done right now. 

The problem with that is when Congress does that, we do the reauthorization. It will be for a few years or something like that and 

then we are going to be right back in the same situation again. I 

think we can walk and chew gum at the same time. I think we can 

do that, but I think we really need to talk about a long-term solution. 

Senator Wyden, you are notorious for thinking outside the box, 

and that’s really what brought us SRS in the first place. 

You have rightfully acknowledged that this is not 1999. I think 

the foundation that this was built on has changed dramatically 

since 1999, and that is simply forest harvest. If you look at a bar 

chart about how many million board feet come off, it is so different 

today than it was in 1999. So what can we do about this? 

Well, the solution actually is at hand. And for us who are concerned about this, the Western states that have these issues, we 

can do this. This is a bipartisan issue and should be done on a bipartisan basis. 

I think a foundation to talk about this is the Community Trust 

Act that actually passed the House. Now it is not exactly the way 

I would do it, but let me tell you what the foundation of the thinking for that is. It is similar to what Mr. Haggerty put on the table, 
129 

and that is to have a separate funding mechanism for funding this 

over the long haul on a permanent basis. I would disagree with 

him on having a third party and a big national endowment. These 

things are better done on the state level. The states are really good 

at that, and I can prove it. 

Finally, for the year that we have statistics available, the State 

of Idaho State Lands Department manages 1.5 million acres of 

land. From that, they harvested and generated on a sustained 

basis $330 million. 

The United States Forest Service manages a little over 22 million acres in the State of Idaho. That same year that the state got $330 

million off 1.5 million, the Federal Government received $75 million off 22 million acres of federal grounds. 

Now admittedly, you are going to say, well, yes, but there is a 

lot of wilderness area in there and that is all true. Nonetheless, on 

timber-producing grounds, we far outstripped the Federal Government. 

Mr. Casamassa is right. They have a different mission. They 

have different responsibilities. But it is not that wide, as the Chairman pointed out. So let’s look to the states to do that. 

And this Community Trust bill is a good starting point. Like I 

said, there are ways I would do it differently and the main suggestion I would have for the Community Trust bill is what—Gordon, 

correct me if I am wrong here—200,000 acres in Idaho for the trust 

to generate income on? 

Mr. CRUICKSHANK. That’s correct. 

Senator RISCH. Okay. 

Mr. CRUICKSHANK. On that 200,000 acres, if it’s done 

sustainably, would take care of ten percent of our SRS funds. 

Senator RISCH. That 200,000 acres makes up less than one percent of the federal ground. Now the environmental community is 

concerned on two fronts. 

Number one, they think this is just the first step of transferring 

title to the states. We have to assure them that that is an issue 

that should not get bound up in this and it has, really, nothing to 

do with this. 

The second thing is the environmental community, at least in 

Idaho, most of them, not all of them, but the vast majority of them, 

have proven themselves to be responsible people as far as doing 

what they want to do. They ought to be involved in identifying the 

200,000 acres so that it is a collaborative effort that identifies the 

200,000 acres. And it ought to be a collaborative effort that moves 

forward, that is, managed by the State Lands Department, but also 

has at least an advisory committee that is made up of a broad spectrum of stakeholders on the national lands. If you did that, I think 

you could put in place a permanent way of taking care of the SRS. 

Senator Wyden, I throw this out for your consideration because 

I know how good you are thinking outside the box. 

Senator WYDEN. Madam Chair? 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Wyden. 

Senator WYDEN. Can I just take 30 seconds to respond? I know 

colleagues are waiting. 

Ryan Zinke, the new Secretary of the Interior, has said that he 

is not for widespread state transfer from federal to state. 
130 

Senator RISCH. And we all know that is not going to happen. 

Senator WYDEN. I guess my only point is there are a whole lot 

of models out there. 

Senator Cantwell has a very good one in Washington State. We 

have one from Oregon that would double the harvest on a sustainable basis, every year for 50 years, and we have environmental 

support. 

We want to work with you but when Ryan Zinke, the new Secretary of the Interior, says he is not for state transfer, I think that 

sends a message. 

Senator RISCH. Well, it does. 

It is a practical message because people talk about this, but 

there is never going to be a wholesale transfer. It simply is not 

going to happen. As much as people would like it to happen, as 

much, regardless of what side you are on, you have got to face the 

realities of it. 

If you do something like the Community Trust bill or like your 

provision or Senator Cantwell’s, you get to some ground that you 

might be able to make. 

My time is up and I thank you, Madam Chairman, but again, 

this is a problem for this Committee on a very bipartisan basis for 

people who have large percentage holdings of federal land. We can 

do this. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Risch. 

I appreciate the conversation and the dialogue. I think this is exactly the type of discussion that we need to build on a bipartisan 

basis that is going to lead to a different result, because we have 

been doing the same thing for a long time and our communities are 

freaked out just about every year as they deal with the uncertainty. 

Let’s go to Senator Heinrich. 

Senator HEINRICH. Madam Chair, I learned from our colleague 

from Maine, that Maine is apparently the most heavily forested 

state in the nation. What I appreciate about Senator King being 

here is that if you look around this dais today, you don’t see a lot 

of Easterners here and that is part of the problem. 

I want to really recognize the effort of everyone who is here focusing on this issue. We have got to get this done. But I especially 

appreciate it when our members from back east show up for these 

things because this is, sort of, a do-or-die situation for us. 

The CHAIRMAN. We do appreciate Senator King. 

Senator KING. I do want to enter into this discussion. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. We look forward to that. 

Senator HEINRICH. I do not think it is any secret that rural communities around the country are struggling, and it is certainly true 

in New Mexico. I think the last thing we should be doing is pulling 

the rug out from under them by ending the Secure Rural Schools 

program. 

Now, before it expired, SRS provided funds for schools and roads 

and public safety in counties with national forests. But in truth, 

the impact of these funds, as our witnesses can attest, is much 

broader than that because counties now have to fill in their school 
131 

and road budgets from their general funds and that means they are 

unable to meet other critical needs. 

I want to share just a couple examples from New Mexico, in particular. 

Sierra County in New Mexico was planning to start a new mental health program in the county, a desperately needed program in 

an underserved area. But now, because their county payment was 

cut from $154,000 to only $6,000, they have had to redirect the 

funds from mental health into law enforcement and road projects 

that would have been covered by SRS. 

In Cibola County, county officials have had to eliminate all road 

improvement projects. Let me say that again, eliminate ALL road 

improvement projects. They will even need to cut back on routine 

maintenance on school bus routes. This means that people in the 

far reaches of that county are more likely to get trapped at home 

in bad weather and school buses are more likely to get stuck on 

poorly maintained roads. 

This is simply not sustainable. We cannot leave rural communities hanging on while we debate forest policy here in Washington. 

Rural counties need these programs. They need them to be reliable 

and they need them now. 

Ms. Ferriter, I want to go back to something, and we have talked 

about this a little bit, but I think it is going to be really important 

for our colleagues to understand. 

In New Mexico and a number of the other states, we have counties that receive PILT but not SRS. But even those counties are 

deeply concerned about the expiration of SRS, and that is because 

PILT payments will have to increase for counties who used to receive funds from both programs because the PILT formula includes 

an offset for those SRS funds. 

Could either you or Mr. Casamassa walk us through, very explicitly, the intersection of these two programs and, in the absence of 

SRS, will we simply need to increase PILT appropriations and if 

so, by how much, if we were to make those counties whole? 

Ms. FERRITER. Thank you for the question. 

And you are correct that the having SRS not authorized will impact the PILT. It won’t impact for FY2017, but it will for 2018. And 

the reason is because for the counties that do receive the SRS when 

we do the PILT calculation those SRS funds are taken into consideration. 

So, if SRS is not reauthorized, it’s going to mean that the PILT, 

the statutory calculation for PILT, would be expected to go up and 

it means that more counties would be looking to have a slice of the 

PILT pie. 

Senator HEINRICH. Mr. Casamassa, do you want to add anything 

to that— 

Mr. CASAMASSA. No, I think that certainly sums it up. There is 

that they are both inextricably linked, PILT and SRS, when it 

comes to those counties that have national forest land in them. So 

they are linked, and it’s directly proportional to PILT payments if 

you do not have the SRS there. 

Senator HEINRICH. And obviously a lot of us in the intermountain West have counties where there are primarily BLM 
132 

lands, for example. They are just as impacted because of this robPeter-to-pay-Paul sort of situation. 

Commissioner? 

Mr. CRUICKSHANK. Senator Heinrich, I just have to say this that 

the calculations that the counties have worked out is that the SRS 

is not taken away from or doesn’t take away from the PILT. The 

PILT would need another $161 million to fully fund all the counties, to keep all the counties whole. 

Thank you. 

Senator HEINRICH. No, I appreciate that very much. 

And I want to say, once again, thank you to the Chair and the 

Ranking Member. There are not a lot of issues like this where we 

find this much unanimity on the Committee, so I think it is incumbent upon all of us to make this right. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Risch and I were just discussing that 

there is a lot of opportunity here to work to find a solution and 

have that solution be long-term and enduring. 

Thank you. 

Senator Lee. 

Senator LEE. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. 

I want to welcome to our Committee again, my friend, Mark 

Whitney, who in addition to being just a fantastic citizen of Utah, 

has served his county for more than a dozen years as a Commissioner and is now the head of the Utah Association of Counties, 

which is a big deal. We are honored to have you here, sir. 

I think the problem that we face with PILT, the Payment in Lieu 

of Taxes program, is a classic problem of Washington’s creation. It 

is a classic Washington solution in the sense that it is, sort of, no 

solution at all. There is a problem in that there are states, and 

Utah is one of those states, where the Federal Government owns 

a lot of land. 

In Utah, it happens to be two-thirds of the land. And because the 

Federal Government has exempted itself from property taxes, this 

leaves counties throughout my state with an inability to collect a 

source of revenue that they rely on to fund everything from police 

and search and rescue services, to road maintenance and schools— 

and this ends up creating a big problem. 

To deal with that problem, Congress has come up with PILT and 

uses a formula, a formula it may or may not use at any given moment, and then leaves the states subject to the will and whim of 

Congress as to when, whether, to what extent, and how to follow 

through on its plan to provide these payments in lieu of property 

taxes. But again, this is not really a solution at all because it 

leaves most of our counties impoverished. It leaves most of our 

counties without the ability to collect anything close to the amount 

of revenue that they would collect if they could tax that land, even 

at the lowest rates. 

Last year, 56 Senators—56 members of the U.S. Senate—voted 

in favor of my proposed amendment to the PILT program. This is 

an amendment that would give counties the option of collecting 

PILT revenue at the level they would have received if but for federal ownership of land in their county. 
133 

I would like to note that these were not all Republican votes. 

There was some bipartisan support for the bill, including at least 

one member of this Committee, Senator Manchin from West Virginia, who voted for it. 

Mr. Whitney, if Beaver County’s PILT payment more accurately 

reflected the obligations imposed upon your county, what would 

you be able to do with that money? 

Mr. WHITNEY. Thank you for that question, Senator Lee. 

There are many things that we could do in our county. It takes 

everything we’ve got. We’ve got over 900 miles of roads that we 

have to take care of with only 6,300 or 6,700 citizens. Only 100, 

roughly 130 of those, qualify for B and C road funds from the state. 

So the rest of it has to come out of our general fund or PILT. We 

are not able to keep those roads at a maximum level of safety. We 

need to increase them. There are many things that we could do. 

We could—there’s just so many things that we just keep at a 

bare minimum of physical responsibilities as Commissioners, those 

of us that are closest to the people are the best government there 

are. We kick the dirt every day. We understand the pitfalls. We understand physical responsibility. 

So we have to do a balancing act on what moneys we can spend, 

what services we can provide. We’ve got wants and we’ve got needs. 

There’s a lot of wants out there, but it’s what we need to provide 

our people. And unfortunately, because of this, we can only provide 

what they need. 

Senator LEE. And you, sir, have witnessed firsthand the fact that 

this is not just about some aspirational, if laudable, set of goals. 

This is often about safety. It is often about life or death. 

In fact, in many instances you are called on, as you have mentioned, to provide emergency services to people who are on federal 

land. 

Can you give us any examples of the type of situation that arises 

there when you are called upon to provide emergency services to 

someone who is on federal land? 

Mr. WHITNEY. Absolutely. 

I mean, emergency services, when you’ve got as many acres as 

you do in my county, that are very, very rural and very, very, you 

know, not accessible in a lot of cases, emergency services are pivotal and important to do that. And we need to ramp that up, as 

I said, we’re very sure of it. 

I really complement my county on the services that we are able 

to provide, but we could go above and beyond the threshold and not 

just this status quo of providing a basic amount of emergency services. And that would be the same as I have to also speak with a 

voice of the Association of Counties all across the country. I think 

you’ve heard the testimony from my other fellow commissioners 

and their counties the same story. 

Senator LEE. I see my time has expired. 

I want to thank you, Commissioner, for coming here today, and 

I want to thank you for helping the Committee understand the 

unique challenges that you face. The fact that you are required to, 

as it were, make bricks without straw to do a lot with fewer resources than you need. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 
134 

Mr. WHITNEY. Thank you, Senator. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Lee. 

Senator Cortez-Masto. 

Senator CORTEZ-MASTO. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to 

thank you as well and Ranking Member Cantwell for bringing together this topic and this important discussion to the rest. 

I am the Senator from Nevada and, as many of my colleagues 

know and many of you know, Nevada has the largest amount of 

public lands of any state in the United States. About 85 percent is 

owned by the Federal Government which means the topic we are 

discussing today is very important to our rural communities in Nevada. I will tell you, I have had conversations with NACo about 

this very subject. 

In fact, one county in particular, Nye County, would be devastated. For example, PILT reductions threaten to undermine 

plans to restore the Senior Nutrition program in Nye County. And 

it is true what my colleagues are saying and you well know, rural 

counties provide basic services and needs that are so important. 

I know this, not only as I sit here today, but I was an Assistant 

County Manager in Clark County and my father was a County 

Commissioner for many years. People in our counties and municipalities are on the front lines providing services every day that are 

so important. 

Our rural communities are challenged. They do not get the sales 

tax, property tax, that some of our urban areas get so they rely on 

PILT and SRS funding. And I am very supportive of how we continue to find long-term, sustainability of funding for our rural communities. 

So my question really is to Mr. Haggerty. I was reading through 

your comments and appreciate your comments about a permanent 

trust. And so, a couple of questions. One, can you discuss a little 

bit more and talk about what you mean by commercial receipts, 

what you would identify as commercial receipts? Nevada does not 

have a lot of revenue from harvesting timber, so I am curious what 

you think that would include. And then, after your comments, I 

would be curious to know what the commissioners think about the 

establishment of a permanent trust for long-term sustainability of 

both SRS and PILT. 

Mr. HAGGERTY. Thank you, Senator, for the question. 

The trust idea, at least the way that we have written about it 

and talked about it as a, kind of, policy idea, would only use receipts that are currently credited to the 25 percent fund for the 

Forest Service and for the BLM O and C lands in Oregon, the 50 

percent revenue sharing payments. And so, those are primarily 

timber receipts, but they include all kinds of revenue from ski area 

leases in Colorado, to leasing right-of-ways and other sources of 

revenue. Timber is certainly the predominant one. 

Senator CORTEZ-MASTO. But there is a discussion of combining 

SRS as well as PILT into this trust fund. Is that correct or no? 

Mr. HAGGERTY. I think, no, I think the simplest way to do it is 

to think of the trust as just a purely financial way of managing the 

revenue volatility and the uncertainty associated with receipts to 

build them over time so that states like Nevada, even in Montana 

and Oregon and other places, counties have different opportunities 
135 

to generate revenue from federal lands. This would provide a way 

to build receipts over time, stabilize those revenues and create a 

permanent funding source. 

Senator CORTEZ-MASTO. Okay, thank you. 

And to the commissioners, I am curious about your thoughts on 

that topic. 

Mr. Mark Whitney: Yes, thank you for that question. I think 

that’s a very important question of this distinguished Board of 

Commissioners that are with me here. 

It’s twofold on this answer. We all want active forest management and to get back to healthy payments under that 25-percent 

rule. We also want mineral extraction and mineral resources on the 

BLM lands. It’s crucial. There are many, many valuable minerals 

that are important. We can extract them within our counties, in 

these rural areas. But until we can get there and get that done, 

we need the bridge to get there. 

And so, we’ve got to fully fund SRS so that the intertwinement 

of it with PILT does not take away from our counties. My county 

is mainly PILT. And as I said in my testimony, if SRS sunsets 

today, then I lose 40 percent of the revenue in my county because 

they’ve got to make the other counties whole on this. 

What I would like to say to each and every one of you, Chairman 

Murkowski and the rest of you, if you would talk to your colleagues 

and really emphasize, both in the House and in the Senate. Our 

great Senator Hatch is introducing a bill tomorrow that is going to 

fully fund SRS. It’s very important that that bill passes. Please 

support that bill until we can get something done to get back to 

active forest management and mineral resources and extraction on 

BLM lands. 

Senator CORTEZ-MASTO. Thank you. 

Any other commissioners have a comment, please? 

Mr. CRUICKSHANK. Yes, Senator Cortez-Masto, thank you for the 

question. 

I was one of the Idaho County Commissioners that helped create 

that Community Forest Trust for Idaho. Of course, I know Idaho, 

so that’s what we looked at. 

I think what we were looking for is the harvest could happen 

anywhere, but we were going to share it with the entire State of 

Idaho using the current SRS funding formula that we have today. 

However, in answer to your question, if we could create some 

type of funding that would create a balance of what we were going 

to get every year, I think we would really take a serious look at 

that because last year we got $1.8 million. If you go back historically, I should have been getting $3.5 million from what we did in 

harvest in early years. Are we going to get back to that? No. But I also want to say that when we were getting $3.5 million the counties in the U.S., in total, were getting over $500 million. 

So that meant that the Forest Service was creating $2 billion in 

revenue. They’re not doing that today, so it’s being funded by taxpayers to help them. 

We’ve got to find a balance there somewhere. And I think we’re 

willing to work for that and find something so we don’t have this 

deep hole and then we jump up every time it’s reauthorized for a 

year or two, and then we fall into that hole again. 
136 

So, thank you for the question and I appreciate being able to explain my thoughts on it. 

Senator CORTEZ-MASTO. Thank you. 

Mr. LANDIS. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

Being from Alaska we have a certain amount of experience with 

trusts and permanent funds situations. I have actually received a 

cash payment every year that the permanent fund in Alaska has, 

just as a personal note, been in existence, and that’s been a very 

successful program. 

I was intrigued by Mr. Haggerty’s statistics of ‘‘if we had done 

this in 2000 what it would look like now.’’ I think that it all depends on the order of magnitude that you start with. It’s going to 

be a big number to start with, but I think it’s important to start 

with the right number rather than set up a program that will fail. 

Thank you. 

Senator CORTEZ-MASTO. Thank you. Thank you very much. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator. And I appreciate that all of 

you had a chance to answer because it is something that, I think, 

if we are trying to look for some out-of-the-box solutions, some of 

these concepts, whether it is what Idaho has been doing or what 

you have mentioned, Mr. Haggerty, these are worth considering. So 

getting that input is important. 

Thank you for the question. 

Senator Gardner. 

Senator GARDNER. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

If anybody has a pocket knife, I think Senator Franken is in 

need of a pocket knife, probably not an appropriate request at a 

Committee hearing but just in case. 

[Laughter.] 

Thank you very much to the witnesses for your time and testimony today and for holding this very timely hearing. Obviously, it 

is one of the key issues that I hear about when I go into Western 

Colorado and talk to county commissioners and leaders of their 

communities about SRS/PILT dollars. 

Whether you are in Hinsdale County, which has over 90 percent 

of the county in public lands, or whether you are in Mesa County 

or Grand Junction that has over 70 percent in public lands, these 

are issues that are on everyone’s mind. 

With so many county commissioners and officials in the room, I 

would just ask you for your consideration of an effort that I am 

leading on moving the BLM Headquarters to the Western United 

States. This is an effort that I think is important. We have around 

9,000 BLM employees across the country, about 400 to 600, depending on how you count them, at the headquarters here in Washington. 

But unlike the Forest Service, where there are actually East 

Coast forests within the system, of the nearly 250 million acres in 

the BLM system, 99.9 percent of those acres are west of the Mississippi River. And so, take a look at my bill and perhaps we could 

get your support for the legislation as we try to make those decisions based out of Washington, a little bit less Washington and 

more representative of the communities and the counties that you 

represent. So thanks for that. 
137 

Obviously this is an important Western-based Committee, and I 

fully support reauthorization of SRS. I am co-sponsoring the legislation, Mr. Whitney, that Senator Hatch will be introducing tomorrow as it relates to the continuation of SRS. It is our job to make 

sure that we do that, to make sure that we fully fund PILT. 

I have also been working with Senator Wyden and the ski areas 

on fee retention. Mr. Casamassa, I would just ask you this question. I am working with Senator Wyden and the ski areas on fee 

retention and my intent is to ensure that SRS and PILT payments 

are not impacted by fee retention in any legislation we introduce, 

because that is an important consideration to make sure that we 

can get both done without hurting the other. 

I can only imagine what the uncertainty that the counties face 

each and every year would do to the Forest Service’s budget. It is 

uncertain, obviously, with fire borrowing and some of those other 

issues that we face, but I can only imagine if Congress had to fund 

its employees and staff based on a provision of law that was not 

going to be there, maybe it would be retroactively applied. 

So how do we get this beyond the current fact today and into a 

situation where we have a more permanent base of funding for 

these two programs? 

Mr. CASAMASSA. Well certainly, Senator, thank you for that question. 

You know, associated with the development of more of a four season mountain resort on National Forest System land, the ski areas 

have really expanded operations to the point where there is almost 

as many people, as you are well aware in the State of Colorado, 

that are visiting the national forests, particularly the ski areas in 

the summertime, as they do in the winter. 

Fee retention associated with those types of developments is 

something that I’m aware of and certainly we haven’t really looked 

at the specifics of what is being proposed, but it is something that 

would provide at least a basis for administration and being responsive to the investments that are now being placed on the national 

forest through those public/private ventures in ski areas. 

Senator GARDNER. Thank you. 

This past summer I had the opportunity to visit Blanca, Colorado 

down in Costilla County which is in the southern part of the state, 

and there was a new mill that was being built. It was a private 

mill built to deal with, mostly, timber coming from private lands. 

It was an interesting philosophy, though, that the manager of 

the mill said, that it was a mill that was there to sustain the forest 

and not the forest there to sustain the mill. I think that is something that we have to recognize that our activities to manage the 

forests, even if it involves something like a mill, are not there simply to destroy this incredible resource, but to make sure that that 

incredible resource is there for future generations to enjoy. That is 

what we know in Colorado is certainly the case. 

Mr. Casamassa, again, I spoke with the White River National 

Forest Supervisor and District Ranger, who deals with Colorado’s 

incredible gems, and brought up the issue of the area known as 

Hanging Lake. A beautiful hike on the east side of Glenwood Canyon leads to a waterfall, a lake. More and more people are enjoying 

it each and every year. Recently it was vandalized, though, which 
138 

was just an incredible shock to all of us and a shameful act, and 

there have been some other issues associated with the area. It has 

seen an 81 percent increase in visitors from across the country just 

over the last three years. 

I know the Forest Service is going to be introducing or releasing 

a new management plan to address some of the issues that the 

area has seen with that 81 percent increase, but how do we make 

sure that we are preserving some of these heavily used national 

treasures? Are there things that we can do, other mechanisms, 

other than shutting it down or cutting it off, that could help us 

manage those and make sure that we prevent the kinds of vandalism that we have seen over there and especially to hold them 

accountable if they do occur? 

Mr. CASAMASSA. Certainly Hanging Lake, it is a gem. It’s a—it 

was, at one point of time, a very limited known place. You’d get 

there by parking at a rest stop along the interstate. And now it’s 

really being used as a trailhead for that particular area. 

So, you know, there is a balance between how we can operate 

and maintain those facilities and then ensure that it is protected 

and being able to be used for a wider variety of folks. There is just 

a balance there to where you reach this capacity where the resource is not sustainable given the use that occurs. So, recognizing 

that that’s one of the challenges associated with more of an urbanization of some of the national forests within the system. 

Senator GARDNER. Thank you. 

Thanks, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Gardner. 

Senator Franken. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Yes, I am sorry, I was in the Judiciary Committee and I have 

the feeling I may go over some territory that has been covered. 

In Minnesota, we have two beautiful national forests, the Chippewa and the Superior. And we have a beautiful national park up 

in Northern Minnesota, Voyageurs National Park. They are beautiful and a great benefit to the entire state, but they do add additional costs to the northern counties in terms of coordinating emergency response and for search and rescue, increased road maintenance demand, and that is why the SRS and the PILT payments 

are so important to help defray the costs of providing critical county services. 

I know that has been a theme here, and I hear this from our 

county commissioners every year. I want to thank the county commissioners from various Western states for being here. 

I just want to know, and if you have been asked this before I got 

here, I apologize, but just how this uncertainty impacts your ability 

to plan and how it affects your operations? Is that something you 

have already answered and I should look at the record or would 

anyone like to add on to what has been said? Mr. Whitney? 

Mr. WHITNEY. Thank you for that question, Senator Franken. 

I can tell you now, I know that I speak on behalf of a whole lot 

of county commissioners throughout this country, there is nothing 

more frustrating than trying to create a budget without certainty 

in revenues. And each year we go into a budget doing that, not 
139 

knowing whether PILT and SRS is going to be funded. We would 

like to have some sort of certainty. 

So, as I said, and I don’t want to sound repetitious or repentant, 

please support Senator Hatch’s bill tomorrow to fully fund SRS 

until we can get back to some sort of— 

Senator FRANKEN. Certainly. 

So you would like some long-term solution to this? 

Mr. WHITNEY. We do. 

There are solutions here. And it’s not about SRS and PILT is not, 

I don’t know if it is the solution. The solution is active forest management and resource and mineral extraction on BLM lands. 

Senator FRANKEN. Okay. 

Mr. WHITNEY. That is the solution. We don’t like to be known as 

the welfare children of the West. 

Senator FRANKEN. To what extent does the Forest Service’s cost 

of fighting wildfires which are obviously more intense and bigger 

than they have been and the fire season is longer. To what extent 

does the money that is needed for that affect the ability to manage 

the forests? 

Yes, Mr. Cruickshank? 

Mr. CRUICKSHANK. Senator Franken, thank you for that question. 

Quite often when we see fire borrowing happening, a project has 

been started and it’s about to be implemented, but then the fire 

borrowing takes the money away. And if that project doesn’t start 

within a certain amount of time, then it basically changes it. It has 

to go back to page one and start over again. So a lot of times those 

projects are shelved. They might be there for four or five years and 

maybe they never get implemented and we’ve already spent money 

to get them started but because of the regulations, we have to go 

back. 

And on your prior question, about funding. ‘‘How do you fund?’’ 

I mean, you look at school teachers. They have no certainty they’re 

going to have a job. So, they’re going to go to the urban areas 

where they know they’re going to have a job. And so, we lose good 

teachers in our rural communities because there’s no certainty that 

they can be there. 

Senator FRANKEN. And we need them. We need them. 

Mr. CRUICKSHANK. Same way with buying equipment for a county. You know, do we go buy a new piece of equipment or do we 

spend $50,000 and fix the old one because you don’t know if you’re 

going to get the money so, you can’t spend $250,000 that you don’t 

have. 

Senator FRANKEN. I believe part of the solution to this may be 

our approach, the approach to fix fire borrowing, because as Mr. 

Whitney said ‘‘if we can manage our forests well . . . ’’ I know 

that in Minnesota we have had ceilings on how much we can harvest because there is so much fire borrowing. 

Thank you. Thank you, all. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Franken. I think one of the 

great takeaways thus far from the hearing this morning has been 

that so much of this is all intertwined, whether it is the fire borrowing, whether it is forest management and then how we deal 

with these economies. 
140 

Senator FRANKEN. It is so unusual hearing in the Senate that 

things are intertwined. 

The CHAIRMAN. It is time to get something done here. That is all. 

Senator FRANKEN. Yes. 

The CHAIRMAN. Let’s go to Senator Hoeven. 

Senator HOEVEN. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

I am going to actually start on the far end with Mr. Whitney and 

then work back, all the way back. I want your top several recommendations for how we can improve and strengthen the PILT 

and SRS programs. Then I am going to ask Mr. Casamassa and 

Ms. Barton Ferriter to respond. 

I am guessing that Mr. Whitney you are going to start out with 

long-term certainty in terms of your top recommendations, but I 

would like your top, maybe, two, three, recommendations from each 

of you and then get responses from people that actually are out 

working with the PILT program, administering it. 

Mr. WHITNEY. Thank you for that question. 

And I missed the gist of what you said, the— 

Senator HOEVEN. Improve. How do we improve and strengthen 

the PILT program so that it works better for you? 

Mr. WHITNEY. The PILT, did you say the PILT? 

Senator HOEVEN. Yes, Payment in Lieu of Taxes. 

Mr. WHITNEY. Right, okay. 

As I said, the way to improve PILT is to fully fund SRS. PILT, 

we could certainly use more money; however, we understand what 

the restraints on the budget, pitfalls you all have back here, that 

you know, that it’s got to be a balancing act of some sort. 

So, would we take more? Absolutely, we would love more. But 

we’d just like to get what is rightfully ours that’s mandated. 

Senator HOEVEN. So your main recommendation would be longterm funding of SRS? 

Mr. WHITNEY. Absolutely. 

Senator HOEVEN. Okay. 

Mr. Haggerty? 

Mr. HAGGERTY. I agree that long-term funding is required but 

one of the problems we have in DC is the inability to get appropriations passed in a timely manner, waiting for long periods of time. 

So, one of the— 

Senator HOEVEN. I am on the Appropriations Committee, so I am 

well aware of that as well. 

Mr. HAGGERTY. Yes. 

One of the ideas that we have been offering as a solution is to 

create a permanent funding source that isn’t reliant just on annual 

receipts which can be volatile and uncertain over time due to markets and politics, frankly. 

But to invest those receipts in a fund that would grow over time, 

very much like a legacy fund that was established in North Dakota 

for oil revenue in the last several years. And as that trust builds 

it would make a distribution back to the Treasury to pay for the 

long-term authorizations of SRS and eventually, if it’s successful 

enough, maybe PILT too. 

Senator HOEVEN. I appreciate you bringing up the legacy funds, 

since it was established when I was Governor. So thanks for bringing up that example. 
141 

Mr. HAGGERTY. Great. 

Senator HOEVEN. It is a great one. 

Mr. HAGGERTY. Thank you for your good work. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator HOEVEN. I appreciate it. 

Mr. Manus? 

Mr. MANUS. Thank you for that question. 

Long-term funding is necessary for PILT. It seems like every 

year, every two years, we’re struggling with our budgets to figure 

out are we going to get PILT funding? If we don’t get PILT, how 

are we going to manage? Who are we going to lay off? 

SRS funding is tied to management, and I think all the timber 

counties would love to see a more aggressive management, not only 

to prevent forest fires and make a healthier forest, but it provides 

jobs in our community. 

We’re down to one sawmill in our community, and that sawmill 

runs one shift currently, would love to be running two shifts. Quite 

frankly, it doesn’t pay for them to operate with just one shift. And 

as a business owner, I understand that. 

We need to get more harvest, we need to get better management, 

we need a healthier forest, and we need the jobs. With that, SRS 

funding would not need to be funded by the Federal Government 

in our county because we’d get the 25 percent. 

Senator HOEVEN. Mr. Landis? Oops, you guys aren’t in the same 

order as my sheet is. I’m sorry. 

Mr. Cruickshank? 

Mr. CRUICKSHANK. Thank you, Senator Hoeven, for the question. 

The PILT, actually the PILT formula, starts with a small population of 5,000, and we have a lot of rural counties out here that 

have smaller population than 5,000. So, a few years ago, we talked 

about trying to find a little higher percentage that would go to 

smaller populations with large land mass. It would cost about $11 

to $12 million in the PILT formula. That would really help these 

small, rural counties. 

But when you also look at the formula, we have some larger 

urban areas of their land mass, they’re getting, like, $2.50 an acre. 

And you heard Mr. Whitney say he was getting around 70 cents 

an acre. In my county we get about 30 cents an acre. 

So sometimes you have to look at how the formula is and I’m 

scared to because then everybody puts their hand in the cookie jar. 

So I’m going to be really cautious when I say that. 

As far as SRS, the economic stability of when we had sawmills 

and that steady paycheck was coming in, is correct. But it also provided that education for our schoolchildren and took care of our 

roads. 

Litigation hampers us so the Equal Act for Justice Act allows 

some people to sue and get their funding back where counties are, 

kind of, left out, they can’t get that. So, and go back to the compact 

that was given to the states that have large public lands through 

counties that with natural resources, we would be better off with 

than counties that don’t have that. 

I appreciate the question and thank you for considering other options. 

Senator HOEVEN. Mr. Landis? 
142 

Mr. LANDIS. Thank you, Senator, for the question. 

In Alaska, well in our part of Alaska, all of the land, nearly all 

of the land, is owned by the Forest Service. So, we don’t have grazing. We don’t have mining. We have forest. 

That active forest management is important, allowing the states 

to increase forest revenues through creative means. We’ve heard 

some this morning about the state forests or forest trusts, things 

that might be innovative, I think, are important for us to look at. 

And failing that, the second idea, of course, is long-term funding 

streams, multi-year appropriations. We’ve heard about endowments 

as well. Those types of things, again, creative solutions for the 

problem, I think, are important. 

Thank you. 

Senator HOEVEN. Okay. 

I would ask Mr. Casamassa and Ms. Barton Ferriter, just to respond in terms of some of those ideas. What is your reaction to 

their recommendations? 

Mr. CASAMASSA. Well certainly, Senator, I appreciate the question. You know, one of the things that we would say is if Secure 

Rural Schools was reauthorized that we would really take a look 

at those ways to streamline, perhaps the Resource Advisory Committee, the development of quorums and the ability for recommendations to be made as it relates to the Title II funding. 

In addition to that, I’d say a part of what we continue to work 

through and take advantage of are some other authorities that we 

have like good neighbor authority, some of the Farm bill, insect 

and disease designations and the streamlining that we do as it relates to our analysis. 

But continuing to work with the states, I think, is an important 

aspect that goes beyond just Secure Rural Schools. 

Senator HOEVEN. Ms. Barton Ferriter? 

Ms. FERRITER. I would agree with my colleague here. We recognize the importance of these programs to rural America. We will 

implement what the Congress authorizes and appropriates. 

I will point out that we do operate PILT on an annual basis, and 

so having a little more certainty about whether we’re talking about 

discretionary or mandatory or some kind of combination of that 

would be helpful. It helps us in providing more clarity for the counties on what’s coming. 

Senator HOEVEN. Right. Okay, thank you. 

I think that gives us something to work on. 

Thanks to all of you. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Hoeven. I think that is a 

good way to wrap things up as we consider a path forward. 

I think one take away this morning is that members of this Committee are clearly engaged. They clearly understand the urgency 

that is in front of us to deal with Secure Rural Schools payments 

to provide for that level of certainty, at least in the short-term 

here. 

We will look forward to the measure being released out of the Finance Committee tomorrow under Senator Wyden’s leadership, 

along with Senator Hatch. I think that is important. 
143 

But recognizing that we need to be looking to a longer-term solution and to hear Senator Wyden’s history with his introduction initially of the program back in the 90’s, but to know that so many 

of us that have been here now for over a decade and feel like it 

is just, kind of, Groundhog Day every year with SRS. 

These small communities, rural communities that don’t have a 

lot of extra money in their budget, scrape up money and cash in 

air miles to send people thousands of miles away to Washington, 

DC to go door-to-door, kind of, hat-in-hand reminding us of the impact to these communities whether it is your sports programs, 

whether it is your art programs, whether it is what you need to do 

with your roads. This is very real in terms of the impact to our 

small and rural communities. 

The stress that you all go through as mayors, as commissioners, 

on an annual basis because we cannot figure out a longer-term and 

more sustainable and more certain approach, is just not right. 

Know that I think we have a collective desire to work with you. 

I think we have heard some good ideas. I think it is important that 

we be thinking outside the box because just looking at this and 

saying well, we will reauthorize, we will try to go a little bit longer 

than 18 months or maybe two years. No, we cannot be thinking 

that way. And so, help us with your ideas. 

For those within the agencies, we need your help on this too. 

This is not just kicking it to well, we did not get the appropriation 

bills through and so, you put it at the feet of Congress. 

Justifiably, we need to get our act together as well, but you have 

certain ideas in terms of how we can create some greater efficiencies, perhaps looking at new aspects of the program. This is 

something that rural America deserves to see resolved and resolved 

in a positive way for our communities. So I look forward to continuing this conversation with all of you. 

And to those of you who have traveled so far to be here, thank 

you for the time that you have given us. 

We will keep working together. 

Thanks and we stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m. the hearing was adjourned.] 
(144) 

APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED 
145 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 2, 2017 Hearing: Federal Payments to Local Governments Provided through 

the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act and the Payment 

in Lieu of Taxes Program and the Need to Provide Greater Fiscal Certainty for 

Resource-Dependent Communities with Tax-Exempt Federal Lands 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Ms. Olivia Barton Ferriter 

Questions from Senator Joe Man chin III 

Ouestions: Ms. Ferriter, President Trump's budget called for discretionary funding for the 

Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PIL T) program at a reduced level, but in line with average funding 

for PIL T over the past decade. The FY 2017 omnibus authorizes $465,000,000 for the PILT 

program for FY2017. West Virginia is also a largely rural state and the expiration of these 

programs will have a greater impact on us than it will more populated states. To be more 

specific, West Virginia has I million acres of SRS eligible land and 1.2 million acres ofPIL T 

eligible land. In your written testimony you stress the importance of programs such as PILT to 

these counties, and you write that the Trump Administration is "interested in ensuring that the 

Federal government can fulfill its role of being a good neighbor to local communities." 

a. What policy recommendations do you have for the committee to ensure this program 

continues? 

The President's 2018 America First Budget Blueprint does not have specific policy 

recommendations for the PIL T program but does call for funding this important program as 

part of the discretionary budget request for FY 2018, instead of requesting mandatory 

funding. This reflects the Administration's commitment to America's communities in a 

constrained budget. 

b. What sort of reforms do you recommend considering? 

The Payments in Lieu of Taxes Act, 31 U.S.C. 6901-6907, as amended, authorized the PILT 

program and prescribes the formula used to calculate payments. The President's 2018 

America First Budget Blueprint does not propose speciftc reforms for the PIL T program and 

instead proposes to continue funding for the current program within budget constraints. 
146 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 2, 2017 Hearing: Federal Payments to Local Governments Provided through 

the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act and the Payment 

in Lieu of Taxes Program and the Need to Provide Greater Fiscal Certainty for 

Resource-Dependent Communities with Tax-Exempt Federal Lands 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Glenn Casamassa 

Questions from Chairman Lisa Murkowski 

Question 1: During the hearing, we discussed the record of accomplishment by states with 

respect to timber production and revenue generation from that harvest and contrasted it 

with the accomplishments of the Forest Service. In some cases, states are producing as 

much as 500% more actual revenue on less than one quarter of the land base that is held 

by the Forest Service. One of the reasons more revenue is generated from state sales is that 

the costs to prepare and implement a state sale is a lot cheaper, as much as 75 percent less 

than a Forest Service sale. You testified that the Forest Service is "taking a look at its 

approach" to bring down the cost of these sales. Please list the specific actions the Forest 

Service is currently undertaking to narrow the delta in costs between federal and state 

timber sale costs. 

Response: The U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service) has identified several actions to reduce the 

cost of planning and implementing timber sales on National Forest System lands. 

The single largest cost to the Agency is planning, including compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Endangered Species Act consultation, and similar legal 

requirements. The Forest Service is using the Insect and Disease provisions (Section 8204) of the 

Agricultural Act of2014 (Farm Bill), where appropriate, to streamline the planning process and 

reduce costs. That authority allows governors in states experiencing an insect or disease 

epidemic to request insect and disease designations on National Forest System lands in that state. 

These designations enable the agency to use streamlined NEPA procedures to conduct insect and 

disease treatment on those lands. Nationally, the agency has been issuing decisions on projects in 

areas designated under the Insect and Disease provision more quickly, or for larger acreages, 

than other projects. For example, in fiscal year 2016, it took an average of 738 days to reach a 

decision on projects in non-designated areas where environmental assessments (EA) were 

prepared, compared to 414 days for projects in designated areas. Based on these kinds of 

successes, the Forest Service has encouraged the use of this Farm Bill authority, and has 

established strike teams in certain regions to continue the development of these projects. 

Another cost factor that the Forest Service considers when implementing a federal timber sale is 

how best to achieve the agency's multiple-use mandate. In many cases, Forest Service sales are 

implemented to meet objectives beyond revenue generation (e.g., fuels reduction, wildlife habitat 

restoration, watershed protection) with a focus on the post timber harvest stand conditions, rather 

than the value of the timber removed. As such, these types of timber sales may not generate 

maximum revenue. However, the Forest Service works with its local partners in the timber 

industry regularly, as well as during semi-annual national meetings, to understand current market 

conditions and offer sales that are feasible and profitable for timber purchasers. 
147 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natuml Resources 

May 2, 2017 Hearing: Federal Payments to Local Governments Provided through 

the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act and the Payment 

in Lieu of Taxes Program and the Need to Provide Greater Fiscal Certainty for 

Resource-Dependent Communities with Tax-Exempt Federal Lands 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Glenn Casamassa 

The Good Neighbor Authority (GNA) provides the Forest Service the opportunity to work with 

states to expand the agency's capacity and augment the existing federal timber program by 

allowing states to perform forest, rangeland, and watershed restoration services on federal lands. 

States such as Idaho, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, and Colorado are working under GNA 

agreements to implement timber or fuels management activities on National Forest System lands. 

The Alaska Region of the Forest Service has established a Master Agreement with the Alaska 

Division of Forestry, and one supplemental project agreement was signed in May 2017, and 

another is being developed to implement timber sales on the Tongass National Forest. Many of 

these projects are implemented using state sale preparation, advertisement, award and 

administration procedures, rather than those required by Federal laws and regulations and the 

Forest Service's policies, as appropriate. The Forest Service is evaluating the success of these 

efforts at achieving our objectives, including the potential to streamline agency policy based on 

the outcomes. Perhaps most importantly, this state support provides another tool to augment and 

potentially add to the federal timber being sold. 

The Forest Service uses technology as another tool to reduce the cost of preparing a timber sale. 

Over the last 3 years, we have increased the use of technology in timber sale preparation with 

more improvements planned. Use of handheld data recorders, which decreases the cost of 

estimating volume, has increased by 40 percent. Trial use of unmanned aerial systems to assess 

forest health is being evaluated, and many more uses are planned, including use in sale 

administration. Digital boundaries are being used where blown down timber makes it dangerous 

to send crews into the affected area. These are boundaries designated by GPS that can be easily 

followed by a timber harvester. Finally, four National Forests in the Southwest United States are 

piloting the use of digital prescription guides. The guides are used where a sale is planned using 

computer tablets, and timber is harvested by following the GPS locations of these different 

units-no paint is used. This allows us to better implement restoration prescriptions and keep it 

simple and efficient for those harvesting timber. 

It is essential to maintain and improve the skills of the Forest Service workforce involved in 

timber management. With recent retirements from the agency's timber management staff, we 

have many new hires that need training to promote continuity and ensure that that new 

employees are familiar with new technology and techniques, and understand the laws, 

regulations, policies and procedures governing the timber program. The Forest Service currently 

has around 25 traditional instructor-led courses that either the agency conducts with their own 

personnel or contracts vendors to teach. In addition, there are around 25 live webinars and over 

50 recorded webinars, videos, and on-line instruction materials available on topics like sale 

preparation, sale and contract administration, timber marking, timber cruising, and silviculture. 

Offering these training opportunities ensures that the Forest Service employees have the skill sets 

necessary to effectively and efficiently carry out timber management tasks. 

2 
148 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 2, 2017 Hearing: Federal Payments to Local Governments Provided through 

the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act and the Payment 

in Lieu of Taxes Program and the Need to Provide Greater Fiscal Certainty for 

Resource-Dependent Communities with Tax-Exempt Federal Lands 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Glenn Casamassa 

Question 2: Please provide a table of projects that have been funded under Title II since 

the enactment of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act. Please 

specify in the table the costs and objectives of each project. 

Response: Table A displays information about projects that have been funded under Title Il of 

the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act of 2000 (the Secure Rural 

Schools Act). The general purposes for which Title ll funds were specified in sections 202(b ), 

203(c), and 204(a)(5) of the Secure Rural Schools Act. Those purposes included the maintenance 

of existing infrastructure, the implementation of stewardship objectives that enhance forest 

ecosystems, and the restoration and improvement of land health and water quality. All Title II 

projects, whether on Federal land or on non-Federal land, were required to benefit resources on 

Federal land. 

Development of projects under Title II was intended to engage local communities in the 

management of national forest lands. Any member of the public was allowed to submit Title II 

project proposals to a Resource Advisory Committee (RACs). RACs would then recommend 

proposals to the Forest Service. While RACs recommended projects, the decision to implement a 

Title II project and to obligate Title li funding was made by the Forest Service. 

Table A displays Title ll funding as well as the partner matching contribution to these projects. 

Significant partner matching resources allowed the Forest Service to leverage Title II funding to 

implement larger projects. In addition to active forest management, Title Il funding was used for 

projects that contributed to sustainable land management included road maintenance, trail 

maintenance, invasive weed control, restoration of wildlife habitat, streams and watersheds, as 

well as opportunities to promote youth engagement in our national forests and grasslands. 

Question from Senator Ron Wyden 

Question: Secure Rural Schools is not only about county payments but it is also about 

active forest management through Title II. The history of Title II is to help communities 

find common ground and carry out important forest management projects. Title II funds 

have gone to projects that reduce hazardous fuels and improve young tree stand density. 

Could you provide me with a list of the projects done under Title II that address the issue 

of active forest management? 

Response: Active forest management is an important component for achieving the multiple use 

mandate that Congress has assigned to the Forest Service and for which Title ll funds were 

appropriated. 

3 
149 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natuml Resources 

May 2, 2017 Hearing: Federal Payments to Local Governments Provided through 

the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act and the Payment 

in Lieu of Taxes Program and the Need to Provide Greater Fiscal Certainty for 

Resource-Dependent Communities with Tax-Exempt Federal Lands 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Glenn Casamassa 

While Table A displays projects that have been funded through Title Il of the Secure Rural 

Schools Act, Table B attempts to identify the subset of those projects whose primary objective 

was active forest management, and included activities such as forest thinning, hazardous fuels 

reduction, and other forest insect and disease treatments. Though Table B is limited to 

displaying active forest management projects, the Title II projects listed in Table A have 

indirectly contributed to sustainable forest management by helping to maintain infrastructure, 

restore wildlife habitat, and engage local communities in the management of national forest 

lands. 

Question from Senator Debbie Stabenow 

Ouestion: In your testimony, you mention an interest in exploring potential changes to the 

Secure Rural Schools Act that would help address the lengthy process for filling posts on 

the Resource Advisory Committees (RACs). I have heard that it can take up to two years 

for seats on the RACs to be filled. 

I think we all share an interest in making sure that rural communities have a voice in 

important federal decisions. Do you have any suggestions on how Congress might address 

the lengthy process for filling RACs while ensuring diversity of views and ideas on these 

Committees? 

Response: 1f and when the Secure Rural Schools Act is reauthorized, we would welcome 

conversations with the Committee to explore potential changes to the administrative provisions 

for implementing the SRS Act, including the RAC member nomination process. 

4 
150 
TABLE A - Page 1 

forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service IAppli !Proj

Year I Region Project Title Ar"10""''1t Name Match Match I Fun

DRY COTIONWOOD CREEK 

2017 01 FISH PASSAGE CLARK FORK COALITION 56688 36500 

BITIERROOT BIO CONTROL RAVALI COUNTY WEED 

2017 01 COOPERATIVE DISTRICT 18000 21930 

WHITEFISH LEGACY 

2017 01 WHITEFISH TRAILS PARTNERS 11333 0 

SBRD RAC MONTANA 

TRAILS/WATERSHED CONSERVATION CORPS2017 01 PROJECTS 2017 RAC 75300 50195.5 1

RAC- KSANKA CREEK 

2017 01 RESTORATION PLANNING LINCOLN COUNTY 25000 0 

AREA IMPROVEMENT 

2017 01 PROJECT AVISTA UTILITIES 20960 23300 

YOUTH IN RESTORATION MISSOULA COUNTY-WEED 

2017 01 PROGRAM-RAC DISTRICT-VIR 9855 14125 

SEASONAL WILDLIFE 

CLOSURES FOR THE HABITAT 

PROTECTION ON THE SOUTH COALITION FOR THE 

2017 02 PARK RANGER DISTRICT UPPER SOUTH PLATIE 24111.57 7225 3
TABLE A - Page 2 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service IAppli Proj

Year Region Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC-FLATIOP TRAILHEAD 

2017 03 PARKING LOT TOWN OF EAGAR 73022.39 36126.7 10

RAC-WOODLAND LAKE PARK 

ACCESS ROAD MAINTENANCE TOWN OF PINETOP2017 03 PHASE Ill LAKESIDE 75809.6 22790.42 9

2017 03 HALL CREEK THINNING APACHE COUNTY 40000 10000 

RAC-COUNTY ROAD 1325 

LIMESTONE AND MGCL 

APPLICATION/ APACHE 

2017 03 COUNTY APACHE COUNTY 50780.64 21000 7

AMERICAN 

RED ROCK TRAIL CONSERVATION 

2017 03 RESTORATION 2017 EXPERIENCE 140875.84 96209.04 23

SRS-BEAR AND SABINO 

CANYONS INVASIVE GRASSES 

2017 03 REMOVAL SKY ISLAND ALLIANCE 47175 24621.97 7

WATER DEVELOPMENT 

2017 03 SURVEYS & MAINTENANCE MULE DEER FOUNDATION 46297.18 12407.5 5

ERADICATING SALT CEDAR UPPER GILA WATERSHED 

2017 03 ON THE GILA RIVER ALLIANCE 19997.36 5085.2 22017 03 FY 2017 YCC PROGRAM COUNTY OF YAVAPAI 107742.92 20631.42 12
TABLE A - Page 3 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl Proj

Year Region Project Title ... Name Match Match Fund

VERDE WATERSHED 

RESTORATION COALITION 

(VWRC) HABITAT 

IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FRIENDS OF VERDE RIVER 

2017 03 PHASE Ill GREENWAY 38095 0 

WILDERNESS AND TRAILS AMERICAN 

RANGER INTERNSHIP CONSERVATION 

2017 03 PROGRAM EXPERIENCE 95308.32 65228.8 160

DEVELOPED RECREATION AMERICAN 

SITE DEFERRED TRAIL CONSERVATION 

2017 03 MAINTENANCE EXPERIENCE 72726.04 70418.18 143

RAC BNF16009 EAST 

FORK/JOHNSON CR ROAD 

RESURFACING & ICE HOLE 

2017 04 ROAD CAMPGROUND VALLEY COUNTY 64802 83000 

2017 04 NEW HARMONY CXT-TITLE 2 NEW HARMONY CITY 17000 12000 

WATER QUALITY SENSOR WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY 

2017 04 NETWORK FOR FISHLAKE NF DR. SUKETU NAIK 11233 4000 

2017 04 720 FENCE RANCH CODY OYLER 10000 12000 
TABLE A -Page 4 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

CORN CREEK/PAHVANT 

ROAD MAGNESIUM MILLARD COUNTY ROAD 

2017 04 CHLORIDE APPLICATION 2017 DEPARTMENT 19810 750 

ACE 2017-18 SUPPLEMENTAL ACE CONSERVATION 

2017 04 PROJECT AGREEMENT EXPERIENCE 146380 123284.12 26

STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2017 04 SCA INTERNS- KRASSEL ASSOCIATION 73879.52 30347.73 10

SAGE GROUSE RANGE 

2017 04 IMPLEMENTATION LEMHI COUNTY 11872.19 9220 2

UTAH CO- UPPER FALLS 

BRIDGE AND CONNECTER 

2017 04 TRAIL UTAH COUNTY 157167.15 83072 24

WASATCH COUNTY -

NOXIOUS AND INVASIVE 

2017 04 WEED COORDINATION WASATCH COUNTY 40980.74 10391.04 5

JUAB CO - POLE CANYON 

DISPERSED CAMPING 

2017 04 MAINTENANCE JUAB COUNTY 36837.41 25310 6

0503 TRAIL WORK- STUDENT STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2017 OS CONSERVATION ASSOC AS SOC 116079.7 73779.83 18
TABLE A -Page 5 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT 

OF FORESTRY AND FIRE 

PROTECTION- VALLEY 

VIEW CONSERVATION 

2017 05 RAC- PLASKETI MEADOWS CAMP 1371.24 2967.6 

DN RAC FIRE SAFE COUNCIL DEL NORTE FIRE SAFE 

2017 05 WATER TANKS (FY17)* COUNCIL 20000 17349 

NW CA RESOURCE 

WEAVER BALLY ROAD CONSERVATION & 

2017 05 SEDIMENT REDUCTION DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL 79SOO 0 

CHILDREN'S FOREST CAREER CHILDREN'S FOREST OF 

2017 06 PATHWAYS CENTRAL OREGON 17473.14 14338.56 

13-KENO WEED KLAMATH WATERSHED 

2017 06 ERADICATION PARTNERSHIP 1SOOO 0 

US FISH & WILDLIFE 

SOUTH FORK SPRAGUE RIVER SERVICE KLAMATH FALLS 

2017 06 FISH SCREEN OFFICE 5S26S 196200 

NORTH WARNER FOREST LAKE COUNTY UMBRELLA 

2017 06 HEALTH PROJECT WATERSHED COUNCIL 183656.96 420000 60

NORTH GATEWAY VISITOR WHITE PASS SCENIC 

2017 06 ENHANCEMENT BYWAY 39127.04 17448.48 S
TABLE A- Page 6 

forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 

1

Proj

Year !Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match I Fun

NORTH FORK MALHEUR RIVER RANGE IMPROVEMENT 

PROJECT (TITLE II- GRANT SOIL AND WATER 

2017 06 S2W6M414) CONSERVATION DISTRICT 48468.55 22781.3 7

TRAINING AND 

EMPLOYMENT 

2017 06 YOUTH CREW- OYCC CREW CONSORTIUM (TEC) 170591.5 43556.7 2

HOOD RIVER GARLIC 

2017 06 MUSTARD ABATEMENT HOOD RIVER SWCD 13050 7900 

2017 06 NYC YOUTH EMPLOYMENT NYC 26994 0 

ROCK CREEK SPILLWAY ROCK CREEK DISTRICT 

2017 06 UPGRADE IMPROVEMENT COMPANY 62610 9414 

LINCOLN COUNTY NORTH 

CREEK AQUATIC 

RESTORATION CCS MIDCOAST WATERSHEDS 

2017 06 AGREEMENT COUNCIL 50000 441250 

NESTUCCA, NESKOWIN 

JEWELL CREEK CULVERT AND SAND LAKE 

2017 06 REPLACEMENTS 16-TI-003 WATERSHEDS COUNCI 23678 127722 

SRS2 FY15 S2W6A115 CRAZY MIDCOAST WATERSHED 

2017 06 CREEK 16-LA-001 COUNCIL 50000 274798.6 3
TABLE A - Page 7 

Forest Forest Tota

IAghi::t::lll"'"' Service Service Appl Proj

Year Region Project Title A ·"- .. Name Match Match Fund

SRS2 S2W6D115 DOUGLAS 

COUNTY LOWER WASSON SMITH RIVER WATERSHED 

2017 06 CREEK RESTORATION COUNCIL 9141 19418.95 28

CHILCOOT FIRE DETECTION DOUGLAS FOREST 

2017 06 CAMERA PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION 38500 3127.2 4

UMPQUA NATIONAL FOREST NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2017 06 TRAIL MAINTENANCE CORPS 18982.96 16989.89 35

COLD CANAL VEG MGMT 

2017 06 PROJECT WALLOWA RESOURCES 28324 7100 

MUDDY SLED FUELS 

2017 06 REDUCTION WALLOWA RESOURCES 22896 5900 

COLLABORATIVE FIRE GRANDE RONDE FIRE 

PREVENTION & EDUATION PREVENTION 

2017 06 PROGRAM ASSOCIATION 10000 0 

LO JO CREEK PROJECT 

2017 06 IMPLEMENTATION WALLOWA RESOURCES 50691.12 40546 91

COORD WEED CONTROL 

JOSEPH CRK & IMNAHA WALLOWA RESOURCES, 

2017 06 CANYONLANDS INC. 58381.12 20742 79
TABLE A - Page 8 

forest forest Tota

" Service Service Appl! 

1

M!)l <:":1110::1 .. Proj

Year I Region Project Title Ar"'H''""lt Name Match Match I fund

PROTECTING FEDERAL LANDS 

BY BUILDING EFFECTIVE 

2017 06 WEED CONTROL PROGRAMS CASCADE PACIFIC RC &D 9818 0 

01-NYC MCKENZIE RIVER NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2017 06 YOUTH TRAIL-PAYCO CORPS 37689.4 24351.36 6

SWEET HOME YOUTH CORPS NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2017 06 COMMUNITY CREW CORPS 26750 11656 

COLUMBIA RIVER GORGE 

NATIONAL SCENIC AREA 

-

CAPE HORN WEED CONTROL CAPE HORN 

2017 06 PROJECT CONSERVANCY 5755.58 5508 1

17 -R0-11080900-004 

MONTGOMERY COUNTY 

ROAD AGREEMENT MG10, MONTGOMERY COUNTY 

2017 08 MG20 & MG40 JUDGE SAMMY JONES 188500 0 

SNOWSHOE HARE HABITAT LEECH LAKE BAND OF 

2017 09 RESTORATION OJIBWE 24500 30406.32 5

HUNTER WALKING TRAIL 

2017 09 MAINTENANCE PARTNERSHIP RUFFED GROUSE SOCIETY 13200 9000 2017 09 NNIS TREATMENT PROJECT BELTRAMI COUNTY 35000 22940 
TABLE A -Page 9 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

GNA HUZZAH PONDS 

PARKING IMPROVEMENTS 

2017 09 (DENT CO) DENT COUNTY, MISSOURI 9208.74 972.56 

GNA DENT COUNTY ROAD 

2017 09 MAINTENANCE (SRS) DENT COUNTY, MISSOURI 17998 5500 

BOSE MILL LOW WATER 

2017 09 CROSSING (RAC PROJECT) OREGON COUNTY 20131 13531.28 3

S20905/S2W9G014-

GOGEBIC CONS DIST RAC GOGEBIC CONSERVATION 

2017 09 NNIP DISTRICT 27200 0 

S2W9GM14- CCROA AIS RAC CISCO CHAIN RIPARIAN 

2017 09 GRANT OWNERS ASSOCIATION 12142.25 24842.4 3

SUPERIOR VOLUNTEER NORTHWOODS 

2017 09 STEWARDSHIP PROJECT VOLUNTEER CONNECTION 4952.11 6594.21 1

LOWER LOOP ROUTE 

2017 09 RESURFACING RED ARROW ATV CLUB 5206.75 2955 

BOG BROOK AGREEMENT2017 09 RAC PROJECT 40 FOREST COUNTY 15360 4709.3 

RAC47 HWY70 MOWING FLORENCE COUNTY 

2017 09 AGREEMENT HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 57436.02 14469 7

A FIREFLY ITINERARY FOR 

THE ALLEGHENY NATIONAL PA FIREFLY FESTIVAL 

2017 09 FOREST INCORPORATED 8952 0 
TABLE A- Page 10 

Forest Forest Tota

IAgreemel Service Service Appl Proj

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fund

2017 10 SCA RAC KMRD INVASIVES SCA 18524.3 3663.32 22

WATERSHED RESTORATION 

OPPORTUNITIES IN THE MONTANA FISH, WILDLIFE 

2016 01 SELWAY MEADOWS AREA AND PARKS 71347 6492.89 77

NARROWS CREEK DAM DESIGN AND 

2016 01 RECONSTRUCTION MONTANA FWP 10521.2 8080 

UPPER RUBY NOXIOUS WEED 

COOPERATIVE RUBY VALLEY 

2016 01 CONTINUATION CONSERVATION DISTRICT 69441.4 25440 9

MIDDLE BEAR CREEK ROAD 

2016 01 CULVERT REPLACEMENT RAVALLI COUNTY 20000 0 

LIGHTNING CREEK WINTER NATIONAL FOREST 

2016 01 WARMING HUT FOUNDATION 26980 14000 

WEEDS LAPTOP BOUNDARY 

2016 01 COUNTY BOUNDARY CO 750 0 

MULLAN PASS TRAILHEAD 

2016 01 PARKING SHOSHONE CO 21500 0 

N KELLOGG FOREST HEALTH 

AND FUELS REDUCTION SHOSHONE CO FIRE 

2016 01 PROJECT MITIGATION 50000 0 
TABLE A - Page 11 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title '1.\pplicant Name Match Match fun

RAC PROPOSALS FOR TOLIET 

INSTALLATION AND 

MAINTENANCE AND REFUSE 

2016 01 COLLECTION SHOSHONE COUNTY 13475 18733 

IDAHO DEPT. OF 

2016 01 IDOCTRAIL CREW CORRECTIONS 93391 51486.3 1

PARKER RIDGE SCA TRAIL 

TRECONSTRUCTION STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2016 01 TRAINING ASSOCIATION 6599.76 0 

MOON PASS TUNNEL SEAL 

2016 01 COATS SHOSHONE COUNTY 16000 0 

SHOSHONE CO PUBLIC 

2016 01 PLACER CREEK BRIDGE WORKS 40000 0 

BOB MARSHALL WILDERNESS 

FOUNDATION TRAILS AND 

2016 01 WEEDS PROJECT SUPPORT BMWF 133987 37440 

JENNY/YOUNGS POST FIRE MONTANA 

2016 01 ANDYOUTHENGAGEMENT CONSERVATION CORPS 220848 154526 

2016 01 SPOTTED BEAR SCA INTERNS SCA-INTERNS 65239.73 32335.38 9

POWDER RIVER WEED 

2016 01 MANAGEMENT POWDER RIVER COUNTY 92752 900 
TABLE A- Page 12 

forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

ABSAROKA-BEARTOOTH ABSAROKA-BEARTOOTH 

WILDERNESS AREA WILDERNESS 

2016 01 COLLABORATION FOUNDATION 105890.62 94662.76 20

RAC: WEED MONITORING, STILLWATER VALLEY 

2016 01 MAPPING & CONTROL WATERSHED COUNCIL 32410 0 

RAC: NOXIOUS WEED SWEET GRASS COUNTY 

2016 01 TREATMENT WEED DEPARTMENT 30000 0 

RAC: BIG CREEK ROAD 

2016 01 IMPROVEMENT PARK COUNTY 47735 24000 

WILLOW CREEK N.FORK 

2016 01 ROAD STABILIZATION PARK COUNTY 13093 3258 

RAC: BOZEMAN'S WEEDY MONTANA 

2016 01 TRAILS CONSERVATION CORPS 17365.4 4939 

RAC: MIDDLE 

COTTONWOOD CREEK TRAIL MONTANA 

2016 01 REALIGN CONSERVATION CORPS 15260.9 9541 

RAC: BIG CREEK TRAIL/WEED MONTANA 

2016 01 MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION CORPS 18000 0 

RAC: PORCUPINE CABIN MONTANA 

2016 01 REMODEL CONSERVATION CORPS 13399.11 7958 2

PILGRIM CREEK ROAD 

BLADING AND RESHAPING- SANDERS COUNTY2016 01 RAC PILGRIM CREEK 8400 15500 
TABLE A- Page 13 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

STEVENS RIDGE TRAIL ROAD 

BLADING AND RESHAPING- SANDERS COUNTY2016 01 RAC STEVENS RIDGE 6650 26500 

MONTANA 

2016 01 FOREST WIDE REC O&M CONSERVATION CORPS 89336 72903.8 1

GREEN MOUNTAIN 

MINERS GULCH CONSERVATION DISTRICT2016 01 RESTORATION PROJECT-RAC MINERS GULCH RAC 47357 239520.4 2POWELL COUNTY ROAD ROW 

2016 01 WEED SPRAYING POWELL COUNTY 12000 1200 

UTILE BLACKFOOT TRAIL 

BRIDGE REPLACEMENT MONTANA 

2016 01 PROJECT CONSERVATION CORPS 14726 9708.91 2

RAC-CLARK FORK 

CONFLUENCE LAND ACCESS 

AND NOXIOUS WEED 

2016 01 CONTROL FIVE VALLEYS LAND TRUST 4200 0 

MONTANA 

WEST FORK FSH CK TRAIL CONSERVATION CORPS2016 01 MAINTENANCE FISH CREEK 13780 11842 

2016 01 CAMELS HUMP HIGHWAY MINERAL COUNTY 28300 3000 

ROUTE OF THE OLYMPIAN 

2016 01 GRADING AND GRAVEL MINERAL COUNTY 44900 3000 
TABLE A- Page 14 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SELWAY-BITTERROOT 

VOLUNTEER & INTERNSHIP FRANK CHURCH 

2016 01 PROGRAM FOUNDATION 166223.9 94307.6 2

PIERCE COMMUNITY 

CENTER'S FACILITY BOILER PIERCE RECREATION 

2016 01 CONVERSION DISTRICT 140000 25000 

LATAH COUNTY ROAD LATAH COUNTY ROAD 

2016 01 DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT 100000 0 

INVASIVE WEEDS 

2016 01 MANAGEMENT IDAHO COUNTY 211180 60000 

NORTHWEST YOUTH 

PALOUSE DEVELOPED REC CORPS DBA IDAHO 

2016 01 SITE MTCE CONSERVATION CORPS 58201.33 16618.68 7

INVASIVE TREATMENT AND 

2016 01 NATIVE PLANTINGS MCC 189468.4 64879 22016 01 NEW INVADER EMPHASIS IDAHO COUNTY 92600 25000 

AG PCEI RIPARIAN AND TRAIL 

2016 01 WORK 16-PA-11011700-040 PCEI 70085 17522 

AG CSWCD SCOFIELD 

PROJECT 16-CS-11011700-

2016 01 047 CSWCD 23638 0 2016 02 BIGHORN COUNTY WEEDS BIG HORN COUNTY 43054.29 18250 6
TABLE A- Page 15 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match fun

NH AGR FRONT RANGE 

2016 02 INVASIVE SPECIES LAWRENCE COUNTY 45332.93 20660 6

MY AGR PENN CO INVASIVE PENNINGTON COUNTY 

2016 02 WEED REDUCTION WEED AND PEST 11540.3 4409.09 1

NH AGR NORTHERN HILLS 

2016 02 ROAD DISTRICT LAWRENCE COUNTY 32572.44 9150 4

CUSTER COUNTY ROAD 

DEPARTMENT MASTER 

2016 02 AGREEMENT CUSTER COUNTY 84238.71 164048 24

MY STEWARDSHIP 

AGREEMENT BETWEEN 

PENNINGTON COUNTY 

2016 02 COMMISSIONERS & BNF PENNINGTON COUNTY 107248 224880 

NRM, GUN, GOTHIC ROAD 

MAINTENANCE AND 

2016 02 CULVERT REPLACEMENT GUNNISON COUNTY 56193.77 25330 8

NRM, GUN, RAC GUNNISON 

COUNTY TAYLOR CANYON 

2016 02 CHEATGRASS GUNNISON COUNTY 8297 2800 

NRM, GUN, NFSR 7765 

CUMBERLAND PASS ROAD 

2016 02 RECONSTRUCTION GUNNISON COUNTY 123527.56 102460 22

G&A HPBE ROUTI COUNTY 

2016 02 RIDERS 2A WORK ROUTI COUNTY RIDERS 172705.4 44304 2
TABLE A - Page 16 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl1 

Year Region Project Title 4.pplicant Name Match Match 

G&A LAR RAC BUFORD ROAD WYOMING STATE 

2016 02 PROJECT FORESTRY 4297 2348 

BCH ENCAMPMENT RIVER SARATOGA ENCAMPMENT 

CHEROKEE/WAGONER RAWLINS CONSERVATION 

2016 02 DIVERSIONS REPLACEMENT DISTRICT 44374 563350 

LARIMER COUNTY YOUTH 

2016 02 CORPS PROJECTS LARIMER COUNTY 16889 0 

COLORADO MOUNTAIN CLUB 

RAC FUNDING TRAIL COLORADO MOUNTAIN 

2016 02 ASSESSMENT CLUB 26044.85 6849.6 3

D02 -2015 RAC MT. COLORADO FOURTEENERS 

2016 02 COLUMBIA INITIATIVE 15000 8946.21 2

BADGER FLATS HABITAT 

2016 02 RESTORATION COLORADO MTN CLUB 34294.99 9625.45 4

CONSERVATION LEGACY, SCC CONSERVATION LEGACY, 

2016 02 RAC FUNDING sec 78759.95 12854 9

RMYC WEST TENNESSEE 

2016 02 LAKES TRAIL RMYC 27354.6 8468 

SCC PARK COUNTY 

CONSERVATION CREW CONSERVATION LEGACY 

2016 02 (SOUTH PLATIE) DBASCC 24267.4 17900.27 4
TABLE A- Page 17 

Forest Forest Tota

A Service Service Appli !Proj

"5' """"'"'"' 

Year !Region Project Title Armlicant Name Match Match Fun

2015 SCC TURQUOISE LAKE CONSERVATION LEGACY 

2016 02 TRAIL (DBA SCC) 14136.64 10218.18 2

MCPHEE AQUATIC NUISANCE 

2016 02 SPECIES STATIONS STATE OF COLORADO 38584.08 39734 7

CR X GRAVEL RESURFACING 

2016 02 PROJECT MONTEZUMA COUNTY 10769.11 10638 2

CONSERVATION LEGACY 

SCC- SAULS CREEK FUELS DBA SOUTHWEST 

2016 02 REDUCTION- LA PLATA SRS CONSERVATION CORPS 16228.44 10168.67 2

HAZARDOUS FUELS 

REDUCTION AND 

ANIMAS/FALLS CREEK 

WATERSHED IMPROVEMENT FALLS CREEK RANCH 

2016 02 ALONG CR205 ASSOCIATION 12480.04 9940.4 2

CONSERVATION LEGACY 

MCPHEE RESERVOIR DBA SOUTHWEST 

2016 02 TAMARISK REMOVAL CONSERVATION CORPS 15427.02 10168.67 2

SAN JUAN COUNTY-SRSSOUTH MINERAL ROAD 

2016 ,02 GRAVEL PROJECT SAN JUAN COUNTY 58069.1 0 
TABLE A- Page 18 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

DOLORES-NORWOOD ROAD 

AND ORMISTON ROAD DUST 

2016 02 ABATEMENT/ SRS PROJECT DOLORES COUNTY 32079.53 46940 7

SAUL'S CREEK ROAD 

RESURFACING (CR 

2016 02 527 /FS#608) LA PLATA COUNTY 21573.11 73925.63 9

COTIONWOOD ROAD 

2016 02 RESURFACING DOLORES COUNTY 19154.96 47000 6

CORNVILLE NON-MOTORIZED 

TRAIL SYSTEM TRAILHEADS2016 03 RAC YAVAPAI COUNTY 28S71 0 

BEAVER CREEK 

RAC- RIMROCK TRAILS COMMUNITY SERVICES, 

2016 03 SUNSET GROUP INC 14923.92 13160 2

YAVAPAI COUNTY 

EDUCATION SERVICE 

2016 03 FY 2016 YCC PROGRAM AGENCY 74686.97 29242.7 10

SUMMER 2016 AMERICAN 

CONSERVATION CORPS TRAIL CONSERVATION 

2016 03 CREW EXPERIENCE 127183 122438.3 2

AMERICAN 

PINAL MOUNTAIN TRAIL CONSERVATION 

2016 03 SYSTEM MAINTENANCE -RAC EXPERIENCE 143091.33 122166.37 2
TABLE A- Page 19 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

NF DUCHESNE COUNTY 

2016 04 GRAVEL DUCHESNE COUNTY 54430 29400 

BOISE NF COALITION 

FACILITATOR COSTS/ WEST CENTRAL 

2016 04 MEETINGS HIGHLANDS RC&D 17385.55 42442.6 5

BOISE COUNTY 

YOUTH OFFENDERS TRAIL COMMUNITY JUSTICE 

2016 04 WORK RAC#15MULT1003 SERVICES 16661.68 10496 2

SOUTHWEST IDAHO 

RESOURCE 

FACILITATOR COSTS BOISE NF CONSERVATION AND 

COLLABORATIVE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, 

2016 04 PARTNERSHIP INC. 52465.31 45703.94 9

RAC #15MULTI005 -ICOE 

RESTORATION DEVELOPMENT PROJECT II BASIN SCHOOL DISTRICT 

2016 04 (BOISE COUNTY) #72 14000 0 

RAC#15MULTI012 & SOUTHWEST IDAHO 

16MULTI003 WOODY RESOURCE AND 

BIOMASS UTILIZATION DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, 

2016 04 PARTNERSHIP INC. 19000 0 

TRAIL WORK JOHNSON MONTANA 

2016 04 CREEK TRAIL RAC#15BNF005 CONSERVATION CORPS 15480 10541.62 2
TABLE A - Page 20 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

NORTH FORK TRAIL WORK YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2016 04 RAC #15BNF007 PROGRAM, INC 16847.61 4482 2

AMERICAN 

NORTH ZONE TRAIL CREW CONSERVATION 

2016 04 CASCADE/LOWMAN EXPERIENCE 50862.34 39173.33 9

RAC #15BNF003 -YOUTH 

CREW MOUNTAIN HOME NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2016 04 TRAIL WORK CORPS (ICC) 22704.38 11297.92 

RAC #16BNF-013 ADULT 

CREW MOUNTAIN HOME NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2016 04 TRAILS CORPS (ICC) 19181.41 10138.21 2

RAC #15MULTI002 

CENTERVILLE ROAD CHIP 

2016 04 SEAL BOISE COUNTY 35070 24350 

SCRIVER CREEK BRIDGE BOISE COUNTY ROAD 

2016 04 RAC#16BNF012 DEPARTMENT 19620 27056.25 4

RAC#16BNF-011, 2ND FORK 

2016 04 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT GEM COUNTY 67700 110940 

RATILESNAKE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT MOUNTAIN HOME 

2016 04 RAC#16BNF0006 HIGHWAY DISTRICT 102032 60000 

DIXIE RAC PROJECT BEAVER UTAH DIVISION OF 

2016 04 RELOCATION WILDLIFE RESOURCES 36460 0 
TABLE A - Page 21 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I Project Title !Applicant Name Match Match fun

JOHNS VALLEY 

2016 04 VEGETATION#4 UDWR 196789 0 

PINE VALLEY 

IMPLEMENTATION AREA 

2016 04 DECOMMISSIONING PROJECT WASHINGTON COUNTY 124500 19000 

2016 HELLS BACKBONE 

INFRASTRUCTURE 

2016 04 IMPROVEMENT D4 GARFIELD COUNTY 100000 306400 2016 04 PAIUTE TRAIL MONITORING PAIUTE TRAIL COMMITIEE 4000 1000 

SELWAY BITIERROOT FCRR 

VOLUNTEER AND SELWAY BITIERROOT 

2016 04 INTERNSHIP PROGRAM FCRR 49499.49 19378.8 6

SELWAY BITIERROOT FRANK 

CHURCH FOUNDATION SELWAY BITIERROOT 

VOLUNTEER & INTERNSHIP FRANK CHURCH 

2016 04 PROGRAM FOUNDATION 37510 28272 2016 04 PAYETIE FOREST COALITION SOUTHWEST IDAHO RC&D 50135.13 69466.86 11

RAC ADAMS CO WI CAP 

2016 04 FIREWOOD ADAMS COUNTY 27290.62 0 22016 04 2016 SCA KRASSEL INTERNS SCA 65408.16 18227.73 8
TABLE A - Page 22 

Forest forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

MONTANA 

2016 04 RAC-TWENTYMILE LAKES CONSERVATION CORP 17766.96 10274 2

RAC MIDDLE FORK WEISER 

2016 04 RIVER ROAD REPAIR ADAMS COUNTY 46030.21 97710.6 14

RAC ADAMS COUNTY 

2016 04 CATILEGUARDS ADAMS COUNTY 8422 6166 

SELWAY BITIERROOT 

WILDERNESS TRAIL INTERN FRANK CHURCH 

2016 04 (FY16 RAC) FOUNDATION 36917.12 11049.2 4

DREDGE STACKER CABLE YANKEE FORK GOLD 

2016 04 REPLACEMENT DREDGE ASSOCIATION 17286.64 15900 3

2016 04 BUTIE COUNTY CWMA BUTTE COUNTY 60119.2 15320 

SOUTH ZONE TRAILS AND YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2016 04 PROPERTY MAINTENANCE PROGRAM 48220.4 13487.6 2016 04 WILDLIFE BOTANICAL INTERN SCA 12182.53 1112.8 1

VALLEY COUNTY FRANK 

CHURCH WILDERNESS TRAILS MONTANA 

2016 04 AND BRIDGES CONSERVATION CORPS 57000 0 

CUSTER COUNTY DEPT. 

2016 04 CUSTER COUNTY CWMA NOXIOUS WEEDS 35000 0 

D1 SUBLETI ROAD SAFETY RAFT RIVER HIGHWAY 

2016 04 IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 16645.32 0 1
TABLE A -Page 23 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

NORTHERN ROCKIES 

NRCC TRUMPETER SWAN CONSERVATION 

2016 04 SURVEYS COOPERATIVE 14263.28 13218.61 2

MINK CREEK AREA TRAIL MINK CREEK STOCKMAN'S 

2016 04 MAINTENANCE AS SOC 4268 2800 

ISLAND PARK BOAT LAUNCH FREMONT COUNTY PARKS 

2016 04 DOCKS-RAC AND RECREATION 23313.4 7128 

LAW ENFORCEMENT BOAT FREMONT COUNTY PARKS 

2016 04 DOCKS-RAC AND RECREATION 15680.4 4770.36 2

UPPER GIRAFFE & DRY CREEK CARIBOU CADLEMEN'S 

2016 04 ENCLOSURES ASSOCIATION 5000 0 

EIGHTMILE AQUATIC 

ORGANISM PASSAGE 

2016 04 PROJECT BEAR LAKE COUNTY 69200 108750 

EAST BEAVER CADLE 

2016 04 OWENS BENCH RAC ASSOCIATION INC. 25682.02 41000 6

MINK CREEK STOCKMAN'S 

2016 04 CROW'S FLAT DRIFT FENCE ASSOC 10184 5440 

CARIBOU-TARGHEE 

TRAVELING IDAHO 

CONSERVATION CORPS IDAHO CONSERVATION 

2016 04 CREWS CORPS 98811.41 56126.12 15

PARIS CREEK RESTORATION BLOOMINGTON CADLE 

2016 04 AREA FENCE-RAC ASSOCIATION 8546.4 4640 
TABLE A - Page 24 

forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Proj

Year I Region Project Title Aonlicant Name Match Match fund

BEAR GULCH/TRAIL CREEK ST. ANTHONY WORK 

2016 04 MAINTENANCE CAMP 6490 0 

WEBBER CREEK TRAIL MONTANA 

2016 04 MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 15101.52 9572 2

TETON BASIN TRAIL MONTANA 

2016 04 PROJECTS CONSERVATION CORP 149035.3 108668 2

ROSASCHI WALKER RIVER SMITH VALLEY 

2016 04 NOXIOUS WEED REMOVAL CONSERVATION DISTRICT 25852 58003.88 8

MINERAL COUNTY RAC PROJECT DEL MONTE 

2016 04 COUNTY BRIDGES MINERAL COUNTY 65000 0 

TOOELE COUNTY- TITLE II 

RAC- TOOELE COUNTY WEED TOOELE COUNTY, STATE 

2016 04 TREATMENTS OF UTAH 25427.49 9200 3

WASATCH COUNTYWASATCH COUNTY NOXIOUS 

2016 04 TITLE II WEEDS WASATCH COUNTY 32030.41 10131.88 4

TOOELE COUNTY- ROAD 

PROJECT AGREEMENT MAIN 

CYN ROAD #87005 REPAIR TOOELE COUNTY, STATE 

2016 04 AND MAINTENANCE OF UTAH 14059.69 14550 2

' 
TABLE A - Page 25 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Applica1 Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

050356 CAPLES CREEK 

EQUESTRIAN TRAILHEAD BACK COUNTRY 

2016 05 (RAC PROJECT) HORSEMEN 31000 40062 

RAC- TRAIL CREW MAINTENANCE OF THE 

2016 05 GREAT SHASTA RAIL TRAIL GREAT SHASTA RAIL TRAIL 30722 5342 

COMMUNITY WILDFIRE SISKIYOU COUNTY FIRE 

2016 05 PROTECTION PLAN UPDATE SAFE COUNSIL 17000 2250 

SHASTA VALLEY CHIPPER NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

2016 05 DAYS RESOURCE CENTER 44285 51507 

SALMON RIVER 

2016 05 SRRCTRAIL TRAINING CREW RESTORATION COUNCIL 30638 8003 

SISKIYOU YOUTH MID KLAMATH 

2016 05 STEWARDSHIP PROJECT WATERSHED COUNCIL 20878 13290 

RAC- SRRC SALMON RIVER SALMON RIVER 

2016 05 NOXIOUS WEED RESTORATION COUNCIL 30721 31130 

RAC WATERSHED SCOTI RIVER WATERSHED 

2016 05 REHABILITATION COUNCIL 19766.91 3150 2

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

FY16 FORESTRY INSTITUTE SOCIETY OF AMERICAN 

2016 05 FOR TEACHERS (FIT) FORESTERS 12000 12000 

2015 SHASTA FORESTRY FORESTRY EDUCATORS 

2016 05 CHALLENGE INCORPORATED 8000 8000 
TABLE A- Page 26 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

AMERICAN 

CONSERVATION 

2016 05 DN RAC NRA TRAILS STUDY EXPERIENCE 8349 2431 

INTERNATIONAL 

DN RAC SMITH RIVER FEDERATION OF FLY 

2016 05 FISHERIES PLAN FISHERS, INC. 15000 20500 

DN RAC PORT ORFORD CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT 

2016 05 CEDAR PROPAGATION OF PARKS & RECREATION 4500 2267 

HUM & TRIN RAC WCFSC WILLOW FIRE SAFE 

2016 05 CHIPPER PURCHASE COUNCIL 33600 139168 

HUM RAC BUCK MT ROAD BRIDGEVILLE COMMUNITY 

2016 05 CLEARANCE CENTER 27245 6102 

DN RAC ROWDY CREEK 

2016 05 CULVERT REPLACEMENT COUNTY OF DEL NORTE 16000 34837 

HUM RAC KLAMATH TREX 

2016 05 SUPPORT EQUIPMENT KARUKTRIBE 21769 0 

TRIN RAC LOWER TRINITY CALIFORNIA 

2016 05 PLANTATION THIN CONSERVATION CORPS 27000 10557 

TRIN RAC BEAVERSLIDE FUEL WATERSHED RESEARCH 

2016 05 TREATMENT AND TRAINING CENTER 34395 9140 

DN RAC PULLING TOGETHER DEL NORTE RESOURCES 

2016 05 INVASIVE PLANTS CONSERVATION DISTRICT 27056 10213 
TABLE A -Page 27 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

HUM RAC HUMBOLDT NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2016 05 YOUTH EMPLOYMENT CORPS 17405.51 16239 3

DN RAC COAST TO CREST CALIFORNIA 

2016 05 TRAIL- CCC SPA CONSERVATION CORPS 20000 6881.6 

DR RAC ORLEANS YOUTH NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2016 05 EMPLOYMENT PROJECT CORPS 9339 8046 

HUM RAC PULLING MID KLAMATH 

2016 05 TOGETHER INVASIVE PLANTS WATERSHED COUNCIL 20784 7571 

DN RAC BIG FLAT ACCESSIBLE CALIFORNIA 

2016 05 TRAILS CONSERVATION CORPS 25520 7507.2 

DN RAC SIX RIVERS SISKIYOU MOUNTAIN 

2016 05 BOUNDARY TRAIL CLUB 10859 11539 

TRIN RAC MRFB 

MAINTENANCE WATERSHED RESEARCH 

2016 05 MASTICATION FS RD. 1N03 AND TRAINING CENTER 31098 8532 

DEL NORTE SOLID WAST 

DN RAC FOREST & RIVER MANAGEMENT 

2016 05 CLEANUP PARTNERSHIP AUTHORITY 33343 4600 

DN RAC BIG FLAT CULVERT 

2016 05 REPLACEMENT 2 COUNTY OF DEL NORTE 63882 0 

DN RAC PATRICKS CREEK RD. 

2016 05 CULVERT REPLACEMENT COUNTY OF DEL NORTE 46300 9981 
TABLE A- Page 28 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Proj

Year I Region Project Title Anniir::mt Name Match Match fund

DN RAC HOLIDAY MINE 

2016 OS CULVERT REPLACEMENT COUNTY OF DEL NORTE SS189 0 

RAC-201S INTERLAKES 

STEWARDSHIP 

AREA/BOHEMOTASH 

2016 OS MOUNTAINTS WESTERN SHASTA RCD 4S387 22480 

SHASTA-TEHAMA-TRINITY 

JOINT COMMUNITY 

2016 OS NATURAL RESOURCE CREW COLLEGE DISTRICT 117736.92 27716 14

THE WATERSHED 

RAC-INDIAN VALLEY RESEARCH AND TRAINING 

2016 OS SUMMER CAMP CENTER 16734.S6 S2489.58 6

RAC- TRINITY/SOUTH FORK 

PLANNING AND TRINITY COUNTY DECOMMISSIONING PROJECT RESOURCE 

2016 OS 2016 CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1SS440 399S9.26 19

WATERSHED RESEARCH 

2016 OS STAFFORD FUEL BREAKS AND TRAINING CENTER 136700 0 

RAC-HAYFORK BASIN TRAILS 

& YOUTH CREW-SUMMER WATERSHED RESEARCH 

2016 OS 2016 AND TRAINING CENTER 417S7.S 10948.93 S

' 
TABLE A- Page 29 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl Proj

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fund

TRINITY COUNTY 

GREENHORN FUELS RESOURCE 

2016 05 REDUCTION CONSERVATION DISTRICT 61408.32 15760 77

RAC- RECLAMATION THE WATERSHED 

COALITION COORDINATION RESEARCH AND TRAINING 

2016 05 2016 CENTER 11605.96 3004.04 

NATIVE PLANT NURSERY FOR TRINITY COUNTY 

WATERSHED RESTORATION RESOURCE 

2016 05 SUPPORT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 9690 2422.8 

WEAVERVILLE BASIN TRAIL TRINITY COUNTY 

SYSTEM MAINTENANCE AND RESOURCE 

2016 05 BRIDGE REPAIR RAC PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 12325 1905 

BACKCOUNTRY 

PACIFIC CREST TRAIL HORSEMEN SHASTA2016 05 OPENING MAINTENANCE TRINITY UNIT 26552.32 34670 6

RAC- BOWERMAN 

HOMESTEAD TRAIL AND 

2016 05 WEB MAP PROPOSAL TRINITY COUNTY RCD 8000 0 
TABLE A - Page 30 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC- HIGH PRIORITY 

NOXIOUS WEED TREATMENT: TRINITY COUNTY 

OREGON FIRE AREA & HWY 3 RESOURCE 

2016 05 NORTH CONSERVATION DISTRICT 28189.2 7104 

TUOLUMNE COUNTY 

FORESTRY INSTITUTE FOR SUPERINTENDENT OF 

2016 05 TEACHERS- RAC SCHOOLS 30500 19900 

SRS2- FONTANILLIS TRAIL TAHOE RIM TRAIL 

2016 05 RAC PROJECT ASSOCIATION 16275 11487 

SRS2 -ANGORA FOREST LEAGUE TO SAVE LAKE 

2016 05 STEWARSHIP[ RAC PROEJCT TAHOE 19097 37160 

AMERICAN 

SRS2- BAYVIEW TRAIL RAC CONSERVATION 

2016 05 PROJECT EXPERIENCE 34584 39277.91 7

TU- RIVERS STEWARDSHIP 

2016 06 PROGRAM TROUT UNLIMITED 37404.39 71792.35 10

CHILDREN'S FOREST CAREER 

2016 06 PATHWAYS DISCOVER YOUR FOREST 40366.03 44706.54 8

VOLUNTEER & COMMUNITY 

2016 06 STEWARDSHIP DISCOVER YOUR FOREST 223006.84 408704.16 

CENTRAL OREGON 

INTERGOVERNMENTAL 

2016 06 COIC- RAC ADMIN COUNCIL 21982.5 0 
TABLE A - Page 31 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region Project Title '.0.pplicant Name Match Match Fun

DESCHUTES COUNTY DESCHUTES COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED COST SHARE NOXIOUS WEED COST 

2016 06 2015 SHARE 2015 14250 23090 2016 06 TREE THINNING THE KLAMATH TRIBES 114705.02 29189.1 14

0603 FH FOREST 

RESTORATION THROUGH 

COLLABORATION 2016 & 

2016 06 2017 SKAMANIA COUNTY EDC 53130 18457 

0603 MSH MSHI STREAM MOUNT ST HELENS 

2016 06 TEAM INSITUTE 32758.4 10998.94 4

KLICKITAT COUNTY- KLICKITAT COUNTY WEED 

2016 06 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL BOARD 37735.89 31777.86 6

0603 MTA STEVENSON 

CARSON SCHOOL DISTRICT STEVENSON CARSON 

2016 06 FOREST YOUTH SUCCESS SCHOOL DISTRICT 187922.45 50990.86 23

ANDERSON CREEK ROAD NOOKSACK NORDIC SKI 

2016 06 3071 CLUB 8963.04 3903.72 1

WHATCOM COUNTY 

OFFENDER FORESTRY WORK WHATCOM COUNTY 

2016 06 CREW SHERIFF'S OFFICE 121702.22 271183.86 39

NOOKSACK SALMON 

ENHANCEMENT 

2016 06 NOOKSACK RIVER STEWARDS ASSOCIATION 21271.57 10000 3
TABLE A - Page 32 

Forest Forest Tota

A Service Service Appl! !Proj

"I>''""'"'"''" 

Year I Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match •Fun

SKAGIT WATERSHED SKAGIT FISHERIES 

2016 06 RESTORATION WORK ENHANCEMENT GROUP 35756.35 14671.9 5

DUMPSTOPPERS- CLACKAMAS COUNTY 

2016 06 CLACKAMAS COUNTY TITLE II PARKS & FOREST 44000 12700 

HOOD RIVER SOIL AND 

SRS2 LOWER HOOD RIVER WATER CONSERVATION 

2016 06 RIPARIAN RESTORATION DISTRICT 10469 15900 

SRS2 MOSIER VALLEY CO- WASCO COUNTY SOIL AND 

MINGLING WELL WATER CONSERVATION 

2016 06 EVALUATIONS DISTRICT 19338 230000 

MT. HOOD NATIONAL 

FOREST WASCO COUNTY 

2016 06 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL WASCO COUNTY 166929.6 72313.55 23

JEFFERSON COUNTY JEFFERSON COUNTY 

COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS COMMUNITY 

2016 06 WORK CREW CORRECTIONS 16777.34 27605.76 

2016 06 WHEELER WEED CONTROL WHEELER SWCD 19000 15500 

CROOKED RIVER WATERSHED CROOKED RIVER WEED 

2016 06 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL MANAGEMENT AREA 52250 161404 
TABLE A - Page 33 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl1 

1

Proj

Year I Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match !Fun

COIC- SCHOOL YEAR, 

FACILITES AND NATURAL 

2016 06 RESOURCE PROJECTS COIC 89521.73 63356.46 15

CENTRAL OREGON 

COIC-OCH/DES-SU M MER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 

2016 06 CREWS COUNCIL 91697.15 41699.51 13

HOC-AMERICORPS OCHOCO 

NF AND CROOKED RIVER 

2016 06 NATIONAL GRASSLAND HEART OF OREGON CORPS 20481.83 10949.05 3

UPPER DUNGENESS LARGE JAMESTOWN S'KLALLAM 

2016 06 WOOD ENHANCEMENT TRIBE 18578.69 307630 32

MASON COUNTY NOXIOUS MASON COUNTY 

WEED INVENTORY AND NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL 

2016 06 TREATMENT BOARD 22597.06 7528.46 3

WCC FY17 FORESTWIDE WA DEPARTMENT OF 

2016 06 CREW ECOLOGY 152072.68 70341 22

KBO YOUTH TRAINING KLAMATH BIRD 

2016 06 PROGRAM OBSERVATORY 19800 0 

2016-2017 COMMUNITY 

JUSTICE FUELS REDUCTION 

2016 ,06 AND ROADSIDE BRUSHING JACKSON COUNTY 27505.03 31251.64 5
TABLE A -Page 34 

forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

JACKSON COUNTY 

COMMUNITY JUSTICERECREATION SITE JACKSON COUNTY 

2016 06 MAINTENANCE COMMUNITY JUSTICE 9370.26 8877.36 1

INVASIVE PLANTS JACKSON COUNTY 

2016 06 TREATMENT PROJECT (COMMUNITY JUSTICE) 28408.1 35509.44 6

STUDENT CONSERVATION 

ASSOCIATION- WILDERNESS STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2016 06 RANGER ASSOCIATION, INC. 5835 0 

NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 

TRAIL MAINTENANCE AND 

INVASIVE SPECIES NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2016 06 ABATEMENT PROJECT CORPS 69286.34 64945.7 13

NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 

TRAILS AND INVASIVE PLANT 

2016 06 MGT NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 93944.98 89312.35 18

ARCHIE KNOWLES 

CAMPGROUND 

2016 06 REHABILITATION LANE COUNTY 54830 252977 

CRANNOG ROAD 

2016 06 BARRIER/RETAINING WALL COOS COUNTY, OREGON 17759 0 

TILLAMOOK COUNTY SOIL 

UTILE NESTUCCA & WATER CONSERVATION 

2016 06 KNOTWEED CONTROL DISTRIC 3728 2213 
TABLE A - Page 35 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region Project Title !Applicant Name Match Match fun

CONCERNED CITIZENS FOR 

2016 06 HWY 101 NO SPRAY CLEAN AIR 20000 18400 

BIG CREEK FLOODPLAIN MIDCOAST WATERSHEDS 

2016 06 RESTORATION COUNCIL 16445 7500 

SCHOONER CREEK RIPARIAN SALMON DRIFT CREEK 

2016 06 FENCE WATERSHED COUNCIL 35750 10296 

GRANT, BENTON COUNTY 

ALCOVE HABITAT MARYS RIVER 

2016 06 RECONNECTION WATERSHED COUNCIL 9352 4455 

GRANT, LANE COUNTY SIUSLAW SOIL AND 

FIDDLE AND BILLY MOORE WATER CONSERVATION 

2016 06 CREEKS ENHANCEMENT DISTRICT 55000 109648 

SRS2 BENTON COUNTY 

2016 06 SHERIFFS FOREST PATROL BENTON COUNTY SHERIFF 8162 0 

SIUSLAW NF YOUTH CORPS 

2016 06 PROJECT NW YOUTH CORPS 9353 8119.3 

CAPE MOUNTAIN TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2016 06 REHABILITATION CORPS 21331.39 20914.05 4

SIUSLAW NF YOUTH 

2016 06 EMPLOYMENT NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 85342.57 29096.24 11

TILLAMOOK COUNTY 

GALLOWAY ROAD TILLAMOOK COUNTY, 

2016 06 AGREEMENT OREGON 50000 51533 
TABLE A - Page 36 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SOUTH UMPQUA RURAL 

DAYS CREEK SCHOOL THREE COMMUNITY 

2016 06 CROCK PARTNERSHIP 13072.92 22573.6 3

DOUGLAS SOIL AND 

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL WATER CONSERVATION 

2016 06 AND MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 37880 0 

MLK YOUTH FOREST WORK LANE CO YOUTH 

2016 06 TEAM SERVICES, MLK CENTER 15000 9212 

OREGON YOUTH 

CONSERVATION CORPS 

FROM PHOENIX SCHOOL IN PHOENIX SCHOOL OF 

2016 06 ROSEBURG ROSEBURG 36415.2 35927.26 7

NU COLLIDING RIVERS DOUGLAS COUNTY 

2016 06 EXPLORATION STATION MUSEUM FOUNDATION 51541.18 69781.36 12

NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2016 06 UMPQUA TRAIL WORK 2016 CORPS 25977.25 23545.98 4

DCWP JOB TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT HOSTED PROGRAM FOR THE 

2016 06 UMPQUA NATIONAL FOREST DOUGLAS COUNTY 33257.36 12911.64 

2016 06 LARGE SCALE SITE CLEAN UP FRIENDS OF THE TRAILS 23798.88 12652.3 3
TABLE A - Page 37 

Forest Forest Tota

"'!>'"'"'"'"''" Service Service Appli 1Proj

Year I Region Project Title A1 ·"· .... Name Match Match I Fun

2016 LAKE CHELAN CRUPINA WASHINGTON 

2016 06 CONTROL PROJECT CONSERVATION CORPS 27226S.74 58804.98 33

ENTIAT & WENATCHEE RIVER 

RANGER DISTRICT RECREATION PROGRAM NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2016 06 SUPPORT CORPS 177162 155076.38 33

COOPERATIVE CONTROL OF CHELAN COUNTY 

NOXIOUS WEEDS IN CHELAN NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL 

2016 06 COUNTY BOARD 9060.8 2510 

LONGBOW AND FERNVIEW LINN COUNTY PARKS AND 

2016 06 CAMPGROUND WELLS REC 18260 0 

SALMON FALLS PARKING 

ANDNORTHFORKROAD MARION COUNTY PUBLIC 

2016 06 ENHANCEMENTS WORKS 87150 0 

MARION COUNTY WORK 

2016 06 CREW TOOLS MARION COUNTY 7540 0 

10-WILDERNESS TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2016 06 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT CORPS 16407.19 11317.46 2

LANE COUNTY-MLK YOUTH 

2016 06 FOREST WORK TEAM LANE COUNTY 197589.62 55715.04 25
TABLE A - Page 38 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match fun

SCA TRAIL MAINTENANCE STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2016 06 INTERNS ASSOCIATION 11981 3331.23 1

MIDDLE FORK INVASIVE 

PLANT REMOVAL, JOB 

TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2016 06 PROJECT CORPS 41639.58 35781.78 7

DEER CREEK FLOODPLAIN MCKENZIE WATERSHED 

2016 06 ENHANCEMENT PROJECT ALLIANCE 252756.23 164984.81 41

LARCH MOUNTAIN ROAD 

2016 06 MAINTENANCE MULTNOMAH COUNTY 19330 69691.7 

HEMLOCK WOOLLY ADELGID KENTUCKY DIVISION OF 

2016 08 PROJECT FORESTRY 86790 0 

DYSON CREEK, LIBERTY 

CHAPEL, NORTH TOWER GRANT PARISH POLICE 

2016 08 ROADS JURY 98660 0 

2016 GUM SPRINGS ROAD WINN PARISH POLICE 

2016 08 RAC PROJECT JURY 101504 324441 

D06 RAC SHARKEY COUNTY 

2016 08 DUMMY LINE ROAD SHARKEY COUNTY 12113 0 

DOl SCOn COUNTY RAC 

ROAD PROJECTS- CLIFTON & 

2016 08 HARRELL ROADS SCOn COUNTY 40344 0 
TABLE A - Page 39 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl; Pro

Year Region I Project Title !Applicant Name Match Match Fun

DOl SMITH CO RAC ROAD 

PROJECTS- SMITH514, 503F, 

2016 08 514A, 538E,578 SMITH COUNTY 32200 0 

D04 AMITE COUNTY RAC ROYAL CHAPEL ROAD PHASE AMITE COUNTY BOARD OF 

2016 08 2 SUPERVISORS 26383 0 

D04 FRANKLIN COUNTY RAC MCCALL CREEK ROAD PHASE FRANKLIN COUNTY BOARD 

2016 08 2 OF SUPERVISORS 99057 0 

MONTGOMERY COUNTY 

2016 08 RECREATION AREA MTNCE MONTGOMERY COUNTY 259625 38200 

HOUSTON CO. ROAD 4740 

2016 08 PROJECT (FY14) HOUSTON COUNTY 116055 24000 

TRINITY CO. APPLE 

2016 08 SPRINGS/HELMIC ROAD TRINITY COUNTY 77371 0 

SRS DENT COUNTY ROAD 

2016 09 MAINTANENCE DENT COUNTY 25677.5 5500 

OZARK COUNTY TRAILHEAD 

2016 09 AND ROAD MAINTENANCE OZARK COUNTY 14138.9 3200 

PROJECT ROAD AGR FOR 

2016 09 MAINTENANCE OZARK COUNTY 10778 3200 

BLACK RIVER HARBOR 

2016 09 PAVILION RENOVATIONS HISTORICORPS 79204 55174.45 13
TABLE A - Page 40 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! 

Year Region Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match 

BWCAW STORM DAMAGE 

2016 09 PORTAGE CLEARING CCMI 64196 16320 

PINCUSHION MTN BIKE TRAIL SUPERIOR CYCLING 

2016 09 RECONSTRUCTION ASSOCIATION 13000 5000 

NATIONAL STUDENT 

2016 09 N.COUNTRY TRAIL RE-ROUTE CONSERV ASSOC. 22046 31400.57 5

RAC YAKUTAT COMMUNITY 

TRAIL SYSTEM- PUGET POINT CITY AND BOROUGH OF 

2016 10 TRAIL YAKUTAT 57968 412285 

RAC SUMMIT LAKE CITY AND BOROUGH OF 

2016 10 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT YAKUTAT 9969 3759.98 1

RAC-OLD SITUK RIVER FORD 

2016 10 IMPROVEMENT YAKUTAT TLINGITTRIBE 32153 8075 

SOUTH POW WOLF ACTIVITY 

AND OCCUPANCY THE NATURE 

2016 10 AGREEMENT CONSERVANCY 30256.68 20396.25 5

STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2016 10 KMRD RAC SCA CREW LEAD ASSOCIATION 15973.26 4426.28 2

STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2016 10 SCA CREW MEMBERS ASSOCIATION 57242.63 16493.49 7
TABLE A- Page 41 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

BITTERROOT ECOLOGICAL 

AWARENESS RESOURCES201S 01 CAMPING CLUB PROGRAM CAMP 17176 14000 

RYE CREEK ROAD SURFACE RAVALLI COUNTY-ROAD 

201S 01 STABILIZATION RAC PROJECT DEPT 30000 17500 

BITTERROOT WATER 

201S 01 EAST FORK REVEG- RAC FORUM 27818 8413.4 

PRIEST RIVER VALLEY BACK COUNTRY 

201S 01 TRAIL MAINTENANCE HORSEMEN 27200 16990 

UPPER PRIEST RIVER TRAIL 

201S 01 308 RECONSTRUCTION NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 139634.23 40776.94 18

TEEN INVASIVE SPECIES GLACIER INSTITUTE201S 01 SYMPOSIUM SYMPOSIUM 23012 4350 

BIG CREEK RANGER STATION 

2015 01 HISTORIC ASSEMBLY GLACIER INSTITUTE 5710 1400 

CDNST BOWL CREEK TRAIL MONTANA WILDERNESS 

2015 01 MAINTENANCE ASSOCIATION 6990 13821.6 

NW MT LAKES VOLUNTEER WHITEFISH LAKE 

2015 01 MONITORING NETWORK-RAC INSTITUTE 17222 64864 
TABLE A - Page 42 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! 

Year Region Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match fun

WESTSIDE RESERVOIRJEWEL BASIN TRAIL CAPITAL MONTANA 

2015 01 IMPROVEMENTS CONSERVATION CORPS 42761 34440.5 

RAC-HUNGRY 

HORSE/GLACIER VIEW RD MONTANA 

2015 01 TRAIL MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 46104.6 29703.63 7

CONSERVATION INTERNS- STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2015 01 SBRD ASSOCIATION-SBRD 40916.26 77930 11

ENGAGING YOUTH IN TRAILS MONTANA 

2015 01 AND RESTORATIN PROJECTS CONSERVATION CORPS 178296 120117 

2015 01 TALLY LAKE TRAILS RAC MCC MCC 24498 19710 

LOWER ROCK CREEK WEED GRANITE COUNTY-WEED 

2015 01 ABATEMENT TRT 4700 4700 

WEED MANAGEMENT IN MISSOULA COUNTY-WEED 

2015 01 MISSOULA COUNTY DISTRICT 51665 59800 

MONTANA 

2015 01 ROMAN CR OHV REHAB- RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 12730 10286 

NINEMILE TRAIL SYSTEM HEAVY MAINTENANCE: MONTANA 

2015 01 RESERVATION DIVIDE RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 14030 10286 
TABLE A -Page 43 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

AG TRAIL MTCE MCC- NFRD 

201S 01 TRAILS1S-PA-11011700-0S2 MCC 3S4S8 9S06 

ROAD CORRIDOR AND 

201S 01 PRIVATE INTERFACE WEEDS IDAHO COUNTY 80000 0 

RED RIVER ROAD 222 CRACK 

201S 01 SEAL/REPAIR IDAHO COUNTY 70000 0 

VEDAUWOO UNAUTHORIZED WILDLANDS 

ROUTE DECOMMISSIONING RESTORATION 

201S 02 & REVEGETATION VOLUNTEERS 20362.96 SS82.21 2

201S 02 ECHO BASIN AGGREGATE MONTEZUMA COUNTY 6S289.97 0 6

SCA/AMERICORP FOREST 

201S 04 PROGRAM SCA/AMERICORP 802461.99 228264.87 10

RAC REDFISH VISITOR 

CENTER REPAIRS (S-C) AND SAWTOOTH INTERPRETIVE 

201S 04 FS MATCH (SNF) & HISTORICAL ASSOC. 12007.98 11000 2

FRIENDS OF THE SNF 

201S 04 RACAVALANCHE SUPPORT AVALANCHE CENTER 7116.08 3800 1

AEGETIER HOLLOW 

201S 04 RIPARIAN CARIBOU CATILEMENS 7848 S900 

RAC INTERAGENCY WASH 

STATION/STORAGE FACILITY 

201S 04 (IRWIN) BONNEVILLE COUNTY 41197 3S0986 
TABLE A -Page 44 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

STRAWBERRY CANYON2015 04 UTAH COLLABORATIVE WEED MINK CREEK CATILEMEN 10987 7160 

PETERSON HOLLOW SPRING 

2015 04 RECONSTRUC./SOUTH POND MINK CREEK CATILEMEN 5894 2050 

BIRCH CREEK WATERSHED 

RESTORATION/ BEAVER 

2015 04 REINTRODUCTION MINK CREEK CATILEMEN 5691 4950 

FREMONT COUNTY WEED FREMONT COUNTY WEED 

2015 04 (RAC) DEPARTMENT 84654.88 371904 45

TARGHEE CREEK FISH 

2015 04 HABITAT REHAB IDAHO FISH AND GAME 10559.45 0 1

BEAR RIVER RANGE 

BACKCOUNTRY WEED 

2015 04 CONTROL FRANKLIN COUNTY 8551.08 1700 1

MT. ADAMS INSTITUTE2015 06 21CSC VETSWORK MT. ADAMS INSTITUTE 164796.6 108638.21 27

KLAMATH WATERSHED 

2015 06 GREAT OUTDOORS ALLIANCE PARTNERSHIP 82550 39778.75 12

SOUTHERN BLUES 

VEGETATION AND FUELS OREGON STATE 

2015 06 MONITORING UNIVERSITY 282692.62 0 28
TABLE A - Page 45 

Forest Forest Tota

" Service Service Appl1 ,Proj

"I>'"'"''""'' .. 

Year I Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

TRAIL AND TRAILHEAD 

PROJECTS, MOUNT BAKER- PACIFIC NORTHWEST 

2015 06 SNOQUALMIE TRAIL ASSOCIATION 62048.35 42722 10

MULTI-FOREST TRAIL MAINTENANCE & WASHINGTON TRAILS 

2015 06 CONSTRUCTION ASSOCIATION 761192.21 4299755 50

WASHINGTON STATE 

FORESTWIDE WCC DEPARTMENT OF 

2015 06 AGREEMENT FY2016 ECOLOGY 122986 76007.71 19

WALLOWA COUNTY WEED 

2015 06 CONTROL WALLOWA RESOURCES 76387.52 56080 13

TAPASH LANDSCAPE HABITAT 

RESTORATION & WASHINGTON 

2015 06 MONITORING CONSERVATION CORPS 62706.08 17786.77 8

2015 08 D04 ROYAL CHAPEL PHASE 1 AMITE COUNTY 30551 0 

D04 TEMPLE ROAD 

2015 08 RESURFACING FRANKLIN COUNTY 107072 0 

MDHA PERMANENT MINNESOTA DEER 

2015 09 OPENING AGREEMENT HUNTERS ASSOCIATION 25100 29517 

ITASCA INVASIVE SPECIES 

2015 09 PARTNERSHIP ITASCASWCD 20676.72 41085 62015 ,09 CWMA HURON PINES HURON PINES 148842.35 49080.48 19
TABLE A- Page 46 

forest forest Tota

" Service Service Appl! Proj

"!>'"'"'"'"''" 

Year I Region Project Title Armlicant Name Match Match !fund

FY2015-2020 OAK WILT OSCODA COUNTY 

2015 09 CONTROL CONSERVATION DISTRICT 39750 4212 

TC RAC CDNST 

MAINTENANCE TRAILS #9 MONTANA WILDERNESS 

2014 01 AND #131 ASSOCIATION 73968.63 77392.8 15

RAC: ARGENTA ROAD REHAB 

2014 01 PHASE II BEAVERHEAD COUNTY 50000 28750 

RAC: BLACKTAIL RIDGE AND BEAVERHEAD 

2014 01 DYCE CREEK WEEDS CONSERVATION DISTRICT 19600 19200 

RAC: DOUGLAS CREEK ROAD 

2014 01 BRIDGE GRANITE COUNTY 50000 292158 

DILLON, WISE RIVER, AND MONTANA 

2014 01 WISDOM TRAILS CONSERVATION CORPS 101642.4 68779.2 1

RAC: LEE METCALF MONTANA 

2014 01 WILDERNESS MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 46009.11 25792.2 7

RAC: VANHOUTEN LAKE FISH MONTANA FISH, WILDLIFE 

2014 01 BARRIER & PARKS 21624.53 17305.6 3

RAC: FRENCH CREEK FISH MONTANA FISH, WILDLIFE 

2014 01 BARRIER & PARKS 15000 328000 
TABLE A - Page 47 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region I Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match fun

RAC: CLIFF AND WADE LAKE 

RD GRAVEL SURFACE 

2014 01 PRESERVATION PROJECT MADISON COUNTY 29429.08 236130 26

RAC-BOULDER CREEK HORSE BITTERROOT 

CAMP AT SAM BILLINGS BACKCOUNTRY 

2014 01 CAMPGROUND HORSEMEN-HORSE CAMP 14900 3902.35 1

SELWAY BITTERROOT 

FRANK CHURCH 

RAC_ST. MARYS PEAK FOUNDATION-ST. MARYS 

2014 01 LOOKOUT STEWARDSHIP RAC LO 77835 76573.2 1

CLASSROOM W/0 WALLS CORVALIS SCHOOL 

2014 01 RAC DISTRICT #1 32650 26250 

COMO LAKE FOOTBRIDGE BITTER ROOT IRRIGATION 

2014 01 RAC DISTRICT 2741.6 3799 

MAINTENANCE OF SELWAY MONTANA 

2014 01 BITTERROOT TRAILS CONSERVATION CORPS 479826.98 432677.8 91

EASTSIDE DALMATIAN RAVALI CO. WEED 

2014 01 TOAD FLAX RAC DISTRICT 15300 9888 

BITTERROOT BIOCONTROL RAVALI CO. WEED 

2014 01 RAC DISTRICT 18460 21040 

IPNF ROADSIDE BRUSH SHOSHONE COUNTY 

2014 01 CUTTING PUBLIC WORKS 64656.9 300 
TABLE A - Page 48 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region Project Title jApplicant Name Match Match Fun

2014 01 RAC FAMILY FORESTRY EXPO FAMILY FORESTRY EXPO 44433 82960 

RAC- BOB MARSHALL BOB MARSHALL 

WILDERNESS FOUNDATION WILDERNESS 

TRAILS AND WEEDS PROJECT FOUNDATION-50TH 

2014 01 SUPPORT ANN IV. 102179 28234 

RAC-NORTH FORK RD 

2014 01 MAINTENANCE FLATHEAD COUNTY 105777 162741 

MCC BIG RIVER TRAIL AT 25 MONTANA 

2014 01 MILE CREEK- RAC CONSERVATION CORP 11326 7837 

HUNGRY HORSE WILDERNESS MONTANA 

2014 01 TRAILS YOUTH CREW- RAC CONSERVATION CORP 12326 27237 

NORTH FORK ROVING TRAILS MONTANA 

2014 01 RAC CONSERVATION CORP 22652 15690 

MONTANA 

2014 01 TALLY LAKE TRAILS 2014 RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 14845 11623 

RAC_TRAIL MAINTENANCE- MONTANA 

LOWER TWIN/MUD LAKE CONSERVATION CORPSLOOKOUT/MINER CREEK SBRD TRAIL 

2014 01 TRAILS-RAC MAINTENANCE 88125 53348 

FLATHEAD WATERSHED WHITEFISH LAKE 

2014 01 EDUCATORS' GUIDE INSTITUTE 15704 78636.52 9
TABLE A - Page 49 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service App!i Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

DANAHER RAC & TRAIL 

PROJECTS FOCUSED ON 

WATERSHED MONTANA 

2014 01 IMPROVEMENTS CONSERVATION CORPS 109951.6 66822 1

EMERALD POOL/ YOUNGS MONTANA 

2014 01 CREEK TRAILS RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 29830 14904 

NORTH DRY CREEK TRAIL RE- LIVINGSTON BICYCLE CLUB 

2014 01 BUILD MAINTENANCE & PCCF 18699.1 22400 

RAC: SHERIFF'S RESOURCE 

2014 01 PROTECTION SWEET GRASS COUNTY 27390 0 

RAC: AQUATIC INVASIVE INVASIVE SPECIES ACTION 

2014 01 SPECIES PROTECTION NETWOR 20202 21230 

RAC: WHEELER GULCH-S. MONTANA 

2014 01 COTIONWOOD CONSERVATION CORP 10321.28 3633.4 1

RAC: EAST ZONE TRAIL STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2014 01 MAINT/WEED CONTROL ASSN, INC 30302.73 27466 5

RAC: W BOULDER PARK COUNTY 

RIVER/MISSION CREEK COOPERATIVE WEED 

WATERSHED WEED MANAGEMENT 

2014 01 MANAGEMENT COMMITIEE 37477.08 43670.48 8

SUNBURST COMMUNITY 

2014 01 RAC RAILS TO TRAILS SERVICE FOUNDATION 6050 0 
TABLE A - Page 50 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl; Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

LINCOLN COUNTY SNO2014 01 OS SNO-KAT GROOMER SHED KATS 17249 28912 

TRAIL MAINTENANCE & FRIENDS OF SCOTCHMAN 

2014 01 VISITOR EDUCATION PEAKS WILDERNESS 77029 185221.88 26

BIG EDDY REC SITE ROAD 

2014 01 IMPROVEMENTS- RAC A VISTA CORPORATION 7040 7500 

MONTANA 

2014 01 CREW LEADERS FOR YCC CONSERVATION CORPS 516857 161188 

LINCOLN RD TRAIL 

MAINTENANCE & MONTANA WILDERNESS 

2014 01 RESTORATION PROJECTS ASSOCIATION 78622.6 36014.8 1

BENCHMARK TRAIL MONTANA 

2014 01 MAINTENANCE 11CS053 CONSERVATION CORPS 27000 32157 

UTILE BLACKFOOT TRAIL MONTANA 

2014 01 MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 25200 20789.5 

WEST CENTRAL MT WEST CENTRAL MT 

2014 01 AVALANCHE CENTER AVALANCHE CENT 149700.24 181543.65 33

SEELEY LAKE BEAR CONFLICT 

PREVENTION( BEAR 

RESISTANT TRASH 

2014 01 CONTAINERS) DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE 9500 1300 
TABLE A -Page 51 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

FINLEY FLATS RECREATION 

AREA FACILITY 

2014 01 IMPROVEMENT RAC A VISTA CORP 15000 20400 

MONTANA 

2014 01 PETTY MTN TRAILS RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 10960 11842 

MONTANA 

2014 01 RATTLESNAKE TRAILS RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 12640 20915 

RAC-ORANGE HAWKWEED 

ERADICATION/STRATEGIC MISSOULA COUNTY WEED 

2014 01 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL DISTRICT 11050 12096 

SEELEY LAKE RD AQUATIC 

RESTORATION AND TROUT UNLIMITED, BIG 

2014 01 MONITORING BLACKFOOT CHAPTER 57383 8400 

MONTANA 

2014 01 ROCK CREEK TRAILS RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 11954 11842 

MONTURE ROAD POWELL COUNTY2014 01 RESURFACING-RAe PROJECT MONTURE 138120 0 

CLEARWATER RESOURCE, CONSERVATION, 

RAC- CLEARWATER BASIN DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, 

2014 01 COLLABORATIVE INC. 220000 37900 

2014 01 RAC- TRAIL MAINTENANCE DUST DEVILS 6006 20070 
TABLE A -Page 52 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC-MOTORIZED TRAIL MAGRUDER ROAD 

2014 01 MAINTENANCE ADVENTURES, LLC 10027 60S7 

RAC- DEFERRED MAl NT. 

MOTORIZED TRAILS- MONTANA 

2014 01 SALMON RIVER RD CONSERVATION CORPS S8131 S0397 

RAC- PALOUSE RD SIGN NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2014 01 INSTALL CORPS 33S16 14217.16 4

RAC-NORTH ZONE NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2014 01 DEVELOPED REC SITE MAl NT. CORPS 29852.4 18294.25 4

PALOUSE-CLEARWATER 

RAC- LITILE SLATE RIPARIAN ENVIRONMENTAL 

2014 01 PLANTING INSTITUTE 32097.24 4941.2 3

RAC- INVASIVE WEED IDAHO COUNTY WEED 

2014 01 TREATMENT DEPT. 74529.52 20000 9

G&A PORCUPINE FALLS TRAIL STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2014 02 PROJECT STAGE II ASSOCIATION 26058.03 41787.42 6

NH FRONT RANGE INVASIVE LAWRENCE CO. INVASIVE 

2014 02 SPECIES SPECIES 35771.73 0 3

MY RIGHTS-OF-WAYS PENNINGTON CO. WEED & 

2014 02 SHADED FUEL BREAK PEST 56189.14 392786.14 44

MY OXEYE DAISY REDUCTION PENNINGTON CO. WEED & 

2014 02 PROJECT PEST 6384.89 8989.92 1
TABLE A - Page 53 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match fun

SOUTHWEST 

2014 02 GUN LAGARITA TRAIL CONSERVATION CORP 33962.5 19604 

TNC-UPPER GUNNSION 

BASIN WETLAND/RIPARIAN THE NATURE 

2014 02 PROJECT CONSERVANCY, CPW, H 140797.68 44500 18

OUR- MONTROSE COUNTY 

2014 02 PROJECT ROAD AGREEMENT MONTROSE COUNTY 36164.16 21600 5

ENHANCEMENT OF EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING 

AVAILABLE IN RELATION TO COOP FISH & WILDLIFE 

2014 02 BEETLE KILL AND ELK RESEARCH UNIT 44717.6 13393.15 5

TREATMENT OF NOXIOUS ALBANY COUNTY WEED & 

2014 02 WEEDS PEST CONTROL DISTRICT 87104.6 58539.5 1

KIT CARSON CHALLENGER ROCKY MOUNTAIN FIELD 

2014 02 RIDGE TRAIL PROJECT INSTITUTE 158891.92 390372.53 54

FEN/WETLAND DELINEATION COLORADO MOUNTAIN 

2014 02 PROJECT COLLEGE 20950.15 6543 2

E3/KFM KUNDALINI FIRE 

2014 02 WILCOX GULCH MANAGMEN 25929.2 25044 

MIDDLE FORK TRAIL SOUTHWEST 

2014 02 MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 48076 17952 
TABLE A - Page 54 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title !Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SOUTH CRESTONE/WILLOW E3/KUNDALINI FIRE 

2014 02 LAKES MANAGEMENT 17140.2 14196 

RAC FUNDED SCC CREWS SOUTHWEST 

2014 02 DIVIDE RD CONSERVATION CORPS 23832 15930.43 3

BIG SPRINGS PICNIC AREA SOUTHWEST 

2014 02 IMPROVEMENT CONSERVATION CORPS 22326 8976 

FSR 520 ROAD CULVERT 

REPLACEMENT AND 

2014 02 EXTENSION HINSDALE COUNTY 59602.8 5000 

RARE ALPINE PLANT MRHI- MOSQUITO RANGE 

2014 02 PROTECTION HERITAGE INITIATIVE 46186.6 116938.52 16

SPK-MRHI UNAUTHORIZED MRHI- MOSQUITO RANGE 

2014 02 ROAD CLOSURE HERITAGE 40917.23 85590 12

SCC SPA SALIDA RANGER SOUTHWEST 

2014 02 DISTRICT CONSERVATION CORPS 111311.06 116274 22

SCC SPA-PARK COUNTY SOUTHWEST 

2014 02 CONSERVATION CREW CONSERVATION CORPS 30154.21 17952 4

LEWIS CREEK ROAD/LA 

2014 02 PLATA RIVER BRIDGE LA PLATA COUNTY 35058.36 19488.64 

LAKE CANYON FOREST 

HEALTH VETERAN CREW SOUTHWEST 

2014 02 THINNING PROJECT, SRS CONSERVATION CORP 30849.54 9232 4
TABLE A -Page 55 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WEST MANCOS ROAD 

2014 02 PARKING LOT- SRS PROJECT MONTEZUMA COUNTY 41927.07 9758.31 5

ORMISTON ROAD 

RESURFACING- SECURE 

2014 02 RURAL SCHOOLS PROJECT DOLORES COUNTY 20941.6 132568.77 15

EAST FORK WIND RIVER TROUT UNLIMITED, 

2014 02 RECONNECT PROJECT WYOMING WATER 31209.6 183950 2

SOUTH PASS ASPEN WYOMING GAME AND 

2014 02 RESTORATION PROJECT FISH COMMISSION 22079 307600.02 32

RIO BLANCO ROAD/MTN. RIO BLANCO COUNTY, 

2014 02 COOPERATIVE AGREE. STATE OF CO 357159.45 53005.72 41

WOODLAND LAKE PARK TOWN OF PINETOP2014 03 ACCESS RD MAl NT. LAKESIDE 42750 0 

PISTOLS, PLOWS & UTILE COLORADO RIVER 

2014 03 PETIICOATS HISTORIC TOUR RC&D 3224.92 2000 2014 03 BLACK CANYON RD 86 NAVAJO COUNTY 69337.22 103993 17

TOBOGGAN HILL HAZARD AMERICAN 

2014 03 TREE REMOVAL CONSERVATION EXPERIEN 10970.71 9310.25 22014 03 HALL CREEK THINNING APACHE COUNTY 51187.86 20006.6 7

ROAD 3140 MAGNESIUM 

2014 03 CHLORIDE APPLICATION APACHE COUNTY 75000 43874 
TABLE A - Page 56 

Forest Forest Tota

'"'!>'"'"'""'"" Service Service Appl: 1Proj

Year !Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match •Fun

ROAD 4140 MAGNESIUM 

2014 03 CHLORIDE APPLICATION APACHE COUNTY 15100 21058 

ROCKY MOUNTAIN YOUTH 

2014 03 SRS- CANJILON FOREST REST CORPS 60687 18093.23 7

CR 79 WATER CANYON ROAD 

2014 03 IMPROVEMENT SOCORRO COUNTY 43000 35759 

VERDE RIVER GREENWAY 

HABITAT IMPROVEMENT FRIENDS OF THE VERDE 

2014 03 PHASE II- RAC RIVER GRE 75222.88 33749.21 10

CORNVILLE TRAILHEAD 

2014 03 IMPLEMENTATION- RAC YAVAPAI COUNTY 21820.28 5434.6 2

CORNVILLE TRAILS 

TRAILHEAD ARIZONA CONSERVATION 

2014 03 IMPLEMENTATION- RAC CORPS 15640 9818 

TRAILS ACCESSIBILITY AND 

WATERSHED RESTORATION GILA WATERSHED 

AND ENHANCEMENT PARTNERSHIP OF 

2014 03 PROJECTS ARIZONA (GWPA) 7000 4560 

D4 SRS FS/BLM AGREEMENTROAD MAINTENANCE & 

2014 03 EROSION- 14K BLM SAFFORD 13951 0 
TABLE A - Page 57 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I Project Title l.\pplicant Name Match Match Fun

D4 SRS TRAILS W/AZ 

CONSERVATION CORP (AZCC) ARIZONA CONSERVATION 

2014 03 20K CORP (AZC 44800 17617.19 6

SPA- HABITAT RESTORATION 

AND HABITAT 

IMPROVEMENT FOR 

2014 03 POLLINATOR SPECIES SKY ISLAND ALLIANCE 24462 193895.2 2

MULTI-COUNTY 1- CNF TRAIL MAINTENANCE- D1, D2, D3, ARIZONA CONSERVATION 

2014 03 & D5 CORPS 127252.24 73152.71 20

GILA RIVER AND WILDERNESS UPPER GILA WATERSHED 

2014 03 FLOOD DEBRIS REMOVAL ALLIANCE 18200 4618 

SOUTH FORK MINERAL CREEK 

TRAIL #798 AND WHITETAIL 

2014 03 CANYON TRAIL #203 CONSERVATION LEGACY 38744.4 26928 2014 03 HERMOSA ROAD (RAC) COUNTY OF SIERRA 0 0 

KAIBAB NATIONAL FOREST 

YOUTH CONSERVATION SOUTHWEST 

2014 03 CORPS RAC YCC- SCC CONSERVATION CORPS 194499.63 173020 36

FUELS REDUCTION AND HIGHLANDS CENTER FOR 

2014 03 HABITAT IMPROVEMENT NATURAL HISTORY 95351.02 32648 12
TABLE A -Page 58 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC FUNDEDINFRASTRUCTURE 

IMPROVEMENTS FOR WATER 

2014 03 CONVEYANCE EFFICIENCY VERDE DITCH COMPANY 72136.28 21000 9

AMERICAN 

DOCE FIRE TRAILS CONSERVATION 

2014 03 REHABILITATION EXPERIENCE 33191.24 27135.14 6

HAZARDOUS FUELS STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2014 03 REDUCTION ASSOCIATION 21280.92 6697.82 2

ROCKY MOUNTAIN YOUTH 

2014 03 DOME TRAIL 151 CORPS 20809.98 10503.99 3

TOP OF PINAL'S TRAIL SOUTHWEST 

2014 03 MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 11561.66 10376 2

ICE HOUSE CANYON TRAIL SOUTHWEST 

2014 03 MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 11583.88 10977 2

EAST MOUNTAIN TRAIL, TOLL 

ROAD TRAIL LOOP; TRAIL 

2014 03 MAINTENACE ACE 14248.12 12496.69 2

AZ NATL SCENIC TRAIL 

REHABILITATION, PASSAGE 

2014 03 19, COTIONWOOD CANYON ACE 17974 12496.69 3
TABLE A- Page 59 

forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl1 

1

Proj

Year I Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match I Fun

FOREST ROAD 512 

SURFACING PROJECT PHASE 

2014 03 2 GILA COUNTY 344623.5 364422 7

ALMA TAYLOR- CART CREEK 

2014 04 STEWARDSHIP AGREEMENT MULE DEER FOUNDATION 100269.33 48978 14

BOISE COUNTY 

TRAIL MAINTENANCE RAC COMMUNITY JUSTICE 

2014 04 PROJECT #14BNF014 DEPARTMENT 12504.11 13966 2

BOISE COUNTY NOXIOUS 

2014 04 WEED CONTROL BOISE COUNTY 178542.71 51343.03 22

MCC TRAIL REPAIR TO FIRE MONTANA 

2014 04 DAMAGED ROUTES CONSERVATION CORPS 46652.4 28940.4 

SAGE HEN HILL ROAD REHAB 

2014 04 RAC #14BNF004 GEM COUNTY 64212 42781.8 1

SHAFER CREEK FISH PASSAGE 

2014 04 IMPROVEMENT TROUT UNLIMITED 73534 46100 

FONTENELLE CREEK FISH 

2014 04 PASSAGE IMPROVEMENT TROUT UNLIMITED 22134 51260 

HIGH LINE TRAIL 

REHABILITATION PROJECT MONTANA 

,2014 04 (RAC) CONSERVATION CORP 11737.8 8597.4 
TABLE A- Page 60 

Forest Forest Tota

'"'!>' "'"'" "'" .. Service Service Appl: 1Proj

Year !Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

FISH CREEK TRAIL CLEARING MONTANA 

2014 04 REHABILITATION PROJECT CONSERVATION CORP 16237.8 12896.1 

PUBLIC SERVICES & SOUTHERN UTAH 

2014 04 ENGINEERING STAFF UNIVERSITY 788530.98 224714.5 10

2014 04 ECOSYSTEM STAFF GROUP SUU IIC 864993.91 215201.03 10

IRON COUNTY ROAD 

2014 04 PROJECT AGREEMENT IRON COUNTY 51720 64770 2014 04 STRAWBERRY ROAD PROJECT KANE COUNTY 59855 7000 

RAC HELLS BACKBONE ROAD 

2014 04 DUST ABATEMENT GARFIELD COUNTY 21156.98 16800 3

MILLARD COUNTY INMATE MILLARD COUNTY 

2014 04 CREW SHERIFFS OFFICE 6016.8 29782.14 3

AMERICAN 

CONSERVATION 

2014 04 ACE TRAIL MAINTENANCE EXPERIENCE 89319.52 44516.1 13

2014-2016 SAN JUAN CWMA 

2014 04 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL CASTLELAND RC&D 12500 0 

UTILE SKI HILL LODGE PAYETIE LAKES SKI CLUB, 

2014 ,04 REMODEL INC. 8807.24 2694.45 1
TABLE A - Page 61 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region I Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SELWAY-BITTERROOT FRANK 

CHURCH FOUNDATION SELWAY-BITTERROOT 

VOLUNTEER & INTERN FRANK CHURCH 

2014 04 PROGRAM FOUNDATION, INC. 50980.51 13530 6

D1 ADAMS 

COUNTY /WICAP/USFS 

2014 04 FIREWOOD 2014 ADAMS COUNTY 15000 3500 

WILLOW BASKET TRAIL MONTANA 

2014 04 MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 18358.2 11842 2014 04 SCA WINTER TRAIL RANGERS SCA 22275.92 18311 4

FC-RONRW TRAIL CLEARING MONTANA 

2014 04 AND MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 75956.76 56971.8 13

C3 SOLUTIONS (BOONE 

BOONE CREEK CATCH BASTIN CREEK CATTLE 

2014 04 (TITLE II FUNDS) ASSOCIATION) 1501.33 3015.2 

COOPERATIVE WEED 

2014 04 MANAGEMENT PROJECT LEMHI COUNTY (CWMA) 405103.6 135135 5

COMMUNITY RAC- NORTH YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2014 04 ZONE TRAILS PROGRAM, INC. 22378.08 38465.07 6

2014 BIG WOOD TRAILS BLAINE COUNTY 

2014 04 PROJECTS RECREATION DISTRICT 63803.2 23000 
TABLE A - Page 62 

Forest Forest Tota

"5' "'"'"'"''" Service Service Appl! 1Proj

Year I Region Project Title Ar:mlicant Name Match Match 1Fun

D5 CAMAS COUNTY NOXIOUS 

2014 04 WEED CONTROL CAMAS COUNTY 41788.5 3095 

D3 NYC BEAVER CRK FIRE NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2014 04 RESTORATION RAC0052014 CORPS 28522.24 10287.08 3

GRIZZLY BEAR I & E IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF 

2014 04 TECHNICIAN FISH AND GAME 21213.69 12330 3

RAC-ROCK CREEK, PINE 

CREEK ABANDONED FENCE CARIBOU CATILEMENS 

2014 04 REMOVAL ASSOCIATION 4540 2500 

STRAWBERRY CANYON TO 

UTAH STATELINE MINK CREEK STOCKMANS 

2014 04 COLLABORATIVE WEED ASSOC 3000 0 

IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF 

2014 04 JESSE CREEK RESTORATION FISH AND GAME 19554.5 40000 

RAC-MILL CREEK BOAT FREMONT COUNTY PARKS 

2014 04 LAUNCH & RECREATION DEPT 10000 4250 

2014 04 JENSEN CREEK SPA TROUT UNLIMITED 60990 71700 

ROCK CREEK RESTORATION SAGEBRUSH STEPPE LAND 

2014 04 PROJECT TRUST 238370 353272 

NORTHWEST YOUTH CORPS NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2014 04 TRAIL MAINTENANCE. CORPS 10264.72 4075.65 1
TABLE A - Page 63 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! 

1

Proj

Year I Region Project Title Armlicant Name Match Match iFun

S20414 STATE OF NEVADA NEVADA STATE HISTORIC 

2014 04 CULTURAL SITE MONITORING PRESERVA 8328.23 2100 1

RAC-NYE COUNTY RECREATION/RESOURCE FRIENDS OF NEVADA 

2014 04 CREW WILDERNESS 54608.4 0 

GBI AGREEMENT FOR FUEL 

REDUCTION AT HISTORIC 

2014 04 RESOURCES GREAT BASIN INSTITUTE 21835.78 11110 3

MINERAL COUNTY 

CONSERVATION AND 

WILDLIFE EDUCATION 

2014 04 PROGRAM MINERAL COUNTY 13727.88 3560 1

SCHEDUAL A WEEDS 

WASATCH- STRAWBERRY 

2014 04 VALLEY WASATCH COUNTY 32492.35 0 3

TITLE II JUAB- SALT CREEK 

2014 04 OVERLOOK JUAB COUNTY 6394 0 

TOOELE COUNTY SCHEDULE 

A ROAD AGREEMENT 

2014 04 HICKMAN AMENDMENT TOOELE COUNTY 23000 0 

' 
TABLE A - Page 64 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region Project Title iApplicant Name Match Match Fun

CACHE COUNTY-TONY 

GROVE ROAD (FSR #20003) 

SHOULDER IMPROVEMENTS2014 04 PHASE I CACHE COUNTY 3S140.48 960 3

PO-OOS74091 SCA TRAIL STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2014 OS CREW ASSOCIATION 463S1.S6 30069.34 

HAPPY CAMP WATER TANKS FOR COMMUNITY PROTECTION FROM HAPPY CAMP FIRE SAFE 

2014 OS WILDFIRE COUNCIL 3S740 34930 

SISKYOU ARBORETUM RAC 

2014 OS PROPOSAL 12-029 SHASTA VALLEY RCD 24S74.97 23880 4

LOWER scan RIVER 

EMERGENCY WATER SOURCE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

2014 OS DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE CENTER 782S 3600 

SHACKLEFORD TRAILHEAD SCOn RIVER WATERSHED 

2014 OS CORRAL REBUILD COUNCIL 11922.8 13022.6 

STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2014 OS KELSEY CREEK TRAIL CORPS ASSOCIATION S7706 73429 

SAWYER'S BAR WUI FUELS SALMON RIVER 

2014 OS REDUCTION RESTORATION COUNCIL 3490S 30899 
TABLE A -Page 65 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

TEHAMA COUNTY 

PONDEROSA WAY SOUTH RESOURCE 

2014 OS SHADED FUEL BREAK CONSERVATION DISTRICT 31421 3S632 

SHASTA FORESTRY FORESTRY EDUCATORS 

2014 OS CHALLENGE INCORPORATED 6809 6809 

LASSEN AG. RESOURCES 

AGAINST WEEDS (RAW), RAC LASSEN COUNTY 

2014 OS GRANT DEPARTMENT OF AG soooo soooo 

MENDOCINO COUNTY ECONOMIC 

BIOCHAR DEMONSTRATION DEVELOPMENT AND 

2014 OS PROJECT FINANCE CORPORATION 2SOO 0 

GLENN COUNTY 

INVASIVE SPECIES DETECTION DEPARTMENT OF 

2014 OS MONITORING AND CONTROL AGRICULTURE 32928.96 9498.72 4

TRAIL MAINTENANCE IN THE 

YOLLA-BOLLY MIDDLE EEL HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2014 OS WILDERNESS AREA TRAIL CREW 16384 103219.8 1

MODOC COUNTY 

WILDLIFE SERVICES DEPARTMENT OF 

2014 OS PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT AGRICULTURE 38832 40000 

MODOC COUNTY 

A-RATED NOXIOUS WEED DEPARTMENT OF 

2014 OS ERADICATION PROJECT AGRICULTURE 38832 38832 
TABLE A - Page 66 

forest forest Tota

A Service Service Appl! 1Proj

"5' "'"'" "'" .. 

Year I Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match I fund

BARRY POINT RANGE 

2014 OS IMPROVMENTS CAL FIRE 73800 23837.S 

RAC FATAL FLAW ANALYSIS, 

WATER RESEARCH AND WATER RESEARCH AND 

2014 OS TRAINING CENTER WORK TRAINING CE S8340 12SOO 

MILL CREEK ROADSIDE 

HAZARDOUS FUELS 

2014 OS REDUCTION PROJECT HOOPA VALLEY TRIBE 112674.3S 3283S.26 14

CALIFORNIA 

2014 OS CCC WATERSHED STEWARDS CONSERVATION CORPS 76082 11S226S 1

TRIN RAC MAD RIVER WATERSHED RESEARCH & 

2014 OS PRESCRIBED FIRE SUPPORT TRAINING 19869 6946 

SRS2 SIERRA ACCESS 

2014 OS COALITION SIERRA ACCESS COALITION 23079.2 123S2.4 

RAC WILDFIRES AND KERN RIVER VALLEY FIRE 

2014 OS WATERSHED HEALTH SAFE CO 4SOO 0 

RAC STEWARDS OF THE STEWARDS OF THE 

2014 OS SEQUOIA SEQUOIA 7000 0 

RC KEEPERS OF THE KERN 

WILD AND SCENIC KERN 

RIVER CLEAN UP AND KEEPERS OF THE KERN A 

,2014 OS MAINTENANCE STEERING 13436 0 
TABLE A -Page 67 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC UNITED TRAIL 

MAINTAINERS OF UNITED TRAIL 

2014 OS CALIFORNIA MAINTAINERS OF CA 6S37 0 

TRINITY COUNTY 

TRINITY COUNTY CHIPPING RESOURCE 

2014 OS SERVICES CONSERVATION DISTRICT 78091 128S7 

TRINITY TIMBERLANDS NORTHWEST CA 

SOUTH FORK TRINITY RIVER RESOURCE 

ROAD SEDIMENT SOURCE CONSERVATION AND 

2014 OS INVENTORY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL 10000 164029 

GREAT SHASTA RAIL TRAIL GREAT SHASTA RAIL TRAIL 

2014 OS PUBLIC ACCESS AND SIGNS ASSOCIATION 1SOOO 7SOO 

RAC ADMINISTRATION NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

2014 OS ASSISTANCE TRAINEE RESOURCE CENTER 2372S.98 6360 3

WATERSHED RESEARCH 

2014 OS MUD SPRINGS FUEL BREAK AND TRAINING CENTER 101321.28 2S339.6 12

THE WATERSHED 

SIMS NOXIOUS WEED RESEARCH AND TRAINING 

2014 OS REMOVAL AND INVENTORY CENTER 60922.22 1S806.28 

SHASTA-TEHAMA-TRINITY 

NATURAL RESOURCE YOUTH JOINT COMMUNITY 

2014 OS TRAINING COLLEGE DISTRICT 7737S.49 19460.92 9
TABLE A - Page 68 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Proj

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WEAVERVILLE BASIN TRAIL TRINITY COUNTY 

SYSTEM MAP, WEBSITE AND RESOURCE 

2014 05 SIGN UPDATE CONSERVATION DISTRICT 15464.67 11019.82 2

BACKCOUNTRY 

HORSEMEN OF 

CALIFORNIA- SHASTA 

2014 05 SHASTA TRINITY TRAILS TRINITY UNIT 97023.98 249455 34

RAC-TRAILS MANAGEMENTBOWERMAN HOMESTEAD TRINITY COUNTY 

INTERPRETIVE TRAIL NEPA & RESOURCE 

2014 05 PROJ PLAN CONSERVATION DISTRICT 3920 1015 

THE WATERSHED 

COLLABORATIVE PILE RESEARCH AND TRAINING 

2014 05 BURNING CENTER 28128.72 7034.11 3

TRINITY COUNTY 

SHADED FUEL RESOURCE 

2014 05 BREAK/PLANTATION NEPA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 182049.21 41401.23 22

TRINITY COUNTY 

SALT CREEK ROAD RESOURCE 

2014 05 DECOMMISSIONING CONSERVATION DISTRICT 135186.8 38000 1
TABLE A -Page 69 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC-TRINITY COUNTY RCD 

2014 OS SUMMER FIELD CAMP 2014 TRINITY COUNTY RCD 76S7 11S10 

THE WATERSHED 

INDIAN VALLEY SUMMER RESEARCH AND TRAINING 

2014 OS CAMP CENTER 11194.16 70S8.S6 1

BACKCOUNTRY 

HORSEMEN OF 

CALIFORNIA SHASTA2014 OS YOLLA BOLLY TRAILS TRINITY UNIT 13112.8 2S923 

GATEWAY TRAIL 

MAINTENANCE AND MT. SHASTA TRAIL 

2014 OS IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATION 30S76 10000 

MT. SHASTA NORDIC CENTER MOUNT SHASTA NORDIC 

2014 OS TRAIL SIGNS SKI ORGANIZATION 1S347.8 39S6 

BCHA SAN JOAQUIN SIERRA 

UNIT 2014 WILDERNESS BCHA SAN JOAQUIN 

2014 OS WORK PROJECTS SIERRA UNIT 7100.42 0 

OS16SO EAGLE MEADOW 

ROAD AND EROSION EAGLE MEADOW 

2014 OS IMPROVEMENT HOMEOWNER'S ASSOC 97SO 191SO 2014 OS SRS2 - RSC YSS TUOLUMNE RIVER TRUST 33131 0 

4N47 AND 4N26B ROAD BACKCOUNTRY 

2014 OS MAINTENANCE HORSEMEN 1S428.84 1S138.5 3
TABLE A - Page 70 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Proj

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

GENERATION GREEN 

2014 OS INTERNS GREAT BASIN INSTITUTE 248074 115174.09 36

;65 COOP NOXIOUS WEED 

GRANT TO ODA WITH 

2014 06 FORESTS PARTICIPATION ODA 161000 0 

CHILDREN'S FOREST 

2014 06 COORDINATION HIGH DESERT ESD 328172.08 249110.23 57

WILDERNESS STEWARDSHIP 

2014 06 VOLUNTEERS MT ADAMS INSTITUTE 15688.27 7058.86 2

CENTRAL OREGON FOREST 

DESCHUTES COLLABORATIVE STEWARDSHIP 

2014 06 FOREST PROJECT DE003 FOUNDATION 142946.6 102588.8 2

CHILDREN'S FOREST OF CENTRAL OREGONCROOKED RIVER WATERSHED CROOKED RIVER 

2014 06 PROJECTS YOUTH OUTREACH WATERSHED COUNCI 9116.36 2731.57 1

DESCHUTES COUNTY WEED 

2014 06 MGT DEOOS DESCHUTES COUNTY 23750 31190 

HIGH DESERT 

MUSEUMFOREST AND 

2014 06 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT HIGH DESERT MUSEUM 36100 13621.06 4
TABLE A - Page 71 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl Proj

Year Region Project Title Name Match Match Fund

AMERICAN 

2014 06 SRS2-DES-SUTILE LAKE TRAIL CONSERVATION EXPERIEN 29335.46 29083.76 58

HOC-COYCC SUMMER 

2014 06 PROGRAM HEART OF OR CORPS 818139.14 234985.78 105

FLYMON EAST STEWARDSHIP NATIONAL WILD TURKEY 

2014 06 PROJECT FEDERATION 23779.76 14999.6 38

S2F69714 WARNER CANYON 

2014 06 SKI AREA THINNING LAKE COUNTY, OREGON 21650 58250 

02-CROOKED CREEK PHASE II 

2014 06 RESTORATION LCUWC 49000 459206 

S2R68614 SPRAGUE 316 VEG KLAMATH LAKE LAND 

2014 06 MGMT- KLLT TRUST 37882 5705 

S2R67914 KLAMATH RIVER KLAMATH WATERSHED 

2014 06 WEED ERADICATION PARTNERSHIP 21540 2520 

HONEY CREEK FISH PASSAGE 

2014 06 AND SCREENING BLM LAKEVIEW 13840 0 

RAC PROJECT K-E-1404, 

SPRAGUE RIVER LEVEE 

2014 06 REMOVAL USFWS 69800 128500 
TABLE A - Page 72 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region I Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC PROJECT K-E-1410, 

HABITAT RESTORATION ON 

2014 06 NORTH FORK SPRAGUE RIVER USFWS 25423 47900 

IYS INVASIVE PLANT INTEGRAL YOUTH 

2014 06 TREATMENT SERVICES 95403.58 26408.31 12

TREATMENT OF INVASIVE LAKE COUNTY 

2014 06 PLANTS COOPERATIVE WEED M 618376.23 218230 83

S2W66814/NFWF0213 JACK 

CREEK SPOTIED FROG 

HABITAT RESTORATION KLAMATH BASIN 

2014 06 PROJECT RANGELAND TRUST 123709 131938.45 25

UPPER WILLIAMSON RIVER KLAMATH BASIN 

2014 06 LARGE WOOD PLACEMENT RANGELAND TRUST 73686.75 48712.93 12

SPENCER CREEK RIPARIAN KLAMATH BASIN 

2014 06 RESTORATION RANGELAND TRUST 8831.97 9000 1

SUN CREEK HISTORIC 

2014 06 CHANNEL RECONNECTION TROUT UNLIMITED 154871 24728 

UPPER SYCAN ASPEN NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2014 06 RESTORATION CORPS 51613.75 32073.35 

SOUTH WARNER 

ASPEN/MEADOW 

2014 06 RESTORATION PROJECT NYC 49354.56 30708.53 8
TABLE A -Page 73 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

LOWER SEVEN MILE 

INSTREAM HABITAT 

2014 06 IMPROVEMENT TROUT UNLIMITED 24825.4 7500 

CROOKED CREEK INSTREAM KLAMATH BASIN 

2014 06 HABITAT IMPROVEMENT RANGELAND TRUST 20098.6 45000.37 6

PINE CREEK VISITOR MOUNT ST HELENS 

2014 06 INFORMATION CENTER INSTITUTE 5395 4522.5 

PINE CREEK VISITOR DISCOVER YOUR 

2014 06 INFORMATION CENTER NORTHWEST 6958 4600 

WHITE PASS SCHOOL 

2014 06 DISCOVERY TEAM DISTRICT 139726.23 36933.12 17

VISITOR INFORMATION SKAMANIA COUNTY 

2014 06 CENTER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 5285 32268 

MT. ST. HELENS TOUTLE 

2014 06 RIVER INVASIVE WEED COWLITZ COUNTY 157543.36 43444.3 20

SKAMANIA COUNTY SKAMANIA COUNTY 

2014 06 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL NOXIOUS WEED BOARD 348660.53 101087.84 44

CFLRP MULTIPARTY 

MONITORING 

COORDINATION AND BLUE MOUNTAIN FOREST 

2014 06 FACILITATION PARTNERS 304811.26 303218.96 60

SUMMER YOUTH GRANT COUNTY SOIL & 

2014 06 CONSERVATION PROJECT WATER CONS 25997.89 6954.54 3
TABLE A- Page 74 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

GRANT COUNTY SOIL AND 

WATER CONSERVATION 

2014 06 PINE CREEK FIREWISE DISTRICT 65968 0 

SNOHOMISH COUNTY 

SHERIFF'S OFFICE 

COOPERATIVE LAW SNOHOMISH COUNTY 

2014 06 ENFORCEMENT SHERIFF 175580 0 

CLACKAMAS STEWARDSHIP CLACKAMAS RIVER BASIN 

2014 06 PARTNERS COORDINATOR COUNCIL 55105 24796 

WA DEPARTMENT OF 

2014 06 WCC FORESTWIDE CREW ECOLOGY 125470 84790 

ESTABLISHING 

PHYTHOPTHORA-RESISTANT OREGON STATE 

2014 06 POC IN CURRY COUNTY UNIVERSITY EXTENS 9236 2535 

LOWER ELK RIVER TRIBUTARY CURRY SOIL & WATER 

2014 06 RESTORATION CONSERVATIO 40402 119417 

GARBAGE AND LITIER SOUTH COAST 

2014 06 ABATEMENT:TRASH DOGS WATERSHEDS 11979 10700 

S2X645 INFORMING LAND 

MANAGMENT PLANNING 

THROUGH AVIAN DATA KLAMATH BIRD 

2014 06 CENTER INTERFACE OBSERVATORY 9000 0 
TABLE A- Page 75 

Forest Forest Tota

"'5' "'"'"'"''" Service Service Appl1 Proj

Year I Region Project Title annlir'lnt Name Match Match Fun

ROGUE RIVER-SISKIYOU NF RECREATION TRAIL 

MAINTENANCE PROGRAM 

2014 06 (2014-2015) NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 69036.6 32605.18 10

S2W644 BITIER LICK CREEK 

RIPARIAN RESTORATION UPPER ROGUE 

2014 06 PROJECT WATERSHED ASSOCIAT 8270.82 3294 1

2014-2015 JACKSON COUNTY 

2014 06 ROADSIDE BRUSHING JACKSON COUNTY 39595.12 38895.75 7

2014-2015 JOSEPHINE 

COUNTY ROADSIDE JOSEPHINE COUNTY 

2014 06 BRUSHING/JOB TRAINING COMMUNITY JUSTICE 46689.97 51474.94 9

JOSEPHINE COUNTY 

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2014 06 ON WILD RIVERS R.D. CORPS 16042.66 7527.13 2

ALSEA RIVER BOAT LAUNCH NORTHWEST 

2014 06 RESTORATION STEELHEADERS MID VAL 19813.7 7775.09 2

MEADOW LAKE ROAD 

2014 06 OVERLAY YAMHILL COUNTY 30003 0 

NORTHWEST YOUTH CORPS NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2014 06 INTERNS CORPS 31420.73 12226.94 4
TABLE A - Page 76 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service App!i Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WHEELER SWCD YELLOW WHEELER SOIL & WATER 

2014 06 STARTHISTL CONSERVATION DISTRICT 15412 0 

TRI-COUNTY 

COOPERATIVE WEED 

TRI-COUNTY COOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT AREA 

2014 06 WEED MANAGEMENT (CWMA) 66416.73 23725 9

TRAIL MAINTENANCE WORK 

2014 06 CREW NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 76800.64 25336.78 10

2014 06 UPPER COW FUELS WUI PHOENIX SCHOOL 45759.85 75282.1 12

MUDDY SLED FUELS 

2014 06 REDUCTION WALLOWA RESOURCES 24699 6275 

TRAINING EMPLOYMENT 

2014 06 WWOYC CONSORTIUM 49478.67 0 4

HELLS CANYON WILDERNESS MONTANA 

2014 06 TRAILS MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 173144.37 102355.47 27

LOWER JOSEPH CREEK DAVIS 

2014 06 CREEK FENCE WALLOWA SWCD 32744.04 11200 4

COMMUNITY WILDLFIRE 

2014 06 PROTECTION PLAN UNION COUNTY 44298.01 45111 8

FOREST HIGHWAY LITIER CHELAN COUNTY PUBLIC 

2014 06 PICK-UP WORKS 15426.06 3912.65 1
TABLE A -Page 77 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

METHOW GATEWAY METHOW VALLEY SPORT 

2014 06 PARKING PROJECT DESIGN TRAILS ASSOCIATION 18446.21 4623.22 2

OKANOGAN COUNTY 

2014 06 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL WEED BOARD 103203.6 91522.1 1

NYC ENTIAT TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2014 06 MAINTENANCE CORPS 108019.15 54743.95 1

EARLY DETECTION RAPID 

RESPONSE NOXIOUS WEED OKANOGAN COUNTY 

2014 06 CONTROL WEED BOAD 29990.68 9340.38 3

2014 SRZ TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2014 06 MAINTENANCE CORPS 29369.24 19547.75 4

2014 MCKENZIE RIVER 

RANGER DISTRICT TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2014 06 MAINTENANCE CORPS 39677.24 14667.22 5

SWEET HOME RANGER 

DISTRICT WEED CONTROL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2014 06 2014 CORPS 26571.19 14248.17 4

MCKENZIE YOUTH MCKENZIE SCHOOL 

2014 06 CONSERVATION CORPS DISTRICT 23072.4 22546.02 4

2014 MCKENZIE RIVER 

RANGER DISTRICT NATURAL RESOURCE RESTORATION LOOKING GLASS YOUTH 

2014 06 WORK EXPERIENCE AND FAMILY 15283.86 8988.18 2
TABLE A - Page 78 

Forest Forest Tota

A Service Service Appi Proj

I"'"''"'"''""'"' 

Year Region Project Title ... Name Match Match Fund

WILDLIFE HABIAT 

RESTORATION AND 

ENHANCEMENT WITH THE 

SSP AND SCC PROGRAMS ON NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2014 06 MCKENZIE RIVER RANGER D CORPS 33413.69 15870.52 49

MIDDLE FORK WILDERNESS 

DEFERRED TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2014 06 MAINTENANCE 2014 CORPS 30288.58 12226.94 42

MCKENZIE SCHOOL EAGLE 

PRIDE COOPERATIVE MCKENZIE SCHOOL 

2014 06 NURSERY DISTRICT 10213 56919.12 67

BAMBER CREEK ROAD FERRY COUNTY PUBLIC 

2014 06 IMPROVEMENT WORKS 120500 0 

SOUTH END OHV TRAIL STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2014 06 RANGERS ASSOCIATION 94473.62 71160 165

PROTECTING FEDERAL LANDS 

BY BUILDING EFFECTIVE 

WEED CONTROL PROGRAMS CASCADE PACIFIC 

2014 06 HW-13-009 RESOURCE CONSE 11895 0 
TABLE A - Page 79 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match fun

GARRISON HOLLOW, DOBBER 

HOLLOW, CAT HOLLOW AND 

OLD HOUSE BRANCH ROAD LESLIE COUNTY FISCAL 

2014 08 IMPROVEMENT COURT 24674.56 0 2

WINN PARISH ROAD 

2014 08 IMPROVEMENT WINN PARISH 109000 82800 2014 08 LOW WATER ROAD FRANKLIN COUNTY 72000 0 2014 08 D04 W.HOMOCHinO RD AMITE COUNTY 33000 0 

DOl RAC 538 IMPROVMENT- SMITH COUNTY BOARD 

2014 08 SMITH COUNTY SUPERVISORS 22373 0 

DOl RAC NEW HOME ROAD 

IMPROVMENT- SCOn 

2014 08 COUNTY scan CO SUPERVISORS 17571 0 

DOl RAC SPRINGFIELD SCOn COUNTY BOARD 

2014 08 OVERLAY- SCan COUNTY SUPERVISORS 17572 0 

DOl RAC DUMMY LINE ROAD SHARKEY COUNTY BOARD 

2014 08 IMP SUPERVISO 11775.98 0 1

LIONS TALE NATIONAL 

RECREATION TRAIL REPAIR POTOMAC APPALACHIAN 

2014 08 AND IMPROVEMENT TRAIL CLUB 7498 0 

14-R0-110809oo-ool scan 

2014 08 COUNTY scan COUNTY 289836 0 
TABLE A - Page 80 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! 

Year Region I Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match Fun

14-R0-11080900-002 

MCCURTAIN COUNTYTIAK 

2014 08 ACCESS ROADS MCCURTAIN COUNTY 47531 0 

14-R0-11080900-003 

MONTGOMERY COUNTY 

2014 08 LOGAN GAP ROAD MONTGOMERY COUNTY 89510 0 

14-R0-11080900-004 POLK 

COUNTY POSEY HOLLOW 

2014 08 ROAD POLK COUNTY 152880 0 

14-R0-11080900-005 LOGAN 

2014 08 COUNTY LOGAN COUNTY 44234 0 2014 08 MADISON CO 2014 TITLE II MADISON CO JUDGE 23584 17000 

CRAWFORD COUNTY 2014 CRAWFORD COUNTY 

2014 08 TITLE II JUDGE 36844 16000 

FRANKLIN COUNTY 2014 

2014 08 TITLE II FRANKLIN COUNTY JUDGE 36870 11000 

2014 08 STONE COUNTY 2014 TITLE II STONE COUNTY JUDGE 32144 16000 

BAXTER COUNTY 2014 TITLE 

2014 08 II BAXTER COUNTY JUDGE 7560 6000 2014 08 YELL COUNTY TITLE II YELL COUNTY JUDGE 56600 0 

JOHNSON COUNTY 2014 

2014 08 TITLE II JOHNSON COUNTY JUDGE 99662 240650 
TABLE A- Page 81 

Forest Forest Tota

" Service Service Appli !Proj1 "!>' "'"'"'"'"' 

Year I Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

NEWTON COUNTY 2014 

2014 08 TITLE II NEWTON COUNTY JUDGE 73698 35555 

SEARCY COUNTY 2014 TITLE 

2014 08 II SEARCY COUNTY JUDGE 31889.24 22275.76 

2014 08 POPE COUNTY 2014 TITLE II POPE COUNTY JUDGE 209985 19980 

SRS2 SEC RURAL SCHLSUNION CO.- SINCLAIR DIRT 

2014 08 ROAD IMPROVEMENTS UNION CO., SC 40957.39 150000 19

SRS2 SEC RURAL SCHLSNEWBERRY CO.- ROAD 

MAINTENANCE & 

2014 08 IMPROVEMENT PROJ. NEWBERRY CO., SC 30636.83 21940 5

COUNTY ROAD 1655 

2014 08 PROJECT HOUSTON COUNTY, TX 40570 0 

2014 08 HOGG ROAD PROJECT TRINITY COUNTY, TX 32062.5 0 

SHOWY LADYSLIPPER BYWAY LADYSLIPPER SCENIC 

2014 09 RESTORATION PROJECT BYWAY 9850 0 

31 ROAD (FSR 9770) ROAD 

2014 09 MAINTENANCE WEXFORD COUNTY 140558 16681 

DENT COUNTY ROAD MAINT 

2014 09 PROJECT DENT COUNTY 22727.9 0 
TABLE A - Page 82 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

POND FORK AND GLADE TOP 

2014 09 TRAIL ROAD MAINTANENCE OZARK COUNTY 16298 4000 

S2190G14- COURTNEY LAKE 

2014 09 EQUESTRIAN TRAIL MI-TRALE 14062.15 8202 2

S2W90H14- BLUFF CREEK ONTONAGON COUNTY 

2014 09 STABILIZATION ROAD COMMISSION 17000 11025.78 2

LAKE GOGEBIC 

S2W90F14- EWM ON LAKE IMPROVEMENT 

2014 09 GOGEBIC ASSOCIATION 25975 0 

S2W9GK14- CR 535 CULVERT GOGEBIC COUNTY ROAD 

2014 09 REPLACEMENT COMMISSION 28272 25215 

S2W9GD14- GOG-12-038 

2014 09 LANGFORD LAKE EWM ISCCW 39241 9500 

COOK COUNTY MOUNTAIN SUPERIOR CYCLING 

2014 09 BIKE TRAIL SYSTEM ASSOCIATION 21810.9 13824 

BAN AD AD TRAIL 

2014 09 TRAIL CLEARING PROJECT ASSOCIATION 5807 5142.5 

NON NATIVE INVASIVE 

SPECIES WEED MANAGMENT CHIPPEWA LUCE 

2014 09 SPA MACKINAC CONSERV 95167.5 26100 1

2550 TCSC WILDLIFE TAYLOR COUNTY 

2014 09 OPENING RAC PROJECT #30 SPORTSMAN CLUB 17570 14000 
TABLE A - Page 83 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match fun

RAC#40 WABENO 

2014 09 LUMBERJACK TRAIL TOWN OF WABENO 12274 8000 

RAC #37 RESTORATION OF FS 

2014 09 PROPERTY LINES FOREST COUNTY 4670 1168 

RAC#39 THELEN ROAD ATV HIDDEN BEAR TRAIL ATV 

2014 09 TO UTV TRAIL UPGRAD CLUB 6895 1725 

SPRING LAKE ATV ROUTE 

2014 09 RESURFACING TOWN OF TOWNSEND 7032.8 6601.2 

RAC #38 LAKEWOOD/LAONA 

SKI TRAIL CLEARING AND WISCONSIN 

2014 09 EROSION MITIGATION CONSERVATION CORPS 22709.12 9986.55 3

RAC #36 OCONTO RIVER RESTORATION & 

2014 09 MAINTENANCE TOWN OF WABENO 9262.5 2520 

SALMON CREEK EE PAVILION TROUT UNLIMITED 288 

2014 09 & INTERP TRAIL IRON FURNACE CHAPTER 19491.89 16918 3

WARREN COUNTY 

RIMROCK TRAIL-RAC DEVELOPMENT 

2014 09 PROJECT ASSOCIATION 5358.5 1721.28 2014 09 QUEEN'S BRIDGE REPAIR HICKORY TOWNSHIP 18553.95 20334 32014 09 JONES FARM ROAD PROJECT GREEN TOWNSHIP 15577.26 7858.4 2
TABLE A - Page 84 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region Project Title !Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WATERSHED CANAAN VALLEY 

2014 09 REHABILITATION ACTIONS INSTITUTE 420238 131052.67 55

CRATER LAKE SKATERS CABIN 

2014 10 - RAC TITLE II CITY OF CORDOVA 59543 0 

SAGA TRAIL CREW RAC TITLE 

2014 10 II SAGA 16301.05 1750 1

SCA PORTAGE VALLEY FISH 

AND WILDLIFE STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2014 10 ENHANCEMENT RACTITLE II ASSOCIATION 31979 0 

HOPE POINT TRAIL TITLE II STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2014 10 RAC ASSOCIATION 38480.4 13240 

CROW CREEK ROAD 

2014 10 DITCHING RAC TITLE II GIRDWOOD INC. 5588.96 550 

COPPER RIVER PARTNERSHIP COPPER RIVER 

2014 10 RAC PROJECTS WATERSHED PROJECT 35815.11 9178.95 4

COPPER RIVER RAC II COPPER RIVER 

2014 10 PROJECTS WATERSHED PROJECT 87055 20805.08 10

SITKA INVASIVE SOIL AND WATER 

2014 10 MANAGEMENT PLAN GRANT CONSERVATION Dl 19093.28 4470 2
TABLE A - Page 85 

Forest Forest Tota

'"'!>' "'"'"'"'' .. Service Service Appli Proj

Year !Region Project Title Armlicant Name Match Match Fun

PRD SRS2 CITY CREEK TRAIL 

2014 10 SECTION 1 PETERSBURG BOROUGH 60000 20000 

2014 10 10 MILE BOG ATVTRAIL YAKUTAT TUNG IT TRIBE 47400 11991.36 5

CITY/BOROUGH OF 

2014 10 YAKUTAT TERN FESTIVAL YAKUTAT 34406.4 22800.4 

COLORADO ROAD STREAM 

2014 10 CROSSINGS YAKUTAT TUNG IT TRIBE 34917.12 8460.8 4

YAKUTAT COM UNITY TRAIL CITY/BOROUGH OF 

2014 10 SYSTEM RAC YAKUTAT 86543 0 

SITUK COOPERATIVE USE CITY/BOROUGH OF 

2014 10 EDUCATION YAKUTAT 12740 0 

POW RAC ROAD 

MAINTENANCE AND PUBLIC 

2014 10 ACCESS CITY OF CRAIG (RAe) 159348.48 44415 20

CRD TBRD SRS2 (RAe) ONE SOUTHEAST ALASKA 

2014 10 DUCK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS WATERSHED COA 67553.87 17840 8

DOG SALMON CREEK THE NATURE 

2014 10 RESTORATION CONSERVANCY 23429.16 6501.14 

SCA INTERN FOR CABINS FY STUDENT CONSERVATION 

,2014 10 15 ASSOCIATI 44655.27 27501 7
TABLE A - Page 86 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl1 Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SALT CHUCK MINE 

INTERPRETIVE SIGN AND ORGANIZED VILLAGE OF 

2014 10 TRAIL INSTALLATION KASAAN 41080 11806 

CUTIHROAT BRIDGE ORGANIZED VILLAGE OF 

2014 10 DECKING KASAAN 35660 10235 

BLACKTAIL DEER CREEK 

2013 01 BRIDGE MT DNRC 14999.87 35000 4

POWELL COUNTY ROADS POWELL COUNTY WEED 

2013 01 WEEDS SPRAYING PROJECT DISTRICT 29574.65 5500 3

HENDERSON CREEK ROAD 

2013 01 BRIDGE PROJECT GRANITE COUNTY 50000 361144 

UPPER RUBY NOXIOUS WEED 

2013 01 COOPERATIVE PROJECT MADISON COUNTY 66137.75 26790 9

DRY COTIONWOOD ROAD 

2013 01 SEDIMENT REDUCTION CLARK FORK COALITION 73416.32 27995 10

UPPER PINTLER CREEK TRAIL MONTANA 

2013 01 MTNCE CONSERVATION CORPS 20735.6 16649 

BEAVERHEAD COUNTY 

2013 01 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL BEAVERHEAD COUNTY 300224.6 241709 52013 01 MILL CREEK ROAD PROJECT MADISON COUNTY 40000 46500 

HEALTHY KIDS HEALTHY 

2013 01 FORESTS BITIER ROOT RC&D 69227.03 50990 12
TABLE A- Page 87 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! 1Proj

Year !Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match •Fun

BITIERROOT IRRIGATION 

2013 01 LOST HORSE FEEDER CANAL DISTRICT 6308.8 5743 

POKER JOE COOPERATIVE 

WEED MANAGEMENT RAC RAVALLI COUNTY WEED 

2013 01 PROJECT DISTRICT 7000 4000 

G & A -CAMERON CREEK 

REVEGETATION AND BIDER ROOT WATER 

2013 01 FENCING FORUM 56265 15951.89 7

IDAHO PANHANDLE SELKIRK 

GRIZZLY BEAR RESEARCH W/ 

2013 01 UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA 212945.04 40709.65 252013 01 TOILET SHOSHONE COUNTY 14000 20998 

MONTANA 

2013 01 MCC CREW FOR SZ CONSERVATION CORP 36998 8268.4 

BOB MARSHALL 

FOUNDATION- TRAIL MNTC BOB MARSHALL 

(G&A MANAGED ON WILDERNESS 

2013 01 FLATHEAD NF) FOUNDATION 14912.5 7250 

ISLAND UNIT NORDIC SKI NORTH SHORE NORDIC 

,2013 ,01 TRAIL MAINTENANCE CLUB 47273.3 79125.98 12
TABLE A - Page 88 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match fun

WEED ID & TRAILWORK BOB MARSHALL 

(INCLUDES FLATHEAD CO WILDERNESS 

2013 01 RAC) FOUNDATION 23225.92 7850 3

SLRD BIG SKY FOUR 

2013 01 WHEELERS CCSA BIG SKY FOUR WHEELERS 22900 137500 

MONTANA 

2013 01 FINGER LAKE TRAIL #802-RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 10071.68 8362 1

HUNGRY HORSE RD; MONTANA 

2013 01 TUCHUCK MTN. RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 11624.8 8468.6 

MONTANA 

2013 01 ISLAND UNIT TRAILS RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 39400.1 27824 

RACMORRISON/MINER/GORDON 

/PENDENT TRAILS AND MONTANA 

2013 01 HISTORIC PHONE LINES CONSERVATION CORPS 65380 39118.61 10

HYALITE SNOWPLOWING 

2013 01 AGREEMENT GALLATIN COUNTY 67785.91 38652.24 102013 01 SEARCH AND RESCUE SWEET GRASS COUNTY 6500 0 

HEBGEN LAKE WEED MONTANA 

2013 01 TREATMENT CONSERVATION CORPS 48614.11 23897.6 7

BULL RIVER RECREATION SITE 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS2013 01 RAC AVISTA CORP 11100 5000 
TABLE A -Page 89 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match fun

SOUTH FORKYAAK RD 68-

2013 01 THREE RIVERS- RAC LINCOLN COUNTY 205000 0 

CARROLL COLLEGE 

ARCHAEOLOGY FIELD 

2013 01 SCHOOL CARROLL COLLEGE 52499.12 64902.36 11

NATURE'S PLAYGROUND LINCOLN, MT CHILDREN'S 

2013 01 FOREST BLACKFOOT CHALLENGE 4400 3000 

SOUTH HILLS TRAILS PRICKLY PEAR LAND 

2013 01 PROJECTS TRUST 37580 114280 

JUDITH BASIN COUNTY D4 

2013 01 DRY WOLF RIP RAP 13DG023 JUDITH BASIN COUNTY 17545 0 

RAC- CABIN GULCH FENCE MONTANA 

2013 01 REMOVAL CONSERVATION CORPS 18218.4 33288 

RAC- LFRC CITIZEN BASED 

2013 01 MONITORING DNRC 5884 2240 

RAC-WILDLIFE CONFLICT NINEMILE WILDLIFE 

2013 01 REDUCTION WORKGROUP 21259.17 7830 2

BACKCOUNTRY LAKES, 

CAMPSITES, AND NOXIOUS GREAT BURN STUDY 

2013 01 WEED MITIGATION GROUP 88685 56880 

MCC ROMAN CREEK OHV MONTANA 

2013 01 REHAB CONSERVATION CORPS 8807.9 7306 
TABLE A - Page 90 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl; 

Year Region Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match Fun

MCC ALBERT POINT TRAIL MONTANA 

2013 01 #732 CONSERVATION CORPS 13211.7 7306 

RAC-DRY CREEK RD FILL 

2013 01 STABILIZATION MINERAL COUNTY 17000 0 

RAC-THOMPSON CREEK 

2013 01 ROAD AND TRAILHEAD MINERAL COUNTY 29965 0 

NEW INVADER EMPHASIS- IDAHO COUNTY WEED 

2013 01 RAC 17-013-009 DEPARTMENT 143250 0 

AGR PENNINGTON COUNTY 

FIRE PROTECTION & MPB PENNINGTON COUNTY 

2013 02 SUPPRESSION WEED & PEST 21329.3 635195.08 65

FENCING ON POLE WYOMING 

2013 02 MOUNTAIN CONSERVATION CORPS 6618.38 2253.91 

SARATOGA ENCAMPMENT 

RIVERSIDE PHASE II STREAM RAWLINS CONSERVATION 

2013 02 RESTORATION DISTRICT 32339 150000 

SCC CREW FOR LA GARITA SOUTHWEST 

2013 02 TRAILS- SAGUACHE CONSERVATION CORPS 40366.91 25556.4 6

SCC SPA- LOST CREEK 

WILDERNESS TRAIL CLEARING SOUTHWEST 

2013 02 AND MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 45004 4156 
TABLE A -Page 91 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WEST FORK ROAD- DOLORES 

COUNTY SECURE SCHOOLS 

2013 02 PROJECT DOLORES COUNTY 38145.95 183720 22

LA PLATA COUNTY HERMOSA 

CREEK RD CR 201, SECURE 

2013 02 SCHOOLS LA PLATA COUNTY 25509.4 72075.44 9

ARCHULETA COUNTY MILL 

CREEK RD CR 302 GRAVEL 

REPLACEMENT, SECURE 

2013 02 SCHOOLS ARCHULETA COUNTY 40409.37 12900 5

ISHOWOOA CREEK FISH 

2013 02 SCREEN PROJECT TROUT UNLIMITED 24703.12 108000 13

APACHE 1- WALLOW FIRE 

2013 03 WEED ERADICATION LCRRC&D 25000 25000 

APACHE 8/18 CHIP SEAL 

CAPPING AGGREGATE BASE 

2013 03 SURFACE APACHE COUNTY 102102 158930 

NAVAJ024/16 NAVAJO 

2013 03 COUNTY FS ROAD 86 NAVAJO COUNTY 47778.7 80099 1

APACHE 11 WEATHER 

2013 03 MODIFICATION LCRRC&D 28975 0 

SRS2- RAC GRANTSPRINGERVILLE RD TRAIL 

2013 03 MAINTENANCE ACE 12824.98 8596.4 2
TABLE A - Page 92 

Forest Forest Tota

"I:>'"'"'"'"''" Service Service Appl1 I Proj

Year I Region Project Title Armlicant Name Match Match .Fun

S2SA- GREENLEE 23 BLUE RD 

2013 03 HAZARD CORNER REMOVAL GREENLEE COUNTY 71432 42097.8 1

G&A RAC CIBOLA CR 69 HOP 

CANYON ROAD 

2013 03 IMPROVEMENT COUNTY OF SOCORRO 228906.61 52335.23 28

2013 03 SRS- FR 180 CIBOLA COUNTY 82124 0 

MARSHALL GRASSLANDS ARIZONA FORESTRY 

2013 03 RESTORATION DIVISION 5356.91 3276 

FOREST IMPROVEMENT JOB GILA WATERSHED 

2013 03 TRAINING PROJECTS PARTNERSHIP 40006.94 10893.72 5

CORONADO NF TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2013 03 MAINTENANCE CORPS (NYC) 25000 14623.6 

SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS 

COOPERATIVE ROAD 

2013 03 MAINTENANCE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY 249732.08 0 24

OCCUPANCY ESTIMATION 

AND PREDICTIVE 

DISTRIBUTION MODELING ROCKY MOUNTAIN BIRD 

2013 03 FOR BATS- RAC 11-13 OBSERVATORY 14498.84 3710.49 1

G&A REHABILITATION OF RIO SOUTH CENTRAL MT 

2013 03 BONITO WATERSHED RC&D COUNCIL 71996 0 
TABLE A- Page 93 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

FOREST ROAD 488 (CORA DUTION ROAD) LINCOLN COUNTY ROAD 

2013 03 MAINTENANCE RAC DEPARTMENT 40000 3950 

INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS FOR WATER 

2013 03 CONVEYANCE EFFICIENCY VERDE DITCH COMPANY 71286 0 

ACE-AMERICAN 

RAC FUNDED- TIN TROUGH CONSERVATION 

2013 03 SPRINGS308 EXPERIENCE 71033.06 52663.65 12

AMERICAN 

PINE CANYON TRAIL CONSERVATION 

2013 03 REHABILITATION EXPERIENCE 43989.52 33579.69 7

A SUPERIOR WEED CONTROL 

2013 03 PROGRAM THE TOWN OF SUPERIOR 8011.53 0 

TOP OF PINALSTRAIL 

2013 03 MAINTENANCE CREC 566.91 4204.33 

ICEHOUSE CANYON TRAIL 

2013 03 MAINTENANCE CREC 561.66 4283.11 

RAC 3 SUPERSTION ARIZONA 

2013 03 TRAIL MAINTENANCE ACE 76192.35 67795.9 14

FOREST ROAD 512 

2013 03 RESURFACING GILA COUNTY 186712.5 90459 2
TABLE A- Page 94 

Forest Forest Tota

" Service Service Appl! 

1

Proj

"I>'""""'"'"' 

Year I Region Project Title Armlicant Name Match Match I Fun

SAGE GROUSE SATELLITE 

2013 04 TELEMETRY RADIOS BLM 110000 0 

UTE TOWER REHABILITATION 

2013 04 PROJECT HISTORICORP 137076.48 72093.87 20

SH-21 UNDERPASS PROJECT IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF 

2013 04 PHASE 4 CONTINUED FISH AND GAME 18S64 S9887 

IDAHO PROJECT LEARNING IDAHO FOREST PRODUCTS 

2013 04 TREE COMMISSION 203704.32 1842658.4 20

GLENNS FERRY HIGHWAY 

2013 04 FS ROAD 181 STABILIZATION DISTRICT 59829.07 8550 6

OLA HIGHWAY SHOULDER 

2013 04 REHAB GEM COUNTY 89212 71400 

HOBBLE CREEK & CORRAL 

CREEK MAINTENANCE MONTANA 

2013 04 PROJECT CONSERVATION CORPS 21483.93 17234.6 3

D1 RECREATION PINE VALLEY 

SPILLWAY CONNECTOR 

2013 04 BRIDGE WASHINGTON COUNTY 73168.69 8620 8

SUU IIC NEW PARTICIPATORY 

2013 04 AGREEMENT SUU IIC 359372 90611.07 44
TABLE A - Page 95 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I Project Title Name Match Match Fun

PINE LAKE GRAVELGARFIELD COUNTY 

2013 04 AGREEMENT GARFIELD COUNTY 6580.96 3000 2013 04 BOX DEATH HOLLOW ACCESS GARFIELD COUNTY 99456.98 38750 13

SALINA CREEK RUSSIAN 

2013 04 OLIVE PROJECT SCUCWMA 30000 18000 

MONROE MOUNTAIN VEG BRIGHAM YOUNG 

2013 04 FOCUSED INVESTMENT UNIVERSITY 142550 42764 

HUNTINGTON CREEK EROSION CONTROL HUNTINGTON-CLEVELAND 

2013 04 STRUCTURES IRRIGATIO 521728.63 194000 71

FOUR CORNERS SCHOOL 

2013 04 BLANDING MWS FENCE OF EDUCATI 98220.64 3269.3 10

HUNTINGTON CANYON 

TRAILS PARTNERSHIP WITH SAN RAFAEL 

2013 04 SRBCH BACKCOUNTRY HORSE ME 59948.4 18370 

FOREST HWY 49/HARTS SAN JUAN COUNTY ROADS 

2013 04 DRAW DRAINAGE REPAIR DEPT 100549.58 75081.6 17

SAN JUAN COUNTY ROAD 

2013 04 ELK RIDGE FR 50088 DEPARTMENT 95472.5 22916.85 11

BUCKEYE AREA ROAD MONTROSE COUNTY, 

2013 04 IMPROVEMENTS COLORADO 7658.5 4122.75 1
TABLE A - Page 96 

Forest Forest Tota

A Service Service Appli 

1

Proj

"I>'"'"'"'"'" 

Year !Region Project Title Armlicant Name Match Match I Fun

SELWAY-BITTERROOT FRANK SELWAY-BITTERROOT 

2013 04 CHURCH FOUNDATION FRANK CHURCH 34333.72 20712 5

COUNCIL SCHOOLS COUNCIL SCHOOL 

2013 04 GREENHOUSE DISTRICT 128654.44 85068 21

NYC CREW- PNF 2013 

DEFERRED TRAIL 

MAINTENANCE/KRASSEL 

2013 04 (RAC) NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 37096.17 18492.04 5

NYC CREW- PNF 2013 

DEFERRED TRAIL 

MAINTENANCE/COUNCIL 

2013 04 (RAC) NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 78122.47 36935 11

TWENTYMILE TRAIL REROUTE NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2013 04 PROJECT (RAC) 2013 CORPS (NYC) 34424.5 9534.1 

JUMBO CREEK ARCH RAC 

2013 04 PROJECT# 13PNF001 VALLEY COUNTY 20281.15 16890 3

RAC MOREHEAD LOOKOUT TV BACKCOUNTRY 

2013 04 STABILIZATION HORSEMEN 4300 9200 

RAC NORTON LOOKOUT TV BACKCOUNTRY 

2013 04 STABILIZATION HORSEMEN 8339.95 11800 2
TABLE A - Page 97 

Forest Forest Tota

IAI:S'"'"'""'nt Service Service App! Proj

Year Region Project Title A .J:. .. Name Match Match Fund

SVS MULTIPARTY 

MONITORING DATA SALMON VALLEY 

2013 04 MANAGEMENT STEWARDSHIP 7020 0 

REPURPOSING FOREST 

2013 04 WASTE PRODUCTS CHARLIE THORNTON 117000 0 

LEMHI COUNTY BIOCHAR 

2013 04 GRANT LEMHI COUNTY 13675 0 

SAGE GROUSE BIOLOGICAL LOST RIVER ECONOMIC 

2013 04 DATA COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT 148664.2 45428 19

NORTH ZONE TRAILS 

2013 04 NORTH EST YOUTH CORP NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 252816.15 125838.49 378

STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2013 04 SCA CAMP CREW ASSOCIATION 281792.62 383066.8 664

NORTH ZONE SAGE GROUSE SALMON VALLEY 

2013 04 TELEMETRY PROJECT STEWARDSHIP 113367.5 28646.25 142

D4 SIHA STANLEY MUSEUM SAWTOOTH INTERPRETIVE 

2013 04 POC CAROL COLE AND HIST 26048.56 23932 49

CAMAS COUNTY WEED 

2013 04 BUREAU CAMAS CREEK CWMA 12500 2850 

2013 04 WARM RIVER BRIDGE FREMONT COUNTY 67149.6 132500 19
TABLE A - Page 98 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC HARRIMAN WILDLIFE REFUGE ASPEN 

RESTORATION PROJECT FRIENDS OF HARRIMAN 

2013 04 PHASE II STATE PARK, INC. 12000 7720 

RAC HARRIMAN EXCLUSION FRIENDS OF HARRIMAN 

2013 04 FENCE STATE PARK, INC. 3391.41 1000 

RAC PORTNEUF RIVER 

2013 04 PROJECT CARRIBOO CONSERVANCY 11804 52500 

RAC TRAIL SIGNAGE 

REPLACEMENT IN HARRIMAN FRIENDS OF HARRIMAN 

2013 04 WILDLIFE REFUGE STATE PARK, INC. 4540 2003 

SPA BEAR GULCH ROAD ST. ANTHONY WORK 

2013 04 CLOSURE CAMP 4178.52 5861.2 12013 04 ISLAND PARK TRAIL ST ANTHONY WORK CAMP 12122.24 11722.4 2

HORSE BASIN SPRING MINK CREEK STOCKMAN'S 

2013 04 RECONSTRUCTION ASSOCI AT 6070 1900 

ASHTON AND DUBOIS NON 

MOTORIZED TRAIL MONTANA 

2013 04 MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 21165.45 17229.41 32013 04 SMITH CANYON ACCESS TETON COUNTY, IDAHO 4000 20300 2013 04 EDRR NOXIOUS WEEDS HIGH COUNTRY RC&D 43324.67 11200 5
TABLE A- Page 99 

Forest Forest Tota

" Service Service Appl Proj

1'"'5"'"""' .,, 

Year Region Project Title Annli""''1t Name Match Match Fund

DESERT CREEK FUELS SMITH VALLEY 

2013 04 REDUCTION CONSERVATION DISTRICT 65522 13955.4 7

CUT-LEAVE TREATMENTS 

WITHIN ELY AND AUSTIN2013 04 TONOPH RANGER DISTRICTS GREAT BASIN INSTITUTE 248377.56 128689.19 377

NYE COUNTY, STATE OF 

2013 04 TOIYABE TOILET TRANSFER NEVADA 10642 13000 

ALPINE WATERSHED 

2013 04 ALPINE WATERSHED GROUP GROUP 14276.95 6176.5 20

JUAB COUNTY WAR ON 

2013 04 WEEDS JUAB COUNTY 9600 0 

D8/D1 PARTNERSHIP-TOOELE 

2013 04 SCHEDULE A TOOELE COUNTY 22600 0 

UTAH COUNTY WAR ON 

2013 04 WEEDS UTAH COUNTY 29294.88 59784 89

HOBBLE CREEK ELEMENTARY 

BUSES TO DIAMOND FORK HOBBLE CREEK 

2013 04 YOUTH FOREST ELEMENTARY 9986.91 6608 16
TABLE A- Page 100 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

CECILVILLE VOLUNTEER 

FIRE AND HOSE COMPANY 

KNOWNOTHING HYDRANT DBA SALMON RIVER FIRE 

2013 05 RAC PROJECT AND RESCUE 17582 3305 

SISKIYOU COUNTY OFFICE 

2013 05 2013 WORKABILITY CREW OF EDUCTION 59255 70614 

PACIFIC CREST TRAIL BACK COUNTRY 

2013 05 OPENING HORSEMEN 66110 110118.02 17

JANESVILLE LANDSCAPE JANESVILLE TOWN 

2013 05 FUELS TREATMENT COUNCIL 77645 11500 

LASSEN ENVIRONMENTAL 

EDUCATION COLLABORATIVE LASSEN LAND AND TRAILS 

2013 05 PARTNERSHIP TRUST, INC 49737 49656 

GREAT SHASTA RAILS TO 

TRAIL ENGINEERING VOLCANIC LEGACY 

INSPECTIONS AND RESOURCE COMMUNITY 

2013 05 SURVEYS PARTNERSHIP 29080 172330 

SHASTA FORESTRY FORESTRY EDUCATORS 

2013 05 CHALLENGE INCORPORATED 6191 20000 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

SHASTA FIT (FORESTRY SOCIETY OF AMERICAN 

2013 05 INSTITUTE FOR TEACHERS) FORESTERS 16000 16000 
TABLE A- Page 101 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Proj4 

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

HAT CREEK RESTORATION & CALIFORNIA TROUT 

2013 05 REVEGETATION CORPORATION 18000 102283 

SIR TRIBAL YOUTH SUSANVILLE INDIAN 

2013 05 CONSERVATION CREW RANCHERIA 56050 8838.7 

YOUNGS CORRAL CADASTRAL 

2013 05 SURVEY BLM 2955.09 0 

MARIJUANA GROWTH SITE HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2013 05 RECLAMATION TRAIL CREW 39250 38340.8 

TEHAMA COUNTY 

RESOURCE 

2013 05 PATION MILL FUEL BREAK CONSERVATION DISTRICT 52901.43 61770.68 11

TIM SHELDON DBA THE 

2013 05 THE WOOD YARD PROJECT WOOD YARD 24210 0 

WILD HORSE HELICOPTER 

2013 05 CENSUS BLM 26117.6 2510.76 2

HUM RAC PULLING 

TOGETHER: PARTNERSHIP 

FOR TREATMENT OF MID-KLAMATH 

2013 05 INVASIVE PLANTS WATERSHED COUNCIL 10742.31 5609.36 1

2013 AMERICOPRS 

WATERSHED STEWARDS CCC- AMERICORPS 

2013 05 PROJECT WATERSHED PROJECT 119368 1360808 
TABLE A- Page 102 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

CALIFORNIA 

2013 OS USFS MAD RIVER INTERN CONSERVATION CORPS S311.91 2492 

HUM RAC BUCK MT. ROAD 

BRUSHING/CHIPPING- BRIDGEVILLE COMMUNITY 

2013 OS AGREEMENT CENTER 18424 SS79 

DN RAC SMITH RIVER FISH 

2013 OS COUNT-AGREEMENT SMITH RIVER ALLIANCE 2842 3606 

HORSE RIDGE NATIONAL RECREATION TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2013 OS MAINTENANCE CORPS 36628.32 16246.68 

CALIFORNIA 

2013 OS PLANTATION THIN- TSI CONSERVATION CORPS 67076.S4 22723.4 8

DN RAC COAST TO CREST CALIFORNIA 

2013 OS TRAIL-CCC AGREEMENT CONSERVATION CORPS 76618 31S37 .88 10

HUM RAC FISH LAKE 

TRAIL/INVASIVES CALIFORNIA 

2013 OS RESTORATION- AGREEMENT CONSERVATION CORPS 27068 12S32 

ROSE FOUNDATION FOR 

DN RAC COAST TO CREST COMMUNITIES AND THE 

2013 OS TRAIL- ROSE AGREEMENT ENVIRONMENT INC 30360.98 6S13 3

MOTORIZED TRAILS INVASIVE REDWOOD COMMUNITY 

2013 OS WEED MITIGATIONS ACTION AGENCY 49183 134SS 
TABLE A- Page 103 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

PULLING TOGETHER: PARTNERSHIP FOR 

TREATMENT OF INVASIVE DEL NORTE RESOURCES 

2013 OS PLANTS CONSERVATION DISTRICT 17761 11362 

KLAMATH YOUTH MID-KLAMATH 

2013 OS STEWARDSHIP PROJECT WATERSHED COUNCIL 492S3 64778 

CALIFORNIA CONSERVATION CORPS2014 AMERICORPS AMERICORPS WATERSHED 

2013 OS WATERSHED STEWARDS STEWARDS 116291 1092337 

DN RAC ILLEGAL DUMPSITE 

2013 OS CLEAN-UP- AGREEMENT CLEAN FOREST PROJECT 120S8.4S 2294.22 12013 05 LOW DIVIDE ROCK PROJECT COUNTY OF DEL NORTE 107012 42988.06 15

SIERRA VALLEY NOXIOUS 

WEED CONTROL & SIERRA VALLEY RESOURCE 

2013 05 ERADICATION PROJECT RAC CONSERV 14000 2000 

CRESCENT GRADE HFR 

SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT #12- PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE 

2013 05 09 SAFE COUNCIL 60864 14246 

SENIOR/DISABLED 

DEFENSIBLE SPACE PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE 

2013 05 ASSISTANCE GRANT #12-10 SAFE COUNCIL 81924 2500 

PLUMAS TO PACIFIC RAC 

2013 05 CYCLE 12 PLUMAS CORPORATION 21470 67936 
TABLE A- Page 104 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

FEATHER RIVER NOXIOUS PLUMAS-SIERRA 

WEED MANAGEMENT COUNTIES DEPARTMENT 

2013 OS PROJECT OF AGRICULTURE 22S38.92 2S00.41 2

CONCOW WATERSHED 

IMPROVEMENT BIOMASS YANKEE HILL FIRE SAFE 

2013 OS REMOVAL AND OUTREACH COUNCIL 37423 9SOO 

FOREST HEALTH CHIPPER 

AND RESIDENTS ASSISTANCE BUTTE COUNTY FIRE SAFE 

2013 OS PROGRAM COUNCIL S38S1 1000 

SRS2 LONG VALLEY SMITH 

2013 OS CREEK PROJECT PLUMAS CORPORATION 3S320 S700 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

RAC FORESTRY INSTITUTE SOCIETY AMERICA 

2013 OS FOR TEACHERS FORESTERS 14684 14684 

LAKES BASIN TRAIL SIERRA BUTTES TRAIL 

2013 OS RESTORATION (RAC) STEWARDSHI 18482.76 13370.5S 3

BECKWOURTH LAKE DAVIS SIERRA BUTTES TRAIL 

2013 OS TRAIL, PHASE 2 (RAC) STEWARDSHIP 42S14.14 13197.47 S

COLLABORATIVE FOREST PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE 

2013 OS LANDSCAPE PLANNING (RAC) SAFE COUNCIL 1S0067 32200 

KERN COUNTY FIRE 

2013 OS CAMP YENIS HANTE (RAC) DEPARTMENT 17000 0 
TABLE A- Page 105 

Forest Forest Tota

"I>'"'"'"'"'' .. Service Service Appli 1Proj

Year I Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match Fun

BRECKENRIDGE HAZARDOUS KERN RIVER VALLEY 

2013 OS FUELS REMOVAL (RAC) FIRESAFE COU 34SO 0 2013 OS PCTTRAIL CONTINUATION HSVTC 900S 10008 

JENNIE LAKES WILDERNESS HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2013 OS TRAIL TRAIL CR 23099 32097 

PI UTE TRAILS PRESERVATION STEWARDS OF THE 

2013 OS PROJECT SEQUOIA 23262 32866.98 S

TOBIAS CREEK TRAILS STEWARDS OF THE 

2013 OS PRESERVATION PROJECT SEQUOIA 8849 16796 

TULE RIVER RESTORATION, 

ENHANCEMENT AND FIRE 

2013 OS PROTECTION WILD PLACES 6401 0 

SRS2 IS-SODA CREEK FUEL DUNSMUIR FIRE SAFE 

2013 OS REDUCTION COUNCIL 4800 733S6 

SRS2 TCRCD SUMMER FIELD TRINITY CO RESOURCE 

2013 OS CAMP 2013 CONSERVATION DISTRICT 6S16 4000 

WEAVER BASIN /TRINITY 

2013 OS ALPS TRAILS TRINITY COUNTY RCD 66S71.14 17S38.49 8

STEWARDS OF THE SIERRA 

2013 OS BASS LAKE RD TRASH PICKUP NF 4140 600 
TABLE A- Page 106 

forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SNF 2013 BCHA SAN 

JOAQUIN UNIT/ SCRD -13- BACK COUNTRY 

2013 OS OS1S00219S7-114 HORSEMEN ASSOCIA 6182.04 0 

TUOLUMNE COUNTY 

FORESTRY INSTITUTE FOR SUPERINTENDENT OF 

2013 OS TEACHERS- RAC GRANT SCHOOLS 8S401.14 7S704 16

COMMUNITY CHIPPING HIGHWAY 108 FIRE SAFE 

2013 OS PROJECT COUNCIL 21232 94100 

RAC- BEAR VALLEY 

DEFENSIBLE SPACE CURBSIDE 

2013 OS CHIPPING PROGRAM COUNTY OF ALPINE 10261 0 

FOREST AND RIPARIAN 

2013 OS EDUCATION TOURS TUCARE 84216 89446 

SUMMER OF SUCCESS YOUTH MOTHERLODE JOB 

2013 OS PARTNERSHIP TRAINING 181697.24 S7923.73 23

BIG RATILESNAKE CREEK TUOLUMNE BAND OF THE 

2013 OS RESTORATION MEWUK IND 12003.44 1638.31 1

YWI ALL LANDS YUBA WATERSHED 

2013 OS COLLABORATION INITIATIVE INSTITUTE 33SO 0 

SIERRA COUNTY FIRE SAFE 

SIERRA COUNTY RAC PA AIS AND WATERSHED 

2013 OS OUTREACH COUNCIL 1039S 0 
TABLE A- Page 107 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

TRUCKEE TRAIL FOUNDATION TRUCKEE TRAILS 

2013 OS AGREEMENT FOUNDATION 163648.8 30718 1

BOCA-LOYALTON RAILROAD SIERRA BUTIES TRAIL 

2013 OS GRADE TRAIL PROJECT STEWARDSHIP 42338.6 107S7 

SIERRA COUNTY AIS PILOT 

MANAGEMENT 

2013 OS PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT SIERRA COUNTY 4S7S9 7SOO 

2013 NOXIOUS WEED GRANT 

TO ODA WITH FORESTS OREGON DEPARTMENT OF 

2013 06 PARTICIPATION AGRICULTURE 12S281 97149 

DESCHUTES CHILDREN'S 

2013 06 FOREST COORDINATION HIGH DESERT ESD 130616.4S 80463.S2 21

CHILDREN'S FOREST SCHOOL 

2013 06 ENGAGEMENT HIGH DESERT ESD 103147.32 126839 22

DESCHUTES CHILDREN'S 

FOREST-HOMETOWN UPPER DESCHUTES 

2013 06 WATERS WATERSHED COUNCIL 77949.26 7SS24.3S 1S

DESCHUTES CHILDREN'S FOREST -THE UPSTREAM UPPER DESCHUTES 

2013 06 PROJECT WATERSHED COUNCIL 4S067.68 S70S8.S 10

DESCHUTES CHILDREN'S DYNW DBA DISCOVER 

2013 06 FOREST INTERN PROGRAM YOUR FOREST 3S218.S 60S17.26 9
TABLE A- Page 108 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

METOLIUS BASIN FOREST 

2013 06 RESTORATION PARTNERSHIP DESCHUTES LAND TRUST 6829.8S 0 

UTILE DESCHUTES 

2013 06 RESTORATION PLANTING HEART OF OREGON CORPS 607.74 610.6S 

HOC COYCC- SUMMER 2013-

2013 06 2015 HEART OF OREGON CORPS 408804.26 170691.43 S7

00- HARVEY RANCH ELDER LAKE COUNTY UMBRELLA 

2013 06 CREEK L-E-1303 WATERSHED COUNCIL 12718.96 1500 1

00-STOVE SPRINGS MEADOW 

REHABILITATION (GERBER 

2013 06 RANCH) GERBER RANCH 10394.22 0 1

LOST RIVER WEED KLAMATH WATERSHED 

2013 06 ERADICATION PARTNERSHIP 24000 8400 

01-DEMING CREEK 

2013 06 RECONNECTION USFWS 75920 76600 

FISH PASSAGE REPAIR ON 

2013 06 FIVE MILE CREEK USFWS 10400 4500 

00-ROAD MAINTENANCE 

2013 06 CREW FS PAYS BLM BLM 637000 0 

RAC PROJECT K-E-1301, ROCKY FORD HABITAT 

2013 06 IMPROVEMENT USFWS 15600 65600 
TABLE A- Page 109 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl1 Proj

Year Region Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

COX FLAT STREAM 

2013 06 RESTORATION LCUWC 271401.68 382552 65

LOWER FOURMILE CREEK- KLAMATH BASIN 

2013 06 FINAL PHASE 3 RANGELAND TRUST 26400 37999.8 

2013 06 BLACK HILLS ECOSYSTEM LOMAKATSI 87134.9 30423.27 11

NW ZONE FENCE AND KLAMATH COUNTY 

2013 06 MEADOW ENHANCEMENT COMMUNITY CORRE 48255.46 83688.47 13

NORTH FORK DITCH 

SCREENING PROJECT, K-2-

2013 06 1302 KBRT 333152.5 153171 4

SKAMANIA COUNTY 

CORRECTION CREW 

2013 06 AGREEMENT SKAMANIA COUNTY 366158.76 295635.52 66

COLLABORATIVE 

2013 06 COORDINATOR PINCHOT PARTNERS 45466.6 55412 1

HARNEY COUNTY SOIL 

ACHIEVING WATER QUALITY AND WATER 

2013 06 STDS THRU ALT ENERGY CONSERVATION DISTRICT 19554 5400 

OREGON YOUTH NORTH FORK JOHN DAY 

2013 06 CONSERVATION CORPS WATERSHED COUNCIL 439011.43 232818.11 67

PRIVATE LAND ASPEN NORTH FORK JOHN DAY 

2013 06 RESTORATION WATERSHED 21563.3 34920 
TABLE A- Page 110 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region I Project Title '1.\ppiicant Name Match Match Fun

ENVIRONMENTAL 

STEWARDSHIP, WATERSHED 

ENHANCEMENT, 

RECREATION MAINTENANCE 

AND CONSERVATION MOUNTAINS TO SOUND 

2013 06 EDUCATION GREENWAY TRUST 310219.1 206246.05 51

MALONEY CREEK TRAIL 

2013 06 INTERPRETIVE SIGNS TOWN OF SKYKOMISH 7931.58 6284.05 1

06- NR HW-13-011 ODELL HOOD RIVER SOIL AND CREEK HYDRO DAM WATER CONSERVATION 

2013 06 REMOVAL S2W603 DISTRICT 5500 6144 

ROCK CREEK IRRIGATION WASCO COUNTY 

2013 06 DITCH PIPING CONSERVATION DIST 57814.04 329864.89 38

JEFFERSON COUNTY TITLE II JEFFERSON COUNTY 

2013 06 WORK CREWS COMMUNITY JUS 18442.54 44318 6

WHEELER COUNTY TITLE II 

2013 06 WORK WHEELER COUNTY 22065.64 17340 3

OCHOCO FOREST CENTRAL OREGON FOREST 

RESTORATION STEWARDSHIP 

2013 06 COLLABORATION FOUNDATION 150802.04 90516.64 24

JEFFERSON COUNTY WEED JEFFERSON COUNTY 

2013 06 CONTROL PUBLIC WORKS 9500 52500 
TABLE A- Page 111 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WASHINGTON STATE 

WCC FORESTWIDE CREW DEPARTMENT OF 

2013 06 2014 ECOLOGY 126766 84S78.S5 21

WILD RIVERS RANGER 

DISTRICT RECREATION SITE JOSEPHINE COUNTY 

2013 06 MAINTENANCE (RAC 111212) COMMUNITY JUSTICE 5245.1 6210.21 1

CURRY COUNTY HIGH 

PRIORITY INVASIVE PLANT NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2013 06 TREATMENT CORPS 26451.32 13700.7 4

ASHLAND WATERSHED 

YOUTH TRAINING AND LOMAKATSI RESTORATION 

2013 06 EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM PROJECT 111929.32 81722.06 19

CURRY JUVENILE, CURRY COUNTY JUVENILE 

2013 06 DEPARTMENT ROGUE CORPS DEPARTME 19166.07 8911.1 2

NYC JACKSON COUNTY TRAIL 

2013 06 MAINTENANCE NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 21092.37 9625.05 3

TAMARA QUAYS VEG MGMT SALMON DRIFT CREEK 

2013 06 PROJECT WATERSHED C 27652.27 8740 3

13_TI_001 BIXBY ROAD 

2013 06 CULVERT REPLACEMENT TILLAMOOK COUNTY 120911 199377 

DRIFT CREEK FALLS TRAIL 

2013 06 MAINTENANCE NW YOUTH CORP 19913.95 9625.05 
TABLE A- Page 112 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Proj

Year Region Project Title • 4.pplicant Name Match Match Fun

LINCOLN COUNTY INVASIVE LINCOLN COUNTY SOIL 

2013 06 SPECIES PA AND WATER 168568.6 65495 2

DOUGLAS CO. RD. 49 

2013 06 CULVERT REPLACEMENT DOUGLAS COUNTY 40211.8 130000 1

SIUSLAW WATERSHED 

COUNCIL RESTORATION & SIUSLAW WATERSHED 

2013 06 OUTREACH COUNCIL 64063.2 43288 1

NORTH UMPQUA 

FISHWATCH BIG BEND POOL THE NORTH UMPQUA 

2013 06 2013 FOUNDATION 69208.9 89789.03 15

OYCC WILDLIFE TECH UMPQUA WATERSHEDS, 

COOPERATIVE WORK INC/PHOENIX SCHOOL OF 

2013 06 EXPERIENCE COLLABORATIVE ROSEBURG 68449.89 46871.18 11

DOUGLAS COUNTY JUVENILE DOUGLAS COUNTY 

2013 06 RESTORATION WORK CREW JUVENILE DEPARTMENT 23654.72 32507.68 

UMPQUA NATIONAL FOREST 

TRAIL MAINTENANCE BY NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2013 06 NORTHWEST YOUTH CORPS CORPS 110161.58 53725.68 16

KENNEDY CONSERVATION 

2013 06 CORPS AL KENNEDY SCHOOL 79907.01 39720.66 11
TABLE A- Page 113 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

JEFFERSON YOUTH LOMAKATSI RESTORATION 

2013 06 CONSERVATION CREW PROJECT 61059.85 19238.11 82013 06 BVINE FUELS REDUCTION WALLOWA RESOURCES 38320 10750 

LOWER JOSEPH CR 

ASSESSMENT & 

2013 06 IMPLEMENTATION WALLOWA RESOURCES 100634.08 44872.6 14

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR 

BLUE MTN ELK NUTRITION AIR AND STREAM 

2013 06 RESEARCH IMPROVMENT, INC 24468 7134.16 3

UPPER GOAT CREEK BRIDGE METHOW VALLEY SPORT 

2013 06 REPLACEMENT TRAILS ASSOCIATION 39850 0 

03-LANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S 

2013 06 WORK CREW LANE COUNTY SHERIFF 235446 0 

SWEET HOME WEED 

2013 06 PROJECTS NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 22918.51 11707.49 

LINN COUNTY JUVENILE LINN COUNTY JUVENILE 

2013 06 WORK CREW DEPARTMENT 113202.58 180487.4 29

MIDDLE FORK WILDERNESS DEFERRED TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2013 06 MAINTENANCE 2013 CORPS 9219.07 4812.53 

04-MARION COUNTY MARION COUNTY SHERIFF 

2013 06 CORRECTIONS CREW OFFICE. 97109.62 113391.71 21

NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2013 06 MARION COUNTY TRAILS CORPS 28081.46 14437.58 4
TABLE A- Page 114 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

NYC MRRD HIGH NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2013 06 PRIORITYTRAI LS CORPS 28154.1 9534.6 

CALAPOOY A MEADOW 

RESTORATION AND WINDY NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2013 06 PASS TRAIL WORK CORPS 29611.27 9534.61 3

WILDERNESS RESOURCE NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2013 06 STEWARD CORPS 27803 7599 

TITLE II PROJECT 6-2012 

PEND OREILLE CO 

NEIGHBORHOOD COOP COST PEND OREILLE COUNTY 

2013 06 SHARE WEED BOARD 107700 0 

UTILE PEND OREILLE LAKES 

2013 06 MILFOIL CONTROL STEVENS COUNTY 20000 27990 

TITLE II SULLIVAN LAKE ROAD PEND OREILLE COUNTY 

2013 06 GABION REPLACEMENT PUBLICWOR 95000 43100 

TITLE II FERRY COUNTY 

2013 06 HERRON CREEK FERRY COUNTY 61926.47 5000 6

TITLE II- PEND OREILLE 

COUNTY WEED BOARD EARLY PEND OREILLE COUNTY 

2013 06 DETECTION RAPID RESPONSE WEED BOARD 42298.4 22911.09 6

MCCREARY COUNTY 

2013 08 TITLE II BAUER ROADWORK FISCAL COURT 84274.33 2696.76 8
TABLE A- Page 115 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WINN PARISH ROAD 

2013 08 IMPROVEMENT WINN PARISH 49232.6 0 

D04 MCCALL CREEK SURFACE FRANKLIN COUNTY BOARD 

2013 08 ROAD TREATMENT SUPERVIS 260694.17 0 26

D04 FRANKLIN COUNTY 

2013 08 ROADS FRANKLIN COUNTY 36681.86 0 3

2013 08 D04 AMITE COUNTY ROADS AMITE COUNTY 38759 0 2013 08 WARWICK MANSION STIDHAM, INC. 32808.29 0 3

01G YELL COUNTY 13 RO 

2013 08 11080900-003 YELL COUNTY 35633 0 

01G MONTGOMERY COUNTY 

SOUTHSIDE AGREEMENT #13-

2013 08 R0-11080900-007 MONTGOMERY COUNTY 92294 0 

01G MCCURTAIN COUNTY 

BROKEN BOW ROADS 

AGREEMENT #13-RO2013 08 11080900-008 MCCURTAIN COUNTY 29439 0 

01G POLK COUNTY ROADS 

AGREEMENT #13-RO2013 08 11090800-010 POLK COUNTY 519686 0 

01G LEFLORE COUNTY 13 RO 

2013 08 11080900-011 LEFLORE COUNTY 96870 0 
TABLE A- Page 116 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match fun

01G LOGAN COUNTY 13 RO 

2013 08 11080900-013 LOGAN COUNTY 35735 0 

CRAWFORD COUNTY TITLE II 

FY12 IMPROVEMENTS OLD 

LOCKE RD/FSR 1007 

2013 08 PROJECTS CRAWFORD COUNTY 35896 43600 

PHILLIPS COUNTY TITLE II 

CARRYOVER GRAVEL 

2013 08 PLACEMENT PROJECT PHILLIPS COUNTY 665S 0 

STONE COUNTY FY 12 TITLE 

GRAVEL PROJECT GUNNER 

POOL/FSR 1102 AND 

2013 08 SUGARLOAF/FSR 1105 STONE COUNTY 33397 18700 

YELL COUNTY FY12 TITLE II 

2013 08 SPRING LAKE RD/ FSR 1601 YELL COUNTY 59247 0 

LOGAN COUNTY FY 12 TITLE 

II ROAD MAINTENANCE 

PROJECT VARIOUS COUNTY 

2013 08 RD LOGAN COUNTY 29340 0 

POPE COUNTY FY12 TITLE II 

OLD HIGHWAY 27/FSR 1355 

2013 08 PROJECT POPE COUNTY 49291 1500 

NEWTON CO. FY12 TITLE II 

2013 08 ROAD IMPROVEMENTS NEWTON COUNTY 35900 11500 
TABLE A- Page 117 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

JOHNSON CO FY12 TITLE II 

ROAD MAINTENANCE 

2013 08 PROJECTS JOHNSON CO 86181 247600 

FRANKLIN CO FY12 TITLE II FUNDS BARNES RD/FSR 1500 

2013 08 PROJECT FRANKLIN COUNTY 24616 5670 

MADISON CO TITLE II FY12 

SPOKE PLANT RD/FSSR 1496 

2013 08 PROJECT MADISON CO 20970 72185 

BROADWAY STREET 

2013 08 RECONDITIONING PROJECT COUNTY OF HOUSTON 37327.33 4470 4

LEECH LAKE BAND OF 

2013 09 NATURE'S LAKE RAC PROJECT OJIBWE 37274 22200 

ITASCA COUNTY SOIL AND 

JESSIE LAKE LAKESHORE WATER CONSERVATION 

2013 09 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DISTRICT 9489 0 

S20905 -- MI-TRALE SUPPLEMENTAL PROJECT 

2013 09 AGREEMENT MI-TRALE 6226 8215.72 1

S2190E- PIONEER TRAIL SPA 

2013 09 (ONT-12-014) MI-TRALE 21721.86 7226 2

TRAIL CLEARING AND CONSERVATION CORPS 

2013 09 MAINTENANCE PROJECT MN 126973 36330 
TABLE A- Page 118 

Forest forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 

1

Proj

Year I Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

CHIK-WAUK MUSEUM & 

NATURE CENTER ROAD AND GUNFLINT TRAIL 

2013 09 TRAIL MAINTENANCE HISTORICAL SOCIETY 6695.8 3974 

SUPERIOR WILDERNESS 

2013 09 VOLUNTEER CONNECTION FRIENDS OF THE BWW 65017 211996 

RESTORATION OF CONIFER THE NATURE 

2013 09 SPECIES CONSERVANCY 51530 35400 

2013 09 EUPCC EUPCC 24304.28 13400 3

RAC 29 BOULDER LAKE HIDDEN BEAR TRAIL ATV 

2013 09 CONNECTOR CLUB 6475 3074.75 

RAC #28 PORCUPINE LAKE 

2013 09 HUNTER WALKING TRAIL RUFFED GROUSE SOCIETY 4818 2664 

2550 RAC 12 NNIS 

2013 09 COORDINATOR TAYLOR COUNTY 35529.21 0 3

EURASIAN WATER MILFOIL FOREST COUNTY SILVER 

2013 09 ERADICATION SURVEY LAKE ASSO 2173.89 6250 

RAC 32 TOWNSHIP ROAD 

2013 09 PROJECTS IN DELTA TOWN OF DELTA 9553 8000 

RAC HARMONY TOWNSHIP 

2013 09 S2R921 HARMONY TOWNSHIP 60176 3190 

RAC JENKS TOWNSHIP 

2013 09 S2R922 JENKS TOWNSHIP 21236 22038.4 

' 
TABLE A- Page 119 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

OHIO-WEST VIRGINIA 

CAMP HORSESHOE YOUTH LEADERSHIP 

2013 09 INFRASTRUCTURE REPARIS ASSOCIATION 51500 0 

LIMESTONE RESTORATION 

2013 09 ACCESS PROJECT WVDNR 43658.86 11209.8 52013 09 NWTF WILDLIFE OPENINGS NWTF 148308.13 40641.5 18

RAC PWS ESHAMY AK DIV OF PARKS & 

2013 10 RESTORATION OUTDOOR REC 67500 0 

RAC NUNU CREEK HABITAT 

2013 10 ENHANCEMENT TATITLEK CORPORATION 12539.66 0 1

RAC NUCHEK ISLAND 

SALMON & TRAIL CHUGACH ALASKA 

2013 10 RESTORATION CORPERATION 4797 0 

RAC CAPE ST. ELIAS/KAYAK 

ISL. HISTORIC BLDG/TRAIL 

2013 10 RESTORATION CAPE ST ELIAS LT KEEPERS 22485 0 

CRD-RAC TRAIL SAFETY STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2013 10 NETIING PROJECT ASSOCIATI 17621 14232 

RAC KENAI RESTORATION STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2013 10 CORPS ASSOCIATI 162935 113553 

SRD SRS2 DEER MONITORING SITKA CONSERVATION 

2013 10 AGREEMENT SOCIETY 22210.27 19473 4
TABLE A - Page 120 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC- HARBOR MTN SOUTHEAST ALASKA 

2013 10 RECREATION GUIDANCE ASSOCIATION 49726.37 14612.92 6

SRS2 HRD RAC BOHEMIA 

BASIN REC AREA & TRAIL 

2013 10 IMPROVEMENT CITY OF PELICAN 51115.89 21517.5 7

JRD SRS2 TREADWELL DITCH 

2013 10 TRAIL BRIDGES TRAIL MIX, INC. 232514.33 58666 29

PETERSON LAKE TRAIL 

2013 10 RECONSTRUCTION PHASE II TRAIL MIX, INC. 39153.68 10426.46 4

JRD SRS2 WINTER TRAIL JUNEAU SNOWMOBILE 

2013 10 GROOMING CLUB 4032 0 

RAC YAKUTAT ANKAU LOCAL CITY & BOROUGH OF 

2013 10 TRAIL SYSTEM YAKUTAT 53107 0 

RAC LOST RIVER AND LOWER 

TAWAH CREEK WETLAND YAKUTAT CITY AND 

2013 10 RESTORATION BOROUGH 17900 0 2013 10 TRAILHEAD PAVING CITY OF CRAIG 3538.88 884.23 

POW SRS2 HARRIS RIVER FISH PASSAGE PHASE Ill (NATURE THE NATURE 

2013 10 CONSERVANCY) CONSERVANCY 39831 7080 

STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2013 10 SCA TRAIL CREW ASSOCIATI 75938.39 29317.58 10
TABLE A- Page 121 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

CONTINENTAL DIVIDE TRAIL MONTANA WILDERNESS 

2012 01 PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS ASSOCIATION 400013.6 499681.72 89

BIOLOGICAL CONTROL WHITEHALL BIOLOGICAL 

EVALUATION ON WEED CONTROL PROJECT, 

2012 01 BUTIE/JEFFERSON DISTRICTS INC. 7880 0 

MADISON RIVER 

2012 01 RAC: ARASTA CREEK FENCE FOUNDATION 28300 2700 

BACK COUNTRY NOXIOUS MADISON VALLEY 

2012 01 WEED PROJECT RANCHLANDS GROUP 6750 2750 2012 01 BOULDER CREEK BRIDGE #2 GRANITE COUNTY 65000 487816 

RAC: SOUTH BOULDER ROAD 

2012 01 EMERGENCY ACCESS MADISON COUNTY 30000 49958 

RAC: SUSTAINING BIG HOLE WATERSHED 

2012 01 RANGELAND HEALTH COMMITIEE 15000 64500 

RAC: NOXIOUS WEED BEAVERHEAD COUNTY 

2012 01 PROJECTS WEED DISTRICT 40000 40000 

RAC: ARGENTA BRIDGE 

REPLACEMENT AND ROAD 

2012 01 REALIGNMENT BEAVERHEAD COUNTY 100000 185180 

RAC: PINTLER & CHERRY 

CREEK TRAIL MONTANA 

2012 01 RECONDITIONING CONSERVATION CORPS 28034.04 16927 4
TABLE A- Page 122 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region I Project Title il.\pplic<:mt Name Match Match Fun

SW MT RAC: ELKHORN WEED JEFFERSON COUNTY WEED 

2012 01 REDUCTION TREATMENTS DISTRICT 48797 22600.64 7

RAC THREEMILE ROAD BITTER ROOT WATER 

2012 01 SEDIMENT REDUCTION FORUM 27302 0 

SKALKAHO BANK 

2012 01 STAB I LIZATIO N-RAC SOEHREN, DOUGLAS 2880 0 

BLODGETT PASS AND BIG 

CREEK TRAIL MONTANA 

2012 01 IMPROVEMENTS RAC-2012 CONSERVATION CORPS 60681 59210 

FACILITATION AND 

2012 01 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE BOUNDARY COUNTY 20000 5000 

FRIENDS OF THE IDAHO PANHANDLE AVALANCHE 

2012 01 AVALANCHE EDUCATION CENTER 57160 10437.5 

SHOSHONE COUNTY 

MULLAN ROAD RECREATION SPORTSMEN'S 

2012 01 PARKING SURFACING ASSOCIATION 12000 13500 

SPRAY TRUCK INJECTION BONNER COUNTY WEED 

2012 01 SYSTEM DEPARTMENT 54000 50000 

SHOSHONE COUNTY 

REPAIR 456- DOBSON PASS PUBLIC WORKS 

2012 01 ROAD DEPARTMENT 25760 0 
TABLE A- Page 123 

Forest Forest Tota

A Service Service Appl! 1Proj

"5' "'""'"''" 

Year I Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match .Fun

BOB MARSHALL 

VOLUNTEER COORDINATION WILDERNESS 

2012 01 FOR BMWC PROJECTS FOUNDATION 51759 13800 

RAC-ASHLEY LAKE ROAD FLATHEAD COUNTY ROAD 

2012 01 DUST ABATEMENT DEPT 53030 77416 

RAC-ASH LEY LAKE ROAD- FLATHEAD COUNTY ROAD 

2012 01 CRUSHED GRAVEL PROJECT DEPT 61400 61400 

RAC-STAR MEADOWS- FLATHEAD COUNTY ROAD 

2012 01 OVERLAY PROJECT DEPT 68630 68630 

RAC-NORTH FORK ROAD- FLATHEAD COUNTY ROAD 

2012 01 DUST ABATEMENT PROJECT DEPT 46271 25350 

RAC-NORTH FORK ROAD FLATHEAD COUNTY ROAD 

2012 01 NARROWING PROJECT DEPT 35250 35250 

RAC-BLANKENSHIP ROAD FLATHEAD COUNTY ROAD 

2012 01 DUST ABATEMENT DEPT 35823 27914 

CY CREEK TRAIL PHASE II- MONTANA 

2012 01 RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 11040 8215.6 

SPOTTED BEAR RD TRAILS MONTANA 

2012 01 2012 CONSERVATION CORPS 154334 116588 

RAC-SPOTTED BEAR INTERNS STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2012 01 2012 ASSOCIATION, INC. 23097 41428 
TABLE A- Page 124 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: 

Year !Region Project Title Aooiicant Name Match Match 

NATIONAL SCENIC AND 

NATIONAL RECREATION MONTANA 

2012 01 TRAILS-RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 11350 24985 

JEWEL BASIN HIKING AREA- MONTANA 

2012 01 ROVING TRAILS-RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 10846 8382 

LUPINE LAKE AND TLRD MONTANA 

2012 01 TRAILS- RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 9960 8268 

STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2012 01 SPOTIED BEAR INTERNS 2013 ASSOCIATION, INC. 63703.2 82856 1

POWDER RIVER COUNTY 

INTEGRATED WEED 

2012 01 MANAGEMENT PROGRAM POWDER RIVER COUNTY 255427.69 0 252012 01 WILLOW CREEK ROAD PARK COUNTY 69995.21 0 62012 01 MAIN BOULDER ROAD PARK COUNTY 348667 0 

NOXIOUS WEED 

MONITORING, MAPPING STILLWATER VALLEY 

2012 01 AND CONTROL WATERSHED COUNCIL 27934.87 0 2

NOXIOUS WEED SWEET GRASS COUNTY 

2012 01 ERADICATION WEED DISTRICT 81368 0 

OUSEL FALLS TRAIL BIG SKY COMMUNITY 

2012 01 MAINTENANCE CORPORATION 4971 4200 
TABLE A- Page 125 

Forest Forest Tota

'"'!:>' ''"" ... "'"' Service Service Appli Proj

Year I Region Project Title Ar".,"""+ Name Match Match Fun

MONTANA 

RAC: GALLATIN COUNTY CONSERVATION CORPS, 

2012 01 STRIKE TEAM INC. 12000 25901 

WF STILLWATER TRAIL# MONTANA 

2012 01 90/LAKE PLATEAU CONSERVATION CORP 67081.04 50316.2 11

RAC: AB TRAIL MONTANA 

2012 01 MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORP 37498.78 34259.4 7

RAC: ORANGE HAWKWEED MONTANA 

2012 01 PROJECT CONSERVATION CORP 14429 8404.6 

MONTANA 

2012 01 RAC: YELLOWSTONE TRAIL CONSERVATION CORPS 15599.05 4146.8 1

RAC: LEE METCALF MONTANA 

2012 01 WILDERNESS MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 39081.2 13286 

KOOTENAI WINTER 

RAC: TURNER MTN STORAGE SPORTS SKI EDUCATION 

2012 01 BUILDING FOUNDATION INC. 56100 24000 

YAAK WATERSHED YAAK VALLEY FOREST 

2012 01 IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS COUNCIL-RESTORATION 129484.69 237457.8 36

TUSCOR CREEK GREEN MOUNTAIN 

2012 01 RESTORATION RAC CONSERVATION DISTRICT 24365.64 98760 12
TABLE A- Page 126 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WESTFORK ELK CREEK ROAD 

RESHAPE AND BLADING 

2012 01 PROJECT SANDERS COUNTY 8511.66 2348.64 

YOUTH FOREST MONITORING MONTANA DISCOVERY 

2012 01 PROGRAM FOUNDATION 111660 26250 

O&M MACDONALD PASS LAST CHANCE NORDIC SKI 

2012 01 CROSS COUNTRY SKI TRAILS CLUB 30786.8 88705.26 11

RAC: HAZARD TREE SKI LIFT INC, DBA 

2012 01 REMOVAL SHOWDOWN MONTANA 19795 5000 

GRANITE BUTTE LOOKOUT MONTANA WILDERNESS 

2012 01 RESTORATION ASSOCIATION 113414.5 32142 1

DEVELOP/MAINTAIN 

2012 01 SELECTED TRAILS ON HNF CITY OF HELENA 20000 20700 

BROADWATER COUNTY 

DEVELOPMENT 

2012 01 MILLER CABIN RESTORATION CORPORATION 26470 6260 

BARR CREEK/SUN RIVER LEWIS AND CLARK 

2012 01 WMAROAD COUNTY 17736.76 0 1

EROSION AND NOXIOUS LEWIS AND CLARK 

2012 01 WEED REDUCTION COUNTY WEED DISTRICT 10357.99 0 1

RAC: SMITH RIVER ROAD 

2012 01 GRAVEL MEAGHER COUNTY 60000 0 

MEAGHER COUNTY ROAD MEAGHER COUNTY WEED 

2012 01 WEED TREATMENT DEPARTMENT 20000 10000 
TABLE A- Page 127 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

JUDITH BASIN LEAFY SPURGE 

2012 01 TREATMENT S2F1AJ JUDITH BASIN COUNTY 45000 0 

ELKHORN WORKING GROUP 

WEED REDUCTION 

TREATMENTS- NORTH 

ELKHORNS/BACKCOUNTRY 

2012 01 PHASE BROADWATER COUNTY 58670.14 15700 7

TRAIL/SIGN MAINTENANCE 

ON THE PLAINS/THOMPSON WILDHORSE PLAINS BCH2012 01 FALLS RD SIGN INVENTORY 14729 24427.7 

RAC- NOXIOUS WEED 

2012 01 CONTROL GRANITE COUNTY 10000 10000 

LAVALLE CREEK ROAD 

2012 01 IMPROVEMENT ROGER INDRELAND 23962 6166 

ROCK CREEK ROAD RIPARIAN 

2012 01 REVEGETATION-RAe Trout Unlimited 22850 28500 

RAC- ROMAN CREEK FOLF MONTANA 

2012 01 COURSE REHABILITATION CONSERVATION CORPS 12089.43 7306 1

RAC- NINEMILE 

TRAIL/RESERVATION DIVIDE MONTANA 

2012 01 TRAIL 98 WORK CONSERVATION CORPS 11556.72 7306 1
TABLE A- Page 128 

Forest Forest Tota

" Service Service Appli 

1

Proj

"'!>' "'"'""'"" 

Year I Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC- HOULE CREEK OHV MONTANA 

2012 01 REHAB CONSERVATION CORPS 8600 0 

SELWAY-BITTERROOT 

2012 FRANK CHURCH 

2012 01 VOLUNTEER/INTERNSHIP FOUNDATION 401414.86 449457.08 85

BID-CONTROL PROGRAM 

2012 01 EXPANSION IDAHO COUNTY 90970 15000 2012 01 NEW INVADER EMPHASIS IDAHO COUNTY 187390 62000 

IDAHO FOREST PRODUCTS 

2012 01 PROJECT LEARNING TREE COMMISSION 42355.4 378503.28 42

2012 ROADSIDE NOXIOUS DEER CREEK HIGHWAY 

2012 01 WEED CONTROL DISTRICT 4756.12 1872 

RAC INTERFACE WEED 

2012 01 TREATMENT IDAHO COUNTY 64456.03 20000 8

INTEGRATED NOXIOUS WEED NEZ PERCE TRIBE BIO2012 01 MANAGEMENT CONTROL CTR 671667.96 72259.38 74

SBW FIRE & WIND EVENT MONTANA 

2012 01 AFFECTED TRAIL CONSERVATION CORPS 83513.15 66744 15

PALOUSE-CLEARWATER 

USER CREATED TRAIL ENVIROMENTAL 

2012 01 INVENTORY INSTITUTE 79781.84 13539.68 9
TABLE A - Page 129 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! 

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match 

STAND EXAMS/GIS 

PREPARATION/PRESCRIPTION 

2012 01 s NEZ PERCE TRIBE 4540 61745.21 6

SHEARER AIRSTRIP MONTANA 

2012 01 MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 26841.8 16808 

GRANGEVILLE-SALMON RD 

2012 01 221- CHIP SEAL IDAHO COUNTY 287651.69 74500 36

PORCUPINE FALLS TRAIL MONTANA 

2012 02 PROJECT, PHASE II CONSERVATION CORPS 12000 0 

SOUTH DAKOTA GAME, 

DEERFIELD RESERVOIR- FISH & PARKS 

2012 02 DUTCHMAN COVE RAMP DEPARTMENT 24263 0 

LAWRENCE COUNTY RAC, SOUTH DAKOTA PROJECT 

2012 02 PROJECT LEARNING TREE LEARNING TREE INC. 5000 4000 

PENNINGTON COUNTY 

2012 02 ROCKERVILLE LEAFY SPURGE WEED & PEST BOARD 10165 13569.89 2

COAL CREEK WATERSHED 

2012 02 MT. EMMONS IRON FEN COALITION 57767.52 5219.96 6

ALPINE PLATEU ROAD 

2012 02 IMPROVEMENT GUNNISON COUNTY 71385 18072.38 8

UNCOMPAHGRE PLATEAU 

2012 02 CATILEGUARD INSTALLATION MONTROSE COUNTY 26500 7000 
TABLE A - Page 130 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Proj

Year Region Project Title 1Applicant Name Match Match Fun

ENHANCEMENT OF EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS 

AVAILABLE TO RESOURCE 

MANAGERSANDTHEPUBUC 

IN RELATION TO BEETLE KILL WYOMING GAME AND 

2012 02 AND ELK FISH COMMISSION 64S49.06 16065.5 8

NEWCOMB CREEK HABITAT ROCKY MOUNTAIN YOUTH 

2012 02 IMPROVEMENT CORPS 2847.8 1543.78 

TEAL LAKE CAMPGROUND 

RESTORATION & ROCKY MOUNTAIN YOUTH 

2012 02 BEAUTIFICATION CORPS 4271.2 2316 

ROCKY MOUNTAIN YOUTH 

2012 02 NATIVE SEED COLLECTION CORPS 14859.84 5335.6 2

SOUTHWEST 

2012 02 TRAIL MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 48538 18399.1 

HEADWATERS TRAILS AND SOUTHWEST 

2012 02 RECREATION WORK CONSERVATION CORPS 72432.66 43002 11

SOUTHWEST 

2012 02 CONEJOS PEAK TRAIL WORK CONSERVATION CORPS 33827.19 17032 52012 02 FS ROAD 250 PROJECT CONEJOS COUNTY 79635.73 169715.68 24

ROAD SURFACE RECLAMATION FOREST 

2012 02 ROADS 250 AND 255 CONEJOS COUNTY 91325 0 
TABLE A - Page 131 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 

Year Region I Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

CANYON LAKES RANGER 

DISTRICT UNAUTHORIZED ROUTE DECOMMISSIONING WILDLANDS 

AND WATERSHED RESTORATION 

2012 02 IMPROVEMENT VOLUNTEERS 119344.64 242956.4 362012 02 NOXIOUS WEED TREATMENT LARIMER COUNTY 477891.11 56616 53

MHYC /SAN CARLOS MILE HIGH YOUTH CORPS, 

2012 02 HUERFANO TRAILS COLORADO SPRINGS 17638.36 6758.25 2

11- MILE CANYON COALITION FOR THE 

2012 02 IMPROVEMENTS UPPER SOUTH PLATIE 6943.48 4675 1

CUCHARAS SANITATION 

2012 02 BRITION RESERVOIR REHAB WATER DISTRICT 21544.35 11750 3

TUNNEL GULCH SILVER SOUTHWEST 

2012 02 PROJECT (SPA) CONSERVATION CORPS 177530.86 84651.68 26

DEBRIS DECOMPOSITION 

2012 02 AND RESEEDING PROJECT MYCOLOGIC DESIGN LLC 2607.52 1098.64 

2012 02 MISSIONARY RIDGE TRAIL TRAILS 2000 9710.37 7143.2 1

GRAVEL PLACEMENT ON CR 

2012 02 302- RAC ARCHULETA COUNTY 42848 0 

MIDDLE MOUNTAIN ROAD2012 02 RAC PROJECT LA PLATA COUNTY 25773.22 12698 3
TABLE A- Page 132 

forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match fun

SHOSHONE RIVER STABILIZATION AND CODY CONSERVATION 

2012 02 RESTORATION PROJECT DISTRICT 36770.49 0 3

FRANC'S FORK FISH SCREEN 

2012 02 PROJECT TROUT UNLIMITED 15598.22 76368.47 9

TIMBER CREEK FISH PASSAGE 

2012 02 PROJECT TROUT UNLIMITED 20598.22 196294.47 21

MONTANA 

2012 02 WOOD RIVER PROJECT CONSERVATION CORPS 24000 0 

UNIVERSITY OF 

RAM SHORN TRAIL NO. 819 WYOMING, WYOMING 

2012 02 PROJECT CONSERVATION CORPS 37678.5 17787.06 5

MESA YOUTH SERVICES, 

INC., WESTERN 

COLORADO 

2012 02 PARTNERSHIP WITH WCCC CONSERVATION CORPS 51140.45 8150 5

2012 03 PINEDALE ROAD (FS 129) NAVAJO COUNTY 75000 26392 

APACHE COUNTY PUBLIC 

2012 03 CR 3140 WORKS 60000 14560 

WHITE MOUNTAIN WILDLIFE & NATURE 

2012 03 BIG SPRING ESA CENTER, INC 11550 2000 

WOODLAND LAKE PARK TOWN OF PINETOP2012 03 TRAIL LAKESIDE 32152.5 8748 
TABLE A- Page 133 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

NORTHERN ARIZONA 

WOOD PRODUCTS 

2012 03 TRANSITION lNG TO 4FRI ASSOCIATION 15206.17 6855 2

NOXIOUS AND INVASIVE LITILE COLORADO RIVER 

2012 03 WEEDS PLATEAU RC&D WMA 32256 31101 

COLUMBINE BASIN TRAIL ROCKY MOUNTAIN YOUTH 

2012 03 (TRAIL #57) CORPS 11597 3835.03 1

NM HWY 115 CORRIDOR CHIMAYO CONSERVATION 

2012 03 PROJECT-FINAL PHASE CORPS 75582 19051.9 

ZUNI MOUNTAIN TRAIL 

PARTNERSHIP PHASE II BAT 

2012 03 MT. TAYLOR CIBOLA COUNTY 75000 0 

SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS 

ATU/UTV CADLE GUARDS 

2012 03 ON MT. TAYLOR CIBOLA COUNTY 112690 0 

SRS- ROCKHILL ALLOTMENT SALADO SOIL AND WATER 

2012 03 TANK CLEANING PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 55800 0 

SRS- TORRANCE COUNTY NEW MEXICO 

CATCHMENT AND DRINKER OUTDOORSMEN FOR 

2012 03 SYSTEMS WILDLIFE 48911 0 

MCGAFFEY AREA TRAIL MAINTENANCE AND 

2012 03 CONSERVATION MCKINLEY COUNTY 149903.54 0 14
TABLE A - Page 134 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appi! Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SRS- MT TAYLOR BOUNDARY USDI/BUREAU OF LAND 

2012 03 SURVEY MANAGEMENT 18562 2984 

SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS ACT 

-COUNCIL ROCK ALLOTMENT 

2012 03 CATILE GUARDS MONTOSA RANCH, LLC 54300 4445.24 5

DESIGN AND 

RECONSTRUCTION OF A PERMANENT EARTH ERN 

BERM AT GIRL'S RANCH COCONINO COUNTY, 

2012 03 ROAD FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 157500 20133 

CULPEPPER-REAY FOREST YAVAPAI COUNTY, PUBLIC 

2012 03 ROAD MAINTENANCE WORKS 70476 0 

COCONINO COUNTY SOLID 

WASTE COMMUNITY 

CLEANUPS- FLAGSTAFF 

LANDFILL AND WILLARD COCONINO COUNTY, 

2012 03 SPRINGS SOLID WASTE DIVISION 154128 0 

BLUE RIDGE COMMUNITY 

FIRE RISK REDUCTION- RAC COCONINO COUNTY 

2012 03 11-03 COMMUNITY SERVICES 42741 39000 

RAC- ARIZONA TRAILHEAD 

2012 03 DEVELOPMENT PINAL COUNTY 80000 699 
TABLE A- Page 135 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

DOUGLAS HIGH SCHOOL ENDANGERED FISH AND DOUGLAS UNIFIED 

2012 03 FROG FACILITY SCHOOL DISTRICT 3500 4420.34 

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT 

FENCING PROJECT FOR OF CORRECTIONS, 

MULESHOE PRESCRIBED FIRE ARIZONA STATE PRISON 

2012 03 (RANGE) COMPLEX-SAFFORD (DOC) 63121 56857.5 1

PAJARITO MOUNTAINS 

COMPLEX BULLFROG 

2012 03 CONTROL PROJECT (RAC) SKY ISLAND ALLIANCE 45132 59998.38 10

SRS TITLE II- TRAIL MTNCE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT 

2012 03 ON SAFFORD RD OF CORRECTION 132157.5 67687.5 

CORONADO NF TRAILS 

MAINTENANCE- NOGALES 

AND SIERRA VISTA RANGER NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2012 03 DISTRICTS CORPS (NYC) 62518 30305.61 9

ARIZONA STATE FORESTRY 

2012 03 INVASIVE PLANT CONTROL DIVISION 111096 20210 2012 03 FRYE MESA RESERVOIR ROAD GRAHAM COUNTY 171806.51 0 17

PINALENO ECOSYSTEM NATIONAL WILD TURKEY 

2012 03 RESTORATION (PERP) FEDERATION 1722177.5 578080.59 23
TABLE A- Page 136 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SACATON ROAD EROSION 

2012 03 CONTROL GRANT COUNTY, NM 26147 0 

ALDO LEOPOLD WILDERNESS AREA INVASIVE PLANT UPPER GILA WATERSHED 

2012 03 INVENTORY ALLIANCE 37935 20860 

TWC YOUTH CORPS 

2012 03 CONTINENTAL DIVIDE TRAIL THE WELLNESS COALITION 17000 22799 

SNOW LAKE ENHANCEMENT 

2012 03 PROJECT TROUT UNLIMITED 106154 42712 

CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF 

BATS AND BAT ROOSTING BAT CONSERVATION 

2012 03 HABITAT- RAC #11-13 INTERNATIONAL 27301.08 8250.67 3

COCONINO COUNTY, 

PUBLIC WORKS 

SOLID WASTE COMMUNITY DEPARTMENT, SOLID 

2012 03 CLEANUP- WILLIAMS- RAC WASTE DIVISION 51864.71 0 5

BILL WILLIAMS MOUNTAIN 

PLANT SURVEYING AND 

2012 03 MONITORING RAC 11-02 HUALAPAI TRIBE 26309.68 944 2

KAIBAB NATIONAL FOREST 

YOUTH CONSERVATION 

2012 03 CORPS YCC (RAe) COCONINO COUNTY 52745.31 0 5
TABLE A- Page 137 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl Proj

Year Region Project Title A .!:. .. Name Match Match Fund

ALAMO NAVAJO SCHOOL 

2012 03 SCOTI THINNING- RAC 11-38 BOARD 265820.69 67107.92 332

FERAL HOG REMOVAL- TASK 

2012 03 FORCE OTERO COUNTY, NM 34124 28496 

YAVAPAI COUNTY JUVENILE YAVAPAI COUNTY 

2012 03 COURT- RAC JUVENILE COURT 59017.16 0 59

SMITH MESA HABITAT ARIZONA GAME AND FISH 

2012 03 IMPROVEMENT- AZGFD COMMISSION 46966.93 36350 83

RAC- BLACK CANYON 

NATIONAL RECREATION 

TRAIL CONNECTIVITY TO BLACK CANYON TRAIL 

2012 03 PRESCOTI NF COALITION, INC. 71429 5479 

WILLIAMSON VALLEY YAVAPAI COUNTY PUBLIC 

ROADWAY GRADING AND WORKS- WILLIAMSON 

2012 03 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS VALLEY ROAD PROJECT 17126.25 0 17

RAC FUNDED- HERITAGE PARK ZOOLOGICAL 

SANCTUARY WILD ANIMAL 

RESCUE AND CONSERVATION PRESCOTI ANIMAL PARK 

2012 03 PROJECT ASSOCIATION 4762 0 
TABLE A- Page 138 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

AMERICAN 

CONSERVATION 

RAC FUNDED- CLARK EXPERIENCE (ACE)- CLARK 

2012 03 SPRINGS TRAIL #40- ACE SPRINGS TRAIL 19387.5 14120.75 3

AMERICAN 

CONSERVATION 

RAC FUNDED- CASTLE CREEK EXPERIENCE (ACE)-

2012 03 TRAIL REHAB- ACE CASTLE CREEK 25196.69 17339.27 4

RIO DEL OSO WATERSHED OHKAY OWINGEH (SAN 

2012 03 RESTORATION JUAN PUEBLO) 57021.9 49433 1

SRS- PECOS WILDERNESS 

TRAIL CLEARING AND LAND 

2012 03 RESTORATION RICHARD LEY 14500 17620 

SAN ANTONIO HOT SPRINGS 

2012 03 REHABILITATION TRAIL PARTNERS 94617.58 56084.46 15

COWLES PONDS HABITAT 

ENHANCEMENT AND ACCESS BUREAU OF 

2012 03 IMPROVEMENT RECLAMATION 87489 0 

SRS- LOS PINOS DITCH LOS PINOS DITCH 

2012 03 IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATION 9209 0 

TRAL OHV VOLUNTEER TONTO RECREATION 

2012 03 PROGRAM EXPANSION ALLIANCE, INC (TRAL) 13000 29000 

EAST MOUNTAIN TRAIL, TOLL COCONINO RURAL 

2012 03 ROAD TRAIL LOOP ENVIRONMENT CORPS 11000 4342.52 1
TABLE A- Page 139 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Proj

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

ARIZONA TRAIL 

MAINTENANCE FROM 

PICKETPOST TRAILHEAD COCONINO RURAL 

2012 03 NORTH TO GLOBE RD ENVIRONMENT CORPS 22966.6 8201.74 3

SCA INTERN VOLUNTEER STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2012 03 PROGRAM EDUCATION 84819.32 108093 19

CHIP SEAL SURFACING 

2012 03 PROJECT FOR FR 423 GILA COUNTY 283825 0 

LEGENDS OF SUPERIOR TRAIL SOUTHWEST 

2012 03 MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 13366.6 8446 

MARICOPA 3 RAC, ARIZONA SOUTHWEST 

2012 03 TRAIL MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 30931.73 16236 4

WEST EMMETI RD West Central Highland 

WATERSHED & RESOURCE Resource Conservation 

2012 04 MGMT PLANNING MTGS and Development Council 221438.98 210213.38 43

SH-21 UNDERPASS PROJECT 

(PHASE 4) LINKAGE IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF 

2012 04 PARTNERSHIP FISH AND GAME 9267.15 37796 4

RAC 12BNF007 GRIMES AND 

GRANTE RESTORATION 

2012 04 EXPANSION TROUT UNLIMITED 30000 40000 
TABLE A- Page 140 

forest forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 

1

Proj

Year I Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match fund

SQUAW VALLEY ROAD #618 

RESURFACING RAC 

2012 04 #11BNF007M GEM COUNTY 34188.6 129300 1

GRANITE CR STABILIZATION BOISE COUNTY ROAD 

2012 04 RAC #12BNF004 DEPARTMENT 24155.2 2687.5 

JOHNSON CR RD 

STABILIZATION RAC 

2012 04 12BNF002 Valley County 174220.45 35200 20

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY, 

UTAH CONSERVATION 

2012 04 RAC SHEEP PASS TRAIL CORPS 15941.18 4264.81 2

MONTANA 

2012 04 PINEDALE TRAIL PROJECTS CONSERVATION CORPS 67192.8 35295.2 

SUBLETTE COUNTY WEED & Sublette County Weed and 

2012 04 PEST Pest Control District 106828.39 44072.24 15

SR- 14 DEER VALLEY TURN UTAH DEPARTMENT OF 

2012 04 LANES TRANSPORTATION 14820 105000 

RAC MAMMOTH CREEK UTAH STATE FORESRTY 

2012 04 FUELS FIRE AND S 83722 3300 

UTAT FORESTRY FIRE AND 

2012 04 RAC BRIAN HEAD STATE L 97140 5100 

2012 ,04 PINE LAKE ROAD GRAVEL GARFIELD COUNTY 89989 6000 
TABLE A- Page 141 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

FOUR CORNERS SCHOOL 

OF OUTDOOR 

EDUCATION, CANYON 

CCYCTRAILAND COUNTRY YOUTH CORPS 

2012 04 CAMPGROUND (FCS/CCYC) 24143.88 6067.89 3

JOHNSON-VERDURE HAZARD NATIONAL WILD TURKEY 

2012 04 FUEL PROJECT FEDERATION 195653.69 0 19

RAC 12MULTI001 SBFCF SELWAY-BITTERROOT 

VOLUNTEER AND FRANK CHURCH 

2012 04 INTERNSHIP PROGRAM FOUNDATION 46479.2 0 

WEST CENTRAL 

HIGHLANDS RESOURCE 

CONSERVATION AND 

RC&D COLLABORATIAVE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, 

2012 04 PROJECT PARTNERSHIP INC. 1226676 317513.58 15

COLLABORATION ON 

STEWARDSHIP GOALS AND 

ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE FC- SELWAY-BITTERROOT 

2012 04 RONRW FOUNDATION 108751.57 43935.84 15

LEMHI COUNTY AQUATIC YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2012 04 MENTORING PROGRAM, INC. 14763.43 4276.02 1

MULTIPARTY MONITORING SALMON VALLEY 

2012 04 FOR RESTORATION PROJECTS STEWARDSHIP 82983.87 35585.3 11
TABLE A- Page 142 

Forest forest Tota

.& Service Service Appli 

1

Proj1 "I>' ''"""' "" .. 

Year I Region Project Title Armlicant Name Match Match I Fun

CUSTER COUNTY- RAC FUEL 

2012 04 REDUCTION CUSTER COUNTY 92635.2 27100.78 11

BUTTE COUNTY- RAC FUEL 

2012 04 REDUCTION BUTTE COUNTY 37081.12 22915.56 5

LEMHI COUNTY- RAC FUEL 

2012 04 REDUCTION LEMHI COUNTY 128593.12 32200 16

RAC SNF02 SAWTOOTH SAWTOOTH INTERPRETIVE 

VISITOR & VOLUNTEER AND HISTORICAL 

2012 04 INFORMATION WEBSITE ASSOCIATION, INC. 21400 2400 

BLAINE COUNTY- WARM 

SPRINGS ROAD 

2012 04 IMPROVEMENT PHASE 1 BLAINE COUNTY 137494.93 205015.76 34

RAC CARIBOU HIGHLAND CARIBOU CATTLEMEN'S 

2012 04 TRAILS ASSOCIATION 16525 8900 

RAC COFFEEPOT TRAIL AND HENRY'S FORK 

2012 04 PARKING FOUNDATION 33470 9852 

RAC SHEEP FALLS ROAD HENRY'S FORK 

2012 04 REHAB FOUNDATION 18999.32 5200 2

RAC ST. CHARLES FISH 

SCREEN AND STREAM BANK 

2012 04 STABILIZATION TROUT UNLIMITED 17685 15000 
TABLE A- Page 143 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

PORTNEUF SOIL & WATER 

2012 04 PEBBLE CREEK RESTORATION CONSERVATION DISTRICT 72720.8 377996.57 45

RAC HARRIMAN FISH POND HENRY'S FORK 

2012 04 DISPERSED CAMPSITES FOUNDATION 15357.72 7227.5 2

SPA BIG HOLE MTN RANGE MONTANA 

2012 04 TRAIL PROJECTS CONSERVATION CORPS 19422.9 16577.6 

RAC FISH POND DAM HENRY'S FORK 

2012 04 SPILLWAY FOUNDATION 16775.52 19209 3

RAC YCT RESTORATION HENRY'S FORK 

2012 04 SCHNEIDER CREEK FOUNDATION 30682.16 32135 6

RAC ANDERSON MILL 

2012 04 CANYON WEED CONTROL FREMONT COUNTY 4698.58 4300 

RAC ANTELOPE FLATS 

NOXIOUS WEED 

2012 04 CONTAINMENT FREMONT COUNTY 4799.06 3412 

2012 04 RAC CAVE FALLS CLEAN UP FREMONT COUNTY 5497.64 4300 

RAC MACKS INN WEED 

2012 04 CONTROL FREMONT COUNTY 2799.06 1462 

RAC SAND CREEK PONDS 

2012 04 WEED CONTROL FREMONT COUNTY 1899.53 5328 

RAC HARRIMAN STATE PARK 

2012 04 NOXIOUS WEED CLEAN UP FREMONT COUNTY 4598.11 15464 2
TABLE A- Page 144 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title 1Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SANTA ROSA CITIZEN NEVADA OUTDOOR 

2012 04 STEWARDSHIP INITIATIVE SCHOOL 56214.84 36332.7 9

NNSG EAST SIDE JARBIDGE 

MOUNTAINS TRAIL NORTHEASTERN NEVADA 

2012 04 MAINTENANCE STEWARDSHIP GROUP 14042.88 3545 1

HABITAT MONITORING AT 

LONG DOCTOR AND CHINA 

CAMP SAGE GROUSE 

2012 04 HABITAT NDOW 5658.55 2000 

NYE COUNTY/AUSTINTONOPAH TRAIL CREW FRIENDS OF NEVADA 

2012 04 PROJECT (RAC) WILDERNESS 148458.48 38583.8 18

MONITORING PJ PROJECTS FOR ADAPTIVE UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA, 

2012 04 MANAGEMENT RENO 83450.87 20006.48 10

SUMMIT TRAIL FRIENDS OF NEVADA 

2012 04 MAINTENANCE (RAC) WILDERNESS 34108.52 10476 4

2012 04 BIOMASS COLLECTION SITE ALPINE COUNTY 40261.29 0 4

SANTA ROSA RD NOXIOUS PARADISE VALLEY WEED 

2012 04 WEED CONTROL DISTRICT 141031.97 45947.89 18

WORTHINGTON CANYON 

SAGE STEPPE RESTORATION EASTERN NEVADA 

2012 04 PROJECT LANDSCAPE COALITION 84846.9 0 
TABLE A- Page 145 

Forest Forest Tota

" Service Service Appl! 1Proj

'"'!>' "'"'" "'"" 

Year I Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

HUMBOLDT WATERSHED 

2012 04 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL CWMA 71070.22 0 7

DUCK CREEK BASIN & GRANTQUINN MOUNTAIN RANGE 

PINYON AND JUNIPER TREE 

2012 04 REMOVAL PROJECT GREAT BASIN INSTITUTE 134389.01 32267.4 16

GBI CREW/NOXIOUS WEED GBINEVADA 

2012 04 CONTROL CONSERVATION CORP 758888.76 341804.34 11

CWMA NOXIOUS WEED NORTHERN 

2012 04 CONTROL NYE/ESMERALDA CWMA 26533.17 25000 5

WORTHINGTON CANYON 

SAGE STEPPE RESTORATION EASTERN NEVADA 

2012 04 PROJECT-IMPLEMENTATION LANDSCAPE COALITION 88721.28 0 8

AURORA CEMETERY FUELS NEVADA DIVISION OF 

2012 04 REDUCTION FORESTRY 6070.25 3740.07 

MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAILS ON 

THE AUSTIN RANGER GBINEVADA 

2012 04 DISTRICT CONSERVATION CORP 1409.5 3108.04 

ROAD PROJECT AGREEMENT 

2012 ,04 (RAC) MINERAL COUNTY 235043.62 0 23
TABLE A- Page 146 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

USU, UCC- RICK'S CANYON 

AND RICHARD'S HOLLOW UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY, 

MOTORIZED TRAIL RE-ROUTE UTAH CONSERVATION 

2012 04 PROJECTS CORPS 96059.25 27346.4 12

BRAG/BRBC- CACHE 

COUNTY SECURE RURAL 

SCHOOLS IMPLEMENTATION 

AND TRAINING PROJECT 

(ROAD MAINTENANCE & 

SMITHFIELD CYN RD BEAR RIVER ASSOCIATION 

IMPROVEMENTS & SIGNING OF GOVERNMENTS, BEAR 

2012 04 ON LOGAN RD RIVER BASIN CORPS 24881.39 24104.37 4

STANISLAUS NATIONAL HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2012 05 FOREST CLEAN UP TRAIL CREW 26670 20827.5 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- CAMP 

2012 05 SACAMENTO ELDORADO COUNTY RCD 74882.53 91284.99 16

TITLE II RAC PROJECTPREVENTING THE SPREAD OF ELDORADO COUNTY 

INVASIVE WEEDS VIA DEPARTMENT OF 

2012 05 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AGRICULTURE 10520 6788 

AMADOR FIRE SAFE 

2012 05 TIGER CREEK COUNCIL 12900.5 71650 
TABLE A- Page 147 

forest forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Proj

Year I Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match fund

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- HAPPY 

VALLEY ROAD ELDORADO COUNTY FIRE 

2012 05 EVACUATION/FUEL BREAKS SAFE COUNCIL 35309.52 13215 4

2012 05 ENF TRAIL CREW SCA 65000 28300 

PLEASANT VALLEY SENIOR FIRE SAFE COUNCIL OF 

2012 05 FUEL REDUCTION PROJECT SISKIYOU COUNTY 42400 11500 

SISKIYOU COUNTY 

CONTROL OF INVASIVE DEPARTMENT OF 

2012 05 SPECIES AGRICULTURE 44680 44833 

EMERGENCY WATER SOURCE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

2012 05 DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE CENTER 14750 6000 

SISKIYOU SHERIFF'S PROJECT SISKIYOU COUNTY FIRE 

2012 05 CREW WARDEN 135000 98000 

HAMMOND RANCH WATER FIRE SAFE COUNCIL OF 

2012 05 STORAGE TANKS SISKIYOU COUNTY 19150 7500 

MOUNT SHASTA AREA 

2012 05 WEEDS TO NATIVE PLANTS AUDUBON 31861.25 29604 6

COS FUELS REDUCTION PLAN COLLEGE OF THE 

2012 05 PROJECT SISKIYOUS 41728.05 43883 8

JUNIPER FLAT ESCAPED BURN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

2012 05 PREVENTION CHIPPER DAYS RESOURCE CENTER 23760 24500 
TABLE A- Page 148 

forest forest Tota

" Service Service Appl! Proj

"!>' "'"'' ""''. 

Year I Region Project Title A1mlicant Name Match Match .fund

MEADOW ENCHANCEMENT CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT 

2012 OS PILOT PROJECT OF FISH AND GAME 21022.4 1226S 

WORKABILITY HIGH SCHOOL SISKIYOU COUNTY OF 

2012 OS PROGRAM EDUCATION 16844.07 29739 4

CALIFORNIA 

2012 OS INVASIVE SPECIES CONTROL CONSERVATION CORPS 10041.9S 0 1

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

2012 OS BLACK ROCK ASPEN FENCE RESOURCE CENTER 8S476.4 24234 1

HONEY LAKE VALLEY 

SUSAN RIVER WATERSHED RESOURCE 

2012 OS ASSESSMENT CONSERVATION DISTRICT S477S soooo 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

FORESTRY INSTITUTE FOR SOCIETY OF AMERICAN 

2012 OS TEACHERS (FIT) FORESTERS 18000 18000 

BURNEY-HAT CREEK FALL RIVER RESOURCE 

2012 OS COMMUNITY FOREST- SCALE CONSERVATION DISTRICT 48800 4900 

BURNEY CREEK/GARDEN 

MEADOWS RESTORATION FALL RIVER RESOURCE 

2012 OS PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 7171.21 0 
TABLE A- Page 149 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

NORTHWEST GATEWAY 

FOREST RESTORATION USDI, NATIONAL PARK 

2012 OS PROJECT SERVICE 286SO 0 

TRIBAL YOUTH SUSANVILLE INDIAN 

2012 OS CONSERVATION CREW RANCHERIA 34648.32 8677 4

INDIAN VALLEY FIRE DISTRICT 

2012 OS EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT COLUSA, COUNTY OF 22900 sooo 

CALIFORNIA NORTH REGION TEHAMA COUNTY 

TRAINING AND SAFTEY RESOURCE 

2012 OS EXERCISE AREA PERMIT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 46142 62000 

ELDER CREEK TO EAGLE PEAK 

2012 OS FUEL BREAK TEHAMA COUNTY RCD 30326 43000 

2012 OS CLEAN FOREST PROJECT CLEAN FOREST PROJECT 62196.1 12032.6S 7

TATHAM RIDGE 

STEWARDSHIP PROJECT 

2012 OS PHASE I CRANE MILLS, INC 166172.76 71967.S 23

DEVIL'S GARDEN WILD MODOC COUNTY FARM 

2012 OS HORSE TERRITORY PLAN BUREAU 203000 72064.86 27

MODOC COUNTY 

WILDLIFE SERVICES DEPARTMENT OF 

2012 OS PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT AGRICULTURE 40000 49626 

2012 OS GRIFFIN CREEK CULVERT COUNTY OF DEL NORTE 17S100 33963 
TABLE A- Page 150 

forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match fun

CALIFORNIA 

2012 AMERICORPS CONSERVATION 

WATERSHED STEWARDS CORPS/AMERICORPS 

2012 OS PROJECT WATERSHED PROJECT 117722.38 1414304 15

NYC PULLING TOGETHER 

INVASIVE PLANT REMOVAL 

2012 05 PROJECT NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 10967.56 6384 1

PULLING TOGETHERPARTNERSHIP IN THE 

TREATMENT OF INVASIVE DEL NORTE RESOURCE 

2012 05 PLANTS, DEL NORTE COUNTY CONSERVTION DISTRICT 41678 25124 

THE WATERSHED 

VAN DUZEN VEGETATION RESEARCH AND TRAINING 

2012 05 MANAGEMENT CENTER 25480.41 6513.5 3

NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2012 05 SISKIYOU WILDERNESS TRAIL CORPS 53670.39 27322.96 8

LOWER TRINITY TRAILS NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2012 05 MAINTENACE CORPS 15999.41 0 1

LOWER TRINITY TRAIL 

2012 05 MAINTENANCE TCCC HOOPA VALLEY TRIBE 1866.23 2632 

2012 LEGACY ROAD 

2012 05 DECOMMISSIONING THE KARUK TRIBE 220450 78935 
TABLE A- Page 151 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl; Pro

Year Region Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

CALIFORNIA 

2012 05 OHV 4 DAY SPIKE CONSERVATION CORPS 8999.5 2589 

KLAMATH RIVER TRIBUTARY 

FISH PASSAGE MID KLAMATH 

2012 05 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT WATERSHED COUNCIL 29797.45 23111 5

PILOT CREEK ROAD BRIDGEVILLE COMMUNITY 

2012 05 BRUSHING & CHIPPING CENTER 5882 1594 

2012 05 BRIDGE APPROACH PAVING COUNTY OF DEL NORTE 77651.95 65226 14

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- LA PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE 

2012 05 PORTE RD. II-A SAFE COUNCIL 73130 7500 

TITLE II RAC PROJECTSPANISH CREEK IN MEADOW 

2012 05 VALLEY PLUMAS CORP 22000 0 

TITLE II RAC PROJECTCHIPPER FOR FOREST BUTIE COUNTY FIRE SAFE 

2012 05 HEALTH COUNCIL 82763 46025 

TITLE II RAC PROJECTCONCOW HAZARDOUS FUEL YANKEE HILL FIRE SAFE 

2012 05 REMOVAL & REFORESTATION COUNCIL 98083 46320 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- THE 

WATERCOURSE- PLUMAS TO 

2012 05 PACIFIC PROGRAM PLUMAS CORP 17400 25096 
TABLE A- Page 152 

Forest Forest Tota

"5' "'"'"'"''" Service Service Appli ,Proj

Year !Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match I Fun

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

FORESTRY INSTITUTE FOR SOCIETY OF AMERICAN 

2012 OS TEACHERS FORESTERS 1SOOO 1SOOO 

FEATHER RIVER COLLEGE FEATHER RIVER 

FUELS REDUCTION E& FIRE COMMUNITY COLLEGE 

2012 OS PLANNING DISTRICT 146S2 11820 

TITLE II RAC PROJECTFORBESTOWN ROADSIDE BUTTE COUNTY PUBLIC 

2012 OS HAZARDOUS FUEL BREAK WORKS S17SO 172SO 

TITLE II RAC PROJECTFOREST STEWARDSHIP AND 

WILDFIRE SAFETY BUTTE COUNTY FIRE SAFE 

2012 OS EDUCATION PROGRAM COUNCIL 80000 18SOO 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- LIVING 

IN THE FOOTHILLS STUDENT BUTTE COUNTY FIRE SAFE 

2012 OS PROGRAM COUNCIL 13SOO 2000 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- MT. SIERRA BUTTES TRAIL 

2012 OS HOUGH TRAIL SYSTEM STEWARDSHIP 23SOO 26S13 

TITLE II RAC PROJECTSOUTH PARK AND CASCADE 

NON-MOTORIZED TRAIL SIERRA BUTTES TRAIL 

2012 OS SYSTEM STEWARDSHIP 77S72 34612 
TABLE A- Page 153 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- UPPER 

FEATHER RIVER WATERSHED 

2012 OS MONITORING PLUMAS CORP 44699 266S4 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT -LAKE 

DAVIS FLAMMULATED OWL PLUMAS AUDUBON 

2012 OS STUDY SOCIETY 1S9SO 9000 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- LAKES SIERRA BUTIES TRAIL 

2012 OS BASIN TRAIL RESTORATION STEWARDSHIP 60668 1S834.71 7

DEER HABITAT 

2012 OS ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS ENTERPRISE RANCHERIA 2130l.S 10S11.8 

TITLE II RAC PROJECTPLUMAS INTEGRATED WEED 

2012 OS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM II FEATHER RIVER RCD 3419S.3 190S2 

SULPHUR-BARRY CREEK FEATHER RIVER CRM 

2012 OS RESTORATION (PLUMAS CORP.) 7491.44 8470 1

EASTSIDE MEADOW RESTORATION ADDITIONAL 

ENVIRONMENTAL 

COMPLIANCE -TITLE II RAC FEATHER RIVER CRM 

2012 OS (11-11) (PLUMAS CORP.) 1390S 12800 

RIVERSIDE PARK PROJECT KERN VALLEY RIVER 

2012 OS (KC103) COUNCIL 42000 0 
TABLE A- Page 154 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appi! Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

KERN COUNTY FUELS KERN COUNTY FIRE 

2012 OS REDUCTION DEPARTMENT 47000 0 

TULARE COUNTY 

JOHNSONDALEFUELLOAD RESOURCE 

2012 OS REDUCTION PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 143387 0 

HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2012 OS MANTER FIRE TRAIL PROJECT TRAIL CREW 30210 1S8794 

PCT KENNEDY MEADOW HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2012 OS TRAIL PROJECT TRAIL CREW 10S7S 3102S 

BACK COUNTRY 

GOLDEN TROUT WILDERNESS HORSEMEN SEQUOIA 

2012 OS SIGNS UNIT 3SOO 0 

TULE RIVER RECREATION HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2012 OS TRAIL TRAIL CREW 14116 86736 

LONG MEADOW TRAIL HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2012 OS PROJECT TRAIL CREW 21322 313S8 

CAMP NELSON TRAIL HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2012 OS PROJECT TRAIL CREW 11984 90072 

NORTHWEST CALIFORNIA 

CONNER CREEK FISH RESOURCE 

PASSAGE IMPROVEMENT CONSERVATION & 

2012 OS PROJECT DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL 80000 237918 
TABLE A- Page 155 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title Name Match Match Fun

SHASTA FORESTRY FORESTRY EDUCATORS 

2012 05 CHALLENGE 2012 INC 10000 16500 

HAYFORK WETLANDS THE WATERSHED RESTORATION AND RESEARCH AND TRAINING 

2012 05 ENHANCEMENT CENTER 10000 7000 

BUREAU OF LAND 

2012 05 BLM STEWARDSHIP PROJECT MANAGEMENT 22948 3000 

YOUTH STEWARDSHIP ASCEND WILDERNESS 

2012 05 PROJECT EXPERIENCE 38702.88 11780 5

BACK COUNTRY 

SHASTA TRINITY TRAILS HORSEMEN, SHASTA2012 05 PROJECT TRINITY UNIT 59232.1 157525 2

TRINITY COUNTY 

WEAVERVILLE BASIN TRAIL RESOURCE 

2012 05 MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT 9530.48 2737.48 1

WCF RIPARIAN AND TRINITY COUNTY 

CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS RESOURCE 

2012 05 PHASE II CONSERVATION DISTRICT 17913 4756 

OPENING TRAIL BACKCOUNTRY 

MANITENANCE PACIFIC HORSEMEN TOP OF STATE 

2012 05 CREST TRAIL UNIT 80730.08 145844.75 22
TABLE A- Page 156 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match fun

ILLEGAL DUMPSITE CLEANUP 

2012 05 PROGRAM CLEAN FOREST PROJECT 6975.36 1000 

WEST HAYFORK COMMUNITY THE WATERSHED 

PROTECTION- TULE THIN RESEARCH AND TRAINING 

2012 05 PHASE I & PHASE II CENTER 139391.08 66731.53 20

TRINITY COUNTY 

GARDEN GULCH SPUR TRAIL RESOURCE 

2012 05 CONSTRUCTION CONSERVATION DISTRICT 14898 8070 

2012 05 TROUT CREEK RECREATION TC & I SHASTA, LLC 21553 17049 

TRINITY COUNTY 

RESOURCE 

2012 05 TRAIL MAP UPDATE CONSERVATION DISTRICT 8614 3650.54 1

WESTSIDE WATERSHED TRINITY COUNTY 

RESTORATION RESOURCE 

2012 05 DECOMMISSIONING PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 55242 45000 

RD 274 FUEL BREAK COARSEGOLD RESOURCE 

2012 05 MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT 31552.5 0 

MUSICK MOUNTAIN STEAM CENTRAL SIERRA 

2012 05 DONKEY HISTORICAL SOCIETY 10256 0 
TABLE A- Page 157 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

PINE LOGGING CAMP CENTRAL SIERRA 

2012 05 SIGNAGE PROJECT HISTORICAL SOCIETY 4000 0 

SRCD/BCHC SAN JOAQUIN SIERRA UNIT BACKCOUNTRY SIERRA RESOURCE 

2012 05 WORK PROJECTS CONSERVATION DISTRICT 8796.64 0 

HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2012 05 EDISON LAKE AREA TRAILS TRAIL CREW 6693 0 

HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2012 05 PACIFIC CREST TRAIL TRAIL CREW 8473 0 

ENVIRONMENTAL SIERRA UNIFIED SCHOOL 

2012 05 ADVENTURES DISTRICT 79857.48 0 7

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- BIG YOSEMITE FOOTHILLS FIRE 

2012 05 LONG SHADED FUEL BREAK SAFE COUNCIL 26230 24780 

TITLE II RAC PROJECTGREELEY HILL COMMUNITY 

HALL FUELS REDUCTION YOSEMITE FOOTHILLS FIRE 

2012 05 PROJECT SAFE COUNCIL 11270.16 15060 2

CALAVERAS HEALTHY 

LAKE ALPINE REC RESIDENCE IMPACT PRODUCT 

2012 05 FUEL REDUCTION PROJECT SOLUTIONS 25694.82 7450 3

TUOLUMNE COUNTY 

TITLE II RAC- WESTSIDE TRANSPORTATION 

2012 05 TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS COUNCIL 9805 2500 
TABLE A- Page 158 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WILD TROUT SIGNAGE TROUT UNLIMITED, SAC2012 OS PROJECT SIERRA CHAPTER 7499.71 38S1.6 1

TITLE II RAC PROJECTNEVADA COUNTY 

COMMUNITY SHADED FIRE SAFE COUNCIL OF 

2012 OS FUELBREAK NEVADA COUNTY, INC. 8361.84 72SO 1

AMERICAN 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- CONSERVATION 

2012 OS PALISADES CREEK TRAIL EXPERIENCE (ACE) S6601 71172.2 1

AMERICAN 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- HOLE CONSERVATION 

2012 OS IN THE GROUND EXPERIENCE (ACE) 17888 19410.6 

SIERRA COUNTY AQUATIC SIERRA COUNTY FIRE SAFE 

2012 OS INVASIVE SPECIES & WATERSHED COUNCIL 13811.46 3S24 1

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- SIERRA COUNTY FIRE SAFE 

2012 OS SCFSWC CHIPPING PROJECT & WATERSHED COUNCIL 344S2.42 S7600 9

TITLE II RAC PROJECTDOWNIEVILLE TRAIL SIERRA BUTTES TRAIL 

2012 OS RESTORATION STEWARDSHIP 30727 31801.9 

TITLE II RAC PROJECTLOWER LITTLE TRUCKEE TROUT UNLIMITED 

2012 OS WATERSHED ASSESSMENT FEATHER RIVER CHAPTER 48000 10741 
TABLE A- Page 159 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appi: 

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match 

ULM-2012-01 URBAN FOREST 

RESTORATION PROJECT, 

AMERICORPS SERVICE CREW 

2012 OS (10 PERSON CREW) GBI 116477.13 56549.16 17

WHOLE WATERSHED 

2012 06 RESTORATION INITIATIVE ECOTRUST 3991690.3 4459905 84

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL OREGON DEPARTMENT OF 

2012 06 ON NFS AGRICULTURE 123889 66109 

DESCHUTES SKYLINE 

COLLABORATIVE FOREST CENTRAL OREGON FOREST 

LANDSCAPE RESTORATION STEWARDSHIP 

2012 06 PROJECT FOUNDATION 24699.07 11500 3

DISCOVER YOUR 

DESCHUTES VOLUNTEER NORTHWEST DBA 

2012 06 STEWARDSHIP PROJECT DISCOVER YOUR FOREST 245126.58 115418.84 36

2012 DESCHUTES COUNTY 

2012 06 WEEDS ALONG ROADS DESCHUTES COUNTY 3178 0 

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL- NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2012 06 DESCHUTES NF CORPS 27708.51 11481.78 3

STATE OF OREGON, 

NEWBERRY FIRE DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF 

2012 06 HANDPILING CORRECTIONS (DOC) 102932.55 208205.62 31
TABLE A- Page 160 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 

1

Proj

Year I Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

HOC SUMMER YOUTH 

2012 06 PROGRAM TITLE II HEART OF OREGON CORPS 38517.54 13949.76 

INVASIVE PLANT CONTROL 

2012 06 ON BEND/FT. ROCK RD HEART OF OREGON CORPS 2320.75 657.8 

CENTRAL OREGON 

COIC YEAR ROUND INTERGOVERNMENTAL 

2012 06 SILVICULTURE PROJECTS COUNCIL 52049.26 81619.67 13

WALKER RANGE 

IVERSON/MOFFITT PROTECTION ASSOC. 

2012 06 LODGEPOLE THIN (WRFPA) 33675 17862 

KLAMATH ECOLOGICAL 

RESTORATION WORKFORCE LOMAKATSI RESTORATION 

2012 06 DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PROJECT 88500 0 

KLAMATH BARK BEETLE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF 

2012 06 MITIGATION 2012 FORESTRY 205106.36 0 20

LILLY'S GULCH STREAM 

2012 06 RESTORATION USFWS 23267 0 

UPPER SPRAGUE CORE AREA U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE 

2012 06 BULL TROUT LWD SERVICE 9520 5000 

BUCK CREEK FISH PASSAGE LAKE COUNTY UMBRELLA 

2012 06 IMPROVEMENT WATERSHED COUNCIL 81899.99 43750 12
TABLE A- Page 161 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

KLAMATH COUNTY NOXIOUS KLAMATH COUNTY PUBLIC 

2012 06 WEED CONTROL WORKS DEPARTMENT 425841.17 416491.2 84

NINE AND MILE LADDER 

2012 06 FUELS THE KLAMATH TRIBES 209339.82 73084.4 28

KLAMATH COUNTY 

PUMICE GRAPEFERN COMMUNITY 

2012 06 HABITAT RESTORATION CORRECTIONS 15216.51 18289.3 3

COLLABORATIVE GROUP 

2012 06 COORDINATOR SKAMANIA COUNTY EDC 44638 49834 

LEWIS COUNTY NOXIOUS LEWIS COUNTY WEED 

2012 06 WEEDS BOARD 203239.04 65582 26

GRANT COUNTY HERBICIDE GRANT SOIL & WATER 

2012 06 COST SHARE PROGRAM CONSERVATION DISTRICT 12283.44 0 1

INFRASTRUCTURE 

MAINTENANCE OF GRANT 

COUNTY ROADS FOR GRANT SOIL & WATER 

2012 06 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL CONSERVATION DISTRICT 53711.04 0 5

TRAINING AND 

TEC RECREATION YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2012 06 CREW CONSORTIUM 378760.67 106366.88 48

GOLD CREEK POND NATIVE CONSERVATION 

2012 06 PROPAGATION ON MBS NF NORTHWEST 14527.84 10680 2
TABLE A- Page 162 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! 1Proj

Year !Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match iFun

LOWER FINNEY CREEK SKAGIT FISHERIES 

2012 06 RESTORATION MONITORING ENHANCEMENT GROUP 10467 3000 

PROTECTING FEDERAL LANDS 

BY BUILDING EFFECTIVE CASCADE PACIFIC RC&D 

2012 06 WEED CONTROL PROGRAMS AREA, INC 68237 0 

BARLOW DISTRICT TRAIL 

2012 06 MAINTENANCE NW YOUTH CORPS 27226.49 7132.13 32012 06 HOC WEEDS CRNG HEART OF OREGON CORPS 4839.87 1441.6 

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2012 06 ON THE OCHOCO NF CORPS 44242.17 19136.3 6

BRIDGE CREEK HEADWATERS 

2012 06 WEED CONTOL & SURVEYS WHEELER SWCD 2362.42 1896.2 

CROOKED RIVER WEED 

MANAGEMENT AREA 

COOPERATIVE INVASIVE CROOKED RIVER WEED 

2012 06 PLANT MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT AREA 21999.79 31048.13 5

PACIFIC RESOURCE STUDENT PACIFIC NORTHWEST 

2012 06 CREW TRAIL ASSOCIATION 20836 19223.41 4
TABLE A- Page 163 

Forest forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 1Proj

Year I Region Project Title Anolicant Name Match Match jfund

CULVERT REPLACEMENT ON 

TRIBUTARY TO NORTH FORK PACIFIC COAST SALMON 

2012 06 CALAWAH RIVER COALITION 123599.86 159991 28

SOUTH FORK SKOKOMISH 

RIVER S-MILE CREEK HABITAT MASON COUNTY 

2012 06 RESTORATION CONSERVATION DISTRICT 10000 30000 

UTILE QUILCENE JUVENILE HOOD CANAL SALMON 

2012 06 SALMON TRAP ENHANCEMENT GROUP 18554 30875 

WASHINGTON STATE 

DEPARTMENT OF 

COLONEL BOB TRAIL ECOLOGY-- WASHINGTON 

2012 06 CLEARING ON OLYMPIC NF CONSERVATION CORPS 39291 18361.5 

OLYMPIC PEN. CO-OP 

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL2012 06 OLYMPIC NATIONAL FOREST CLALLAM COUNTY 193412.69 58921.79 25

WASHINGTON STATE 

DEPARTMENT OF 

WCC FORESTWIDE CREW ECOLOGY-- WASHINGTON 

2012 06 2013 CONSERVATION CORPS 81666 81840 
TABLE A - Page 164 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match Fun

UPPER ROGUE 

BIG BUTIE SPRINGS NOXIOUS WATERSHED 

2012 06 WEEDS ASSOCIATION 8888.55 0 

IDENTIFY AND CLEAN ILLEGAL 

DUMP SITES--HIGH 

2012 06 CASCADES Clean Forest Project 28443.7 1700 

CURRY SOIL & WATER 

2012 06 CURRY ADOPT-A-STREAM II CONSERVATION DISTRICT 13333 3000 

WILD RIVERS COAST ROAD CURRY SOIL & WATER 

2012 06 WEEDS CONSERVATION DISTRICT 13333 0 

FOGGY/EDEN RIPARIAN POWERS SCHOOL 

2012 06 HABITAT RESTORATION DISTRICT 6924 0 

2012-2013 ROADSIDE 

BRUSHING, RESOURCE 

PROTECTION AND ROAD JOSEPHINE COUNTY 

2012 06 SAFETY COMM JUSTICE 33244.75 36735.27 6

CHETCO/GOLD BEACH 

RANGER DISTRICT 

LANDSCAPING 

MAINTENANCE & CURRY COUNTY JUVENILE 

2012 06 RECREATION PROJECTS DEPARTMENT 20986.35 23879.96 4
TABLE A- Page 165 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match 

COOS COUNTY 

2012 06 FOREST WORK CREWS COMMUNITY SERVICE 17806.5 15200 

ILLINOIS RIVER TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2012 06 MAINTENANCE CORPS 8000 3827.26 1

FUELS REDUCTION & FIRE JACKSON COUNTY 

2012 06 MANAGEMENT (COMMUNITY JUSTICE) 151562 44321.6 1

YOUTH EDUCATION 

STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM 

2012 06 (JACKSON COUNTY) THE JOB COUNCIL 65866.65 31652.03 9

YOUTH EDUCATION 

STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM 

2012 06 (JOSEPHINE COUNTY) THE JOB COUNCIL 7102.85 3385.94 1

ROGUE RIVER TRAIL MAINTENANCE AND NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2012 06 IMPROVEMENT CORPS 9025.6 3827.26 1

HIGH PRIORITY INVASIVE PLANT CONTROL GOLD NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2012 06 BEACH & POWERS RDS CORPS 34481 15309.04 4

JACKSON COUNTY TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2012 06 PROJECT CORPS 56968.02 16115.56 7

SISKIYOU MOUNTAINS & 

HIGH CASCADES INVASIVE JACKSON COUNTY 

2012 06 PLANT CONTROL (COMMUNITY JUSTICE) 109198.79 93202.94 20
TABLE A- Page 166 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WILDERNESS BACKCOUNTRY 

RANGERINTERNS,SCA 

PROJECT# P0-00160795 AND STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2012 06 #P0-00180067 ASSOCIATION 17026 37724 

LINCOLN COUNTY INVASIVE LINCOLN SOIL AND WATER 

2012 06 SPECIES CONTROL PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 41580 24519 

NESTUCCA INVASIVE PLANT 

REMOVAL AND RIPARIAN NESTUCCA-N ESKOWIN 

2012 06 PLANTING WATERSHEDS COUNCIL 14500 11835 

MidCoast Watersheds 

2012 06 NATURAL RESOURCE CREWS Council 28742.62 24570 5

FIVEMILE BELL BRIDGE 

2012 06 PROJECT SIUSLAW INSTITUTE 416279.61 200775 61

RESTORATION OF NATIVE PLANT SPECIES AND NATIVE NON-FOREST PLANT Institute for Applied 

2012 06 COMMUNITIES Ecology 92531.54 22140 11

THE CONFEDERATED 

MAINTENANCE OF ELK TRIBES OF GRANDE MEADOWS ON THE GRANDE RONDE COMMUNITY OF 

2012 06 RONDE RESERVATION OREGON 15457.82 6780 2
TABLE A- Page 167 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

TENMILE LAKE COUNTY PARK 

2012 06 AND BOAT RAMP COOS COUNTY 52235.99 0 5

BENTON COUNTY SHERIFF'S BENTON COUNTY 

2012 06 FOREST PATROL (SHERIFF'S OFFICE) 22938 0 

HART'S COVE TRAIL 

2012 06 MAINTENANCE NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 9588 3827.26 1

NIAGARA FALLS TRAIL 

2012 06 MAINTENANCE NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 16163.65 7880.23 2

LINCOLN COUNTY 

COOPERATIVE WEED Lincoln County Public 

2012 06 CONTROL Works Department 47322 24692.6 

1201-SAND LAKE RNA 

INVASIVE PLANT CONTROL 

2012 06 AND PILING NW YOUTH CORPS 17554.37 8598.46 2

SNOWY PLOVER HABITAT 

RESTORATION- EUROPEAN NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2012 06 BEACHGRASS PULLING CORPS 8324.17 3827.26 1

CAPE MOUNTAIN TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2012 06 MAINTENANCE CORPS 21856.02 7654.52 2

MP 0.45 SLIDE REPAIR ON S. 

DRIFT CREEK CAMP ROAD 

2012 06 NO. 109A LINCOLN COUNTY 47108.39 0 4

WALLA WALLA NATIVE NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2012 06 PLANT RESTORATION CORPS 78194.95 16757.91 9
TABLE A - Page 168 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I Project Title jApplicant Name Match Match Fun

STEAMBOAT FALLS FISH 

LADDER IMPROVEMENT- OREGON DEPARTMENT OF 

2012 06 PHASE 3 FISH & WILDLIFE 146411.46 210000 35

COORDINATED WEED CONTROLJOSEPH CR AND 

2012 06 WALLOWA CANYONLANDS WALLOWA RESOURCES 93770 102200 

ALLEN CANYON FUELS 

2012 06 REDUCTION WALLOWA RESOURCES 43970.91 0 4

MT. HOWARD FUELS 

2012 06 REDUCTION WALLOWA RESOURCES 32581.91 0 3

TRAINING AND 

WMO NATURAL RESOURCE EMPLOYMENT 

2012 06 MANAGEMENT CONSORTIUM 50508 14300 

HOSTED TEe'S 2012 TRAINING AND 

NATURAL RESOURCE YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2012 06 CREW CONSORTIUM 20367.28 37730.4 5

WESTSIDE MITIGATION 

2012 06 PROJECT WALLOWA RESOURCES 42342 1700 2012 06 MVRD TRAIL MAINTENANCE NYC 54858.03 22963.56 7

CANYON CREEK LARGE 

WOOD ENHANCEMENT SOUTH SANTIAM 

2012 06 PROJECT WATERSHED COUNCIL 189279.91 150000 33
TABLE A - Page 169 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match Fun

IDENTIFY AND CLEAN UP 

ILLEGAL DUMPSITES2012 06 MARION COUNTY CLEAN FOREST PROJECT 20000 1212.5 

SPA#4 NATURAL RESOURCE LOOKING GLASS YOUTH 

2012 06 RESTORATION WORK AND FAMILY SERVICES 10949.9 15049.44 2

TRAIL CREW INTERNS (2) FOR STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2012 06 SANTIAM RIVER ZONE ASSOCIATION 9212 0 

SWEET HOME RD TRAIL 

2012 06 MAINTENANCE NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 17256.53 7654.52 2

MCKENZIE RIVER RD TRAIL 

2012 06 MAINTENANCE NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 28445.84 3826.6 3

2012 MARION COUNTY 

SHERIFF'S WORK CENTER MARION COUNTY 

2012 06 PROGRAM SHERIFFS OFFICE 33600 0 

2012 LINN COUNTY 

JUVENILE WORK SERVICE LINN COUNTY JUVENILE 

2012 06 PROGRAM DEPARTMENT 25643.6 21933.6 

2012 TRAIL WORK IN WALDO NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2012 06 LAKE WILDERNESS AREA CORPS 17367.34 7654.52 2

CALISPELL SNOWMOBILE 

2012 06 ROUTE SNO POSSE 4992.44 2840 
TABLE A- Page 170 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WASHINGTON STATE 

FOREST HEALTH DEPARTMENT OF 

2012 06 ENHANCEMENT NATURAL RESOURCES 41462.63 45000 8

TONASKET CREEK /OTIS 

CREEK ROAD FERRY COUNTY PUBLIC 

2012 06 IMPROVEMENTS WORKS 72500 4700 

FERRY COUNTY INTEGRATED FERRY COUNTY NOXIOUS 

2012 06 WEED CONTROL PROJECT WEED CONTROL BOARD 104996.87 37000 14

WEED ABATEMENT SAND STEVENS COUNTY 

2012 06 CREEK ROADSIDES CONSERVATION DISTRICT 23000 10000 

GIBRALTAR TRAIL 

2012 06 CONSTRUCTION NYC 33621.16 15308.95 4

DENNIS COVE ROAD 

IMPROVEMENT AND 

2012 08 MAINTENANCE (SRS) CARTER COUNTY 53154 0 

SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS 

2012 08 PROJECT AGREEMENT MARION COUNTY 200000 0 

WATERSHED IMPROVEMENT RAPIDES PARISH POLICE 

2012 08 TRASH CLEANUP JURY 13247 14700 

WINN PARISH ROAD 

2012 08 IMPROVEMENT WORK #2 WINN PARISH 70899.75 0 7
TABLE A - Page 171 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

FY12 TITLE II, JORDAN 

SUMRALL ROAD, CAMP 

ROAD PHASE I & II BUND 

BULTER ROAD, AND OLD WAYNE COUNTY BOARD 

2012 08 HWY 84 ROAD OF SUPERVISORS 187S99 0 

FY12 TITLE II, PARET TOWER PERRY COUNTY BOARD OF 

2012 08 ROAD OVERLAY SUPERVISORS 937003.64 0 93

SCOTT COUNTY BOARD OF 

2012 08 TITLE II ROAD (SPARKSVILLE) SUPERVISORS 69375 24400 

BENTON COUNTY PROJECT 

2012 08 ROAD AGREMEEMENT BENTON COUNTY 52500 0 

ROAD PROJECT AGREEMENT LAFAYETTE COUNTY, 

2012 08 LAFAYETTE COUNTY MISSISSIPPI 22439 0 

ROAD PROJECT AGREEMENT YALOBUSHA COUNTY, 

2012 08 YALOBUSHA COUNTY MISSISSIPPI 7247.51 2872 1

PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT SHARKEY COUNTY BOARD 

2012 08 (DUMMY LINE) OF SUPERVISORS 61225 0 

ENHANCING HABITAT FOR APPALACHIAN TRAIL 

2012 08 WL DIVERSITY ALONG A.T. CONSERVANCY S021 136S7 

COWPASTURE R. ACCESS 

2012 08 PARK ALLEGHANY COUNTY, VA 1062SO 12S16 
TABLE A -Page 172 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

JACKSON RIVER PUBLIC FALLING SPRING RURITAN 

2012 08 ACCESS IMPR CLUB 18286 16000 

GREAT NORTH MTN 

(FORMERLY SQUIRREL GAP 

2012 08 TRAIL RELOCATION) HARDY COUNTY, WV 11700 0 

2012 08 BRUSHY HOLLOW SAVANNAH HARDY COUNTY, WV 15406.85 0 1

DOUTHAT LAKE FISH HAB 

2012 08 IMPRVTS VA OCR/DOUTHAT SP 2725.71 0 

BEARPROOF GREEN BOX 

2012 08 PROJECT BATH COUNTY, VA 34000 1725 

ENHANCED FS TRAIL & 

INTERPRETIVE SIGN 

2012 08 PROGRAM BATH COUNTY, VA 34632.95 5310 3

WL OPENING REFURBISHING NATL WILD TURKEY 

2012 08 PGM FEDERATION 13900 0 

2012 08 L.E. EQUIPMENT SUPPORT SMYTH COUNTY, VIRGINIA 2441.48 0 

ENHANCEMENT PROJECT- SETILERS MUSEUM 

2012 08 PH. II FOUNDATION 31971 0 

2012 08 PARTICIPATING AMERICAN YOUTH WORKS 11709 0 

POLK COUNTY ENHANCED 

2012 08 PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT LAND DATA 85500 0 
TABLE A -Page 173 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

2012 08 ROAD AGREEMENT (TITLE II) MONTGOMERY COUNTY 156959 0 2012 08 ROAD AGREEMENT PERRY COUNTY 35094.98 0 3

MCCURTAIN COUNTY, 

2012 08 ROAD AGREEMENT (TITLE II) OKLAHOMA 103836 0 

MONTGOMERY COUNTY, 

2012 08 TITLE II AGREEMENT ARKANSAS 72254 0 

MCCURTAIN COUNTY, 

2012 08 TITLE II PROJECT AGREEMENT OKLAHOMA 57714 0 

LEFLORE COUNTY, 

2012 08 TITLE II PROJECT OKLAHOMA 183559 0 

01G SRS SCOTI BLACKFORK, 

2012 08 NELLA, WHITE OAK TOWER SCOTICOUNTY 490315 0 

ROAD AGREEMENT (GREEN STONE COUNTY, 

2012 08 MTRD) ARKANSAS 33500 33855 

STONE COUNTY, 

2012 08 GUNNER POOL ROAD TITLE II ARKANSAS 66809 21885 2012 08 TITLE II ROAD PROJECT #46 POPE COUNTY, ARKANSAS 83560 0 

SEARCY COUNTY ROAD SEARCY COUNTY 

2012 08 IMPROVEMENT TITLE II ARKANSAS 42300 58300 

NEWTON COUNTY ROAD NEWTON COUNTY, 

2012 08 IMPROVEMENT TITLE II FY12 ARKANSAS 60441 17000 
TABLE A- Page 174 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 1Proj

Year !Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match 'Fun

PRESCRIBED FIRE PLANNING 

2012 08 & IMPLEMENTATION TNC-SC CHAPTER 258000 9129.98 26

2012 08 LULA GREEN ROAD UNION COUNTY, SC 64000 0 

CH-29 LAND BRIDGE ROAD2012 08 BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION OCONEE COUNTY, SC 202639 385000 

JERICHO HORSETRAIL 

2012 08 IMPROVEMENTS BERKELEY COUNTY, SC 85000 38247 

2012 08 WOMACK ROAD COUNTY OF TRINITY 72374.85 4650 7

WILDLIFE HABITAT 

2012 09 IMPROVEMENT RUFFED GROUSE SOCIETY 19599.97 90000 10

MINNESOTA 

PERMANENT WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT OF 

2012 09 OPENINGS MAINTENANCE NATURAL RESOURCES 16300 12000 

BLUEBERRY AND ECOSYSTEM LEECH LAKE BAND OF 

2012 09 RESTORATION OJIBWE 39750 10950.23 5

PUG HOLE LAKE ROAD 

2012 09 PROJECT- CO. ROAD 161 CASS COUNTY 95000 0 

ROADSIDE MANAGEMENT OF LEECH LAKE BAND OF 

2012 09 WILD PARSNIP OJIBWE 28985 17101 

CONSERVATION CORPS 

2012 09 RIPARIAN PLANTING MINNESOTA 12777.79 5044 1
TABLE A -Page 175 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WET MEADOWS RX BURN MINNESOTA WILDLIFE HABITAT DEPARTMENT OF 

2012 09 RESTORATION NATURAL RESOURCES 101280 39816.9 1

MAKI AND TILLY'S CREEK 

2012 09 STREAM CROSSINGS ITASCA COUNTY 43000 99580 

EAST SIDE LAKE 13 FR2996 & LEECH LAKE BAND OF 

2012 09 FR3917 ROAD REHAB OJIBWE 17000 0 

FR2130 MP 5.74 SHOULDER LEECH LAKE BAND OF 

2012 09 REPAIR OJIBWE 4435 285 

WILDLAND URBAN 

INTERFACE OAK WILT OSCODA COUNTY 

2012 09 REDUCTION PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 5250 551 2012 09 MIO DAM PARK PROJECT BIG CREEK TOWNSHIP 19400 8500 

PROJECT ROAD AGREEMENT2012 09 FSR 3169 AND FSR 265. SHANNON COUNTY 65481.36 8000 7PROJECT ROAD AGREEMENT2012 09 FSR 759 DOUGLAS COUNTY 6832.44 1275 NARROWS CREEK GOGEBIC CONSERVATION 

2012 09 RESTORATION DISTRICT 13377.5 0 

GOGEBIC COUNTY GARLIC GOGEBIC CONSERVATION 

2012 09 MUSTARD DISTRICT 19129.62 854.4 1
TABLE A- Page 176 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl; Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

AGONIKAK TRAIL 

2012 09 RESTORATION- RAC WATERSMEET TOWNSHIP 102000 0 

COURTNEY EQUESTRIAN 

2012 09 TRAIL MI-TRALE 8845 9882 

ONTONAGON COUNTY ROAD ONTONAGON BOARD OF 

AGREEMENT, FEDERAL COUNTY ROAD 

2012 09 FOREST HIGHWAY 16 COMMISSIONERS 250000 0 

LANGFORD LAKE 

LANGFORD LAKE EURASIAN EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL 

2012 09 WATERMILFOIL ASSOCIATION 12500 7756.32 2

INVASIVE PLANTS IN 

2012 09 SYLVANIA FRIENDS OF SYLVANIA 46012.21 5553.6 5

WATERSMEET TOWNSHIP INVASIVE SPECIES 

BOATER EDUCATION & BOAT CONTROL COALITION OF 

2012 09 WASHING (RAC) WATERSMEET 10100 2729.1 

BUCKTHORN CONTROL 

2012 09 PROJECT CITY OF ELY 24475 0 

RAC NORTH COUNTRY TRAIL NORTH COUNTRY TRAIL 

2012 09 RESTORATION PROJECT ASSOCIATION 83598.13 0 8

2012 09 CORMORANT CONTROL USDA APHIS 1975.63 0 
TABLE A - Page 177 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 

Year Region I Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match 

HAZARDOUS FUELS THE NATURE 

2012 09 INVERNTORY & ANALYSIS CONSERVANCY 52240 6985.26 5

Chippewa County Road 

2012 09 SALT POINT ROAD Commission 64999.49 6672.8 7

DELTA COUNTY ROAD 

2012 09 OSIER ROAD COMMISSION 56394.99 49119.82 10

RAC #12 LOGGER LAKE ARMSTRONG CREEK 

2012 09 BOARDWALK SPORTSMENS CLUB INC 294.5 0 

MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAIL Chequamegon Area 

CONSTRUCTION AND Mountain Bike Association 

2012 09 MAINTENANCE (CAMBA) 21290 23018 

RAC RAT RIVER RECREATION 

2012 09 TRAIL BLACKWELL, TOWN OF 72629.94 0 72012 09 WORK STUDY PROGRAM Northland College 67440.28 25383.5 9

TOWN OF DRUMMOND 

ROAD MTC ON WASHBURN 

2012 09 DISTRICT DRUMMOND, TOWN OF 18650 0 

RAC #23 FR 144 ASPHALT 

2012 09 PAVING TOWN OF FIFIELD 174723.6 0 1

LAMONAVILLE ROAD 

2012 09 MAINTENANCE JENKS TWP 34400 4000 

SNOWMOBILE TRAIL Forest County 

2012 09 IMPROVEMENTS-RAe Snowmobile Club 98000 66000 
TABLE A -Page 178 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

ATV TRAILHEAD PENNSYLVANIA TRAILS 

2012 09 IMPROVEMENTS-RAe FOUNDATION, INC. 50196.5 0 

SPRING CREEK HORSE TRAIL 

2012 09 SIGNAGE PROJECT-RAC GWEN PFAFF-WILLS 1490 5200 

MARIENVILLE ROD&GUN 

2012 09 CLUB CULVERTS FOREST COUNTY 12708 0 2012 09 HEMLOCK ROAD REPAIR GLADE TOWNSHIP 82500 26669.6 1

ALLEGHENY NF FIREFLY 

2012 09 SURVEY LYNN FAUST 7990 9732 

BELLTOWN ROAD (T-302) 

2012 09 REPAIR BARNETI TOWNSHIP 133387 500 

ROPER HOLLOW ROAD ELK TOWNSHIP 

2012 09 MAINTENANCE SUPERVISORS 32000 13888 

MORRISON RUN AQUATIC WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA 

2012 09 ORGANISM PASSAGE CONSERVANCY 30000 57400 

CAMP WOOD BUNKHOUSE ALMOST HEAVEN HABITAT 

2012 09 RESTORATION FOR HUMANITY 30000 35196 

TRAIL MTCE & RESTORATION 

2012 09 PROJECT The Mountain Institute 47046 38470 

HOOVER-GAY SHARP 

2012 09 RIPARIAN FENCING TROUT UNLIMITED 35730 10640 

HEART OF THE HIGHLANDS TUCKER COMMUNITY 

2012 09 TRAIL MATERIALS FOUNDATION 31909 43351 
TABLE A - Page 179 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC: COOPER CREEK 

2012 10 CAMPGROUND Youth Restoration Corp 35570.36 0 3

STATE OF ALASKA, 

DEPARTMENT OF 

2012 10 RAC:MINERALCREEK NATURAL RESOURCES 86300 0 

RAC: WESTERN PW SOUND DISPERSED CAMPSITE 

RESTORATION & INVASIVE 

2012 10 PLANT ALASKA GEOGRAPHIC 427915.12 214356.98 6

RAC: PORTAGE VALLEY 

2012 10 WATERSHED RESTORATION ALASKA GEOGRAPHIC 31100 0 

RAC: NAKED ISLAND 

2012 10 CLEANUP GOAK 53600 16500 

RAC: MARINE DEBRIS 

2012 10 REMEDIATION GOAK 100000 1407020 

2012 10 RAC: EMERALD COVE TRAIL CITY OF WHITTIER 25567.21 0 2

2012 10 RAC: HORSETAIL FALL TRAIL CITY OF WHITTIER 20670 0 

RAC:GIRDWOOD NORDIC GIRDWOOD NORDIC SKI 

2012 10 TRAIL REPAIRS CLUB 50767 74150 

RAC: MOOSE 

2012 10 BROWSE/HYDROAXE NATIVE VILLAGE OF EYAK 172270 0 

COPPER RIVER 

2012 10 RAC: CHILDS GLACIER TRAIL WATERSHED PROJECT 57162.96 17664 7
TABLE A - Page 180 

forest forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Proj

Year Region I Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match fun

SHAKESPEARE CREEK O'NEIL 

2012 10 RD CULVERT CITY OF WHITTIER 406281.24 0 40

RAC: EYAK MOUNTAIN TRAIL COPPER RIVER 

2012 10 IMPROVEMENT WATERSHED PROJECT 40682 0 

RAC: ODIAK POND COPPER RIVER 

2012 10 RESTORATION WATERSHED PROJECT 118820 91309 

CORDOVAINTERNS-SCA 

REFERENCE: CHUGACH Ill STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2012 10 CORDOVA ASSOCIATION 17484 28S.7S 1

2012 10 RAC: CRATER LAKE TRAIL SCA 18251 12722 

Southeast Alaska 

2012 10 RAC: IBEC & CRATER LAKE Guidance Assoc. 22807.8 9600 

Southeast Alaska 

2012 10 AMERICORPS Guidance Assoc. 21204.57 11826 3

CONSERVATION CREWS- STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2012 10 SEWARD RANGER DISTRICT ASSOCIATION 105313.91 82543.63 18

RAC SITKA WATERSHED SITKA CONSERVATION 

2012 10 MONITORING SOCIETY 33271.5 0 

RAC- GREATER SITUK CITY AND BOROUGH OF 

2012 10 RESTORATION YAKUTAT 85000 0 

RAC- SCOW BAY BOAT PETERSBURG ECONOMIC 

2012 10 LAUNCH RAMP DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL 32983.78 0 3
TABLE A - Page 181 

Forest forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region I Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match fun

RAC KENNEL CREEK 

ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION 

AND ECOSYSTEM 

WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT HOONAH INDIAN 

2012 10 PROJECT ASSOCIATION 225300 0 

RAC- PETERSBURG SCHOOL PETERSBURG CITY 

2012 10 SHOP SCHOOLS 41226.41 9588 52012 10 RAC- WILSON CREEK CITY OF PETERSBURG 65000 10000 

RAC- BANANA POINT 

2012 10 UPLANDS CITY OF PETERSBURG 44119.79 2000 4

RAC STIKINE RIVER BIRDING CITY AND BOROUGH OF 

2012 10 FESTIVAL WRANGELL 20400 0 

INVASIVE PLANT ALASKA ASSOCIATION OF 

MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR CONSERVATION DISTRICTS 

2012 10 NON-FEDERAL LANDS (AACD) 60083.19 7723.8 6

STIKINE LECONTE 

WILDERNESS REED ALASKA ASSOCIATION OF 

CANARYG RASS AND INVASIVE CONSERVATION DISTRICTS 

2012 10 WEED CONTROL (AACD) 623.2 16073.84 1

RAC- HARBOR MTN/GAVAN 

2012 10 HILL TRAIL OBLITERATION Sitka Trail Works, Inc. 58623.44 3002 6

STUDENTS LEARNING ABOUT 

2012 10 SOIL HEALTH UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA 1356.48 7861.27 
TABLE A- Page 182 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

STARRIGAVAN FOREST AND DEPARTMENT OF 

2012 10 MUSKEG TRAIL MNTC. NATURAL RESOURCE 8240 3700 

REDOUBT LAKE MONITORING STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2012 10 PROJECT ASSOCIATION, INC. 77468 3436S 

RUST LAKE INVASIVE PLANT SITKA CONSERVATION 

2012 10 REMOVAL SOCIETY 1242S 119S9.2 

RAC HOONAH NOXIOUS HOONAH INDIAN 

2012 10 WEED PROJECT ASSOCIATION 49900 0 

SITKA SOUND SCIENCE 

2012 10 NATIVE PLANTS GARDEN CENTER 332SO 18SOO 

MOOSE LAKE CULVERT JUNEAU WATERSHED 

2012 10 REPLACEMENT PARTNERSHIP 14340.47 6043.19 2

WEST GLACIER CULVERT JUNEAU WATERSHED 

2012 10 REPLACEMENT PARTNERSHIP 14042.71 3999.99 

MONTANA CREEK JUNEAU WATERSHED 

2012 10 WATERSHED PARTNERSHIP 206S7.S3 7969.94 2

TRAIL MAINTENANCE AND 

FISH PASSAGE AT BEAVER 

2012 10 DAMS TRAIL MIX, INC. 48912.86 19040 6

PETERSON LAKE TRAIL 

2012 10 RECONSTRUCTION TRAIL MIX, INC. 1439S7.6 44921.62 18

SOUTHEAST ALASKA 

2012 10 SPORTSMAN CABIN REPAIR GUIDANCE ASSOCIATION 141S4.S4 4300 1
TABLE A - Page 183 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: 

Year Region I Project Title !Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WILDERNESS STEWARDSHIP SOUTHEAST ALASKA 

2012 10 ON THE TONGASS NF CONSERVATION COUNCIL 99854.73 196899.12 29

RAC ANGOON TRIBAL 

WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ANGOON COMMUNITY 

2012 10 CREW ASSOCIATION 304515 91845 

RAC: MIDDLE DANGEROUS 

2012 10 TRAIL MAINTENANCE YAKUTAT TLINGIT TRIBE 66557 28310.66 9

WEST FORK SITUK STREAM 

2012 10 REHAB YAKUTAT SALMON BOARD 13464 4700 

RAC CRAIG TRIBAL 

ASSOCIATION RECYCLING CRAIG COMMUNITY 

2012 10 PROGRAM ASSOCIATION 40376.68 19500 5

CRAIG DISTRICT WILDLIFE THE STUDENT 

INTERN, 1 CONSERVATION CONSERVATION 

2012 10 INTERN 13 WEEKS ASSOCIATION 8044 0 

COMMUNITY 

2012 10 INVASIVE PLANT WEED PULL CONNECTIONS, INC. 30465.52 14834.95 4

THREE-SIDED SHELTER SOUTHEAST ISLAND 

2012 10 PROJECT SCHOOL DISTRICT 52000 0 

RAC: CHERRY CREEK MONTANA DEPARTMENT 

WESTSLOPE CUTIHROAT OF FISH, WILDLIFE & 

2011 01 TROUT RESTORATION PARKS 40000 204000 
TABLE A- Page 184 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

MONTANA DEPARTMENT 

RAC: NARROWS CREEK OF FISH, WILDLIFE & 

2011 01 NATIVE FISH SPAWNING PARKS 1SOOO 12800 

RAC: DEEP CREEK MONTANA DEPARTMENT 

WATERSHED COOPERATIVE OF FISH, WILDLIFE & 

2011 01 HABITAT IMPROVEMENT PARKS 35000 18100 

MADISON RIVER 

2011 01 FOUNDATION 8000 2150 

CRAIGHEAD 

MADISON VALLEY WILDLIFE ENVIRONMENTAL 

2011 01 PLANNING RESEARCH INSTITUTE 7735.02 9300 1

CDTA RAC PROJECT: CONTINENTAL DIVIDE 

2011 01 JOHNSON LAKE TRAIL WORK TRAIL ALLIANCE 20723.5 24534 

RAC: BLACKTAIL RIDGE, DYCE 

CREEK & CLARK CANYON 

RESERVOIR WEED BEAVERHEAD 

2011 01 MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 25650 34000 

BASIN CREEK ROAD BRIDGE 

2011 01 REPLACEMENT JEFFERSON COUNTY 43830 233368 

POTOSI TRAIL MONTANA 

2011 01 IMPROVEMENT CONSERVATION CORPS 13759.2 9001 

BARRIER DESIGN AND MONTANA DEPT OF FISH, 

2011 01 CONSTRUCTION WILDLIFE AND PARKS 50726.57 195503 24
TABLE A- Page 185 

Forest Forest Tota

" Service Service Appl! 1Proj

"'!:>"""'"'"'' .. 

Year !Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match •Fun

RAC: YOUTH EXPEDITION MONTANA 

2011 01 MAINTENANCE PROJECT CONSERVATION CORPS 42423.6 64242 1

AMERICORPS-ST. LOUIS 

2011 01 PROJECT WORK AMERICORP 453966.84 716939.8 11

MONTANA 

2011 01 DILLON DISTRICT PROJECTS CONSERVATION CORPS 24603.06 15002 3

ELK SURVIVAL EVALUATION MONTANA FISH, WILDLIFE 

2011 01 & RECRUITMENT & PARKS 133777.35 523100 65

SELWAY-BITTERROOT 

STMARY'S LOOKOUT RAC FRANK CHURCH 

2011 01 PROJECT FOUNDATION 29349.25 44064 7

BITTERROOT FLOATING RAVALLI COUNTY WEED 

2011 01 WEED PULL DISTRICT 5000 36183 

LOST HORSE FEEDER CANAL BITTER ROOT IRRIGATION 

2011 01 RAC DISTRICT 4875 0 

WEED PROJECTS ON & OFF RAVALLI COUNTY WEED 

2011 01 NFS DISTRICT 130000 56900 

SLEEPING CHILD 

BUGLOSSNEW INVADERS- RAVALLI COUNTY WEED 

2011 01 RAC PROJECT DISTRICT 36212.4 25250 

W FORK BITTERROOT RIVER 

2011 01 RIPARIAN MANAGEMENT RAVALLI COUNTY 2517 33100 
TABLE A - Page 186 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region I Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

BITTERROOT TRAIL MAINTENANCE MONTANA 

2011 01 2011/2012/2013 CONSERVATION CORPS 502905 247126.8 7

GRANT WRITING KOOTENAI TRIBE OF 

2011 01 CONSULTANT IDAHO 9000 3000 

BOUNDARY COUNTY 

2011 01 SPRAY EQUIPMENT WEED DEPARTMENT 14000 10000 

SPRAY TRUCK & WEED 

MAPPING COMPUTER WITH BONNER COUNTY WEED 

2011 01 ACCESSORIES DEPARTMENT 96000 73000 

MONTANA 

2011 01 PRIEST TRAIL WORK CONSERVATION CORPS 41826 8904 

DANNY ON AND SUMMIT WHITEFISH MOUNTAIN 

2011 01 TRAILS- RAC RESORT 10918.05 9525 2

FY11 MISSION MTN & SWAN 

2011 01 FRONT RANGERS_CFLR Swan Ecosystem Center 182656.6 149320 3

NORTH FORK ROAD GRAVEL FLATHEAD COUNTY ROAD 

2011 01 RAC PROJEC DEPT 93300 95000 

ASHLEY LAKE ROAD DUST FLATHEAD COUNTY ROAD 

2011 01 ABATEMENT RAC PROJEC DEPT 21120 21120 

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL AT 

2011 01 GRAVEL PITS- RAC MONTANA DNRC 3243.53 1250 
TABLE A - Page 187 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match Fun

NW MOUNTAIN LAKES 

VOLUNTEER MONTORING 

2011 01 NETWORK Whitefish Lake Institute 24753 60000 

MCC RAC PROJECT- CY MONTANA 

2011 01 CREEK TRAIL CONSERVATION CORPS 12498.2 5936 

RAC WESTSLOPE CUTTHROAT NORTHWEST 

2011 01 TROUT CONSERVATION CONNECTIONS 11009.42 7500 1

SPOTTED BEAR AND SEELEY 

LAKE RD TRAILS RAC MONTANA 

2011 01 PROJECTS CONSERVATION CORPS 190829.5 162192 3

MCCTRAIL MAINTENANCE MONTANA 

2011 01 SWAN LAKE RD CONSERVATION CORPS 203615 148687.7 3

WEST YELLOWSTONE SKI 

RAC: RENDEZVOUS SKI TRAIL EDUCATION FOUNDATION 

2011 01 IMPROVEMENTS (WYSEF) 85680 51950 

CDTA RAC PROJECT: CONTINENTAL DIVIDE 

2011 01 WATKINS CREEK TRAIL TRAIL ALLIANCE 3268 0 

SPA: ABSAROKA-BEARTOOTH ABSAROKA-BEARTOOTH 

WILDERNESS WILDERNESS 

2011 01 COLLABORATION FOUNDATION 129289.86 205577.58 33

RAC: SOURDOUGH CANYON GALLATIN VALLEY LAND 

2011 01 TRAILHEAD RESTORATION TRUST 57190 0 
TABLE A- Page 188 

forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region I Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

BOZEMAN RANGER DISTRICT MONTANA 

2011 01 PROJECTS CONSERVATION CORP 37505.8 12472.61 4

EUREKA RURAL 

DEVELOPMENT 

2011 01 RAC- ROAD BRUSHING PARTNERS, INC. 46790.42 12750 5

CABINET-YAK ECOSYSTEM 

2011 01 GRIZZLY DNA ASSESSMENT University of Montana 170578.58 38495.57 20

RAC- TROY SHOOTING 

2011 01 RANGE PHASE 4 LINCOLN COUNTY 25000 30000 

Lower Clark Fork 

2011 01 CHAPEL SLIDE RESTORATION Watershed Group 101446 110000 

KOOTENAI TRAIL MAINT AND 

CAMPGROUND MONTANA 

2011 01 IMPROVEMENT CONSERVATION CORPS 292850.22 145264.6 43

SOUTH HILLS TRAIL SYSTEM PRICKLY PEAR LAND 

2011 01 PROJECT TRUST 13200 15000 

2010-2011 LAST CHANCE NORDIC SKI 

2011 01 OPERATING/FINANCIAL PLAN CLUB 8500 0 

CDTA RAC PROJECTS- BISON CONTINENTAL DIVIDE 

2011 01 MOUNTAIN TRAIL ALLIANCE 3243 0 

CONSERVATION EDUCATION MONTANA DISCOVERY 

2011 01 AGREEMENT FOUNDATION 297960 89950 
TABLE A- Page 189 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

GOLDEN ANCHOR HISTORIC 

MLL AREA STABILIZATION DEER LODGE 

2011 01 PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 11180 0 

ELKHORN CREEK FISH MONTANA FISH WILDLIFE 

2011 01 BARRIER AND PARKS 9558.43 0 2011 01 ORO FINO FUELS REDUCTION ORO FINO ENTERPRISES 3016 0 

SOUTHERN CROWN OF THE 

CONTINENT COMMERCIAL ROCKY MOUNTAIN FRONT 

2011 01 APPLICATION PACKAGE WEED ROUNDTABLE 32000 0 

TANSY RAG WORT /ST LEWIS AND CLARK 

2011 01 JOHNSWORT ERADICATION COUNTY WEED DISTRICT 1068.8 0 

PONDEROSA SNOW PONDEROSA SNOW 

2011 01 WARRIORS WEED CONTROL WARRIORS 7857 0 

PONDEROSA SNOW 

2011 01 NOXIOUS WEED TREATMENT WARRIORS 301721.04 298882.8 60

PATTERSON PRAIRIE WEED 

2011 01 TREATMENT BLACKFOOT CHALLENGE 53590.88 13379 6

NOXIOUS WEED TREATMENT 

2011 01 GROUND/AERIAL Ill BLACKFOOT CHALLENGE 177575 49636 

THE NATURE 

WEEDS MANAGEMENT OF CONSERVANCY MONTANA 

2011 01 TNC LEGACY LANDS CHAPTER 15000 15034 
TABLE A- Page 190 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC- SANDERS COUNTY Green Mountain 

2011 01 WATER FESTIVAL RAC Conservation District 12789.6 12194 2011 01 RICHARDS PEAK LOOKOUT MONTANA DNRC 9000 197S 

CLEARWATER WATERSHED CLEARWATER RESOURCE 

2011 01 WEED MAPPING/CONTROL COUNCIL 29612.5 14730.52 4

MONTANA 

2011 01 MCC NINEMILE OHV REHAB CONSERVATION CORPS 14152.9 5884 

NORTH FORK BLACKFOOT 

2011 01 ROAD POWELL COUNTY 220499 22000 

2011 VOLUNTEER & SELWAY-BITIERROOT 

2011 01 INTERNSHIP PROGRAM FOUNDATION 91204.37 92137.5 18

FIREWOOD FOR THE ELDERLY COMMUNITY ACTION 

2011 01 - RAC PARTNERSHIP 3150 1496 

FIREWOOD FOR THE ELDERLY IDAHO COUNTY SHERIFF'S 

2011 01 AND NEEDY DEPARTMENT 2443.95 2414.4 

IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF 

2011 01 OROGRANDEOHVLOOP CORRECTIONS 88047.04 41339.32 12

PLANTING NATIVE MONTANA 

2011 01 REVEGETATION CONSERVATION CORPS 99915.07 14653438 1

ROADSIDE NOXIOUS WEED DEER CREEK HIGHWAY 

2011 01 CONTROL DISTRICT 6408.27 1872 

ROAD #221, GRANGEVILLE 

SALMON SLIDE REPAIR AND 

2011 01 SAFETY REALIGNMENT IDAHO COUNTY 252418.16 20000 27
TABLE A - Page 191 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Proj

Year Region Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

PITISBURG ROAD- POST FIRE DEER CREEK HIGHWAY 

2011 01 REHABILITATION DISTRICT 78505.08 30500 10

7 DEVILS ROAD NO. 517 CHIP 

2011 01 SEAL IDAHO COUNTY 161879.55 55000 21

PORCUPINE FALLS TRAIL MONTANA 

2011 02 PROJECT CONSERVATION CORPS 36804.18 12246 4

BIG HORN COUNTY WEED 

NOXIOUS WEED INVENTORY AND PEST CONTROL 

2011 02 AND TREATMENT DISTRICT 177203.54 54782 23

INVASIVE SPECIES SURVEY 

AND TREATMENT- EARLY BIG HORN COUNTY WEED 

DETECTION/RAPID RESPONSE AND PEST CONTROL 

2011 02 - RAC DISTRICT 42001.69 73745 11

SOUTH DAKOTA GAME, 

SHERIDAN LAKE 385 FISHING FISH & PARKS 

2011 02 ACCESS DEPARTMENT 61620 5000 

ADJACENT LANDOWNER CUSTER COUNTY WEED & 

2011 02 WEED TREATMENT PEST BOARD 12570.4 4406.25 1

LAWRENCE COUNTY 

LAWRENCE COUNTY MPB INVASIVE SPECIES 

2011 02 AGREEMENT MANAGEMENT 136664.2 55000 1

COOPERATIVE ROAD 

2011 02 MAINTENANCE CUSTER COUNTY 143684.66 135825.13 27
TABLE A - Page 192 

Forest Forest Tota

IAgr.,.,,,.,,. Service Service lApp I Proj

Year !Region Project Title 8 ""li""''1t Name Match Match Fund

2011-2012 MPB PENNINGTON COUNTY 

2011 02 SUPPRESSION PROJECT WEED & PEST BOARD 61082 275646 

COLORADO DEPARTMENT 

KIOSKS, ROAD CLOSURE OF CORRECTIONS, 

GATES, CONCRETE LOW COLORADO 

WATER CROSSING PLANKS, CORRECTIONAL 

OFFHIGHWAY VEHICLE INDUSTRIES, DELTA 

2011 02 CATILEGUARDS CORRECTIONAL CENTER 73738.98 86914.97 160

FOREST SERVICE 

COOPERATIVE NOXIOUS 

2011 02 WEED CONTROL MONTROSE COUNTY 73653.1 19947 9

COOK ALLOTMENT SPRING SARATOGA ENCAMPMENT 

DEVELOPMENT -RAWLINS 

2011 02 RECONSTRUCTION CONSERVATION DISTRICT 2780.29 0 2

GRIZZLY-HELENA TRAIL 

2011 02 IMPROVEMENT SHEILA RYAN 8400 0 

KERBER CREEK RESTORATION 

2011 02 PROJECT TROUT UNLIMITED 75865 63700 
TABLE A- Page 193 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RIO GRANDE WATERSHED 

RAC NOXIOUS WEED CONSERVATION & 

2011 02 CONTROL EDUCATION INITIATIVE 64940 15000 

RAC RIO GRANDE RESERVOIR 

2011 02 ROAD IMPROVEMENT HINSDALE COUNTY 424337 45000 

SURVEYING FOR BEAVER IN MANITOU INSTITUTE AND 

2011 02 THE SANGRES CONSERVANCY 7700 2000 

STORM KING CAMPGROUND SOUTHWEST 

2011 02 RESTORATION CONSERVATION CORPS 31255.13 13287 4

WILLOW LAKE TRAILHEAD SOUTHWEST 

2011 02 AND FOREST SYSTEM TRAILS CONSERVATION CORPS 81042.83 52908 13

CONEJOS COUNTY ROAD 

HOT CREEK BRIDGE AND BRIDGE 

2011 02 REPLACEMENT DEPARTMENT 28655 20516 

RAC NOXIOUS WEEDS 

2011 02 ADMINISTRATION USDI BLM 2997.68 0 

SCC CHAFFEE TRAIL SOUTHWEST 

2011 02 MAINTENANCE CREW CONSERVATION CORP 69174.43 13900 8

BUFFALO PEAKS TRAIL SOUTHWEST 

2011 02 RESTORATION (SPA) CONSERVATION CORP 13353.69 2308.94 1
TABLE A- Page 194 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SCC PARK COUNTY SOUTHWEST 

2011 02 CONSERVATION CREW CONSERVATION CORPS 49084.67 32756.4 8

TELLER-PARK CONSERVATION TELLER-PARK 

2011 02 DISTRICT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 43281.45 44902 8

RARE ALPINE PLANT MOSQUITO RANGE 

2011 02 PROTECTION HERITAGE INITIATIVE 58245.99 11282 62011 02 HUERFANO COUNTY WEEDS HUERFANO COUNTY 60657.59 14760 7

SOUTHWEST 

2011 02 TANGLEWOOD TRAIL CONSERVATION CORPS 146408.78 32756.4 17

MONTEZUMA COUNTY, 

DOLORES-NORWOOD ROAD MONTEZUMA COUNTY 

2011 02 MAINTENANCE ROADS 31431 25539.9 

LOG CHUTES Ill TRAILS 

MAINTENANCE AND IMPACT 

2011 02 MITIGATION TRAILS 2000 33044.03 68221.6 10

PIEDRA ROAD ENGINEERING 

2011 02 DESIGN ARCHULETA COUNTY 145150.44 0 14

GRAVEL PLACEMENT ON CR 

2011 02 400- RAC ARCHULETA COUNTY 67303 40000 

HAZARDOUS FUELS 

MITIGATION WITHIN FIRE UPPER PINE RIVER FIRE 

2011 02 DISTRICT PROTECTION DISTRICT 12593.64 4600 1
TABLE A- Page 195 

forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

LAP LATA CANYON- RAC 

2011 02 PROJECT LA PLATA COUNTY 62106.93 56476.2 11

MIDDLE CREEK NORDIC SKI PARK COUNTY NORDIC SKI 

2011 02 BRIDGE ASSOCIATION 21164.81 7717.04 2

RED CANYON CRM RAC THE NATURE 

2011 02 PROJECT CONSERVANCY 77120.37 40000 11

HOLMES DITCH FISH SCREEN 

2011 02 PROJECT TROUT UNLIMITED 25596.55 112000 13

UPPER SUNSHINE DIVERSION 

2011 02 FISH LADDER TROUT UNLIMITED 20596.55 260000 28

HORSE CREEK DIVERSION 

2011 02 IMPROVEMENT TROUT UNLIMITED 15596.55 74000 8

NORTHFORKSHOSHONE 

IRRIGATION CANAL FISH 

2011 02 SCREEN TROUT UNLIMITED 30596.55 119500 15

NOXIOUS WEED TREATMENT 

AND PLANT SURVEY WORK- PARK COUNTY WEED AND 

2011 02 (RAe) PEST CONTROL DISTRICT 228799.75 162500 392011 02 WEED TREATMENT PROJECTS GARFIELD COUNTY 177642.12 55207.6 23

WOODLAND LAKE PARK 

TRACT- NATIONAL 

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY TOWN OF PINETOP2011 03 ACT ANALYSIS LAKESIDE 55000 26200 
TABLE A- Page 196 

Forest Forest Tota

" Service Service Appl! Proj

"'15' "'"'"''"" 

Year I Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match I Fun

FOR 512 YOUNG ROAD GILA COUNTY PUBLIC 

2011 03 MAINTENANCE PROJECT WORKS DIVISION 631118 674080 1

FOREST HEALTH, FIRE AND WHITE MOUNTAIN 

THINNING EDUCATION AND WILDLIFE AND NATURE 

2011 03 INTEPRETATION CENTER 29998.97 4000 3

EDUCATION FOR CHILDREN TONTO NATURAL 

ON AGICULTURE AND RESOURCE 

2011 03 CONSERVATION RESOURCES CONSERVATION DISTRICT 15000 0 

BEAR MONITORING IN ARIZONA GAME AND FISH 

2011 03 PRESCRIBED BURN ZONES DEPARTMENT 60073.23 0 6

ATASCACITA/IRIS ARIZONA FORESTRY 

2011 03 PRESCRIBED BURN DIVISON 16560 4726 

SPRINGERVILLE RD NONMOTORIZED TRAIL 

2011 03 MAINTENANCE CREC 22542.58 7337.68 2

NORTHERN RIO GRANDE RESOURCE 

CAPULIN GRAZING CONSERVATION AND 

ALLOTMENT HAZARDOUS DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, 

2011 03 FUELS REDUCTION PROJECT INC. 50994 0 

,2011 03 RA NM HIGHWAY 115 RIO ARRIBA COUNTY 73055 0 
TABLE A- Page 197 

forest Forest Tota

" Service Service Appl! 

1

Proj

'"'5' ''"''"'"'' .. 

Year I Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match I Fun

RIO ARRIBA D2 STOCK TANKS 

2011 03 CLEANING AND ROADS RIO ARRIBA COUNTY 51340.4 0 

ILLEGAL DUMPSITE CLEAN2011 03 UP MARCOS VALDEZ 74901 0 

TRAIL MAINTANENCE ON MT. 

2011 03 TAYLOR CIBOLA COUNTY 38546 0 

ZUNI MOUNTAINS TRAIL 

2011 03 SYSTEM MCKINLEY COUNTY 150000 0 

SCHULTZ FLOODING-INNER 

BASIN PIPELINE RAC PROJECT 

2011 03 #11-37 CITY OF FLAGSTAFF 258104.31 4862.2 26

ARIZONA NATIONAL SCENIC 

TRAIL (ANST) MAINTENNACE, ARIZONA TRAIL 

2011 03 WALNUT CANYON PASSAGE ASSOCIATION 37144.26 3940 4

RED ROCK LOOP ROAD ROAD YAVAPAI COUNTY PUBLIC 

2011 03 IMPROVEMENT WORKS DEPARTMENT 49669 0 

PROPAGATING ASPEN 

CLONES: SURVIVAL IN THE FRIENDS OF NORTHERN 

,2011 03 21ST CENTURY ARIZONA FORESTS 41820.35 44211 8

' 
TABLE A- Page 198 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 1Proj

Year I Region Project Title Applitcmt Name Match Match Fun

COCONINO COUNTY 

MARSHALL GRASSLAND COMMUNITY 

2011 03 RESTORATION SERVICES,CREC 47465.25 15946 6

RAC- MOUNT LEMMON 

ROAD REALIGNMENT AND 

2011 03 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PINAL COUNTY 51540 25096 

CREC- ARIZONA TRAIL COCONINO RURAL 

2011 03 MAINTENANCE ENVIRONMENT CORPS 25000 8740.15 3

R3 FIRE REHAB FUNDING FIRE 

REHABILITATION/TRAIL 

WORK ON THE DOUGLAS, 

SIERRA VISTA AND NOGALES 

RANGER DISTRICTS- COCONINO RURAL HORSESHOE 2, MONUMENT, ENVIRONMENT CORPS 

2011 03 AND MURPHY FIRES (CREe) 303559.06 114813.36 41

LEAFY SPURGE/BULL THISTLE 

TREATMENT ON NM ROUTE SIERRA SOIL & WATER 

2011 03 150 CONSERVATION DISTRICT 19393 0 

MOGOLLON BOX UPPER GILA WATERSHED 

2011 03 CAMPGROUND ALLIANCE 33726.17 0 3
TABLE A- Page 199 

Forest Forest Total 

Agreeme1 Service Service Appl ln .• : .

'"J"

Year I Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match I Fund

NORTH BOUNDARY 

CONTINENTAL DIVIDE NM CONTINENTAL DIVIDE 

2011 03 NATIONAL SCENIC TRAIL TRAIL ALLIANCE 10632.4 13440 22011 03 WALNUT ROAD SIERRA COUNTY 24144 0 2011 03 BERRENDA ROAD SIERRA COUNTY, NM 59130 0 

GRANT COUNTY PUBLIC 

SHOOTING RANGE EARTH 

2011 03 WORK GRANT COUNTY, NM 6000 0 

CDNST MAINTENANCE WITH CONTINENTAL DIVIDE 

2011 03 AMERICAN HIKING SOCIETY TRAIL ALLIANCE 7299 8400 

TUSAYAN FLOOD CONTROL SOUTH GRAND CANYON 

2011 03 PROJECT NEPA- SGCSD SANITARY DISTRICT 113872.49 0 113

THE GRINDSTONE 

MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAILS 

2011 03 PROJECT VILLAGE OF RUIDOSO, NM 81284.57 4395 85

SACRAMENTO MOUNTAIN OTERO SOIL AND WATER 

2011 03 WATERSHED STUDY CONSERVATION DISTRICT 78000 4840 

--------------------- ---------------- ---------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------ -- -------------- -------- ----------- --------
TABLE A - Page 200 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl1 Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RIPARIAN HABITAT 

IMPROVEMENT IN THE 

UPPER VERDE RIVER 

WILDLIFE ARIZONA GAME AND FISH 

2011 03 AREA/HEADWATERS- AZGFD DEPARTMENT 71130 0 

VERDE RIVER GREENWAY 

HABITAT IMPROVEMENT- ARIZONA STATE PARKS 

2011 03 PHASE 1- AZSPF FOUNDATION 46268 0 

VOLUNTEER STEWARDSHIP 

OF NATURAL AND 

RECREATIONAL RESOURCES 

OF THE PRESCOTT NATIONAL COMMUNITY FOREST 

2011 03 FOREST- CFT TRUST 106250 48160 

BACK COUNTRY 

GROOM CREEK HORSE CAMP HORSEMEN OF CENTRAL 

2011 03 CORRALS- BCHCAZ ARIZONA- CORRALS 7291.72 1864.92 

STEWARDS OF THE WILD- ARIZONA WILDERNESS 

2011 03 AWC COALITION 98587.96 87376.96 18

HIKER/EQUESTRIAN ACCESS 

GATES EXCLUDING BACK COUNTRY 

MOTORIZED VEHICLES- HORSEMEN OF CENTRAL 

2011 03 BCHCAZ ARIZONA- GATES 4869 0 
TABLE A - Page 201 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title !Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SENATOR HWY ROADWAY YAVAPAI COUNTY PUBLIC 

2011 03 PLATING AND GRADING WORKS- SENATOR HWY 23130 0 

VERDE VALLEY YOUTH 

RESTORE NATIVE HABITAT USDI, NPS, MONTEZUMA 

ON FEDERAL, STATE, AND CASTLE NATIONAL 

2011 03 TRIBAL LANDS- NPS MONUMENT 34359.28 33180 6

YCC CREW FOR YAVAPAI YAVAPAI COUNTY 

COUNTY AND THE PRESCOTI EDUCATION SERVICE 

2011 03 NATIONAL FOREST AGENCY 277206.74 107882.47 38

SANTA FE NF/ PUEBLO OF 

2011 03 JEMEZ BOUNDARY PUEBLO OF JEMEZ 43628.93 2640 4

PECOS WILDERNESS ROCKY MTN YOUTH 

2011 03 RESTORATION PROJECT CORPS 128710 22433 

RAC GRANT FOR NOXIOUS 

WEED CONTROL IN GILA 

2011 03 COUNTY ADOT 7383.29 6916 1

ARIZONA 2010 CHIRICAHUA 

LEOPARD FROG RELEASE COCONINO RURAL 

2011 03 SURVEYS ENVIRONMENT CORPS 25736.85 8513.15 

UTAH FOREST RESTORATION 

2011 04 GROUP UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY 26619 6655 
TABLE A - Page 202 

Forest Forest Tota

"IS'"'"'"'"'"' Service Service Appl! 1Proj

Year I Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match •Fun

RAC 11BNF002 PIERCE CREEK 

BRIDGE AND JOY LANE TED TRUEBLOOD CHAPTER 

2011 04 CROSSING OF TROUT UNLIMITED INC 109000 16000 

RAC 11BNF009 BOISE 

COUNTY SO STORAGE BOISE COUNTY SHERIFF'S 

2011 04 FACILITY OFFICE 72500 0 

HEAVY TRAIL MAINTENANCE MONTANA 

2011 04 (3 RANGER DISTRICTS) CONSERVATION CORPS 67486.48 56519 12

SQUAW VALLEY ROAD #618 

RECONSTRUCTION RAC 

2011 04 #11BNF007 GEM COUNTY 135600 19238 

SUPPLEMENT 7 RAC PROJECT 

10007 CLEAR CREEK 

2011 04 STABILIZATION VALLEY COUNTY 75800.54 135690.98 21

SUBLETIE MOOSE HERD WYOMING GAME AND 

2011 04 POPULATION STUDY FISH COMMISSION 57087.54 55000 11

RAC EASTSIDE CANAL 

2011 04 DIVERSION FISH LADDER TROUT UNLIMITED 15000 20000 

RAC POLE CREEK 

CULVERT/CROSSING 

,2011 04 REPLACEMENT LINCOLN COUNTY 5000 3000 
TABLE A - Page 203 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl; Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL 

GREYS RIVER AND LINCOLN COUNTY WEED 

2011 04 KEMMERER RD AND PEST DISTRICT 253837.01 65275.96 31

PINE VALLEY RANGER 

DISTRICT LANDSCAPE 

CONSERVATION THE NATURE 

2011 04 FORECASTING PROJECT CONSERVANCY 104296.34 40000 14

CONSTRUCTION WORKSHOP 

FOR BUILDING BEAVER FLOW 

2011 04 CONTROL DEVICES GRAND CANYON TRUST 5696.36 1000 

STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2011 04 FY 2011 ASSOCIATION 4247 12257 

SOUTHERN REGION BEAVER UTAH DIVISION OF 

2011 04 TRANSPLANT PROPOSAL WILDLIFE RESOURCES 21804.16 3475 2

2011 RAC ROUND 1 DIXIE 

NATIONAL FOREST ROAD 

2011 04 MAINTENANCE PROJECT GARFIELD COUNTY 340000 97900 

2011 ROAD MAINT., 

AGGREGATE, MAGNESIUM 

2011 04 CHLORIDE COMBINATION MILLARD COUNTY 66999.94 0 6
TABLE A - Page 204 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SAN PITCH CWMA NOXIOUS 

2011 04 WEED CONTROL SANPETE COUNTY 90000 0 

HUNTINGTON CANYON NON- CASTLELAND RESOURCE 

MOTORIZED TRAIL CONSERVATION AND 

MAINTENANCE/IMPROVEME DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, 

2011 04 NT INC. 34061.31 0 3

CARBON COUNTY, 

HUNTINGTON AND ECCLES 

CANYONS NATIONAL 

SCENIC BYWAY 

2011 04 INTERPRETIVE PLAN COMMITIEE 19400 0 

MANTI-LA SAL YOUTH CORPS 

WATERSHED RESTORATION FOUR CORNERS SCHOOL 

2011 04 PROJECTS OF OUTDOOR EDUCATION 48000 0 

BLANDING MUNICIPAL 

WATERSHED SNOW FENCE FOUR CORNERS SCHOOL 

2011 04 RAC OF OUTDOOR EDUCATION 33555.84 7812.62 4

RAC 11PNF002 UTILE SKILL 

2011 04 HILL WELL DRILLING PROJECT PAYETIE LAKES SKI CLUB 17800 5500 

RAC 11PNF006M SUMMER COUNCIL SCHOOL 

YOUTH SUPERVISED WORK DISTRICT (RAC 

2011 04 EXPERIENCE 11PNF006M) 24152.41 1680 2
TABLE A -Page 205 

Forest forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC 

11MULTI001M/13MULTI003 

WOODY BIOMASS IDAHO COUNCIL OF 

UTILIZATION PARTNERSHIP GOVERNMENTS/SAGE 

2011 04 OPERATIONS COMMUNITY RESOURCES 37500 38500 

RUSH CREEK & BOUNDARY NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2011 04 TRAILS RECONSTRUCTION CORPS 30215.64 19152.93 4

NYC CRESTLINE TRAIL #109 NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2011 04 HEAVY MAINTENANCE CORPS 4886.91 6384.31 1

LEMHI COUNTY AQUATIC YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2011 04 MONITORING PROGRAM, INC. 20926.02 7504.62 2

HAZARD TREE REMOVAL 

2011 04 ALONG HIGHWAY 75 CUSTER COUNTY 66223.01 21000 8

SALMON AND PAHSIMEROI 

RIVER NOXIOUS WEED 

2011 04 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT CUSTER COUNTY 82636.35 21847 10

SOUTH ZONE TRAIL YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2011 04 MAINTENANCE PROGRAM, INC. 200750.32 44193.39 24

YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2011 04 NORTH ZONE HITCH RAILS PROGRAM, INC. 15783.94 5625.33 2

NORTH ZONE 

TRAILS/PROPERTY YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2011 04 MANAGEMEMT PROGRAM, INC. 386570.79 134060.81 5
TABLE A -Page 206 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SOUTH ZONE PROPERTY YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2011 04 MAINTENANCE PROGRAM, INC. 52947.51 17056.24 7

PANTHER CREEK RIPARIAN MONTGOMERY 

2011 04 FENCE EXCLOSURE PROJECT PROPERTIES LLC 34175.1 42000 

LEMHI COUNTY (LCWMA) 

2011 04 WEED MANAGEMENT Lemhi County (LCWMA) 490679 183507.5 6

SUPPLEMENT TO MASTER PA MONTANA 

2011 04 #10-PA-11015600-011 CONSERVATION CORPS 181573.74 124957.37 30

FIELDWORK TRAINING SHOSHONE BANNOCK 

2011 04 PROGRAM TRIBES 207260.56 59995.2 26

RAC SNF00310 TRAIL CREEK 

RESTORATION PROJECT PART 

2011 04 II BLAINE COUNTY 20338 20388 

RAC SNF01210 NOXIOUS 

2011 04 WEED CONTROL CAMAS COUNTY 20000 18455 

BLM SWEECO DOZER USDI, BLM, HOLLISTER 

2011 04 W/OPERATOR FIELD OFFICE 5198.14 0 

FREMONT COUNTY PARKS 

2011 04 JOHNNY SACK CABIN AND RECREATION 5687.32 8345 1

PARIS LIBERTY CATILE 

2011 04 RAC RIPARIAN DRIFT FENCE ASSOCIATION 8623.5 4200 

RAC WILLIAMS WATER YOUNG RESOURCES LTD 

2011 04 SYSTEM PARTNERSHIP 17860.35 7400.15 
TABLE A - Page 207 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title ,Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC DRY VALLEY WATER DRY VALLEY CATILE 

2011 04 SYSTEM ASSOCIATION 35377.5 95075.44 13

RAC CHESTER DAM FISH HENRY'S FORK 

2011 04 LADDER FOUNDATION 22806.36 777154.87 79

RAC CULVERT 

REMOVAL/BRIDGE 

CONSTRUCTION AND HENRY'S FORK 

2011 04 FENCING FOUNDATION 26137.74 22790.5 4

HENRY'S FORK 

2011 04 RAC BUFFALO RIVER FENCES FOUNDATION 12848 6125 

RAC SILVER LAKE DAM HENRY'S FORK 

2011 04 FISHWAY FOUNDATION 21586.09 290916 31

RAC LAST CHANCE RIPARIAN HENRY'S FORK 

2011 04 FENCE FOUNDATION 5179 4100 

RAC GRANDVIEW BOAT HENRY'S FORK 

2011 04 LAUNCH FOUNDATION 16764.43 9900 2

CARIBOU MOUNTAIN NONMOTORIZED TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2011 04 MAINTENANCE CORPS 44326.51 52936.33 9

RAC SCHOOL HOUSE 

HOLLOW POND AND 

RIPARIAN FENCE MINK CREEK CATILE 

2011 04 CONSTRUCTION ASSOCIATION 6099.61 7700.5 1
TABLE A -Page 208 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SPA- ALLEMAN DAM 

REMOVAL AND STREAM 

RESTORATION ON 

2011 04 GEORGETOWN CREEK TROUT UNLIMITED 24834.38 6250 3

RAC BEAR LAKE ALLOTMENT 

WATERSHED AND RIPARIAN BEAR LAKE CATILE 

2011 04 ENHANCEMENT PROJECT ASSOCIATION 23265.5 23500 

RAC CANYON CREEK CANAL FRIENDS OF THE TETON 

2011 04 SCREENING PROJECT RIVER 14688.09 203220 21

ASHTON/ISLAND PARK 

RANGER DISTRICT NOXIOUS 

2011 04 WEED CONTROL FREMONT COUNTY 207107 186144 

RAC REMOTE WEED CARIBOU CATILEMEN'S 

2011 04 CONTAINMENT ASSOCIATION 26067.92 6550 3

RAC WEST END ACCESS 

2011 04 IMPROVEMENT FREMONT COUNTY 10588.02 7521 1

ALPINE FIRE SAFE COUNCIL ALPINE FIRE SAFE 

2011 04 COORDINATION FUNDING COUNCIL 31017.08 0 3

DEFENSIBLE SPACE CURBSIDE ALPINE FIRE SAFE 

2011 04 CHIPPING PROGRAM COUNCIL 11761.49 0 1

COMMUNITY FIRE SAFE ALPINE FIRE SAFE 

2011 04 PROGRAM II COUNCIL 5449.29 0 
TABLE A- Page 209 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

MARKLEEVILLE FUELS ALPINE FIRE SAFE 

2011 04 PROJECf- PHASE I COUNCIL 6871.3 0 

WATER QUALITY ALPINE WATERSHED 

2011 04 MONITORING PROGRAM GROUP 10000 14000 

ROSACHIRANCH 

UNDESIRABLE PLANT SMITH VALLEY 

2011 04 TREATMENT CONSERVATION DISTRICf 230021.02 4640 232011 04 ROAD MTNCE AND REPAIR ALPINE COUNTY 21S30.67 2SOO 2

WASATCH CO WEEDS: CLYDE 

CREEK; LITTLE VALLEY; SOLDIER SUMMIT; MAIN 

CANYON, LAKE CREEK; COOP 

CREEK; MILL HOLLOW; STRAWBERRY RIVER; SOLDIER CREEK; WEST FK 

DUCHESNE RIVER; ASPEN 

2011 04 GROVE, & CENTER CREEK. WASATCH COUNTY 124S18.5 3S69.92 12

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- LEONI NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

2011 OS MEADOWS FUEL REDUCfiON CONFERENCE soooo 20304 

ELDORADO NATIONAL 

2011 OS FOREST TRAIL CREW #14068 SCA 4939S 3S304.72 8
TABLE A- Page 210 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

BEAVER CREEK DOUBLE FRUIT GROWERS SUPPLY 

2011 OS FORDS COMPANY 84800 91770 

PLEASANT VALLEY WATER SISKIYOU COUNTY FIRE 

2011 OS TANKS SAFE COUNCIL 30000 4SSO 

KLAMATH YOUTH MID KLAMATH 

2011 OS STEWARDSHIP WATERSHED COUNCIL 17370 14286 

SHACKLEFORD CREEK FALLS 

RECREATION AREA 

HAZARDOUS FUELS NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

2011 OS REDUCTION RESOURCE CENTER 38SOO 10SOO 

SCOTI RIVER WATERSHED 

WOODY BIOMASS NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

2011 OS UTILIZATION RESOURCE CENTER 38400 2028230 2

CECIL VILLE VOLUNTEER 

2011 OS SALMON RIVER CHIPPER FIRE & HOSE COMPANY 22SOO 939S 

SISKIYOU FIRE WARDEN FIRE SAFE COUNCIL OF 

2011 OS BRUSH CHIPPER SISKIYOU COUNTY 32000 86700 

BURNEY- HAT CREEK 

COMMUNITY FOREST FALL RIVER RESOURCE 

2011 OS PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 93601.44 79442 17

LASSEN AGRICULTURE LASSEN COUNTY 

RESOURCE AGAINST WEEDS DEPARTMENT OF 

2011 OS (RAW) AGRICULTURE 1SS812.6S 306900 46
TABLE A - Page 211 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WESTERN LASSEN COUNTY 

SCOTCH AND PERENNIAL 

PEPPERWEED ERADICATION FALL RIVER RESOURCE 

2011 05 AND EDUCATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION DISTRICT 114555.87 46600 16

ELDERLY/ DISABLED SUSANVILLE INDIAN 

2011 05 DEFENSIBLE SPACE RANCHERIA 50000 14000 

COOPERATIVE CONSERVATION PIT RESOURCE 

2011 05 PARTNERSHIP INITIATIVE CONSERVATION DISTRICT 66000 800000 

SUSANVILLE INDIAN 

RANCHERIA TRIBAL YOUTH SUSANVILLE INDIAN 

2011 05 CONSERVATION CREW RANCHERIA 30000 8678.07 3

PELLOWS ROAD GRADING TEHAMA COUNTY 

AND DRAINAGE RESOURCE 

2011 05 IMPROVEMENT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 26513 13800 

TEHAMA COUNTY 

RESOURCE 

2011 05 EAST SAND SLOUGH PHASE II CONSERVATION DISTRICT 13873 8711 

UKIAH CENTER SNOW MTN CALIFORNIA 

2011 05 WILDERNESS TRAIL SPIKE CONSERVATION CORP 20000 7239.2 
TABLE A- Page 212 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

LANTZ RIDGE THOMES CALIFORNIA 

2011 05 GORGE TRAIL MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION CORPS 69632 21360.5 

RETIRED WORKERS MODOC COUNTY FARM 

2011 05 PROGRAM BUREAU 200466.49 79535.65 28

PHOTO-MONITORING 

TRAINING AND MODOC COUNTY FARM 

2011 05 IMPLEMENTATION ADVISOR 4252 9000 

RIPARIAN AND UPLAND ENHANCEMENT AT PIT RIVER PIT RESOURCES 

2011 05 ALLOTMENTS CONSERVATION DISTRICT 2160 10552 

NATIVE GRASS SEED THE CENTRAL MODOC 

2011 05 COLLECTION RIVER CENTER 6460 2392.32 

MCBRIDE SPRINGS/WILLOW 

CREEK MEADOW PIT RESOURCES 

2011 05 RESTORATON PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 14305.68 115600 12

KLAMATH YOUTH MID KLAMATH 

2011 05 STEWARDSHIP WATERSHED COUNCIL 26000 33270 

SMITH RIVER LEVEL II 

2011 05 STREAM INVENTORY SMITH RIVER ALLIANCE 62715.84 16911 72011 05 COAST TO CREST TRAIL ROSE FOUNDATION 9200.58 38400 4

WESTERN SISKIYOU MID KLAMATH 

2011 05 SUSTAINABLE FUELBREAKS WATERSHED COUNCIL 49651 21319 
TABLE A- Page 213 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SUNSET HIGH SCHOOL 

REDWOOD EXPERIENTIAL 

AND ADVENTURE LEARNING DEL NORTE COUNTY 

2011 OS COMMUNITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 41399.56 130SOO 17

BIOMASS EHTANOL 

PRODUCTION FEASIBILITY TRI-AGENCY ECONOMIC 

2011 OS STUDY DEVELOPMENT 23320 3000 

SMITH RIVER ALLIANCE NRA 

2011 OS STEWARDSHIP SMITH RIVER ALLIANCE 3011S.7 29SO 

MID KLAMATH PRIVATE ROADS ASSESSMENT MID KLAMATH 

2011 OS PROJECT WATERSHED COUNCIL 42376 6347 

BUCK MOUNTAIN 

EVACUATION ROUTE BRIDGEVILLE COMMUNITY 

2011 OS PROJECT CENTER 100S8S 0 

MAD RIDGE FUELBREAK THE WATERSHED MASTICATION RESEARCH AND TRAINING 

2011 OS MAINTENANCE TREATMENT CENTER 710S9.81 20638.99 

CALIFORNIA 

2011 OS COAST TO CREST TRAIL CONSERVATION CORP 38000 14S04 

PILOT CREEK ROAD 

BRUSHING & CHIPPING FUEL BRIDGEVILLE COMMUNITY 

2011 OS RECUCTION PROJECT CENTER 26384 10944 
TABLE A- Page 214 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

KLAMATH RIVER WEEDS 

ASSESSMENT AND MID KLAMATH 

2011 05 TREATMENT WATERSHED COUNCIL 24560 25426 2011 05 FRENCH HILL ROAD PROJECT COUNTY OF DEL NORTE 112104.54 66196 17

PATRICK CREEK ROAD CHIP 

2011 05 SEAL PROJECT COUNTY OF DEL NORTE 131507.13 70679 20

TITLE II RAC PROJECT2011 05 STUDENTS AS STEWARDS PLUMAS CORP 30130 32190 TITLE II RAC PROJECT- PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE 

2011 05 CRESCENT GRADE HFR SAFE COUNCIL 39985 90365 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- LONG PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE 

2011 05 VALLEY II HFR SAFE COUNCIL 251.35 0 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- UPPER 

RED CLOVER VALLEY 

RESTORATION 

2011 05 (DESIGN/CEQA/NEPA) PLUMAS CORP 51274.83 75000 12

TITLE II RAC PROJECTPLUMAS INTEGRATED WEED 

2011 05 MANAGEMENT PROGRAM SIERRA VALLEY RCD 43007 17675 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- UPPER 

FEATHER RIVER WATERSHED 

2011 05 MONITORING PLUMAS CORP 73690 15600 
TABLE A- Page 215 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

DEFENSIBLE ASSISTANCE FOR KERN RIVER VALLEY FIRE 

2011 05 HARDSHIP CASES SAFE COUNCIL 5874 0 

RIVERSIDE PARK STREAMBED KERN VALLEY RIVER 

2011 05 RESTORATION COUNCIL 24610 0 

MONARCH WILDERNESS HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2011 05 TRAIL MAINTENANCE TRAIL CREW 13352 40198 

BACK COUNTRY 

GOLDEN TROUT WILDERNESS HORSEMEN SEQUOIA 

2011 05 TRAILS UNIT 14774 0 

WESTERN DIVIDE LONG HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2011 05 MEADOW PROJECT TRAIL CREW 18349 0 

FORKS OF KERN TRAIL TULE RIVER INDIAN TRIBAL 

2011 05 PROJECT COUNCIL 27712.68 0 2

SOUTH DUNSMUIR FUELS DUNSMUIR FIRE SAFE 

2011 05 REDUCTION COUNCIL 2571.88 15000 1

TRINITY COUNTY 

GARDEN GULCH SPUR TRAIL RESOURCE 

2011 05 NEPA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 5000 2894.47 

TRINITY COUNTY 

RESOURCE 

2011 05 SUMMER FIELD CAMP CONSERVATION DISTRICT 12600 10326 
TABLE A- Page 216 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match Fun

BAGLEY OHV RECREATION OUTDOORS 

2011 05 DEMONSTRATION PROJECT COALITION 29474.52 31496 6

2011 SFMU ROAD 

STORMPROOFING TRINITY COUNTY 

MAINTENANCE AND RESOURCE 

2011 OS UPGRADE CONSERVATION DISTRICT 324277.67 84004.31 40

NORTHWEST CALIFORNIA RESOURCE AND 

CHINA GULCH RD SEDIMENT CONSERVATION 

2011 05 REDUCTION PHASE 2B DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 49990.44 3350 5

MT. SHASTA NORDIC SKI 

2011 05 SNOW CAT ORGANIZATION 30000 50000 

2011 05 WCF GARDEN GULCH TRINITY COUNTY RCD 32232 8500 

WCF EAST BRANCH 1 FUELS 

2011 05 REDUCTION TRINITY COUNTY RCD 72624 20625 

WEAVERVILLE COMMUNITY TRINITY COUNTY 

FOREST EAST BRANCH II RESOURCE 

2011 05 FUELS REDUCTION CONSERVATION DISTRICT 73963.27 18855.42 9

TRINITY COUNTY 

2011 TRMU WEED RESOURCE 

2011 05 TREATMENT PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 20647.3 8107 
TABLE A- Page 217 

forest forest Tota

"!>'"'"'"'"''" Service Service Appli 1Proj

Year !Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match fund

THE WATERSHED 

RESEARCH & TRAINING 

2011 OS 2011 SFMU WEED REMOVAL CENTER 26222.89 4712.89 3

HAYFORK BASIN TRAILS THE WATERSHED 

YOUTH CONSERVATION RESEARCH AND TRAINING 

2011 OS CREW CENTER 110S2S.S 30644.7 1

BROWNS PROJECT INSTREAM WATERSHED RESEARCH 

2011 OS MONITORING AND TRAINING CENTER 38107.31 11986.18 S

MUSSER HILL AND CHINA TRINITY COUNTY 

GULCH-PHASE II FUELS RESOURCE 

2011 OS REDUCTION PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 219066 141424 

SEDIMENT REDUCTION ROAD 

TREATMENTS (HIDDEN 

VALLEY ROAD UPGRADE & TRINITY COUNTY 

UTILE BROWNS CREEK ROAD RESOURCE 

2011 OS DE COM CONSERVATION DISTRICT 68134 20490 

HAYFORK AREA FU ELBREAKS MAINTENANCE BURNING WATERSHED RESEARCH 

2011 OS NEPA AND TRAINING CENTER 3S942 9123 
TABLE A- Page 218 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region I Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SRCD/BCHC SAN JOAQUIN 

SIERRA UNIT BACKCOUNTRY SIERRA RESOURCE 

2011 05 WORK PROJECTS CONSERVATION DISTRICT 4028.28 0 

CALIFORNIA TRAIL USERS COALITION/STEWARDS OF 

#9 MOTORIZED TRAIL THE SIERRA NATIONAL 

2011 05 RESOURCE MITIGATION FOREST 24450 0 

ENVIRONMENTAL SIERRA UNIFIED SCHOOL 

2011 05 ADVENTURES DISTRICT 64304 0 

#15 REDUCTION OF LOSS OF TIMBERVIEW AREA 

LIFE AND PROPERTY- FIREWISE IMPROVEMNET 

2011 05 TIMBERVIEW COUNCIL (TAFIC) 10700 0 

NELDER GROVE 

INTERPRETIVE GUIDE FRIENDS OF NELDER 

2011 05 (BROCHURE) GROVE 1500 0 

MCCORMICK MEADOW TUOLUMNE BAND OF ME2011 05 RESTORATION PROJ, PHASE 1 WUK INDIANS 9483.94 13327 2

COMMUNITY CHIPPING HIGHWAY 108 FIRE SAFE 

2011 05 PROJECT COUNCIL 14575 112350 
TABLE A- Page 219 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

COMMUNITY FIRE YOSEMITE FOOTHILLS FIRE 

2011 OS PROTECTION WATER SOURCE SAFE 0 10000 

ODD FELLOWS FUEL 

REDUCTION & ROAD HIGHWAY 108 FIRE SAFE 

2011 OS MAINTENANCE COUNCIL 3877S 1SOOO 

RAC HWY 108 TWAIN HARTE HIGHWAY 108 FIRE SAFE 

2011 OS FUEL BREAK COUNCIL 16409 2412S 

RAC MT ELIZABETH DRIVE HIGHWAY 108 FIRE SAFE 

2011 OS ROAD MAINT COUNCIL 3S200 41000 

EMIGRANT BASIN TRAIL 

2011 OS PROJEG CCC 4S993 74610.6 1

TITLE II RAC PROJEGDOWNIEVILLE TRAIL SIERRA BUTTES TRAIL 

2011 OS RESTORATION STEWARDSHIP 9S01 6899 

TITLE II RAC PROJECTSIERRA BUTTES LOOKOUT SIERRA BUTTES TRAIL 

2011 OS TRAIL RESTORATION STEWARDSHIP 20S44.96 7522 2

2011 05 RAC ASPEN RESTORATION SYRCL 727S S050 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- LITTLE TRUCKEE RIVER FOREST 

HEALTH AND FISH HABITAT 

2011 05 IMPROVEMENT PROJEG TROUT UNLIMITED, INC. 21633 23149 
TABLE A -Page 220 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

TITLE II RAC PROJECTKENTUCKY MINE STAMP MILL SIERRA COUNTY 

2011 05 ROOF AND FLOOR REPAIR HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION 10000 1450 

TITLE II RAC PROJECTSIERRA COUNTY WEED 

2011 05 MANAGEMENT PROJECT SIERRA VALLEY RCD 58925 44025 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- PLACER COUNTY 

FORESTHILL WUI FUEL RESOURCE 

2011 05 REDUCTION CONSERVATION DISTRICT 12506.5 22000 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- OLD YUBA WATERSHED 

2011 05 GROWTH AT SPRING CREEK INSTITUTE 10000 8000 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- FIRE SAFE COUNCIL OF 

2011 05 SCOTCH BROOM CHALLENGE NEVADA COUNTY 5000 20500 

TITLE II RAC PROJECTPERAZZO CANYON/COLD 

STREAM WATERSHED 

ASSESSMENT -STREAM TROUT UNLIMITED2011 05 CONDITION SURVEY FEATHER RIVER CHAPTER 60000 17154.77 7

PUBLIC EDUCATION & 

OUTREACH FOR NOXIOUS 

2011 06 WEED CONTROL DESCHUTES COUNTY 74100 48478 
TABLE A - Page 221 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match 

DESCHUTES COUNTY WEEDS 

2011 06 ALONG ROADS DESCHUTES COUNTY 36S7 0 

DESCHUTES COUNTY COST 

2011 06 SHARE WEED PROGRAM DESCHUTES COUNTY 66880 4799S 

TSID FISH SCREENING AND 

2011 06 PASSAGE- PHASE II UDWC 56726.16 100000 1S

TREAT HAZARDOUS FUELS 

ON NATIONAL FOREST OREGON DEPARTMENT OF 

2011 06 SYSTEM LANDS CORRECTIONS 87109.39 164763.92 25

DESCHUTES NF NOXIOUS NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2011 06 WEED CONTROL CORPS 10SS79.37 80497.1 18

HAND-PULL INVASIVE DESCHUTES COUNTY 

2011 06 PLANTS SHERIFF'S OFFICE 30662.1 66202.94 9

WALKER RANGE FIRE 

PROTECTION 

2011 06 CRESCENT LAKE WUI ASSOCIATION 21318.3S 9948.7S 

ASPEN RESTORATION OREGON STATE 

2011 06 STRATEGY AND MONITORING UNIVERSITY 42175.52 0 4

LOST RIVER WEED KLAMATH WATERSHED 

2011 06 ERADICATION PARTNERSHIP 23967.58 8400 3

SPRAGUE RIVER NOXIOUS KLAMATH WATERSHED 

2011 06 WEED CONTROL PARTNERSHIP 70647.31 8400 7
TABLE A - Page 222 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: 

Year Region Project Title !Applicant Name Match Match 

(FS FUNDS) SPRAGUE RIVER 

2011 06 RANCH RESTORATION USFWS 68900 111000 

(FS FUNDS) SAND CREEK 

2011 06 RANCH RESTORATION USFWS 23200 53904 

(FS FUNDS) MIRANDA 

2011 06 SPRING LEVEE BREACH USFWS 71000 33000 

(FS FUNDS) 

FOURMILE/HARRIMAN 

2011 06 RESTORATION USFWS 423011 100400 

KELLEY CREEK CULVERT 

REMOVAL AND BRIDGE LAKE COUNTY UMBRELLA 

2011 06 REPLACEMENT PROJECT WATERSHED COUNCIL 52328 44622 

JACK CREEK MEADOW NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2011 06 RESTORATION 2011 CORPS 20280.15 20927.11 4

WEST DREWS ASPEN OREGON DEPT. OF 

2011 06 ENHANCEMENT PROJECT CORRECTIONS 14950.35 20661.45 

YOUTH STREAM TEAM MOUNT ST. HELENS 

2011 06 MONITORING INSTITUTE 65215 37500 

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL 

ON THE GIFFORD PINCHOT 

2011 06 NATIONAL FOREST KLICKITAT COUNTY 63457.6 243089 3

DISCOVER YOUR 

2011 06 MSH VISITOR INFORMATION NORTHWEST 56260.8 41341 
TABLE A -Page 223 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

UPPER MALHEUR RIVER GRANT SOIL & WATER 

2011 06 RANGE IMPROVEMENT CONSERVATION DISTRICf 93916.17 0 9

GRAZING LANDS NOXIOUS GRANT COUNTY SOIL & 

2011 06 WEED MANAGEMENT WATER CONSERVATION 336800 43000 

SOUTH FORK RIPARIAN 

IMPROVEMENT PROJECf (GR- GRANT SOIL & WATER 

2011 06 MAL11-162) CONSERVATION DISTRICf 131692 110993 

RUDIO CREEK RANCH 

HABITAT RESTORATION 

2011 06 PROJECT (GR-MAL11-168) THE FRESHWATER TRUST 78375 0 

2011 YCC RECREATION TRAINING AND 

YOUTH CREW, GR-MALL-12- EMPLOYMENT 

2011 06 286 CONSORTIUM 64609.99 16325.98 8

TEC/ECRD EGLEY/COW TRAINING AND 

ASPEN RESTORATION EMPLOYMENT 

2011 06 PROJECf CONSORTIUM 32038.92 26441.8 5

2011 OREGON YOUTH 

CONSERVATION CORP TRAINING AND 

SUMMER TRAINING/WORK EMPLOYMENT 

2011 06 PROGRAM/WORK PROGRAM CONSORTIUM (TEC) 88445.57 0 8

SKAGIT RIVER SYSTEM 

2011 06 SAUK BASIN RESTORATION COOPERATIVE 64490 57660 
TABLE A -Page 224 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SUMMER YOUTH FORESTRY WASHINGTON STATE 

2011 06 INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION 44000 8000 

INSTALL TRAILHEAD KIOSKS 

AT MULTIPLE LOCATIONS ON PACIFIC NORTHWEST 

2011 06 THE MBS NATIONAL FOREST TRAIL ASSOCIATION 43890 28769 

PACIFIC NORTHWEST 

2011 06 BS SKY PROGRAM TRAIL ASSOCIATION 56674 51673.2 1

NOOKSACK SALMON 

ENHANCEMENT 

2011 06 NOOKSACK RIVER STEWARDS ASSOCIATION 40000 25000 

REITER FOOTHILLS ROAD 

2011 06 BLOCKAGE WASHINGTON STATE DNR 4662.7 0 

FOREST RESOURCE SNOHOMISH COUNTY 

2011 06 PROTECTION COOP LE RAC SHERIFF'S OFFICE 112100 0 

DRD UPPER SAUK INVASIVE SKAGIT FISHERIES 

2011 06 PLANT CONTROL TITLE II ENHANCEMENT GROUP 32013.98 27896 5

TRAIL MAINTENANCE ON THE NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2011 06 MT. BAKER-SNOQUALMIE NF CORPS 66943.7 33670.7 1

HARLAN CREEK RIDGE 

2011 06 MEADOW RESTORATION TULALIP TRIBES 75404.07 16521 9

INSTREAM FLOW MIDDLE FORK IRRIGATION 

2011 06 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 25000 120800 
TABLE A - Page 225 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match 

SALMON RIVER 

2011 06 RESTORATION, HW-09-133 THE FRESHWATER TRUST 109245 23620 

WASCO COUNTY SOIL AND 

MILL CREEK RESTORATION WATER CONSERVATION 

2011 06 PLAN DISTRICT 63943.69 0 6

MT. HOOD NF NOXIOUS WASCO COUNTY WEED 

2011 06 WEED CONTROL AND PEST 445412.03 133125 57

WHEELER COUNTY WEED Wheeler Soil and Water 

2011 06 MANAGEMENT PROJECT Cons.Dist 98804.3 39715 1

CENTRAL OREGON 

INTERGOVERNMENTAL 

2011 06 RAC ADMIN SUPPORT COUNCIL (COIC) 39590 0 

CROOK COUNTY 

2011 06 JUNIPER BIOMASS GUIDE EXTENSION SERVICE 13021.21 12085.59 

JEFFERSON COUNTY WEED JEFFERSON COUNTY 

2011 06 CONTROL PUBLIC WORKS 13292 0 

INVASIVE PLANT CONTROL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2011 06 DESCHUTES/OCHOCO CORPS 45076.77 30447.85 7

HOC YEAR ROUND CREW 

2011 06 WEEDS HEART OF OREGON CORPS 5525.18 2215.87 

TITLE II FSR 2929 070 CLALLAM COUNTY PUBLIC 

2011 06 RESTORATION WORKS 158909.15 69583 22
TABLE A -Page 226 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

UPPER QUINAULT RIVER QUINAULT INDIAN 

2011 06 RESTORATION 09 NATION 149954.04 0 14

WASHINGTON STATE 

DEPARTMENT OF 

WCC FORESTWIDE CREW ECOLOGY-- WASHINGTON 

2011 06 2012 CONSERVATION CORPS 108817.54 107719 21

UPPER ROGUE 

SKY LAKES WILDERNESS POST WATERSHED 

2011 06 FIRE TRAILS RESORATION ASSOCIATION 44626 800 

MOTORIZED TRAIL MAINTENANCE ON THE 

SISKIYOU MOUNTAINS AND 

WILD RIVERS RANGER MOTORCYCLE RIDERS 

2011 06 DISTRICTS ASSN 11627 7962.5 

GARBAGE & LITIER 

ABATEMENT AKA THE TRASH SOUTH COAST 

2011 06 DOGS WATERSHEDS 15400 15900 

SILVER-LOBSTER ROAD CURRY SOIL & WATER 

2011 06 IMPROVEMENTS CONSERVATION DISTRICT 35556 0 

CURRY SOIL & WATER 

2011 06 CURRY ADOPT-A-STREAM CONSERVATION DISTRICT 16889 6000 
TABLE A - Page 227 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title A.pplicant Name Match Match Fun

FOGGY/EDEN RIPARIAN POWERS SCHOOL 

2011 06 HABITAT RESTORATION DISTRICT 31044 0 

2011 OPERATING AND CURRY COUNTY SHERIFF'S 

2011 06 FINANCIAL PLAN DEPT 47494.16 0 4

COMMUNITY JUSTICE FUELS 

REDUCTION AND FIRE MANAGEMENT 

2011 06 (RAC#101194) JACKSON COUNTY 65836.58 75717.66 14

HIGH CASCADES/SISKIYOU 

MTNS ROADSIDE 

2011 06 BRUSHING(RAC#101116) JACKSON COUNTY 20070.49 21527.57 4

FY2011-2012 ROADSIDE 

BRUSHING, RESOURCE 

PROTECTION AND ROAD JOSEPHINE COUNTY 

2011 06 SAFETY COMM JUSTICE 13668 12627.5 

BILLINGS CREEK SEDIMENT & LOWER ROGUE 

2011 06 SHADE PHASE II WATERSHED COUNCIL 1621.78 0 

CHETCO/GOLD BEACH 

DISTRICT LANDSCAPING AND CURRY COUNTY JUVENILE 

2011 06 MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT 9648.06 34092.8 4

BILLINGS CREEK SEDIMENT& COOS FOREST PROTECTIVE 

2011 06 SHADE PHASE II FUELS BREAK ASSOCIATION 3595.64 2197.29 
TABLE A - Page 228 

Forest Forest Tota

A Service Service Appli 

1

Proj

""''"'"'""'"" 

Year I Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match I Fun

WILD RIVERS RANGER JOSEPHINE COUNTY 

2011 06 DISTRICT RECREATION SITES COMM JUSTICE 9273.48 11112.2 2

INVASIVE PLANT CONTROL 

AND BITTERBRUSH HABITAT 

IMP (SISKIYOU 

MOUNTAINS/HIGH Jackson County 

2011 06 CASCADES RD) Community Justice 26859.53 26723.88 5

APPLEGATE FISH HABITAT Jackson County 

2011 06 IMPROVEMENT Community Justice 9053.03 7423.3 1

GOLD BEACH RD-ROGUE 

RIVER TRAIL AND PIT TOILET 

2011 06 MAINTENANCE NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 40564.14 24358.28 6

PAYCO 11-LA-005 SIUSLAW 

RIPARIAN RESTORATION SIUSLAW WATERSHED 

2011 06 FIELD CREW COUNCIL 204094.75 9275 21

CLEANUP OF UNLAWFUL 

TRASH DUMPING IN BENTON 

2011 06 COUNTY CLEAN FOREST PROJECT 29908.71 2224 3

CLEANUP OF UNLAWFUL 

TRASH DUMPSITES IN 

2011 06 LINCOLN COUNTY CLEAN FOREST PROJECT 18182 0 
TABLE A - Page 229 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SNOWY PLOVER HABITAT 

RESTORATION- EUROPEAN NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2011 06 BEACHGRASS PULLING CORPS 8114.13 6089.57 

PIONEER INDIAN TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2011 06 MAINTENANCE CORPS 6119.94 7418.78 1

WALLA WALLA RD NATIVE NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2011 06 PLANT RESTORATION CORPS 7834 7444.45 1

JEFFERSON YOUTH LOMAKATSI RESTORATION 

2011 06 CONSERVATION CORP PROJECT 87148 0 

LEMOLO LAKE TUI CHUB FISH PARTNERSHIP FOR THE 

2011 06 TRAPPING UMPQUA RIVER 55204 0 

ELK CK/SOUTH UMPQUA 

SALMON RESTORATION PARTNERSHIP FOR 

2011 06 PROJECT UMPQUA RIVER 50000 70436 

CEDAR SPRINGS 

COMMUNICATIONS AND 

AUTOMATED SMOKE DOUGLAS FOREST 

2011 06 DETECTION SYSTEM SITE PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION 29700 0 

PHOENIX SCHOOL OREGON 

YOUTH CONSERVATION PHOENIX SCHOOL OF 

2011 06 CORP ROSEBURG 161188.24 213352.33 37

HAZARDOUS FUEL WORK ON Douglas County Public 

2011 06 NURD Works 60987.3 233886 2
TABLE A - Page 230 

Forest Forest Tota

IAg•ee .. ,.., ... Service Service Appl Proj

Year Region Project Title Annli""'"lt Name Match Match Fund

HOSTED TEC'S 2011 TRAINING AND 

NATURAL RESOURCE YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2011 06 CREW CONSORTIUM 5883.35 0 5

WALLOWA MOUNTAINS TRAINING AND 

OFFICE NATURAL RESOURCES EMPLOYMENT 

2011 06 CREW CONSORTIUM 36496.81 11170 47

NOXIOUS WEED SURVEY & CHELAN COUNTY WEED 

2011 06 CONTROL BOARD 75529.2 13311.57 88

LAKE CHELAN CRUPINA WASHINGTON 

2011 06 CONTROL PROJECT CONSERVATION CORPS 356477.23 131775.2 488

WENATCHEE RIVER 

TRAILHEAD WEED CONTROL WASHINGTON 

2011 06 PROJECT CONSERVATION CORPS 42140.15 5436.06 47

FORESTWIDE WEED WASHINGTON 

2011 06 CONTROL CONSERVATION CORPS 50187.76 11191.83 61

FY11 RAC- DIRTY FACE TRAIL 

2011 06 #1500 MTCE NYC 23503.74 0 23

LANE COUNTY SHERIFFS 

2011 06 LANE COUNTY WORK CREW WORK CREW 486162 0 

YOUTH ENVIRO SQUAD OREGON STATE 

2011 06 FOREST STEWARDSHIP UNIVERSITY 60376 0 
TABLE A - Page 231 

Forest Forest Tota

Agr Service Service 1Appli Proj1 

Year !Region I Project Title !Applicant Name Match Match Fund

DETROIT LAKE 

COMPREHENSIVE FEDERAL LAKES 

RESTORATION AND RECREATION COMMITIEE 

2011 06 ENHANCEMENT DESIGN FOR DETROIT LAKE 13784.26 0 13

FIRE WATER WELL AND 

2011 06 OVERHEAD FILL AT ROAD 19 UPPER MCKENZIE RFPD 58717.79 0 58

2011 MARION COUNTY 

SHERIFF'S WORK CENTER MARION COUNTY 

2011 06 PROGRAM SHERIFFS OFFICE 34650 0 

2011 LINN COUNTY JUVENILE LINN COUNTY JUVENILE 

2011 06 WORK SERVICE PROGRAM DEPARTMENT 27825 0 

TRAIL CREW INTERNS (2) FOR STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2011 06 SANTIAM RIVER ZONE ASSOCIATION 6682 0 

SALMO-PRIEST TRAILS WASHINGTON TRAILS 

2011 06 SUPPORT ASSOCIATION 18126.48 3873.48 21

NEIGHBORHOOD 

COOPERATIVE COST SHARE Pend Oreille County Weed 

2011 06 PROJECT Board 170495.99 0 170
TABLE A -Page 232 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

NORTHEAST WASHINGTON 

STEWARDSHIP PROJECT 

REGENERATION HARVEST, ROAD & STREAMSIDE NE WASHINGTON 

2011 06 BUFFER MONITORING FORESTRY COALITION 41018.38 2700 4

SAND CANYON (CHEWELAH STEVENS COUNTY DEPT 

2011 06 CREEK) RD REHAB PROJ OF PUBLIC WORKS 90000 8976 

SHEEP CREEK CAMPGROUND STEVENS COUNTY 

2011 06 RESTORATION CONSERVATION DISTRICT 23000 13000 

PEND OREILLE COUNTY 

2011 06 LECLERC CREEK CROSSING PUBLIC WORKS 230000 258200 

UTILE PEND OREILLE LAKES 

2011 06 MILFOIL CONTROL STEVENS COUNTY 6035 3631 

MILFOIL REDUCTION 

PROGRAM- PEND OREILLE PEND OREILLE COUNTY 

2011 06 COUNTY PUD #1 47500 0 

COLVILLE CHAMBER OF 

2011 06 FOREST TRAIL GUIDES COMMERCE 17100 1300 

WOODARD CREEK REACH 1 LOWER COLUMBIA FISH 

2011 06 RESTORATION ENHANCEMENT GROUP 39900 0 

IDENTIFY AND CLEAN UP 

ILLEGAL DUMPSITES2011 06 MULTNOMAH CLEAN FOREST PROJECT 11038.38 0 1
TABLE A - Page 233 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

HEMLOCK WOOLLY ADELGID KENTUCKY DIVISION OF 

2011 08 PROJECT FORESTRY 237476.07 0 23

TITLE II ROAD MAINTENANCE JACKSON COUNTY FISCAL 

2011 08 (ROAD #4, #407, #393) COURT 98209.75 0 9

TITLE II ROAD MAINTENANCE 

(ROAD #1433, OLD LAUREL COUNTY FISCAL 

2011 08 WILDERNESS ROAD) COURT 38500 0 

TITLE II LESLIE COUNTY ROAD LESLIE COUNTY FISCAL 

2011 08 PROJECT COURT 33986.71 0 3

SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS 

TITLE II PROJECT-- GRANT 

PARISH ROAD 

2011 08 IMPROVEMENT GRANT PARISH 591201 377140 

SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS 

TITLE II- CASTOR PLUNGE 

2011 08 ROAD RAPIDES PARISH 291450 111465 

SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS 

TITLE II PROJECTNATCHITOCHES PARISH 

ROAD IMPROVEMENT2011 08 MORA NATCHITOCHES PARISH 448795 97642.55 54
TABLE A - Page 234 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS 

TITLE II PROJECT- WELDON 

2011 08 ROAD CLAIBORNE PARISH 35961 57773 

AMITE COUNTY BOARD OF 

2011 08 PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT SUPERVISOR 180999.96 25000 20

PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT OKHISSA LAKE SEWER 

2011 08 (OKHISSA LAKE) DISTRICT 180000 10000 

PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT 

2011 08 (PLEASANT VALLEY) FRANKLIN COUNTY 34877.51 2000 3

PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT 

2011 08 (TEMPLE RD) FRANKLIN COUNTY 250102.24 2000 25

PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT WILKINSON COUNTY 

2011 08 (TOM CRUM) BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 62471 0 

PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT FRANKLIN COUNTY BOARD 

2011 08 (BERRYTOWN) OF SUPERVISORS 86500 2000 

IMPACT SITES, LEAVE NO HARDY COUNTY WEST 

2011 08 TRACE, SIGNAGE AND MAPS VIRGINIA 12057.09 0 1

LOGAN COUNTY, 

2011 08 ROAD AGREEMENT ARKANSAS 98141 0 

TITLE II COOPERATIVE ROAD MCCURTAIN COUNTY, 

2011 08 AGREEMENT OKLAHOMA 106073 0 
TABLE A - Page 235 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region Project Title !Applicant Name Match Match Fun

2011 08 TITLE II PROJECT AGREEMENT LEFLORE COUNTY 194775 0 

LEFLORE COUNTY, 

2011 08 TITLE II PROJECT OKLAHOMA 253777 0 

ROAD AGREEMENT (TITLE II 

2011 08 PROJECT) YELL COUNTY, ARKANSAS 184664 0 

MONTGOMERY COUNTY, 

2011 08 PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT ARKANSAS 39190 0 

NEWTON CO. ROAD NEWTON COUNTY, 

2011 08 IMPROVEMENT TITLE II ARKANSAS 123930 0 

ROAD AGREEMENT (GRANNY 

2011 08 GAP TITLE II) POPE COUNTY, ARKANSAS 109000 23000 

2011 08 ROAD PROJECT AGREEMENT YELL COUNTY 72000 2700 

2011 08 ROAD AGREEMENT JOHNSON COUNTY 0 120000 

JOHNSON COUNTY, 

2011 08 ROAD AGREEMENT ARKANSAS 160650 170000 

FRANKLIN COUNTY, 

2011 08 ROAD AGREEMENT ARKANSAS 35980 0 

MADISON COUNTY, 

2011 08 ROAD AGREEMENT ARKANSAS 0 46000 

CRAWFORD COUNTY 

2011 08 ROAD AGREEMENT ARKANSAS 45312 85450 
TABLE A - Page 236 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

COOPERATIVE FOREST ROAD 

2011 08 AGREEMENT BERKELEY COUNTY, SC 274300 0 

BEISEL ROAD 

2011 08 IMPROVEMENTS NEWBERRY COUNTY, SC 87800 0 

LOUISVILLE ROAD PROJECT 

2011 08 ROAD AGREEMENT TRINITY COUNTY 154895.38 68785 22

HOUSTON COUNTY SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS TITLE II R 

2011 08 1170 HOUSTON COUNTY 120393.04 11350 13

LADY SLIPPER ECOSYSTEM LADY SLIPPER SCENIC 

2011 09 RESTORATION PROJECT BYWAY 52600 22000 

ITASCA COUNTY INVASIVE ITASCA WATER LEGACY 

2011 09 SPECIES PARTNERSHIP PARTNERSHIP 64111.3 56810 1

AU SABLE RIVER FISH 

HABITAT PROTECTION AND 

2011 09 IMPROVEMENT HURON PINES 37350 5000 

RAC #'S: GOG-11-002; GOG11-008; GOG11-010 & GOG2011 09 11-014- WE PIC SPA WE PIC 15053.84 6142.25 2

EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL DUCK LAKE NUISANCE 

2011 09 CONTROL AQUATICS COMMITIEE 6362.16 17460 22011 09 SPA #3. LAKE AIS SURVEYS. WE PIC 7000 2000 

RAC #BAR-11-003 PLAINS BARAGA COUNTY ROAD 

2011 09 ROAD BRIDGE COMMISSION 10663 225000 
TABLE A -Page 237 

forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

FOREST ROAD AGREEMENT-- GOGEBIC COUNTY ROAD 

2011 09 BLACK RIVER ROAD REHAB COMMISSION 150692 0 

COOK COUNTY VISITORS 

2011 09 GUNFLINT GREEN UP BUREAU 20008 0 2011 09 ARROWPOWER 2011 BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA 10774 0 

PINCUSHION MOUNTAIN SUPERIOR CYCLING 

2011 09 BIKE TRAILS- SRS TITLE II ASSOCIATION 127571.99 53800 18

INTERNATIONAL 

SUGARBUSH MOUNTAIN MOUNTAIN BICYCLING 

2011 09 BIKE TRAIL ASSOCIATION 51485.35 14153 6

COOK COUNTY INVASIVES 

2011 09 TEAM IMPLEMENTATION COOK COUNTY 230701 87762 

SUGARBUSH & PINCUSHION CONSERVATION CORPS 

2011 09 TRAIL PROJECT MINNESOTA 25989.55 9480 3

RAC #25 MARENGO RIVER BAD RIVER WATERSHED 

2011 09 ACTION PLAN ASSOCIATION 176846 0 2011 09 RAC#7 HHT RUFFED GROUSE SOCIETY 14914 8740 2011 09 RAC #8 WILDLIFE OPENINGS RUFFED GROUSE SOCIETY 27850 7300 2011 09 RAC #14 WILDLIFE OPENINGS RUFFED GROUSE SOCIETY 678 0 
TABLE A - Page 238 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

2011 09 RAC #12 NNIS COORDINATOR PRI-RU-TA RC&D 12615.56 0 1

2011 09 RAC #16 GRAZING PRI-RU-TA RC&D 42500 0 

RAC #17 NORTHWOODS NORTHWOODS 

COOPERATIVE WEED COOPERATIVE WEED 

2011 09 MANAGEMENT AREA MANAGEMENT AREA 60603.65 28255 8

RAC#2 MTN LAKES ATV 

2011 09 CONNECTER RIVERVIEW, TOWN OF 22040 0 

RAC #4- NICOLET STATE 

TRAIL UPGRADE ON FOREST 

2011 09 SERVICE LAND TOWNSEND, TOWN OF 14600 11600 

ICE AGE NATIONAL SCENIC 

2011 09 TRAIL ICE AGE TRAIL ALLIANCE 49464.48 0 4

RAC #3 PORTABLE DICKINSON 

2011 09 BOATWASH CONSERVATION DISTRICT 40430.97 11556 5

RAC #14 BLUEGILL 

2011 09 IMPOUNDMENT RUFFED GROUSE SOCIETY 2340 1251 

HEART OF THE HIGHLANDS 

SMOKEJUMPERS TRAIL TUCKER COMMUNITY 

2011 09 PROJECT FOUNDATION 3037.25 0 

SRS LIMESTONE TREATMENT 

2011 09 ACCESS WVDNR 36200 0 
TABLE A - Page 239 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

INTERPRETIVE TRAILS & 

2011 09 IMPROVEMENTS AFHA 118112 37100 

WEBSTER COUNTY 

2011 09 TROUT STOCKING PROJECT COMMISSION 154000 0 

TUCKER COUNTY TUCKER COUNTY SCHOOL 

2011 09 GREENHOUSE DISTRICT 110500 0 

WATER RESOURCES TASK POCAHONTAS COUNTY 

2011 09 FORCE COMMISSION 169548 0 

PREVENTING COPPER RIVER DELTA INVASIVE PLANT 

INFESTATIONS WITH RAPID COPPER RIVER 

2011 10 RESEPONSE IN CORDOVA WATERSHED PROJECT 237667 0 

RAC #11-001 KENAI 

PENINSULA WEED AK ASSOC. OF 

2011 10 MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION DISTRICTS 196787 23925 

CORDOVA RD TRAILS 

MAINTENANCE INTERN STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2011 10 MAXID 13392 ASSOCIATION 17581 0 

STATE OF ALASKA, 

STUDENT INTERN PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF 

2011 10 WORK PARTNERSHIP NATURAL RESOURCES 19815 9820 

CHUGACH GLACIER RD- STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2011 10 ECOLOGY CREW ASSOC 14340 0 
TABLE A -Page 240 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

ALICE SMITH TRAIL Southeast Alaska 

2011 10 RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT Guidance Assoc. 220S6 9216 

STATE OF ALASKA, DEPT 

RAC: CROW CREEK BRIDGE OF TRANSPORTATION 

2011 10 DECK REPAIRS AND PUBLIC FACIITIES 23591.92 0 2

WETLAND AND WATERFOWL 

2011 10 CONSERVATION DUCKS UNLIMITED INC. 195362.8 13000 2

RAC: MILE 25 SPAWNING COPPER RIVER 

2011 10 CHANNEL RESTORATION WATERSHED PROJECT 33941 0 

HARRIS RIVER SUBDIVISION THE NATURE 

2011 10 FISH PASSAGE CONSERVANCY 58415.99 0 S

NORTH FORK LAKE 

WATERSHED IMPROVEMENT 

2011 10 PROJECT CITY OF CRAIG 27SOOO 0 2011 10 NOLAN CENTER CITY OF WRANGELL 21582.42 0 2

RAC- WRANGELL BEAR FEST 

2011 10 ENHANCEMENT BEARFEST COMMITIEE 24600 0 

PETERSBURG VISITOR PETERSBURG CHAMBER 

2011 10 INFORMATION CENTER OF COMMERCE 2000 0 

RAC- TONGASS RAINFOREST 

2011 10 FESTIVAL ENHANCEMENT PETERSBURG EDC 2799.S 0 
TABLE A- Page 241 

Forest Forest Tota

" Service Service Appli I Proj,...,, "'"'"'"''" 

Year I Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

ALASKA RAINFOREST ISLAND ALASKA RAINFOREST 

2011 10 MARKETING ISLANDS PARTNERSHIP 31670 12372 

EAST CHANNEL PADDLE 

2011 10 CRAFT ACCESS TRAIL CITY OF WRANGELL 16995.84 0 1

CHIEF SHAKES TRIBAL HOUSE WRANGELL COOPERATIVE 

2011 10 RENOVATION ASSOCIATION 50000 83584 

TRI-COUNTY HABITAT 

2010 01 SANITATION PROJECT DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE 45000 3293 

POWELL COUNTY WEED 

SPRAYING GROUND POWELL COUNTY WEED 

2010 01 APPLICATION BOARD 32593 0 

2010 01 RACETRACK CREEK BRIDGE POWELL COUNTY 40000 120363 

RAC: BIRCH CREEK ROAD 

2010 01 REHABILITATION BEAVERHEAD COUNTY 74000 455478 

HELL ROARING/ODELL MONTANA 

2010 01 MOUNTAIN TRAIL PROJECTS CONSERVATION CORPS 36000 0 

CLASSROOM WITHOUT CORVALLIS SCHOOL 

2010 01 WALLS DISTRICT #1 32100 7107 

BITIERROOT TRAIL MONTANA 

2010 01 MAINTENANCE 2010 CONSERVATION CORPS 96068 55688 

. 
TABLE A - Page 242 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appi: Pro

Year Region I Project Title 1 .!\pplicant Name Match Match Fun

SEKLIRK GRIZZLY BEAR 

RECOVERY ZONE IDAHO DEPT OF FISH & 

2010 01 CONSERVATION GAME 213160 319900 

RAC-TRIMBLE JUNO BOUNDARY COUNTY 

2010 01 HANDHELD GPS UNITS NOXIOUS WEED DEPT 4600 2540 

RAC-4X4 PICKUP & ATV BONNER COUNTY WEED 

2010 01 W/SPRAY UNIT/TRAILER DEPT 20900 0 

HERBICIDE -SHOSHONE SHOSHONE COUNTY 

2010 01 COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED DEPT 9797.99 0 

BOUNDARY COUNTY 

2010 01 SUMMER YOUTH PROGRAM SCHOOL DISTRICT 96063.67 26900 12

UNIVERSITY OF IDAHOBEAVER CREEK WATERSHED COOPERATIVE EXTENSION 

2010 01 ASSESSMENT SERVICE 88525.47 8930 9

MEADOWCREEK NOXIOUS CLEARWATER RC&D 

2010 01 WEED TREATMENT- RAC COUNCIL, INC. 17205 8473 

IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF 

2010 01 YOUTH TRAINING PROGRAM LABOR 132395.13 39535 17

BOB MARSHALL 

COORDINATOR FOR TRAIL WILDERNESS 

2010 01 WORK IN THE BMW FOUNDATION 95108 33020.96 12

CONTINENTAL DIVIDE 

2010 01 CDNST RAC PROJECTS TRAIL ALLIANCE 29540.55 0 2
TABLE A -Page 243 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

FLATHEAD COUNTY, 

OFFICE OF EMERGENCY 

2010 01 RAC- RAWS SITE SERVICES 122SO 4800 

BLANKENSHIP ROAD RAC FLATHEAD COUNTY ROAD 

2010 01 PROJECT DEPT 15670 7920 

NORTH FORK ROAD DUST FLATHEAD COUNTY ROAD 

2010 01 ABATEMENT RAC PROJEC DEPT 31500 22000 

RAC SHRUB PLANTING & MONTANA 

2010 01 MONITORING CONSERVATION CORPS 10800 0 

NORTH FORK 

RAC-NORTH FORK NOXIOUS LANDOWNER'S 

2010 01 WEED MAPPING ASSOCIATION 1200 0 

SPOTTED BEAR TRAIL MONTANA 

2010 01 MAINTENANCE 2010 CONSERVATION CORPS 75500 45634 

HY ALITE ROAD 

2010 01 SNOWPLOWING GALLATIN COUNTY 59951.09 24000 8

GNFAC AVALANCHE FRIENDS OF THE 

2010 01 EDUCATION PROGRAM AVALANCHE CENTER 18387.5 18800 

CUTTHROAT POPULATION MONTANA DEPARTMENT 

PROTECTION/BARRIER OF FISH, WILDLIFE & 

2010 01 CONSTRUCTION PROJECT PARKS 112112.5 443880 5

RAC BIG CREEK BALDY LINCOLN COUNTY SNO2010 01 WARMING SHELTER KATS SNOWMOBILE CLUB 65281.71 28219.44 9
TABLE A - Page 244 

Forest Forest Tota

"!:>' "'"""'"" Service Service Appli jProj

Year !Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match Fun

SOUTH FLOWER CR CROSS 

COUNTRY SKI TRAIL AND 

WARMING HUT KOOTENAI CROSS 

2010 01 MAINTENANCE COUNTRY SKI CLUB 44506.46 80563 12

YAAK VALLEY FOREST 

2010 01 RAC-CULVERT MAINTENANCE COUNCIL 14142.6 3375 

TROY SHOOTING RANGE 

2010 01 PHASE 3 RAC Lincoln County 21831 0 

CABINET DISTRIC Lower Clark Fork 

2010 01 WATERSHED RESTORATION Watershed Group 15780 17000 2010 01 QUARTZ CR CHIP SEAL LINCOLN COUNTY 13400 1224 

DEVELOPMENT AND 

MAINTENANCE OF SELECTED CAPITAL TRAIL VEHICLE 

2010 01 RECREATION TRAILS ASSOCIATION 68143.8 57200 1

UPPER FORD CREEK WEED TETON COUNTY 

2010 01 MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT CORP 5800 500 

NOXIOUS WEED LEWIS & CLARK COUNTY 

2010 01 CONTAINMENT SYSTEM WEED DISTRICT 2802.68 5250 

DUCK CREEK TRAVEL TRI-CO FIRESAFE 

2010 ,01 CORRIDOR FIRESAFE PROJECT WORKING GROUP 41634.96 0 4
TABLE A - Page 245 

forest forest Tota

" Service Service Appli 1Proj

'"'!>' "'"'"'"''" 

Year I Region Project Title Armlicant Name Match Match fund

ELKHORN WORKING GROUP 

WEED REDUCTION 

TREATMENTS- GLENDALE BROADWATER COUNTY 

2010 01 BUTTE PHASE WEED DISTRICT 45360 0 

CENTRAL ELKHORNS COOPERATIVE WEED 

MAPPING AND TREATMENT BROADWATER COUNTY 

2010 01 PROJECT WEED DISTRICT 24716.75 0 2

DAVIS GULCH/ARCHERY 

RANGE WEED CONTROL 

2010 01 PROJECT CITY OF HELENA 2235 18125 

2010 01 RAC FISH CREEK WEEDS TROUT UNLIMITED INC 9990 115128 

MCC NINEMILE SCHLEY MTN. MONTANA 

2010 01 TRAIL CONSERVATION CORPS 11489 5569 

BITTER ROOT RESOURCE 

2010 VOLUNTEER AND CONSERVATION & 

2010 01 INTERNSHIP PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AREA, INC. 75896 59948 

2010 01 IDAHO COUNTY COVE ROAD IDAHO COUNTY 175000 389542.12 56

CLEARWATER HIGHWAY 

2010 01 MUSSELLSHELL ROAD DISTRICT 95238 531258 
TABLE A - Page 246 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

FOREST TOURS FOR EDUCATORS AND OPINION 

2010 01 LEADERS IDAHO FOREST PROJECTS 18885 245800 

ROADSIDE NOXIOUS WEED DEER CREEK HIGHWAY 

2010 01 CONTROL DISTRICT 6574.13 2384.1 

IDAHO COUNTY BIO2010 01 CONTROL IDAHO COUNTY 41515 10050 

SBW TRAILS AFFECTED BY MONTANA 

2010 01 FIRE CONSERVATION CORPS 91943.16 52992 142010 01 UPPER SALMON ROAD IDAHO COUNTY 125907.64 43520 16

DEER CREEK HIGHWAY 

2010 01 KURRY CREEK CRUSHING DISTRICT 61406.87 63000 12

GRANGEVILLE SALMON 

SURFACE REPAIR AND CHIP 

2010 01 SEAL IDAHO COUNTY 62613 51000 

DCC OFF-GROUNDS WORK DELTA CORRECTIONAL 

2010 02 PROGRAM CENTER 72439 60897.04 13

EAST FORK ENCAMPMENT 

2010 02 RIVER WEIR TROUT UNLIMITED 99853.48 87027.3 18

FOLSOM WATER DELIVERY FOLSOM VOLUNTEER FIRE 

2010 02 SYSTEM DEPARTMENT 32300 0 

WOOD STRAW- PUTTING IT PURE WOOD PRODUCTS, 

2010 03 TO USE LLC 14253 20000 
TABLE A- Page 247 

Forest Forest Tota

" Service Service Appli Proj

"!>' "'"'"'"'" 

Year !Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

MOGOLLON RIM 

CHIRICAHUA LEOPARD FROG 

MANAGEMENT-CONTROL OF ARIZONA GAME & FISH 

2010 03 NON-NATIVE SPECIES DEPARTMENT 22410.29 11652 3

COUNTY ROAD 3141 APACHE COUNTY PUBLIC 

2010 03 (CR3140) WORKS DEPARTMENT 57000 15000 

AGGRESSIVE WEED 

MANAGEMENT ON A_S NFS- UTILE COLORADO RIVER 

2010 03 PHASE II PLATEAU RC&D 72630 0 

NORTHERN ARIZONA 

WOOD PRODUCTS 

2010 03 SURVIVING THE RECESSION ASSOCIATION 71350 0 

FIRE ESCAPE ROUTE FOR PINETOP AND PINETOP 

LAKES HOME OWNERS NAVAJO COUNTY PUBLIC 

2010 03 ASSOCIATION COMMUNITIES WORKS DEPARTMENT 33036.4 35000 

NAVAJO COUNTY PUBLIC 

2010 03 PINEDALE ROAD CHIP SEAL WORKS DEPARTMENT 50000 42500 

PORTER MOUNTAIN ROAD NAVAJO COUNTY PUBLIC 

2010 03 CHIP SEAL WORKS 75000 55000 
TABLE A - Page 248 

Forest Forest Tota

" Service Service Appl: 

1

Proj

"I>'"'"'""'" .. 

Year I Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match I Fun

GILA COUNTY 

SOUTHERN GILA COUNTY EMERGENCY 

COMMUNITY WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT AND 

2010 03 PROTECTION PLAN HEALTH PREPAREDNESS 35700 9895 

PINEDALE ROAD (FR 129) NAVAJO COUNTY PUBLIC 

2010 03 CHIP SEAL II WORKS DEPARTMENT 65000 42500 

COUNTY ROAD 3140 APACHE COUNTY PUBLIC 

2010 03 (CR3140) II WORKS 60000 15000 

SPRINGERVILLE RD- MOUNT 

BALDY WILDERNESS TRAILS COCONINO COMMUNITY 

2010 03 2010 SERVICES- CREC 18804.62 7764.18 

THE COHNVILLE TRAIL 

2010 03 COOPERATIVE NEPA PROJECT YAVAPAI COUNTY 45501.69 33348 7

ACE- SUPPLEMENTAL ACE- AMERICAN 

PROJECT AGREEMENT FOR CONSERVATION 

2010 03 FOREST-WIDE TRAIL WORK EXPERIENCE 167754 87810.77 25

CHIRICAHUA LEOPARD FROG 

2010 03 HEAD-STARTING PROGRAM THE PHOENIX ZOO 42600 10700 

THE TOWN OF STAR 

2010 03 THE STAR WARS PROJECT VALLEY 7483.19 4785 1
TABLE A -Page 249 

Forest forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

AMERICORPS MEMBER PALOUSE-CLEARWATER 

ENVIROMENTAL EDUCATION ENVIROMENTAL 

2010 04 TECHNICIAN INSTITUTE 8512.4 4308.2 

SQUAW VALLEY ROAD 

2010 04 REPAIR RAC #10008 GEM COUNTY 115605.4 8500 1

TO DEVELOP NATIVE PLANT SOUTHERN UTAH 

2010 04 MATERIALS UNIVERSITY 422762 5000 

INTERACTIONS BETWEEN 

WINTER RECRATION USE 

AND WOLVERINES IN WEST- ROUND RIVER 

2010 04 CENTRAL IDAHO CONSERVATION STUDIES 1590106.8 422257.48 20

RAC 10108 BOULDER CREEK VALLEY COUNTY 

2010 04 NATURAL AREA PATHWAYS 32808.77 0 3

RAC 10112 & 11PNF020M COUNCIL SCHOOL 

COUNCIL SCHOOL STREAM DISTRICT (RAC 

2010 04 ECOLOGY 10112/11PNF020M) 13230 0 

ID POWER -INDIAN CREEK 

CULVERT REPLACEMENT Idaho Power Company, 

2010 04 WITH BRIDGE Inc. 71500 80000 

SCA -11655 MONUMENTAL, STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2010 04 MILK CREEK TRAILS ASSOCIATION, INC. 23316 4510 

2010 AND 2011 KRASSEL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 04 DISTRICT TRAIL PROJECTS CORPS 150525.7 94637.51 24
TABLE A - Page 250 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl; Proj

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

2010/2011 DEFERRED TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 04 MAINTENANCE CORPS 31338.32 24358.28 

CRESTLINE TRAIL #109 HEAVY NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 04 MAINTENANCE CORPS 15650.13 12179.34 2

RAC 10104 ELK CREEK ROAD 

2010 04 REHAB VALLEY COUNTY 135344.7 0 1

TRAIL CREEK DUST LOST RIVER HIGHWAY 

2010 04 ABATEMENT DISTRICT 60500 0 

BUTTE COUNTY BUTTE COUNTY 

DEPARTMENT OF NOXIOUS DEPARTMENT OF 

2010 04 WEEDS NOXIOUS WEEDS 143107.14 39043.64 18

IDAHO DEPT OF PARKS & IDAHO DEPT OF PARKS & 

RECREATION- LAND OF THE RECREATION -LAND OF 

2010 04 YANKEE FORK STATE PARK THE YANKEE FORK 40447.24 0 4

YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2010 04 TRAIL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM, INC. 84511.56 23416.38 10

YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2010 04 SLASH PROGRAM, INC. 34539.81 0 3

SALMON VALLEY 

2010 04 HUGHES CREEK STEWARDSHIP 20000 5550 

SALMON VALLEY 

2010 04 ASPEN INVENTORY STEWARDSHIP 4000 4230 
TABLE A - Page 251 

Forest forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match fun

RAC-CONIFER REMOVAL SALMON VALLEY 

2010 04 ASPEN BREAKS PROJECT STEWARDSHIP 20000 3000 

MINE HILL ROAD LOST RIVER HIGHWAY 

2010 04 IMPROVEMENTS DISTRICT 54000 0 

RAC 8-0005 BLAINE COUNTY 

TRAILS AND PATHS WEB BLAINE COUNTY 

2010 04 PAGE RECREATION DISTRICT 13217.95 0 1

2010 04 NOXIOUS WEED FREMONT COUNTY IDAHO 5000 3144 

OHV EDUCATION AND 

2010 04 MONITORING MADISON COUNTY 5000 5000 

MASTER- ST. ANTHONY 

2010 04 WORK CAMP STATE OF IDAHO- SAWC 52440.7 7335.5 

RAC GRANT CUB RIVER 

2010 04 BACKCOUNTY WEED Franklin County 4900 700 

RAC -BEAR RIVER 

2010 04 BACKCOUNTRY WEEDS FRANKLIN COUNTY 33070 15000 

HANDICPPED ACCESSIBLE 

2010 04 CAMPING FACILITY Bear River RC&D 17373.18 1800 1

RAC- WORM CREEK WATER BEAR LAKE CADLE 

2010 04 SYTEM ASSOCIATION 10875 10102.4 

RAC- GREEN CANYON BEAR LAKE CADLE 

2010 04 WATERSYTEM ASSOCIATION 12070 8020 
TABLE A -Page 252 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

STODDARD MILL KIDS HENRY'S FORK 

2010 04 FISHING POND FOUNDATION 16650 7000 

HENRY'S FORK 

2010 04 HENRY'S LAKE OUTLET FOUNDATION 12000 9500 2010 04 RAC-MONIDA PASS TRAIL CDT ALLIANCE 14175 4975 

RAC -WALKER CREEK 

2010 04 STABILIZATION NORTHWEST PIPELINE GP 10000 12000 

RAC-TOM'S AND FISH CREEK HENRY'S FORK 

2010 04 RESTORATION FOUNDATION 51500 12500 

BACK COUNTRY 

HORSEMEN OF 

PACIFIC CREST TRAIL (PCT) CALIFORNIA, TOP OF THE 

2010 05 OPENING MAINTENANCE STATE UNIT 30000 92245.75 12

SEIAD FIRE SAFE COUNCIL 

WATER DEVELOPMENT NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

2010 05 PROJECT RESOURCE CENTER 25070 9500 

SCOTIVALLEY MULTIPLE 

MUNICIPALITIES WILDLAND NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

2010 05 FIRE PROTECTION PROJECT RESOURCE CENTER 169750 28000 

BIG MEADOWS & KIDDER MASON, BRUCE & 

2010 05 CREEK ROAD MAINTENANCE GIRARD, INC. 150896.89 15000 16

MT. SHASTA VIST FIRE 

2010 05 WATER STORAGE TANKS COMPANY 56481.13 7100 6
TABLE A -Page 253 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

KLAMATH YOUTH MID KLAMATH 

2010 OS STEWARDSHIP PROJECT WATERSHED COUNCIL 23829 28S74 

OTOLITH MICROCHEMISTRY SHASTA VALLEY 

OF COHO AND CHINOOK RESOURCE 

2010 OS SALMON CONSERVATION DISTRICT 297S.S8 2S480 2

SISKIYOU SHERIFF'S PROJECT SISKIYOU COUNTY FIRE 

2010 OS CREW WARDEN 3SOOO 98000 

2010 WORKABILITY HIGH 

SCHOOL PROGRAM ON SISKIYOU COUNTY OFFICE 

2010 OS SALMON/SCOTT RIVERS OF EDUCATION 17369.S8 26324.66 4

2010/2011- SALMON RIVER 

RESTORATION NOXIOUS SALMON RIVER 

2010 OS WEED TREATMENTS RESTORATION COUNCIL 231S7.07 S100.19 2

FOREST HEALTH PROJECTS NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

2010 OS ON GOOSEN EST RESOURCE CENTER S6961.32 14040 7

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT 

ROUND MOUNTAIN FUEL OF FORESTRY AND FIRE 

2010 OS REDUCTION PROJECT PROTECTION 20823.72 18SOO 3

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT 

CANYON VIEW LOOP WATER OF FORESTRY AND FIRE 

2010 OS TANK PROJECT PROTECTION 8431.76 S62S 1
TABLE A - Page 254 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match Fun

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT 

PAYNES CREEK SPORTSMAN'S OF FORESTRY AND FIRE 

2010 OS CLUB WATER TANK PROTECTION 9907.69 S900 1

LASSEN COUNTY 

RESOURCES AGAINST WEEDS DEPARTMENT OF 

2010 OS (RAW) AGRICULTURE 79S9l.S2 134S90 21

WESTERN LASSEN COUNTY 

SCOTCH THISTLE AND 

PERENNIAL PEPPERWEED 

ERADICATION AND FALL RIVER RESOURCE 

2010 OS EDUCATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION DISTRICT 247SO 12100 

SUNFLOWER CRMP FUEL Cottonwood Creek 

2010 OS REDUCTION- 2010 Watershed Group 48400 soooo 

MENDOCINO COUNTY ECONOMIC 

WOODY BIOMASS WORKING DEVELOPMENT AND 

2010 OS GROUP FEASI FINANCE CORPORATION sooo 117SO 

TAKE BACK THE FOREST, WILLITS ENVIRONMENTAL 

2010 OS PHASE I CENTER 42239 16200 

PYLE ROAD BROOM WEST LAKE RESOURCE 

2010 OS ERADICATION PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 3494S.19 6806.2 4
TABLE A - Page 255 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL Glenn County Department 

2010 05 PROJECT 2010 of Agriculture 26929.27 8374 3

CEDAR PASS SNOW PARK 

2010 05 PROJECT CEDAR PASS SNOW PARK 4500 6000 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

MODOC FORESTRY INSTITUTE SOCIETY OF AMERICAN 

2010 05 FOR TEACHERS FORESTERS 7660 7660 

MODOC COUNTY 

A RATED NOXIOUS WEED AGRICULTURAL 

2010 05 ERADICATION DEPARTMENT 80000 80000 

AVANZINO FENCE 

2010 05 CONSTRUCTION PIT RIVER TRIBE 9699.75 4610 1

TRINITY COUNTY DEPT OF 

2010 05 MULE BRIDGE PROJECT TRANSPO RTAIO N 10445.05 0 1

2010 YCC CREW LEADER 

TRAINEE AT MAD RIVER WATERSHED RESEARCH 

2010 05 RANGER DISTRICT AND TRAINING CENTER 14777.23 2494.66 1

FUELS REDUCTION- MAD 

RIVER ADMIN THIN PROJECT BRIDGEVILLE COMMUNITY 

2010 05 AREA CENTER 36841.69 7903.49 4

GREENHORN CREEK PLUMAS CORPORATION, 

2010 05 WATERSHED RESTORATION FEATHER RIVER CRM 71060 25990 
TABLE A - Page 256 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! 

Year Region I Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match 

MOUNT ELWELL TRAIL SIERRA BUTTES TRAIL 

2010 OS RESTORATION STEWARDSHIP 88480 22639.S 1

GENESEE VALLEY FOREST 

2010 OS REHABILITATION ROBERT BECKWITH 27SOO 148SS 

GREENVILLE NATURAL SIERRA INSTITUTE FOR 

RESOURCE ACADEMY & COMMUNITY 

2010 OS MOONLIGHT FIRE STUDY ENVIRONMENT 48680 20000 

MONARCH WILDERNESS- HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2010 OS KANAWYER TRAIL TRAIL CREW 12664 0 

TRINITY COUNTY 

RESOURCE 

2010 OS SUMMER FIELD CAMP CONSERVATION DISTRICT 817S 12047 

2010 AWE STEWARDSHIP ASCEND WILDERNESS 

2010 OS PROJECT EXPERIENCE 24400 772S 

BACK COUNTRY 

OPENING TRAIL HORSEMEN OF 

MAINTENANCE ON THE PCT CALIFORNIA-TOP OF THE 

2010 OS PLUS FEEDER TRAILS STATE UNIT 26824.76 S0130 7

TRINITY COUNTY WEED 

MANAGMENT COOPERATIVE 

2010 OS EDUCATIONAL OUTREACH COUNTY OF TRINITY 2600 0 
TABLE A - Page 257 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I ProjectTitle 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

2010 05 BLM STEWARDSHIP PROJECT BLM 131551.83 0 13

HAYFORK YOUTH CREW WATERSHED RESEARCH 

2010 05 WEED REMOVAL 2010 AND TRAINING CENTER 19684.2 0 

2010 05 CCC WEED REMOVAL 2010 CA CONSERVATION CORPS 25200 0 

INDIAN VALLEY SUMMER WATERSHED RESEARCH 

2010 05 CAMP AND TRAINING CENTER 110191.07 90412.79 20

TRINITY COUNTY 

CARVILLE ROAD DYER'S RESOURCE 

2010 05 WOAD REMOVAL PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 41280 11186 

TRINITY COUNTY 

SFMU RATILESNAKE CREEK RESOURCE 

2010 05 UPGRADE CONSERVATION DISTRICT 81885 84777 

SIERRA RESOURCE 

PUBLIC DRINKING WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT2010 05 SYSTEM 017 9500 0 

SRCD/BCHC SAN JOAQUIN 

SIERRA UNIT BACKCOUNTRY SIERRA RESOURCE 

2010 05 WORK PROJECTS CONSERVATION DISTRICT 6717.36 0 
TABLE A - Page 258 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region Project Title I Applicant Name Match Match Fun

HUNTINGTON LAKE AREA HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2010 OS TRAILS TRAIL CREW 36S4 0 

JOHN MUIR WILDERNESS- HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2010 OS PACIFIC CREST TRAIL TRAIL CREW 21966 0 

HANDS ON THE LAND USDI, BUREAU OF LAND 

2010 OS SUMMER SCIENCE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 41148 0 

CRABTREE ROAD (4N26) BACKCOUNTRY 

RESTORATION AND HORSEMEN OF 

2010 OS MAINTENANCE PROJECT CALIFORNIA, INC. 119640 49680 

EAGLE MEADOW HORSE 

CAMP ROAD/EROSION 

2010 OS CONTROL PROJECT TWAIN HARTE HORSEMEN 14600 4380 

TUOLUMNE COUNTY 

FOREST AND RIPARIAN ALLIANCE FOR RESOURCES 

2010 OS EDUCATION TOURS AND ENVIRONMENT 43SOO 0 

MT. ELIZABETH DRIVE HIGHWAY 108 FIRE SAFE 

2010 OS SHADED FUEL BREAK COUNCIL 122S2 2200 

LOWER YANKEE HILL SHADED HIGHWAY 108 FIRE SAFE 

2010 OS FUEL BREAK COUNCIL 3817S S200 

DEFENSIBLE SPACE CURB2010 OS SIDE CHIPPING PROGRAM ALPINE COUNTY 9800 0 
TABLE A - Page 259 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Proj

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

ERADICATION OF YELLOW 

STAR THISTLE AND OTHER 

NOXIOUS WEEDS IN THE 

2010 OS MERCED RIVER CANYON COUNTY OF MARIPOSA 19984 1SS12.59 3

TITLE II RAC PROJECTDOWNIEVILLE TRAIL SIERRA BUTIES TRAIL 

2010 OS RESTORATION STEWARDSHIP 3S263.18 11700 4

COOPERATIVE NOXIOUS OREGON DEPT. OF 

2010 06 WEED CONTROL AGRICULTURE 1018930 742279 

HOM FOREST 

2010 06 MANAGEMENT, PHASE I HIGH DESERT MUSEUM 47SOO sooo 

FUEL/FIRE REDUCTION ON 

2010 06 METOLIUS DESCHUTES LAND TRUST 38000 1919S 

NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 06 SUTILE LAKE TRAIL CORPS 23826.42 12179.12 3

HOC JOB TRAINING 

2010 06 PROGRAM HEART OF OREGON CORPS 3147S7.03 170S68.46 48

NATIONAL FOREST 

2010 06 WHYCHUS TRAILS FOUNDATION 41280.5S 17390 S

LANDBIRD MONITORING KLAMATH Bl RD 

2010 06 AND CONSERVATION OBSERVATORY S996S.74 16383.1 7

COLLIER STATE PARKS FUELS OREGON STATE PARKS 

2010 06 REDUCTION AND RECREATION 99901.67 86393 18
TABLE A - Page 260 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl1 Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

KLAMATH RIVER WEED KLAMATH WATERSHED 

2010 06 ERADICATION PARTNERSHIP 18538.66 0 1

KLAMATH COUNTY BARK OREGON DEPARTMENT OF 

2010 06 BEETLE MITIGATION PROJECT FORESTRY 310500 0 

JUNIPER CONTROL ROAD 

IMPROVEMENT TO BULLARD 

2010 06 CANYON WATERSHED TOWN OF LAKEVIEW 45000 9125 

BRIDGE CREEK SLASH BUREAU OF LAND 

2010 06 BUSTING MANAGEMENT 17814.7 0 

VEGETATION MANAGEMENT 

2010 06 ON BLACK DRAKE RANCH USFWS- KLAMATH 19140 0 

LAKE COUNTY 

LAKE COUNTY WEED COOPERATIVE WEED 

2010 06 MANAGEMENT PROJECT MANAGEMENT AREA 379952.6 394029 7

CAMP COTIONWOOD 

THINNING AND HAZARDOUS DOC WARNER CREEK 

2010 06 FUELS REDUCTION CORRECTIONAL FACILITY 4980 16346.16 2

JACK CREEK MEADOW NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 06 RESTORATION CORPS 21453.58 0 2
TABLE A - Page 261 

forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl; Proj

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

TEENS AND TRAILSCROOKED CREEK TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 06 REHAB CORPS 27275.94 18464.51 4

COWLITZ VALLEY ROAD 

MAINTENANCE AND 

2010 06 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PINCHOT PARTNERS 31999 0 

COLLABORATIVE CAVE BEAR 

2010 06 CREEK GPTASK FORCE 43310 6900 

VISITOR INFO CENTER SKAMANIA COUNTY 

2010 06 STAFFING CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 24127.72 93471 11

SKAMANIA COUNTY SNOWPLOW FOR SKAMANIA COUNTY 

2010 06 RECREATION PUBLIC WORKS 105000 51654 

NATURAL RESOURCES YOUTH NATURAL RESOURCES 

2010 06 CAMP YOUTH CAMP 14000 46020 2010 06 BEAR CREEK SKAMANIA COUNTY EDC 23207 0 

KLICKITAT COUNTY 

CONTROL SPREAD OF NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL 

2010 06 HOUNDSTONGUE BOARD 57165.18 307226 36

FOREST STUDENT SUCCESS PROGRAM ON THE GIFFORD STEVENSON-CARSON 

2010 06 PINCHOT NF SCHOOL DISTRICT 793676.61 373157.68 11
TABLE A -Page 262 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

MALHEUR NF ALLOTMENT GRANT SOIL & WATER 

2010 06 IMPROVEMENT CONSERVATION DISTRICf 399709 0 

MIDDLE FORK JOHN DAY 

RIVER RESTORATION 

2010 06 PROJECT (GR-MAL09-007) THE FRESHWATER TRUST 38348S 0 

JD WATERSHED PROJECf GRANT COUNTY SOIL & 

2010 06 PHASE Ill WATER CONSERVATION S10S90 0 

COOPERATIVE BIG-CONTROL GRANT SOIL & WATER 

2010 06 COLLECTION CONSERVATION DISTRICf 3740 0 

MAINTENANCE OF COUNTY GRANT SOIL & WATER 

2010 06 ROADS FOR NOXIOUS WEEDS CONSERVATION DISTRICf 63230 0 

2010 OREGON YOUTH 

CONSERVATION CORP TRAINING AND 

SUMMER TRAINING/WORK EMPLOYMENT 

2010 06 PROGRAM/WORK PROGRAM CONSORTIUM (TEC) 100966.67 43711.06 14

PUBLIC LANDS & FRIENDS OF THE TRAIL, 

2010 06 WATERWAYS CLEAN UPS INCORPORATED 163262.3S 64509 22

WASHINGTON TRAILS WASHINGTON TRAILS 

2010 06 ASSOCIATION CREW LEADERS ASSOCIATION 215666.45 357875.67 57
TABLE A -Page 263 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

PACIFIC NW NATIONAL PACIFIC NORTHWEST 

2010 06 SCENIC TRAIL MAINTENANCE TRAIL ASSOCIATION 225476.64 107448 33

ENVIRONMENTAL 

STEWARDSHIP, WATERSHED 

ENHANCEMENT, AND MOUNTAINS TO SOUND 

2010 06 CONSERVATION EDUCATION GREENWAY TRUST 132610.76 269388 40

WHATCOM COUNTY 

OFFENDER FORESTRY WORK WHATCOM COUNTY 

2010 06 CREW SHERIFF'S OFFICE 471709.32 411865.98 8

MIDDLE AND SOUTH FORK 

SNOQUALMIE NOXIOUS MOUNTAINS TO SOUND 

2010 06 WEEDS GREENWAY TRUST 23643.24 12255 3

UTILE ZIGZAG RIVER MT. HOOD KIWANIS 

2010 06 RESTORATION PHASE 2 CAMP, INC. 34205 15000 

WASCO COUNTY SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION 

2010 06 WAMIC CULVERT DISTRICT 40822.28 8925 4

CLACKAMAS STEWARDSHIP CLACKAMAS COUNTY SOIL 

PARTNERS COORDINATOR AND WATER 

2010 06 POSITION CONSERVATION DISTRICT 27000 5000 
TABLE A - Page 264 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 

1

Proj

Year I Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match Fun

CASCADE PACIFIC 

RESOURCE 

BUILDING EFFECTIVE WEED CONSERVATION & 

2010 06 CONTROL PROGRAMS DEVELOPMENT 11950 40018 

CLACKAMAS STEWARDSHIP GIFFORD PINCHOTTASK 

2010 06 PARTNERS DIRECTOR FORCE 189000 40926 

ILLEGAL DUMPING Clackamas County Parks & 

2010 06 PREVENTION AND CLEANUP Forest, Forest Program 319380 75250 

CLEAR BRANCH DAM FISH MIDDLE FORK IRRIGATION 

2010 06 PASSAGE FEASIBILITY STUDY DISTRICT 67882.46 30096.6 9

EAST FORK IRRIGATION 

2010 06 EFID HEADWORKS DESIGN DISTRICT 199957 13350 

WOLF RUN IRRIGATION 

2010 06 WOLF RUN- CARVER PIPELINE COOPERATIVE, INC. 19900 0 

CR WATERSHED WEED CROOKED RIVER WEED 

2010 06 CONTROL MGMTAREA 332770 406281.95 73

JEFFERSON COUNTY WEED JEFFERSON COUNTY 

2010 06 CONTROL PUBLIC WORKS 23750 85000 

CROOK COUNTY WEED 

,2010 06 COUNTY PROPERTIES CONTROL 5984.75 0 
TABLE A - Page 265 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL 

ON THE OCHOCO & NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 06 DESCHUTES NF CORPS 69283.6S 48716.56 11

HYDROLOGY INTERN, STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2010 06 POSITION # 11544 ASSOCIATION 10843.36 11S94 2

INVASIVE PLANT INVENTORY 

2010 06 AND CONTROL HEART OF OREGON CORPS 7149.45 4793.1 1

ELK CREEK HABITAT NORTH OLYMPIC LAND 

2010 06 RESTORATION TRUST 54097.56 0 5

UPPER QUINAULT RIVER QUINAULT INDIAN 

2010 06 RESTORATION PAS NATION 164621 0 

JEFFERSON CO. SKY- PNT 

TRAIL DEVELOPMENT AND PACIFIC NORTHWEST 

2010 06 MAINTENANCE TRAIL ASSOCIATION 109788.81 104S84 21

QUILCENE RANGER CORPSPNT TRAIL DEVELOPMENT PACIFIC NORTHWEST 

2010 06 AND MAINTENANCE TRAIL ASSOCIATION 143047.2 94398.5 2

CLALLAM SKY- PNT TRAIL 

DEVELOPMENT AND PACIFIC NORTHWEST 

2010 06 MAINTENANCE TRAIL ASSOCIATION 132648.87 130597 26

WASHINGTON 4-H JEFFERSON COUNTY, 

2010 06 STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM WASHINGTON 108847.31 39835 14
TABLE A - Page 266 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

UTILE QUILCENE JUVENILE HOOD CANAL SALMON 

2010 06 SALMON TRAP ENHANCEMENT GROUP 14600 22150 

DUCKABUSH RIVER WILD 

STEELHEAD 

SUPPLEMENTATION AND 

2010 06 MONITORING LONG LIVE THE KINGS 53780 126424 

MASON COUNTY NOXIOUS MASON COUNTY 

WEED INVENTORY AND (NOXIOUS WEED 

2010 06 TREATMENT CONTROL BOARD) 172985.93 68713.94 24

CLALLAM COUNTY 

2010 06 CHAIN GANG PROJECT SHERIFF 243541.37 238881.96 48

WASHINGTON STATE 

DEPARTMENT OF 

WCC FORESTWIDE CREW ECOLOGY-- WASHINGTON 

2010 06 2011 CONSERVATION CORPS 108793 100000 

AUTOMATED SMOKE 

DETECTION SYSTEM-BALD COOS FOREST PROTECTIVE 

2010 06 KNOB ASSOCIATION 21960 1000 

ECOLOGICAL MONITORING:ASHLAND KLAMATH BIRD 

2010 06 WATERSHED FUELS PROJECT OBSERVATORY 13493 0 
TABLE A -Page 267 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

THOMPSON CREEK SW OREGON RESOURCE 

IRRIGATION ASSOCIATION CONSERVATION & 

2010 06 O'BRIEN DITCH PIPE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL 11671 1300 

EARLY WEED DETECTION & 

RAPID RESPONSE, 

WINCHUCK / CHETCO CURRY SOIL & WATER 

2010 06 KNOTWEED CONSERVATION DISTRICT 53496 22171 

2010 AOP RECREATION JOSEPHINE COUNTY 

2010 06 PATROLS SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT 58750 0 

CHETCO/GOLD BEACH 

DISTRICT LANDSCAPING AND CURRY COUNTY JUVENILE 

2010 06 MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT 14093 38923.52 5

LOWER ROGUE RIVER TRAIL LOWER ROGUE 

2010 06 IMPROVEMENT WATERSHED COUNCIL 9861.83 5814 1

COMMUNITY SERVICE COOS COUNTY 

2010 06 FOREST WORK CREWS COMMUNITY SERVICE 41382.38 102801.5 14

KALMIOPSIS WILDERNESS 

TRAIL & ILLINOIS RIVER TRAIL 

2010 06 SYSTEM MAINTENANCE NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 26740.98 21313.5 4

GOLD BEACH & POWERS 

HIGH PRIORITY TRAILS AND 

LOWER ROGUE RIVER TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 06 IMPROVEMENTS CORPS 56384.51 42626.99 
TABLE A -Page 268 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

ROADSIDE BRUSHING, 

RESOURCE PROTECTION AND JACKSON COUNTY 

2010 06 ROAD SAFETY COMMUNITY JUSTICE 51725.25 55674.75 

JACKSON COUNTY 

2010 06 JCO ADULT WORK CREW COMMUNITY JUSTICE 46951.94 50849.61 9

ROADSIDE BRUSHING, RESOURCE PROTECTION AND JOSEPHINE COUNTY 

2010 06 ROAD SAFETY COMM JUSTICE 27968.44 25760.1 5

LINCOLN COUNTY INVASIVE LINCOLN SOIL AND WATER 

2010 06 SPECIES CONTROL PROGRAM CONSERVATION DISTRICT 94000 39446 

IDENTIFY/ CLEAN UP ILLEGAL CLEAN FOREST PROJECT, 

2010 06 DUMPSITES INC 29999.78 2719.6 3

PAYCO- FIDDLE CREEK 

STREAM ENHANCEMENT 

2010 06 PROJECT 09-LA-009 SIUSLAW SWCD 68433 6750 

YOUTH, COMMUNITY LINCOLN COUNTY, 

2010 06 SERVICE TRASH COLLECTION JUVENILE DEPARTMENT 108925 6100 

MARY'S PEAK TRAIL 

MAINTENANCE AND BRIDGE NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 06 REPLACEMENT CORPS 21508.97 19597.92 4

SAND LAKE HAZARDOUS NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 06 FUELS REDUCTION CORPS 18019.53 0 1
TABLE A- Page 269 

forest forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl; 1Proj

Year !Region Project Title Armlirant Name Match Match ;fund

HART'S COVE AND CASCADE NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 06 HEAD TRAIL MAINTENANCE CORPS 15668.99 0 1

COORDINATED WEED CONTROL IN THE WALLOWA 

2010 06 CANYON LANDS WALLOWA RESOURCES 92905 128000 

INDIGO/DIXON 

INTERAGENCY BIG GAME OREGON DEPARTMENT OF 

2010 06 ENHANCEMENT FISH AND WILDLIFE 32902.54 0 3

DOUGLAS COUNTY JUVENILE DOUGLAS COUNTY 

2010 06 RESTORATION WORK CREW JUVENILE DEPARTMENT 46000 27684 

SOUTH UMPQUA 

COOPERATIVE BEAVER PARTNERSHIP FOR THE 

2010 06 REINTRODUCTION PROJECT UMPQUA RIVERS 38050 79269.93 11

BIG GAME FORAGE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF 

2010 06 ENHANCEMENT PROJECT FISH & WILDLIFE 98018 14047 

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL & Douglas Soil & Water 

2010 06 MANAGEMENT Conservation District 140227 53345.8 1

NORTH UMPQUA THE NORTH UMPQUA 

2010 06 FISHWATCH FOUNDATION 64505 25200 

LOWER JOSEPH CREEK 

2010 06 WATERSHED ASSESSMENT WALLOWA RESOURCES 80381.91 21900 . 10
TABLE A - Page 270 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

TRAINING AND 

TRAIL MAINTENANCE- EMPLOYMENT 

2010 06 WALLOWA COUNTY YCC CONSORTIUM 28846.88 9690 3

PNNST 4TH OF JULY TRAIL PACIFIC NORTHWEST 

2010 06 SEGMENT MAINTENANCE TRAIL ASSOCIATION 6127.81 15025 2

LONG DRAW TRAIL PACIFIC NORTHWEST 

2010 06 MAINTENANCE TRAIL ASSOCIATION 78400.48 83586 16

LARGE SCALE SITE CLEAN-UP 

ON NATIONAL FOREST 

2010 06 SYSTEM LANDS FRIENDS OF THE TRAIL 88241 57239.52 14

WHISTLER CANYON 

2010 06 TRAILHEAD PHASE! OKANOGAN COUNTY 73610.27 0 7

FYlO RAC CRUPINA CONTROL WASHINGTON 

2010 06 PROJECT CONSERVATION CORPS 87340 25108 

NACHES HABITAT 

IMPROVEMENT & GRAVEL WASHINGTON 

2010 06 SAMPLING CONSERVATION CORPS 72047.8 14950.2 

WENATCHEE RIVER RD TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 06 MTCE & CONST PROJECT CORPS 399172.18 193347.05 59

LANE COUNTY YOUTH 

JUVENILE FOREST WORK SERVICES (MLK EDUC 

2010 06 TEAM CENTER) 504033 72128 
TABLE A - Page 271 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

INVASIVE PLANT REMOVALLOWER MIDDLE FORK MIDDLE FORK 

2010 06 WILLAMETIE WATERSHED COUNCIL 25820 134173 

MIDDLE CALAPOOIA RIVER CALAPOOIA WATERSHED 

2010 06 REACH 2 RESTORATION COUNCIL 55900 2900 

IDENTIFY AND CLEAN UP 

2010 06 ILLEGAL DUMPSITES- LANE CLEAN FOREST PROJECT 40142.04 1262.5 4

AMES CREEK RESTORATION South Santiam Watershed 

2010 06 HW-09-166 Council 31111.48 108510 13

LINN COUNTY WATERSHED 

2010 06 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM LINN COUNTY ROAD DEPT. 73000 0 

FIRE WATER WELL AND 

2010 06 OVERHEAD FILL UPPER MCKENZIE RFPD 39477.09 3000 4

MT HAGEN & COUGAR ROCK Oregon Department of 

AUTOMATED SMOKE Forestry-South Cascade 

2010 06 DETECTION CAMERAS District 19092.39 71478 9

TRAIL WORK IN WALDO LAKE 

AND DIAMOND PEAK NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 06 WILDERNESS AREAS CORPS 23503.66 18268.71 4

LINN COUNTY JUVENILE LINN COUNTY JUVENILE 

2010 06 WORK SERVICE PROGRAM DEPARTMENT 27300 0 

MARION COUNTY SHERIFF'S MARION COUNTY 

2010 06 WORK CENTER PROGRAM SHERIFFS OFFICE 51231.75 104725.5 15
TABLE A -Page 272 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

NON-NATIVE BLACKBERRY 

CONTROL AT CAMAS PRAIRIE NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 06 AND MOOSE MOUNTAIN CORPS 7670.92 0 

CALAPOOYA DIVIDE 

WHIPFELLING & MANUAL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2010 06 WEEDS CORPS, INC 36756.78 0 3

COLUMBIA GORGE WEED EXOTIC SPECIES CONTROL 

2010 06 CONTROL INITATIVE PROJECT 72855 0 

EAST MULTNOMAH SOIL 

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL IN AND WATER 

2010 06 THE COLUMBIA GORGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT 49894 13350 

IDENTIFY AND CLEAN UP ILLEGAL DUMPSITES2010 06 MULTNOMAH CLEAN FOREST PROJECT 17012.93 2724 1

ARKANSAS STATE 

HIGHWAY AND 

TRANSPORTATION 

2010 08 PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT DEPARTMENT 462000 388061 

MONTGOMERY COUNTY 

2010 08 ROAD AGREEMENT JUDGE 116282 0 

2010 08 ROAD AGREEMENT PERRY COUNTY ARKANSAS 64350 0 
TABLE A - Page 273 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region Project Title iApplicant Name Match Match Fun

2010 08 ROAD AGREEMENT MONTGOMERY COUNTY 83000 0 

MONTGOMERY COUNTY 

CAMPGROUND 

2010 08 MAINTENANCE MONTGOMERY COUNTY 636049.37 0 63

COOPERATIVE ROAD CRAWFORD COUNTY, 

2010 08 AGREEMENT ARKANSAS 49880 S9032.16 102010 08 SCHEDULE A- 2010 CRAWFORD COUNTY S1830 9S49S.28 142010 08 ROAD AGREEMENT JOHNSON CO. ARKANSAS 52000 0 

MEDFORD OPENING AND TAYLOR COUNTY 

2010 09 TRAIL SPORTSMAN'S CLUB 25822 3000 

GREATER SITUK 

2010 10 RESTORATION YAKUTAT SALMON BOARD 90219 0 

GREEN'S CAMP 

2010 10 IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF PETERSBURG 95580 71000 

ROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK 

2009 01 RMEF STEWARDSHIP SPA FOUNDATION, INC. 181274.94 59186.52 24

LIDAR- DATA & MAPPING 

2009 01 PROJECT RAVALLI COUNTY 172309 114000 

LOST HORSE CANYON REC BITTERROOT CLIMBERS' 

2009 01 SITE IMPROVMENTS COALITION 3345 1989 

HEALTHY FORESTS HEALTHY 

2009 01 KIDS BITTER ROOT RC&D 154507 87918 
TABLE A- Page 274 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

BITIERROOT FLOATING RAVALLI COUNTY WEED 

2009 01 WEED PULL DISTRICf 4000 8310 

SKALKAHO STREAM 

2009 01 RESTORATION RAC PROJECf GREGORY CHESTER 3800 14831 

CFLRP WEED MONITORING & MONTANA 

2009 01 MAPPING CONSERVATION CORP 316463 154528 

ARRA #WFM-0103 SWIFT ROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK 

2009 01 CREEK STEWARDSHIP FOUNDATION 319414 33000 

SHOSHONE COUNTY 

2009 01 YOUTH CREW SUPERVISOR PUBLIC WORKS DEPT 5632 15840 

PULASKI GROUP- A&E GREATER WALLACE 

DESIGN SPECS FOR PULASKI ECONOMIC 

2009 01 TUNNEL/LOOKOUT DEVELOPMENT CORP. 17800 5000 

GRADUATESTUDENT-CDA 

2009 01 RIVER MGMT PLAN UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO 10000 25000 

BOUNDARY COUNTY 

2009 01 PORTABLE SPRAY SYSTEM WEED DEPARTMENT 18250 9900 

RAC-NEW TRUCK FOR 

2009 01 HERBICIDE SPRAYING BENEWAH COUNTY 28000 15400 

SHOSHONE COUNTY 

2009 01 PARKING AREA & TOILETS SPORTMENS ASSOCIATION 80000 85520 
TABLE A -Page 275 

forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

2009 01 SUMMIT TRAIL RAC PROJECT FLATHEAD FAT TIRES 20100 14125 

2009 01 FAMILY FORESTRY EXPO Family Forestry Expo 51800 87000 

MONTANA STATE 

UNIVERSITY, EXTENSION 

2009 01 PROJECT LEARNING TREE RAC FORESTRY 2353 1775 

NORTH FORK ROAD FLATHEAD COUNTY ROAD 

2009 01 GRAVELLING RAC PROJEC DEPT 113000 0 

TALLY LAKE WATER QUALITY 

& AQUATIC NUISANCE 

2009 01 SPECIES Whitefish Lake Institute 34600 3700 

MIDDLE+ NORTH FORK MONTANA FISH, WILDLIFE 

2009 01 RIVER WEEDS & PARKS 54185.32 5960 6

NATIONAL RECREATION+ MONTANA 

2009 01 SCENIC TRAIL MAINTENCE CONSERVATION CORPS 27929 45812 

Montana Conservation 

2009 01 SPOTIED BEAR RIVER TRAILS Corps 47124 15400 

TRAIL MAINTENANCE- MONTANA 

2009 01 ELKCALF & LONG CREEK RAC CONSERVATION CORPS 25669 6069 

TURNER MTN SKI SIGNS & Kootenai Winter Sports Ski 

2009 01 WEED CONTROL Ed Found 12000 3280 

TEN LAKES SNOWMOBILE 

2009 01 BIRCH CREEK PAVILION CLUB 17938 65240 
TABLE A -Page 276 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

2009 01 RAC KEELER WARMING HUT TROY SNOWMOBILE CLUB 31421.76 21000 5

TROY SHOOTING RANGE 

2009 01 PHASE 2 RAC Lincoln County 34000 20000 

Lower Clark Fork 

2009 01 MARTEN CREEK RAC Watershed Group 51150 41000 

LINCOLN VALLEY 

SNOWMOBILE TRAILS WEED PONDEROSA SNOW 

2009 01 PROJECT WARRIORS 2350 0 

TRAIL MAINTENANCE GREAT FALLS TRAIL BIKE 

2009 01 ACTIVITES RIDERS ASSOCIATION 78533 173320 

LEGRANDE FOREST 

ECOSYSTEM HEALTH RESTORATION AND FOREST CITY OF HELENA- DEPT. 

2009 01 FUELS TREATMENT OF PARKS & RECREATION 84700 0 

LINCOLN VALLEY 

MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAIL CHAMBER OF 

2009 01 ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING COMMERCE, INC. 28300 0 

THE NATURE 

CONSERVANCY MONTANA 

2009 01 FISH CREEK WEEDS CHAPTER 9524 17383 

MOSQUITO CREEK PARKING 

2009 01 RAC MONTANA DNRC NWLO 7953.46 3175 12009 01 COOPER GULCH REHAB A VISTA CORP 3000 12000 
TABLE A - Page 277 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Proj

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

FINLEY FLATS RAILROAD 

2009 01 CROSSING SANDERS COUNTY 106193 117500 

RAC TITLE II PROJECT CLEARWATER RESOURCE, 

CLEARWATER BASIN CONSERVATION & 

2009 01 COLLABORATIVE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL 433020 279900 

SELWAY-BITTERROOT BITTER ROOT RESOURCE 

FOUNDATION VOLUNTEER CONSERVATION & 

2009 01 COORDINATION PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AREA, INC. 33467 30826 

SBW TRAILS AFFECTED BY MONTANA 

2009 01 FIRE CONSERVATION CORPS 107156.2 11266 1

LOCHSA TRAIL EROSION 

CONTROL & DRAINAGE 

STRUCTURE MONTANA 

2009 01 REPAIR/IMPROVEMENT CONSERVATION CORPS 94235 23909 

PHASE IV (B)/TEE-COLBY LATAH SOIL & WATER 

2009 01 MEADOW RESTORATION CONSERVATION DISTRICT 129281 712510 

IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF 

2009 01 SHEEP MOUNTAIN/CAMP 60 CORRECTION 20112.6 16710 

SBW TRI-FOREST FIRE MONTANA 

2009 01 AFFECTED TRAILS CONSERVATION CORPS 113654 24010 
TABLE A -Page 278 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

2010 ROADSIDE NOXIOUS DEER CREEK HIGHWAY 

2009 01 WEED CONTROL DISTRICT 1099 2383 

CUSTER COUNTY BIOLOGICAL CUSTER CONSERVATION 

2009 02 NOXIOUS WEEDS DISTRICT 3155.24 3400 

LAWRENCE COUNTY 

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL- INVASIVE SPECIES 

2009 02 LAWRENCE COUNTY MANAGEMENT 189075.49 69700 25

CUSTER COUNTY NOXIOUS CUSTER CONSERVATION 

2009 02 WEEDS DISTRICT 5000 5400 

CUSTER STATE PARK 

2009 02 NOXIOUS WEEDS CUSTER STATE PARK 20709.74 76556 9

RIO BLANCO COUNTY, 

2009 02 ROAD AGREEMENT STATE OF COLORADO 521583.38 5424.64 52

SOUTHWEST 

2009 03 SW CONSERVATION CORPS CONSERVATION CORPS 375800 0 

RAC PROJECT 9011 GEM WEST CENTRAL 

COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT RED HIGHLANDS RCD (RAC 

2009 04 ZONE #9011) 28000 0 

BOISE CNTY ROAD SUPP 1 

ALDER CREEK ROAD/TWIN BOISE COUNTY ROAD 

2009 04 BRIDGES DEPARTMENT 138370.15 0 13

MILLARD COUNTY 

2009 04 INMATES WORK PROJECT SHERIFF'S OFFICE 29153.01 29782.14 5
TABLE A -Page 279 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

RAC PROJECT 9107 ADAMS 

COUNTY WEED WASH ADAMS COUNTY WEED 

2009 04 STATION CONTROL (RAC #9107) 4SOOO 1SOOO 

RAC PROJECT 

9109/10114/11PNF013M/13 

PNF015 ADAMS COUNTY ADAMS COUNTY (RAC 

FOREST HEALTH THINNING #9109/10114/11PNF013M 

2009 04 AND FIREWOOD PROJECT ) 68000 0 

RAC PROJECT 9110 COUNCIL 

SCHOOL DISTRICT COUNCIL SCHOOL 

2009 04 COOPERATIVE GREENHOUSE DISTRICT (RAC 9110) 54252.59 13235 6

RAC PROJECT 9111 ADAMS 

COUNTY WILD HORSE RIVER ADAMS COUNTY (RAC 

2009 04 BRIDGE #9111) 19366.96 255194 27

IDF&G RAC PROJECT 9101 

LOST VALLEY NORTH ERN IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF 

IDAHO GROUND SQUIRREL FISH AND GAME (RAC 

2009 04 INTERPRETIVE SITE 9101) 19000 21500 

NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2009 04 NYC- TOOL CACHE TR CORPS 31161.92 10854.94 4

BUTIE COUNTY BUTIE COUNTY 

DEPARTMENT OF NOXIOUS DEPARTMENT OF 

2009 04 WEEDS NOXIOUS WEEDS 30286.7 16891.86 4
TABLE A - Page 280 

forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Pro

Year Region Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match Fun

PASS CREEK GRAZING 

2009 04 PASS CREEK RIDER ASSOCIATION 15588.8 0 

MOSQUITO FLAT/FS MOSQUITO FLAT WATER 

2009 04 RESERVOIR DAM USERS 20000 74660 

2009 04 CUSTER COUNTY WEEDS CUSTER COUNTY CWMA 16200 5400 

MONTANA 

CONSERVATION CORPS2009 04 CARLSON LAKE FENCE CARLSON LAKE 11754 0 

STUDENT CONSERVATION 

ASSOC, INC- SCA CAMP 

2009 04 SCA- CAMP MOYER CAMP MOYER 188500 41216 

STUDENT CONSERVATION 

ASSOC, INC- SCA CAMP 

2009 04 TRAILS- CAMP MOYER CAMP MOYER 73994 0 

STUDENT CONSERVATION 

ASSOC, INC- SCA CAMP 

2009 04 SCA- CAMP MOYER CAMP MOYER 213100 0 

YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2009 04 FISH SHOCKING PROGRAM, INC. 20034 11393.05 3

YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2009 04 YEP- SNRA THINNING PROGRAM, INC. 7197.93 1306.91 

YEP- RED FISH LAKE YOUTH EMPLOYMENT 

2009 04 WINDTHRO CLEAN-UP PROGRAM, INC. 24347.22 6920.75 3
TABLE A - Page 281 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 

Year Region Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match 

2009 04 TRAVEL PLAN ENFORCEMENT BANNOCK COUNTY 5940 0 

2009 04 EDUCATE PUBLIC ON MAPS ONEIDA COUNTY 8250 250 

2009 04 RAC GRANT FREMONT COUNTY IDAHO 132000 776362 

BIG HOLE MTN 

OHV/EDUCATION AND 

2009 04 MONITORING TETON COUNTY SHERIFF 11808 3360 

RAMMEL MOUNTAIN ROAD TETON COUNTY ROAD 

2009 04 RECONSTRUCTION AND BRIDGE 20976 32896 

2009 04 RAC NOXIOUS WEED MADISON COUNTY 3500 4000 

RESTORATION OF STREAM FRIENDS OF THE TETON 

2009 04 BANK RIVER 8000 107111 

TETON REGIONAL LAND 

2009 04 RAC GRANT- TRAILS TRUST 900 900 

RAC JACKNIFE/DEEP CREEK 

2009 04 DIVERSION SCREENING TROUT UNLIMITED 39500 29250 

FISH HAVEN CREEK TRAIN 

2009 04 BRIDGE TROUT UNLIMITED 12000 59000 

HOWARD CREEK STREAM THE NATURE 

2009 04 RESTORATION CONSERVANCY 20000 42600 

NOXIOUS WEED CARIBOU CATILEMEN'S 

2009 04 CONTAINMENT ASSOCIATION 4350 1150 
TABLE A -Page 282 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

MONTPELIER-ELK VALLEY CARIBOU CATILEMEN'S 

2009 04 ALLOTMENT IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATION 97533.6 17805 1

TITLE II RAC BEAR LAKE TRAIL 

2009 04 MAINTENANCE BEAR LAKE RANGERS sooo 3000 

COOPERATIVE TRAIL CARIBOU CATILEMEN'S 

2009 04 MAINTENANCE ASSOCIATION 9300 6000 

HARDEN AND IMPROVE TWO HENRY'S FORK 

2009 04 BOAT LAUNCHES FOUNDATION 33982.56 41500 7

MOOSE AND LUCKY DOG HENRY'S FORK 

2009 04 STREAM RESTORATION FOUNDATION 26000 0 

BONNEVILLE CUTIHROAT 

2009 04 TROUT BEAR LAKE COUNTY 97000 30000 

BONNEVILLE CUTIHROAT 

2009 04 TROUT CITY OF GEORGETOWN 8000 5000 

CROW CREEK STREAM 

2009 04 RESTORATION TROUT UNLIMITED 85966.6 136250 2

WHITE BARK PINE SURVEY STUDENT CONSERVATION 

2009 04 AND INVENTORY ASSOCIATION 91135.2 76588 1

COOPERATIVE ROAD 

2009 04 AGREEMENT MADISON COUNTY 375140 260000 

NOXIOUS WEED SURVEY, NEVADA CONSERVATION 

2009 04 MAPPING AND TREATMENT CORPS 182588.63 55335.88 23
TABLE A - Page 283 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Proj

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

BOGUS CREEK COHO NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

2009 OS RESTORATION RESOURCE CENTER 208370 0 

SCOTI VALLEY COMMUNITY SISKIYOU RESOURCE 

2009 OS WELL LEVEL PROGRAM CONSERVATION DISTRICT 10S74 2000 

SOUTH YREKA AREA FIRE 

SAFE COUNCIL ELDERLY & NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

2009 OS DISABLED DEFENSIBLE SPACE RESOURCE CENTER 49SOO 13SOO 

TRIBAL YOUTH SUSANVILLE INDIAN 

2009 OS CONSERVATION CREW RANCHERIA 30000 8677 

LAKE FOREST FUEL 

REDUCTION PROJECT 

CAPACITY AND RISK LASSEN COUNTY FIRE SAFE 

2009 OS ASSESSMENT COUNCIL 31900 26747S 

SUSANVILLE FUEL 

REDUCTION AND LASSEN COUNTY FIRE SAFE 

2009 OS WATERSHED RESTORATION COUNCIL 637SS 41SOOO 

HOG FLAT HAND CREW FUEL LASSEN COUNTY FIRE SAFE 

2009 OS TREATMENTS COUNCIL ssoo 16000 

LASSEN COUNTY 

A-RATED NOXIOUS WEED DEPARTMENT OF 

2009 OS ERADICATION AGRICULTURE 27SOO 73SOO 
TABLE A -Page 284 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

COOPERATIVE CONSERVATION 

PARTNERSHIP INTIATIVE PIT RIVER RESOURCE 

2009 OS CAPACITY FUNDING CONSERVATION DISTRICT 82SOO 0 

JANESVILLE LANDSCAPE 

SCALE FUEL TREATMENTS JANESVILLE TOWN 

2009 OS AND RISK ASSESSMENT COUNCIL, INC sosoo 212S2S 

EAGLE LAKE TROUT UNIVERSITY OF 

2009 OS RESTORATION CALIFORNIA, DAVIS 9448.61 0 

SCOTCH AND PERENNIAL 

2009 OS PEPPERWOOD ERADICATION FALL RIVER RCD 29273.6S 17SOO 4

BURNEY/HATCREEK 

COMMUNITY FOREST FALL RIVER RESOURCE 

2009 OS PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 189400 39000 

MENDOCINO SUMMIT CALIFORNIA 

2009 OS WILDERNESS SPIKES CONSERVATION CORPS 4SOOO S62S 

TEHAMA COUNTY 

EAST SAND SLOUGH RESOURCE 

2009 OS INVASIVES MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 6S832 23428 

FOUTS SPRINGS ROAD- 2009 COUNTY OF COLUSA ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC 

2009 OS IMPROVEMENTS WORKS 22778.19 11000 3
TABLE A - Page 285 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 

Year Region I Project Title 'Applicant Name Match Match 

CENTRAL MODOC 

UPPER PIT RIVER RESOURCE 

2009 OS WATERSHED CONSERVATION DISTRICT 49667.9 184S6 

2009 OS NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL PIT RIVER TRIBE 1SS21 19283 

PIT RIVER WATERSHED NORTH CAL NEVA RC&D 

2009 OS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY COUNCIL, INC. 16970 0 

MAD RIDGE FUELBREAK MAINTENANCE & BRIDGEVILLE COMMUNITY 

2009 OS PRESCRIBED FIRE SUPPORT CENTER soooo 62186 

LONG LAKE AND MUD LAKE SIERRA BUTTES TRAIL 

2009 OS TRAIL MAINTENANCE STEWARDSHIP 43296 0 

EASTSIDE MEADOW 

2009 OS RESTORATION PLUMAS CORP 98SOO 3200 

SIERRA VALLEY RESOURCE 

2009 OS WEED CONTROL CONSERVATION DISTRICT S46SO 24747 

NATIVE PLANT 

2009 OS PROPAGATION FEATHER RIVER COLLEGE 27310.28 2S200 S

PLUMAS SIERRA 

COUNTIES DEPARTMENT 

2009 OS FR NOXIOUS WEED MGT OF AGRICULTURE 79130 66S22 
TABLE A -Page 286 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

LANDSCAPE ENHANCEMENT SUSANVILLE INDIAN 

2009 OS PROJECT RANCHERIA 30000 S009 

HIGH SIERRA VOLUNTEER 

2009 OS TRAIL MAINTENANCE TRAIL CREW 28702 0 

ASCEND WILDERNESS 

2009 OS AWE STEWARDSHIP PROJECT EXPERIENCE 9S12 0 

2009 SHASTA-TRINITY BACK COUNTRY 

FISH/TRAILS TRINITY CO RAC HORSEMEN OF CA, 

2009 OS PROJECT SHASTA-TRINITY UNIT 644S3.32 7012S 13

TRINITY COUNTY 

WEAVERVILLE BASIN TRAIL RESOURCE 

2009 OS MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT 16024 1606 

JACKASS RIDGE TRAIL 

2009 OS CONSTRUCTION TRINITY COUNTY RCD 6024 2016.1 

CLEAN FOREST PROJECT2009 OS FOREST TRASH REMOVAL CLEAN FOREST PROJECT 10208 1SS3 

2009 PCT OPENING BACK COUNTRY 

MAINTENANCE SHASTA CO HORSEMEN, TOP OF 

2009 OS RAC STATE UNIT 26437 41630 

NORTHWEST CA RESOURCE AND 

DUTCH CREEK ROAD CONSERVATION 

2009 OS SEDIMENT REDUCTION DEVLOPMENT DISTRICT 300SS.34 0 3
TABLE A - Page 287 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl! Pro

Year Region I Project Title iApplicant Name Match Match Fun

SHASTA COLLEGE 

STUDENT MONITORING NATURAL RESOURCES 

2009 05 PROJECT DEPT 7482.05 3500 1

HAPPY VALLEY ELEMENTARY SHASTA COLLEGE 

SCHOOL GREENHOUSE AGRICULTURE & NATURAL 

2009 05 ENRICHMENT PROJECT RESOURCES DEPT 4506.65 0 

SHASTA COLLEGE 

SHASTA COLLEGE AGRICULTURE & NATURAL 

2009 05 EXCAVATOR RESOURCES DEPT 132000 30000 

TEDOC MT. FUELS Cottonwood Creek 

REDUCTION PROJECT, PHASE Watershed Group - Raney 

2009 05 II Peak Fuel Break 650.1 47500 

2009 TRINITY COUNTY TRINITY RIVER 

2009 05 NOXIOUS WEED REMOVAL CONSERVATION CAMP 894.88 0 

OPERATING PLAN 2009-001 

FIRE RELATED WEED AND TRINITY COUNTY 

RESTORATION TREATMENTS RESOURCE 

2009 05 2009 CONSERVATION DISTRICT 49239.73 12618.24 6

THE HAYFORK YOUTH THE WATERSHED 

RESTORATION AND BASIN RESEARCH AND TRAINING 

2009 05 TRAIL CREW CENTER 10413.65 2540.4 1
TABLE A - Page 288 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

HAYFORK BASIN TRAILS & WATERSHED CENTERYOUTH CREW- 2009 TRAIL HAYFORK BASIN TRAIL & 

2009 OS MAINTENANCE YOUTH CREW 2009 49762 0 

WEAVERVILLE BOULDER CALIFORNIA 

2009 OS CREEK TRAIL SPIKES CONSERVATION CORPS 10440 0 

THE WATERSHED 

HAYFORKFOREST HEALTH 1 RESEARCH & TRAINING 

2009 OS FMZ CENTER 1822S3 17798.26 20

WEAVERVILLE COMMUNITY 

2009 OS FOREST ROAD UPGRADE TRINITY COUNTY RCD 72S30 9S489 

OREGON MT. FOREST 

2009 OS RESTORATION TRINITY COUNTY RCD 791S7 23768 

WCF RIPARIAN AND 

2009 OS CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS TRINITY COUNTY RCD 10881.96 8992.S 1

CHINA GULCH FUELS 

2009 OS REDUCTION TRINITY COUNTY RCD 14S380 40614 

WILDERNESS TRAIL & SIERRA RESOURCE 

2009 OS TRAILHEAD PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 8012.44 0 

FFY09 COOPERATIVE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF 

2009 06 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL AGRICULTURE 3719SO 23SS21 

CENTRAL OREGON CENTRAL OREGON 

PARTNERSHIPS FOR INTERGOVERNMENTAL 

2009 06 WILDFIRE RISK REDUCTION COUNCIL 433902.3S 290266.61 72
TABLE A- Page 289 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli 1Proj

Year !Region Project Title Ar.mlicant Name Match Match I Fun

LAKE COUNTY UMBRELLA 

2009 06 BAUERS CREEK FISH PASSAGE WATERSHED COUNCIL 108360 116429.5 2

SEVENMILE CREEK FISH KLAMATH BASIN 

2009 06 PASSAGE RANGELAND TRUST 31997 61409 

CHEWAUCAN WATERSHED LAKE COUNTY RESOURCES 

2009 06 MONITORING INITIATIVE 83530 4350 

IDENTIFY AND CLEAN ILLEGAL 

2009 06 DUMP SITES Clean Forest Project 59891.6 22093 

BLM ROAD MAINT. SERVICE2009 06 FS PAYS BLM BLM- LAKEVIEW DISTRICT 460162.7 0 4

2009 06 SPRAGUE RIVER DUSTY LANE USFWS- KLAMATH 5975 41696 

WESTSIDE SPRINGS 

2009 06 ENHANCEMENT USFWS- KLAMATH 7708 32636 

IVERSON RANCH WETLANDS 

2009 06 ENHANCEMENT USFWS 30135 56417 

SUMMER LAKE-- LAKE COUNTY 

TREATMENT OF NOXIOUS COOPERATIVE WEED 

2009 06 WEEDS MANAGEMENT AREA 144585.82 167189 31

MOUNT ADAMS 

2009 06 CAVE/BEAR CREEK PROJECT RESOURCE STEWARDS 45030 0 
TABLE A - Page 290 

Forest Forest Tota

A Service Service Appli 1Proj

"I>'""""'"''" 

Year I Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match !fund

FOREST STUDENT SUCCESS PROGRAM ON THE GIFFORD STEVENSON-CARSON 

2009 06 PINCHOT NF SCHOOL DISTRICT 1S1477 1697SO 

WHITE PASS NATURAL WHITE PASS SCHOOL 

2009 06 RESOURCE DISCOVERY TEAM DISTRICT 604392.69 126102.23 73

PACIFIC CREST TRAIL 

MAINTENANCE ON THE 

GIFFORD PINCHOT NATIONAL PACIFIC CREST TRAIL 

2009 06 FOREST ASSOCIATION 104964.34 30681.9 13

SW WASHINGTON TRAIL STEWARDSHIP- GIFFORD WASHINGTON TRAILS 

2009 06 PINCHOT NATIONAL FOREST ASSOCIATION 99719.97 234637.13 3

COWLITZ COUNTY NOXIOUS 

WEED CONTROL ON THE 

GIFFORD PINCHOT NATIONAL 

2009 06 FOREST COWLITZ COUNTY 190034.41 S0237.07 24

PINE CREEK INFORMATION 

STATION-DYNW STAFFING OF 

PINE CREEK INFORMATION DISCOVER YOUR 

,2009 06 FACILITY NORTHWEST 8000 12292 
TABLE A - Page 291 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: 

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match 

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL 

ON OLYMPIC NATIONAL 

2009 06 FOREST GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY 129631.18 44563.18 17

UPPER ROGUE 

WATERSHED 

2009 06 SKY LAKES WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION 14200 800 

IDENTIFY AND CLEAN ILLEGAL 

2009 06 DUMP SITES Clean Forest Project 185045.4 8211.48 19

ECOLOGICAL MONITORING: 

2009 06 ASHLAND FOREST RESILIENCY Klamath Bird Observatory 7066 0 

COOS COUNTY 

2009 06 FOREST WORK CREWS COMMUNITY SERVICE 15600 0 

LOBSTER CREEK SEDIMENT CURRY SOIL & WATER 

2009 06 ABATEMENT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 18453 5768 

FOGGY EDEN RIPARIAN POWERS SCHOOL 

2009 06 RESTORATION EDUCATION DISTRICT 1734.61 0 

AUTOMATED SMOKE COOS FOREST PROTECTIVE 

2009 06 DETECTION CAMERA ASSOCIATION 8524 800 

POWERS SCHOOL 

2009 06 HEADLANDS TO OCEAN DISTRICT 9722.42 13560 2
TABLE A - Page 292 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl: Pro

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

2009 RECREATION PATROL- JOSEPHINE COUNTY 

2009 06 JOSEPHINE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT S8000 0 

2009 OPERATING PLAN- CURRY COUNTY SHERIFF'S 

2009 06 RECREATION PATROL DEPT 78750 0 

JUVENILE FOREST WORK 

CREW- 2009 NOXIOUS JACKSON COUNTY 

2009 06 WEEDS & TRAILS COMMUNITY JUSTICE 65015.15 162506.56 22

COMMUNITY JUSTICE FUELS 

REDUCTION, FIRE JACKSON COUNTY 

2009 06 MANAGEMENT & ROADS COMMUNITY JUSTICE 125869.7 141293.34 26

SISKIYOU MOUNTAIN RD 

YOUTH EDUCATION 

2009 06 STEWARDSHIP THE JOB COUNCIL 59245.22 30874.42 9

DOUGLAS COUNTY TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2009 06 MAINTENANCE 2009 CORPS 17085.58 18592.97 3

SKY LAKES WILDERNESS 

CULVERT REMOVAL- SCA 

2009 06 BRAVO CREW SCA 21478 5266.4 

GOLD BEACH 2009 

LANDSCAPING & CURRY COUNTY JUVENILE 

2009 06 MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT 1963.51 8641 1

BILLINGS CREEK SEDIMENT & LOWER ROGUE 

2009 06 SHADE WATERSHED COUNCIL 15104.34 4289 1
TABLE A- Page 293 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

WILD RIVERS RD FUELS, JOSEPHINE COUNTY 

2009 06 FENCING, TRAILS & ROADS COMMUNITY JUSTICE 71989.89 70469.2 14

SISKIYOU MTNS RD NOXIOUS Jackson County 

2009 06 WEED ERADICATION Community Justice 6S2S9.5 38409.84 10

PAYCO 09-LA-006 SIUSLAW 

RIPARIAN RESTORATION SIUSLAW WATERSHED 

2009 06 FIELD CREW COUNCIL 120341.09 13525 13

IDENTIFY I CLEAN UP ILLEGAL CLEAN FOREST PROJECT, 

2009 06 DUMPSITES INC 20000 6928 

IDENTIFY I CLEAN UP ILLEGAL 

2009 06 DUMPSITES CLEAN FOREST PROJECT 59971.32 0 5

PAYCO 09-LA-010 BIG CREEK SIUSLAW SOIL AND 

KNOTWEED CONTROL WATERSHED 

2009 06 PROJECT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 25850 4250 

PIONEER-INDIAN TRAIL AND DRIFT CREEK FALLS TRAIL MAl NT, 8.0 Ml HISTORICAL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2009 06 TRAIL AND 1.5 MILE LOOP TR CORPS 23042.83 16282.41 32009 06 HARDWOOD RESTORATION NEZ PERCE TRIBE 89988.43 40578.26 13

IDENTIFY AND CLEAN ILLEGAL 

2009 06 DUMP SITES Clean Forest Project 33330.07 3572.4 3
TABLE A -Page 294 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

ENGAGING YOUTH, 

COMMUNITY AND OREGON STATE 

2009 06 WATERSHEDS UNIVERSITY 13332 8929 

LEMOLO LAKE TUI CHUB PARTNERSHIP FOR 

2009 06 REMOVAL UMPQUA RIVERS 47222 47452 

KENNEDY CONSERVATION SOUTH LANE SCHOOL 

2009 06 CORP FOREST RESTORATION DISTRICT 146847 62740 

NORTH UMPQUA AND 

DIAMOND LAKE SCOTCH 

BROOM AND MEADOW 

2009 06 KNAPWEED ERADICATION NORTHWEST YOUTH CORP 17972.26 10854.94 

UMPQUA NATIONAL FOREST NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2009 06 TRAIL MAINTENANCE CORPS 275256.8 134248.24 40

TRI-COUNTY 

COOPERATIVE INVASIVE COOPERATIVE WEED 

2009 06 PLANT MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT AREA 365945.1 325535 6

COOPER PASS AREA ROAD CONSERVATION 

2009 06 DECOMMISIONING NORTHWEST 5400 0 

FY09 RAC CRUPINA CONTROL WASHINGTON 

2009 06 PROJECT CONSERVATION CORPS 25180 8393 

ROARING WUI PRE- NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2009 06 COMMERCIAL THINNING CORPS 13895.98 7598.57 2
TABLE A -Page 295 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

ANDREWS CREEK TRAIL FIRE NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2009 06 RESTORATION CORPS 10024.SS 5427.47 1

CADY RIDGE TRAIL HEAVY NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2009 06 MAINTENANCE CORPS 50449.98 26897.89 7

FIRE RISK CHELAN COUNTY 

REDUCTION/NOXIOUS WEED REGIONAL JUSTICE 

2009 06 PULLING CENTER 131128.S7 73621 20

2009 TITLE II SKY PROGRAM PACIFIC NORTHWEST 

2009 06 TRAIL AND RANGE PROJECTS TRAIL ASSOCIATION S3241 43879 

COOPERATIVE FUELS CHELAN COUNTY FIRE 

2009 06 MANAGEMENT PROJECTS DISTRICT #8 97081 32418 2009 06 WALDO LAKE STUDIES PSU 34139.63 0 3

YOUTH CREW WORK MCKENZIE SCHOOL 

2009 06 EXPERIENCE OPPORTUNITIES DISTRICT 14977 21617 

JUVENILE WORK SERVICE 

PROGRAM, SUPPLEMENTAL PROJECT AGREEMENT: 

INVASIVE SPECIES CONTROL, LINN COUNTY SHERIFF'S 

2009 06 REC MAINT DEPARTMENT 367SO 0 

REC MAINTENANCE AND SITE 

CLEANUP, LOG BOOM 

2009 06 REPLACEMENT MARION COUNTY 1S225 0 
TABLE A - Page 296 

Forest forest Tota

A Service Service Appl1 

1

Proj

"I>'"'"'"'"''" 

Year I Region Project Title Aoolicant Name Match Match I Fun

SWEET HOME PROJECTS 

2009, WEED CONTROL AND NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2009 06 MEADOW RESTORATION CORPS 15786.92 10854.94 2

CHARLETON BURN LOGOUT NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2009 06 09 CORPS 23042.88 16282.41 3

WILDERNESS TRAIL NORTHWEST YOUTH 

2009 06 MAINTENANCE CORPS 23042.88 0 2

COOPERATIVE NATIVE PLANT MCKENZIE SCHOOL 

2009 06 NURSERY DISTRICT 53425.76 92234.4 14

SUMMER YOUTH 

2009 06 PARTNERSHIP NEXT DOOR, INC. 409107.3 139771.88 54

PROJECT ROAD AGREEMENT2009 08 RACTITLE II HOUSTON COUNTY 133514 0 

COOPERATIVE WORK TO 

IMPROVE, MAINTAIN AND 

RESTORE WILDLIFE 

IMPOUNDMENTS LOCATED LEECH LAKE BAND OF 

2009 09 WITHIN THE CHIPPEWA NF OJIBWE 205616.88 83775 28

SITUK WATERSHED 

2009 10 RESTORATION YAKUTAT SALMON BOARD 63200 10000 

BEAVERHEAD COUNTY 

2008 01 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL WEED DISTRICT 208717.37 105050 31
TABLE A - Page 297 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

BLODGETI TRAIL 

REHABILITATION RAC 

2008 01 PROJECT Bitterroot BCH 19294 7625 

BLACKTAIL SKI TRAIL 

2008 01 GROOMING North Shore Nordic Club 27186.07 36250 6

BOB MARSHALL 

WILDERNESS 

2008 01 BMWC RESOURCE PROJECTS FOUNDATION 78299.78 0 7

FLATHEAD COUNTY ROAD 

2008 01 STAR MEADOWS ROAD RAC DEPT 165530 0 

WEED INVENTORY AND GREAT BURN STUDY 

2008 01 MAPPING GROUP 77615.76 66252 14

PALOUSE CWMA 

TREATMENT & CLEARWATER RESOURCE 

MANAGEMENT OF NOXIOUS CONSERVATION & 

2008 01 WEEDS DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL 186204.62 399559 58

CLEARWATER BASIN CWMA CLEARWATER RESOURCE 

TREATMENT & CONSERVATION & 

MANAGEMENT OF NOXIOUS DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, 

2008 01 WEEDS INC. 12499 23500 2008 02 ROAD MAINTENANCE DOLORES COUNTY ROADS 174294.75 277689.08 45

BOISE COUNTY NOXIOUS 

2008 04 WEED CONTROL Boise County 413802.13 94789.89 50
TABLE A -Page 298 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

LEMHI COUNTY (LCWMA) 

2008 04 WEED MANAGEMENT Lemhi County (LCWMA) 62203S.9 188693.S4 81

ELDERLY, DISABLED PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE 

2008 OS DEFENSIBLE SPACE SAFE COUNCIL 101000 8SOO 

TUOLUMNE COUNTY 

FORESTRY INSTITUTE FOR SUPERINTENDENT OF 

2008 OS TEACHERS PROJECT SCHOOLS OFFICE 119000 73700 

WHOLE WATERSHED 

2008 06 RESTORATION INITIATIVE Ecotrust 2864838.7 3271902 61

FIVE MILE CREEK FISH 

2008 06 PASSAGE AND FISH SCREEN USFWS 769S3 4SOOO 

2008 06 INTEGRAL YOUTH SERVICES Integral Youth Services 183887.74 963S6.14 28

SKATE CREEK CORRIDOR 

RESOURCE PROTECTION 

PROJECT GIFFORD PINCHOT DESTINATION PACKWOOD 

2008 06 NF ASSOCIATION 36S19.4 12027 

MOUNT ST. HELENS 

INSTITUTE STEWARDSHIP 

PROGRAM ON GIFFORD MOUNT ST. HELEN'S 

2008 06 PINCHOT NATIONAL FOREST INSTITUTE 327820 3SS631 

MIGRATORY BIRD NORTH CASCADES 

2008 06 CONSERVATION EDUCATION INSTITUTE 22SS18.44 127S60.2 3S
TABLE A -Page 299 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match fun

JEFFERSON CO JUSTICE Jefferson County 

2008 06 WORK CREWS Community Justice 48403.93 98561.75 14

OLYMPIC PEN. CO-OP 

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL2008 06 OLYMPIC NATIONAL FOREST CLALLAM COUNTY 382605.1 177450.43 56

MEDFORD AIR ATIACK BASE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF 

2008 06 (MATB) FORESTRY 2097926.8 349700 24

KNOTWEED CONTROL 

2008 06 PROJECT PHASE IV Lincoln Soil and Water 82811 0 

APHIS PLOVER PREDATOR USDA Animal and Plant 

2008 06 CONTROL and Health Inspection 238720.02 0 23

WASHINGTON STATE 

INTEGRATED WEED CONTROL WASHINGTON STATE 

2008 06 PROJECT UNIVERSITY 300547.34 0 30

ANTOINE/CABIN TURNPIKES AND TRAIL DELINEATION & OKANOGAN TRAIL 

2008 06 SIGNAGE COALITION 19874 5400 

WASHINGTON 

2008 06 ASPEN PROTECTION FENCING CONSERVATION CORPS 33610 0 2008 06 ADULT FOREST WORK CAMP Lane County 1022634 0 

LAKE DATABASE 

2008 06 DEVELOPMENT osu 44239.84 2631 4
TABLE A - Page 300 

Forest Forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appli Proj

Year Region I Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

2008 08 PA- KICKAPOO Trinity County 327559.09 20000 34

SUSTAINABLE FOREST 

BIOENERGY PRODUCTION 

USING IN-WOODS FAST 

PYROLYSIS CONVERSION 

INCLUDING BIO-OIL 

PRODUCTION AND BIO-CHAR RENEWABLE OIL 

2008 22 INCORPORATION INTERNATIONAL 112571 35512 

SELWAY-PINTLER 

WILDERNESS 

BACKCOUNTRY 

2007 01 BACKCOUNTRY PROJECTS HORSEMEN 20680 89498 

Coeur d'Alene Chamber of 

2007 01 JIM DORAN CONSULTANT Commerce 27500 0 

OPERATION AND 

MAINTENANCE OF 

GROOMED SNOWMOBILE PONDEROSA SNOW 

2007 01 TRAILS WARRIORS & MT FW&P 31791 269580 

SEELEY STEWARDSHIP 

2007 01 PROJECT RMEF 190901.68 52432 24

IDAHO FOREST PRODUCTS 

2007 01 PROJECT LEARNING TREE COMMISSION 24005 206000 
TABLE A - Page 301 

Forest forest Tota

'"'5' "'""""'"' Service Service Appl: Proj

Year I Region Project Title Armlicant Name Match Match !fund

2007 RAC FUNDED NOXIOUS IDAHO COUNTY WEED 

2007 01 WEEDS MANAGEMENT 353607 106025 

INSECT RELEASES AND WEED NEZ PERCE TRIBE 

2007 01 INVENTORY BIOCONTROL 645562.79 266750.35 91

Rocky Mountain Youth 

2007 02 MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS Corps 403185.45 105495.59 50

COORDINATED TREATMENT 

2007 02 OF UNDESIRABLE PLANTS LARIMER COUNTY 133856.99 31120.25 16

Idaho Forest Products 

2007 04 PROJECT LEARNING TREE Commission 163015.1 707322.18 87

YELLOWSTONE CUTIHROAT 

2007 04 TROUT Trout Unlimited 367500 0 

EASTERN PLUMAS FUELS PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE 

2007 OS REDUCTION SAFE COUNCIL 85200 177490 2007 06 2007 FLYMON STEWARDSHIP NWTF 315448.37 371984.74 68

SKAMANIA COUNTY 

CORRECTIONS CREWMULTIPLE PROJECTS ON THE 

2007 06 GIFFORD PINCHOT NF SKAMANIA COUNTY 280599 158841 

LEWIS COUNTY NOXIOUS LEWIS COUNTY WEED 

2007 06 WEEDS BOARD 307790.58 92190.85 39
TABLE A- Page 302 

forest forest Tota

Agreement Service Service Appl Proj

Year Region Project Title Name Match Match Fund

SKAMANIA COUNTY 

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL -

GIFFORD PINCHOT NATIONAL SKAMANIA COUNTY WEED 

2007 06 FOREST BOARD 1315471.7 470902.21 1782007 06 WESTSIDE 2 STEWARDSHIP NWTF 486830.45 305130.28 791

STREAM KEEPERS/OLYMPIC 

NATIONAL FOREST CLALLAM COUNTY 

2007 06 COOPERATIVE MONITORING STREAM KEEPERS 19025.68 0 19

LINCOLN COUNTY 

COOPERATIVE WEED Lincoln County Public 

2007 06 CONTROL Works Department 75589 51782 

DOUGLAS COUNTY JUVENILE Douglas County Juvenile 

2007 06 RESTORATION WORK Dept 69000 41669 

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL- Okanogan County Noxious 

2007 06 TITLE II Weed Control Board 113168 7000 

MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAIL Chequamegon Area 

CONSTRUCTION AND Mountain Bike Association 

2007 09 MAINTENANCE (CAMBA) 33625 47520 
TABLE A -Page 303 

Forest Forest Tot

Agreement Service Service Applicant Pro

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

POST-HARVEST 

FERTILIZATION AS 

MITIGATION FOR NUTRIENT 

2007 22 REMOVALS UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO 20300 20300 

INVENTORY AND MAPPING University of Montana 

2006 01 WEEDS Wilderness Institute 53492.37 16058 6

2006 RAVALLI COUNTY 

2006 01 INVASIVES COOPERATION Ravalli County 174778 39342 

VOLUNTEER PROGRAM MONTANA DISCOVERY 

2006 01 PROJECT SUPPLEMENTS FOUNDATION 162472.15 23017 18

GREAT BURN AREA GREAT BURN STUDY 

2006 01 RESOURCE PROTECTION GROUP 92909 54574 2006 02 ROAD MAINTENANCE CUSTER COUNTY 138489.92 185019.86 32

CUSTER COUNTY WEED & 

2006 02 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL PEST 41928.43 0 4

KLAMATH COUNTY NOXIOUS 

2006 06 WEED CONTROL Klamath County 469016.57 399800 86

CHALLENGE COST SHARE 

AGREEMENT BETWEEN 

WASCO COUNTY WEED AND 

PEST AND USDA FOREST 

SERVICE, MT. HOOD Wasco County Weed and 

2006 06 NATIONAL FOREST Pest 542910 213700 

2006 06 RAC ADMIN SUPPORT COIC 61962 0 
TABLE A- Page 304 

forest forest Tota

A Service Service Appl: 1Proj

"!>' ''"""'"'"' 

Year I Region Project Title Armlicant Name Match Match fund

PHYTOPHTHORA SPS 

2006 06 DIAGNOSTICS Oregon State University 1042897.9 0 10

PHOENIX SCHOOL OREGON 

YOUTH CONSERVATION Phoenix School of 

2006 06 CORPS Roseburg 324746 165868 

Douglas County Public 

2006 06 DEVIL'S FLAT FUEL BREAK Works 138243.21 29530.76 16

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL Idaho Dept of Fish & 

2005 04 ON/NEAR FOREST Game 735 745 

KLAMATH COUNTY 

HEADCUT REPAIR & COMMUNITY 

2005 06 PROTECTION, CHEMULT RD CORRECTIONS 16167 40133.76 5

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL 

ON THE GIFFORD PINCHOT 

2005 06 NATIONAL FOREST KLICKTAT, COUNTY 242464 562142 

CHELAN COUNTY WEED Chelan County Weed 

2005 06 CONTROL Board 106898.4 50232 1

SEWER SYSTEM, PORTER OKHISSA LAKE SEWER 

2005 08 CREEK DISTRICT 537392.92 0 53

Boundary County School 

DEVELOPMENTAL District/Idaho Dept of 

2004 01 OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUTH Labor 57746.43 18921 7
TABLE B- Page 1 5/16/17 Embargoed Draft QFR response 

Agreement USFS Forest Service Applicant To

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fu

2006 06 DEVIL'S FLAT FUEL BREAK Douglas County Public Works $138,243 $29,531 

2007 05 EASTERN PLUMAS FUELS REDUCTION PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $85,200 $177,490 2008 05 ELDERLY, DISABLED DEFENSIBLE SPACE PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $101,000 $8,500 

LEGRANDE FOREST ECOSYSTEM HEALTH 

RESTORATION AND FOREST FUELS CITY OF HELENA- DEPT. OF PARKS & 

2009 01 TREATMENT RECREATION $84,700 $0 

RAC TITLE II PROJECT CLEARWATER CLEARWATER RESOURCE, CONSERVATION & 

2009 01 BASIN COLLABORATIVE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL $433,020 $279,900 

i><AC PROJECT 

9109110114111PNF013M/13PNF015 ADAMS 

COUNTY FOREST HEALTH THINNING AND 

2009 04 FIREWOOD PROJECT ADAMS COUNTY (RAC #9109/10114111PNF013M) $68,000 $0 2009 04 CUSTER COUNTY- RAC FUEL REDUCTION Custer County- RAC Fuel Reduction $80,000 $0 2009 04 LEMHI COUNTY- RAC FUEL REDUCTION Lemhi County- RAC Fuel Reduction $90,000 $0 

2009 04 BUTTE COUNTY -RAC FUEL REDUCTION BUTTE COUNTY- RAC Fuel Reduction $32,000 $0 

2009 04 YEP SNRA THINNING YOUTH EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM, INC. $7,198 $1,307 

LAKE FOREST FUEL REDUCTION PROJECT 

2009 05 CAPACITY AND RISK ASSESSMENT LASSEN COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $31,900 $267,475 

SUSANVILLE FUEL REDUCTION AND 

2009 05 WATERSHED RESTORATION LASSEN COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $63,755 $415,000 

JANESVILLE LANDSCAPE SCALe FUEL 

2009 05 TREATMENTS AND RISK ASSESSMENT JANESVILLE TOWN COUNCIL, INC $50,500 $212,525 

MAD RIDGE FUELBREAK MAINTENANCE & 

2009 05 PRESCRIBED FIRE SUPPORT BRIDGEVILLE COMMUNITY CENTER $50,000 $62,186 

TEDOC MT. FUELS REDUCTION PROJECT, Cottonwood Creek Watershed Group- Raney Peak 

2009 05 PHASE II Fuel Break $650 $47,500 

USDA Confidential 6/20/2017 
TABLE B- Page 2 5/16/17 Embargoed Draft QFR response 

Agreement USFS Forest Service Applicant To

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fu

COMMUNITY JUSTICE FUELS REDUCTION, 

2009 06 FIRE MANAGEMENT & ROADS JACKSON COUNTY COMMUNITY JUSTICE $125,870 $141,293 

WILD RIVERS RD FUELS, FENCING, TRAILS 

2009 06 & ROADS JOSEPHINE COUNTY COMMUNITY JUSTICE $71,990 $70,469 

ROARING WUI PRE-COMMERCIAL 

2009 06 THINNING NORTHWEST YOUTH CORPS $13,896 $7,599 2009 06 CHARLETON BURN LOGOUT 09 NORTHWEST YOUTH CORPS $23,043 $16,282 2009 05 HOG FLAT HAND CREW FUEL TREATMENTS LASSEN COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $5,500 $16,000 2009 05 CHINA GULCH FUELS REDUCTION TRINITY COUNTY RCD $145,380 $40,614 

COOPERATIVE FUELS MANAGEMENT 

2009 06 PROJECTS CHELAN COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT #8 $97,081 $32,418 

DUCK CREEK TRAVEL CORRIDOR 

2010 01 FIRESAFE PROJECT TRI-CO FIRESAFE WORKING GROUP $41,635 $0 

DUCK CREEK TRAVEL CORRIDOR 

2010 01 FIRESAFE PROJECT TRI-CO FIRESAFE WORKING GROUP $41,635 $0 

FIRE ESCAPE ROUTE FOR PINETOP AND 

PINETOP LAKES HOME OWNERS 

2010 03 ASSOCIATION COMMUNITIES NAVAJO COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT $33,036 $35,000 

SOUTHERN GILA COUNTY COMMUNITY GILA COUNTY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND 

2010 03 WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN HEALTH PREPAREDNESS $35,700 $9,895 

2010 04 RAG-MUNICIPAL WATERSHED FUELS INV LEMHI COUNTY $0 $0 

2010 04 SLASH YOUTH EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM, INC. $34,540 $0 

SCOTT VALLEY MULTIPLE MUNICIPALITIES 

2010 05 WILDLAND FIRE PROTECTION PROJECT NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RESOURCE CENTER $169,750 $28,000 

HAPPY CAMP FIRE SAFE COUNCIL 

2010 05 CHIPPER REPLACEMENT HAPPY CAMP FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $17,000 $0 

FOREST HEALTH PROJECTS ON 

2010 05 GOOSEN EST NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RESOURCE CENTER $56,961 $14,040 

ROUND MOUNTAIN FUEL REDUCTION CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND 

2010 05 PROJECT FIRE PROTECTION $20,824 $18,500 

SUNFLOWER CRMP FUEL REDUCTION2010 05 2010 Cottonwood Creek Watershed Group $48,400 $50,000 

USDA Confidential 6/20/2017 
TABLE 8- Page 3 5/16/17 Embargoed Draft QFR response 

Agreement USFS Forest Service Applicant Tot

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fu

MENDOCINO COUNTY WOODY BIOMASS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCE 

2010 05 WORKING GROUP FEASI CORPORATION $5,000 $11,750 

FUELS REDUCTION- MAD RIVER ADMIN 

2010 05 THIN PROJECT AREA BRIDGEVILLE COMMUNITY CENTER $36,842 $7,903 

CARVILLE ROAD DYER'S WOAD REMOVAL TRINITY COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION 

2010 05 PROJECT DISTRICT $41,280 $11,186 

MT. ELIZABETH DRIVE SHADED FUEL 

2010 05 BREAK HIGHWAY 108 FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $12,252 $2,200 

2010 05 LOWER YANKEE HILL SHADED FUEL BREAK HIGHWAY 108 FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $38,175 $5,200 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- BEAR VALLEY 

2010 05 COMMON AREA FUELS REDUCTION ALPINE COUNTY $45,000 $0 

DEFENSIBLE SPACE CURB-SIDE CHIPPING 

2010 05 PROGRAM ALPINE COUNTY $9,800 $0 

2010 06 FUEL/FIRE REDUCTION ON METOLIUS DESCHUTES LAND TRUST $38,000 $19,195 

2010 06 COLLIER STATE PARKS FUELS REDUCTION OREGON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION $99,902 $86,393 

2010 06 BRIDGE CREEK SLASH BUSTING BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT $17,815 $0 

CAMP COTTONWOOD THINNING AND 

2010 06 HAZARDOUS FUELS REDUCTION DOC WARNER CREEK CORRECTIONAL FACILITY $4,980 $16,346 

ECOLOGICAL MONITORING ASHLAND 

2010 06 WATERSHED FUELS PROJECT KLAMATH BIRD OBSERVATORY $13,493 $0 

SAND LAKE HAZARDOUS FUELS 

2010 06 REDUCTION NORTHWEST YOUTH CORPS $18,020 $0 

2011 01 FIREWOOD FOR THE ELDERLY- RAC COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP $3,150 $1,496 

2011 01 FIREWOOD FOR THE ELDERLY AND NEEDY IDAHO COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT $2,444 $2,414 

HAZARDOUS FUELS MITIGATION WITHIN 

2011 02 FIRE DISTRICT UPPER PINE RIVER FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT $12,594 $4,600 

FOREST HEALTH, FIRE AND THINNING WHITE MOUNTAIN WILDLIFE AND NATURE 

2011 03 EDUCATION AND INTEPRETATION CENTER $29,999 $4,000 

NORTHERN RIO GRANDE RESOURCE 

CAPULIN GRAZING ALLOTMENT CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, 

2011 03 HAZARDOUS FUELS REDUCTION PROJECT INC $50,994 $0 

2011 04 UTAH FOREST RESTORATION GROUP UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY $26,619 $6,655 

USDA Confidential 6/20/2017 
TABLE 8- Page 4 5/16/17 Embargoed Draft QFR response 

Agreement USFS Forest Service Applicant To

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fu

RAC 11 MUL TI001 M/13MUL TI003 WOODY 

BIOMASS UTILIZATION PARTNERSHIP IDAHO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS/SAGE 

2011 04 OPERATIONS COMMUNITY RESOURCES $37,500 $38,500 

HAZARD TREE REMOVAL ALONG HIGHWAY 

2011 04 75 CUSTER COUNTY $66,223 $21,000 

2011 04 BIOMASS COLLECTION SITE ALPINE FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $10,000 $0 

2011 04 REDUCE FUELS ONCOUNTY ROADS ALPINE COUNTY $20,000 $0 

2011 04 ALPINE COUNTY BIOMASS COLLECTION ALPINE COUNTY $20,000 $0 

DEFENSIBLE SPACE CURBSIDE CHIPPING 

2011 04 PROGRAM ALPINE FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $11,761 $0 

2011 04 COMMUNITY FIRE SAFE PROGRAM II ALPINE FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $5,449 $0 

2011 04 MARKLEEVILLE FUELS PROJECT- PHASE I ALPINE FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $6,871 $0 

BURNEY- HAT CREEK COMMUNITY FOREST FALL RIVER RESOURCE CONSERVATION 

2011 05 PROJECT DISTRICT $93,601 $79,442 

2011 05 ELDERLY/ DISABLED DEFENSIBLE SPACE SUSANVILLE INDIAN RANCHER lA $50,000 $14,000 

WESTERN SISKIYOU SUSTAINABLE 

2011 05 FUELBREAKS MID KLAMATH WATERSHED COUNCIL $49,651 $21,319 

MAD RIDGE FUELBREAK MASTICATION THE WATERSHED RESEARCH AND TRAINING 

2011 05 MAINTENANCE TREATMENT CENTER $71,060 $20,639 

PILOT CREEK ROAD BRUSHING & 

2011 05 CHIPPING FUEL RECUCTION PROJECT BRIDGEVILLE COMMUNITY CENTER $26,384 $10,944 

DEFENSIBLE ASSISTANCE FOR HARDSHIP 

2011 05 CASES KERN RIVER VALLEY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $5,874 $0 

2011 05 SOUTH DUNSMUIR FUELS REDUCTION DUNSMUIR FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $2,572 $15,000 

MUSSER HILL AND CHINA GULCH-PHASE II TRINITY COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION 

2011 05 FUELS REDUCTION PROJECT DISTRICT $219,066 $141,424 

HAYFORK AREA FUELBREAKS 

2011 05 MAINTENANCE BURNING NEPA WATERSHED RESEARCH AND TRAINING CENTER $35,942 $9,123 

2011 05 COMMUNITY CHIPPING PROJECT HIGHWAY 108 FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $14,575 $112,350 

COMMUNITY FIRE PROTECTION WATER 

2011 05 SOURCE YOSEMITE FOOTHILLS FIRE SAFE $0 $10,000 

USDA Confidential 6/20/2017 
TABLE B- Page 5 5/16/17 Embargoed Draft QFR response 

Agreement USFS Forest Service Applicant Tot

Year Region Project Hie Applicant Name Match Match Fu

ODD FELLOWS FUEL REDUCTION & ROAD 

2011 05 MAINTENANCE HIGHWAY 108 FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $38,775 $15,000 

2011 05 RAC HWY 108 TWAIN HARTE FUEL BREAK HIGHWAY 108 FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $16,409 $24,125 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- FORESTHILL WUI PLACER COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION 

2011 05 FUEL REDUCTION DISTRICT $12,507 $22,000 

TREAT HAZARDOUS FUELS ON NATIONAL 

2011 06 FOREST SYSTEM LANDS OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS $87,109 $164,764 

WEST DREWS ASPEN ENHANCEMENT 

2011 06 PROJECT OREGON DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS $14,950 $20,661 

2011 06 JUNIPER BIOMASS GUIDE CROOK COUNTY EXTENSION SERVICE $13,021 $12,086 

COMMUNITY JUSTICE FUELS REDUCTION 

2011 06 AND FIRE MANAGEMENT (RAC#101194) JACKSON COUNTY $65,837 $75,718 

BILLINGS CREEK SEDIMENT& SHADE 

2011 06 PHASE II FUELS BREAK COOS FOREST PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION $3,596 $2,197 

2011 06 HAZARDOUS FUEL WORK ON NURD Douglas County Public Works $60,987 $233,886 

NORTHEAST WASHINGTON STEWARDSHIP 

PROJECT REGENERATION HARVEST, 

ROAD & STREAMSIDE BUFFER 

2011 06 MONITORING NE WASHINGTON FORESTRY COALITION $41,018 $2,700 2011 08 HEMLOCK WOOLLY ADELGID PROJECT KENTUCKY DIVISION OF FORESTRY $237,476 $0 

2011 01 ORO FINO FUELS REDUCTION ORO FINO ENTERPRISES $3,016 $0 

BLUE RIDGE COMMUNITY FIRE RISK 

2012 03 REDUCTION- RAC 11-03 COCONINO COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES $42,741 $39,000 

2012 04 CUSTER COUNTY- RAC FUEL REDUCTION CUSTER COUNTY $92,635 $27,101 

2012 04 BUTTE COUNTY- RAC FUEL REDUCTION BUTTE COUNTY $37,081 $22,916 

2012 04 LEMHI COUNTY- RAC FUEL REDUCTION LEMHI COUNTY $128,593 $32,200 

II Lc II RAe. "K0JECT - HAPPY VALLe' 

2012 05 ROAD EVACUATION/FUEL BREAKS ELDORADO COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $35,310 $13,215 

VALLeY SeNIUK UeL 

2012 o;; _____ REDUCTION PROJECT FIRE SAFE COUNCIL OF SISKIYOU COUNTY $42,400 

-------- ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- -- -------------- -

USDA Confidential 6/20/2017 
TABLE 8- Page 6 5/16/17 Embargoed Draft QFR response 

USFS Forest Service To

Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Fu

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- CONCOW 

HAZARDOUS FUEL REMOVAL & 

2012 05 REFORESTATION YANKEE HILL FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $98,083 $46,320 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- FORBESTOWN 

2012 05 ROADSIDE HAZARDOUS FUEL BREAK BUTTE COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS $51,750 $17,250 

2012 05 KERN COUNTY FUELS REDUCTION KERN COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT $47,000 $0 

JOHNSONDALE FUEL LOAD REDUCTION TULARE COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION 

2012 05 PROJECT DISTRICT $143,387 $0 

COARSEGOLD RESOURCE CONSERVATION 

2012 05 RD 274 FUEL BREAK MAINTENANCE DISTRICT $31,553 $0 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- BIG LONG SHADED 

2012 05 FUEL BREAK YOSEMITE FOOTHILLS FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $26,230 $24,780 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- GREELEY HILL 

COMMUNITY HALL FUELS REDUCTION 

2012 05 PROJECT YOSEMITE FOOTHILLS FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $11,270 $15,060 

LAKE ALPINE REC RESIDENCE FUEL CALAVERAS HEALTHY IMPACT PRODUCT 

2012 05 REDUCTION PROJECT SOLUTIONS $25,695 $7,450 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- NEVADA COUNTY 

2012 05 COMMUNITY SHADED FUELBREAK FIRE SAFE COUNCIL OF NEVADA COUNTY. INC $8,362 $7,250 

DESCHUTES SKYLINE COLLABORATIVE FOREST LANDSCAPE RESTORATION CENTRAL OREGON FOREST STEWARDSHIP 

2012 06 PROJECT FOUNDATION $24,699 $11,500 

COIC YEAR ROUND SILVICULTURE CENTRAL OREGON INTERGOVERNMENTAL 

2012 06 PROJECTS COUNCIL $52,049 $81,620 

2012 06 KLAMATH BARK BEETLE MITIGATION 2012 OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY $205,106 $0 2012 06 NINE AND MILE LADDER FUELS THE KLAMATH TRIBES $209,340 $73,084 

COLONEL BOB TRAIL CLEARING ON WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY 

2012 06 OLYMPIC NF -WASHINGTON CONSERVATION CORPS $39,291 $18,362 2012 06 FUELS REDUCTION & FIRE MANAGEMENT JACKSON COUNTY (COMMUNITY JUSTICE) $151,562 $44,322 2012 06 ALLEN CANYON FUELS REDUCTION WALLOWA RESOURCES $43,971 $0 

2012 06 MT. HOWARD FUELS REDUCTION WALLOWA RESOURCES $32,582 $0 

USDA Confidential 6/20/2017 
TABLE 8 Page 7 5/16/17 Embargoed Draft QFR response 

Agreement USFS Forest Service Applicant ToYear Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fu

WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL 

2012 06 FOREST HEALTH ENHANCEMENT RESOURCES $41,463 $45,000 

PRESCRIBED FIRE PLANNING & 

2012 08 IMPLEMENTATION TNC-SC CHAPTER $258,000 $9,130 

PERMANENT WILDLIFE OPENINGS MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL 

2012 09 MAINTENANCE RESOURCES $16,300 $12,000 

WET MEADOWS RX BURN WILDLIFE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL 

2012 09 HABITAT RESTORATION RESOURCES $101,280 $39,817 

2012 09 BUCKTHORN CONTROL PROJECT CITY OF ELY $24,475 $0 

HAZARDOUS FUELS INVERNTORY & 

2012 09 ANALYSIS THE NATURE CONSERVANCY $52,240 $6,985 

2012 10 RAG SITKA WATERSHED MONITORING SITKA CONSERVATION SOCIETY $33,272 $0 

S2SA- GREENLEE 23 BLUE RD HAZARD 

2013 03 CORNER REMOVAL GREENLEE COUNTY $71,432 $42,098 

2013 04 ELK RIDGE FR 50088 SAN JUAN COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT $95,473 $22,917 

CONCOWWATERSHED IMPROVEMENT 

2013 05 BIOMASS REMOVAL AND OUTREACH YANKEE HILL FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $37,423 $9,500 

FOREST HEALTH CHIPPER AND 

2013 05 RESIDENTS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM BUTTE COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $53,851 $1,000 

BRECKENRIDGE HAZARDOUS FUELS 

2013 05 REMOVAL (RAC) KERN RIVER VALLEY FIRESAFE COU $3,450 $0 

TULE RIVER RESTORATION, 

2013 05 ENHANCEMENT AND FIRE PROTECTION WILDPLACES $6,401 $0 

2013 05 SRS2 15-SODA CREEK FUEL REDUCTION DUNSMUIR FIRE SAFE COUNCIL $4,800 $73,356 

RAC- BEAR VALLEY DEFENSIBLE SPACE 

2013 05 CURBSIDE CHIPPING PROGRAM COUNTY OF ALPINE $10,261 $0 

METOLIUS BASIN FOREST RESTORATION 

2013 06 PARTNERSHIP DESCHUTES LAND TRUST $6,830 $0 2013 06 TAMARA QUAYS VEG MGMT PROJECT SALMON DRIFT CREEK WATERSHED C $27,652 $8,740 

2013 06 BVINE FUELS REDUCTION WALLOWA RESOURCES $38,320 $10,750 

2014 03 TOBOGGAN HILL HAZARD TREE REMOVAL AMERICAN CONSERVATION EXPERIEN $10,971 $9,310 

2014 03 HALL CREEK THINNING APACHE COUNTY $51,188 $20,007 

USDA Confidential 6/20/2017 
TABLE B 8 5/16/17 Embargoed Draft QFR response 

Agreement USFS Forest Service Applicant To

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name M21tch Match Fu

FISH CREEK TRAIL CLEARING 

2014 04 REHABILITATION PROJECT MONTANA CONSERVATION CORP $16,238 $12,896 

GBI AGREEMENT FOR FUEL REDUCTION AT 

2014 04 HISTORIC RESOURCES GREAT BASIN INSTITUTE $21,836 $11,110 

2014 05 SAWYER'S BAR WUI FUELS REDUCTION SALMON RIVER RESTORATION COUNCIL $34,905 $30,899 

MILL CREEK ROADSIDE HAZARDOUS 

2014 05 FUELS REDUCTION PROJECT HOOPA VALLEY TRIBE $112,674 $32,835 

TRIN RAC MAD RIVER PRESCRIBED FIRE 

2014 05 SUPPORT WATERSHED RESEARCH & TRAINING $19,869 $6,946 

2014 05 MUD SPRINGS FUEL BREAK WATERSHED RESEARCH AND TRAINING CENTER $101,321 $25,340 

THE WATERSHED RESEARCH AND TRAINING 

2014 05 COLLABORATIVE PILE BURNING CENTER $28,129 $7,034 

TRINITY COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION 

2014 05 SHADED FUEL BREAK/PLANTATION NEPA DISTRICT $182,049 $41,401 

DESCHUTES COLLABORATIVE FOREST CENTRAL OREGON FOREST STEWARDSHIP 

2014 06 PROJECT DE003 FOUNDATION $142,947 $102,589 

CLACKAMAS STEWARDSHIP PARTNERS 

2014 06 COORDINATOR CLACKAMAS RIVER BASIN COUNCIL $55,105 $24,796 

2014 06 UPPER COW FUELS WUI PHOENIX SCHOOL $45,760 $75,282 

2014 06 MUDDY SLED FUELS REDUCTION WALLOWA RESOURCES $24,699 $6,275 

2014 09 WATERSHED REHABILITATION ACTIONS CANAAN VALLEY INSTITUTE $420,238 $131,053 

SOUTHERN BLUES VEGETATION AND 

2015 06 FUELS MONITORING OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY $282,693 $0 

N KELLOGG FOREST HEALTH AND FUELS 

2016 01 REDUCTION PROJECT SHOSHONE CO FIRE MITIGATION $50,000 $0 

JENNY/YOUNGS POST FIRE AND YOUTH 

2016 01 ENGAGEMENT MONTANA CONSERVATION CORPS $220,848 $154,526 

HAZARDOUS FUELS REDUCTION AND 

ANIMAS/FALLS CREEK WATERSHED 

2016 02 IMPROVEMENT ALONG CR205 FALLS CREEK RANCH ASSOCIATION $12,480 $9,940 

RAC #15MUL TI005- ICOE RESTORATION 

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT II (BOISE 

2016 04 COUNTY) BASIN SCHOOL DISTRICT #72 $14,000 $0 

RAC #15MULTI012 & 16MULTI003 WOODY SOUTHWEST IDAHO RESOURCE AND 

2016 04 BIOMASS UTILIZATION PARTNERSHIP DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, INC $19,000 $0 

USDA Confidential 6/20/2017 
TABLE B- Page 9 5/16/17 Embargoed Draft QFR response 

Agreement USFS Forest Service Applicant To

Year Region P rojec!Title Applicant Name Match Match Fu

2016 05 STAFFORD FUEL BREAKS WATERSHED RESEARCH AND TRAINING CENTER $136,700 $0 

TRINITY COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION 

2016 05 GREENHORN FUELS REDUCTION DISTRICT $61,408 $15,760 

SRS2- ANGORA FOREST STEWARSHIP[ 

2016 05 RAC PROEJCT LEAGUE TO SAVE LAKE TAHOE $19,097 $37,160 

2016 06 TREE THINNING THE KLAMATH TRIBES $114,705 $29,189 

0603 FH FOREST RESTORATION THROUGH 

2016 06 COLLABORATION 2016 & 2017 SKAMANIA COUNTY EDC $53,130 $18,457 

RAC- KSANKA CREEK RESTORATION 

2017 01 PLANNING LINCOLN COUNTY $25,000 $0 

2017 01 YOUTH IN RESTORATION PROGRAM-RAG MISSOULA COUNTY-WEED DISTRICT-YIR $9,855 $14,125 

2017 03 HALL CREEK THINNING APACHE COUNTY $40,000 $10,000 

2017 03 RED ROCK TRAIL RESTORATION 2017 AMERICAN CONSERVATION EXPERIENCE $140,876 $96,209 

ERADICATING SALT CEDAR ON THE GILA 

2017 03 RIVER UPPER GILA WATERSHED ALLIANCE $19,997 $5,085 

ACE 2017-18 SUPPLEMENTAL PROJECT 

2017 04 AGREEMENT ACE CONSERVATION EXPERIENCE $146,380 $123,284 

NORTH WARNER FOREST HEALTH 

2017 06 PROJECT LAKE COUNTY UMBRELLA WATERSHED COUNCIL $183,657 $420,000 

COLLABORATIVE FIRE PREVENTION & 

2017 06 EDUATION PROGRAM GRANDE RONDE FIRE PREVENTION ASSOCIATION $10,000 $0 

TITLE II RAC PROJECT- LEONI MEADOWS 

2011 05 FUEL REDUCTION NORTHERN CALIFORNIA CONFERENCE $50,000 $20,304 

SHACKLEFORD CREEK FALLS 

RECREATION AREA HAZARDOUS FUELS 

2011 05 REDUCTION NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RESOURCE CENTER $38,500 $10,500 

2011 05 WCF EAST BRANCH 1 FUELS REDUCTION TRINITY COUNTY RCD $72,624 $20,625 

WEAVERVILLE COMMUNITY FOREST EAST TRINITY COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION 

2011 05 BRANCH II FUELS REDUCTION DISTRICT $73,963 $18,855 

2012 03 SCOTT THINNING- RAC 11-38 ALAMO NAVAJO SCHOOL BOARD $265,821 $67,108 

2012 04 RAC MAMMOTH CREEK FUELS UTAH STATE FORESRTY FIRE AND STATE LANDS $83,722 $3,300 

USDA Confidential 6/20/2017 
TABLE 8 Page 10 5/16/17 Embargoed Draft QFR response 

Agreement USFS Forest Service Applicant Tota

Year Region Project Title Applicant Name Match Match Fun

JOHNSON-VERDURE HAZARD FUEL 

2012 04 PROJECT NATIONAL WILD TURKEY FEDERATION $195,654 $0 $

2012 04 AURORA CEMETERY FUELS REDUCTION NEVADA DIVISION OF FORESTRY $6,070 $3,740 

2012 05 COS FUELS REDUCTION PLAN PROJECT COLLEGE OF THE SISKIYOUS $41,728 $43,883 $

FEATHER RIVER COLLEGE FUELS 

2012 05 REDUCTION E& FIRE PLANNING FEATHER RIVER COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT $14,652 $11,820 

2013 04 DESERT CREEK FUELS REDUCTION SMITH VALLEY CONSERVATION DISTRICT $65,522 $13,955 $

JANESVILLE LANDSCAPE FUELS 

2013 05 TREATMENT JANESVILLE TOWN COUNCIL $77,645 $11,500 

2013 05 PATTON MILL FUEL BREAK DISTRICT $52,901 $61,771 $

2013 05 PLANTATION THIN- TSI CALIFORNIA CONSERVATION CORPS $67,077 $22,723 $

MY RtGH IS-OF WAYS SHADED FUeL 

2014 02 BREAK PENNINGTON CO. WEED & PEST $56,189 $392,786 $4

PONDEROSA WAY SOUTH SHADED FUEL TEHAMA COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION 

2014 05 BREAK DISTRICT $31,421 $35,632 

S2F69714 WARNER CANYON SKI AREA 

2014 06 THINNING LAKE COUNTY, OREGON $21,650 $58,250 

2016 05 TRIN RAG BEAVERSLIDE FUEL TREATMENT WATERSHED RESEARCH AND TRAINING CENTER $34,395 $9,140 

2016 2017 COMMUNITY JUSTICE FUELS 

2016 06 REDUCTION AND ROADSIDE BRUSHING JACKSON COUNTY $27,505 $31,252 $

CENTRAL OREGON PARTNERSHIPS FOR CENTRAL OREGON INTERGOVERNMENTAL 

2009 6 WILDFIRE RISK REDUCTION COUNCIL $433,902.35 $290,266.61 $7

2017 06 MUDDY SLED FUELS REDUCTION WALLOWA RESOURCES $22,896 $5,900 

USDA Confidential 6/20/2017 
465 

U.S. Senate Committee on. Energy and Natural Resources 

May 2, 2017 Hearing: Federal Payments to .Ll)cal Governments Provided through 

the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act and the Payment 

in Lieu of Taxes Program and the Need to Provide Greater Fiscal Certainty for 

Resource-Dependent Communities with Tax-Exempt Federal Lands 

Questions for the Record Submitted to the Honorable Gordon. Cruickshank 

Questions from Senator Joe Manchin III 

Questions: I have received several letters from school superintendents, teachers, and business 

managers from counties that receive SRS funds. Just last month l received a letter from the 

Finance Director of the. Pocahontas County .Board of Education, who is grappling v,;i.th difficult 

decisions needing to be made from the reduction in SRS funds. This year Pocahontas County 

received $72,000 in SRS, a sharp reduction from prior year amoinrts $750,000. Right now, 

Pocahontas. County is in a budget shortfall of $300,0.00. Already, through attrition or reduction 

in force reduced staff by 14 people. 

This is what she says will be the impacts of these cuts: 

a. Buildings will not have adequate staff to clean them. 

b. Two bus runs have been eliminated creating longer bus. routes. Approximately half of 

their students average a bus ride longer than a halfhour. 

c. Principals are teaching classes each day. 

d. A cook is required to cover two schools. 

e. The food coordinator will· be teacllirtg half time at one of the schools. 

f. The curriculum coordinator has been cut, the central office stafhvill assume these 

duties. 

g. A Title I teacher is retiring, another Title. I teacher will have assig!lnlents at two 

schools which are 26 miles apart from each other. 

And; I recently received another letter notifying me that Hardy County Schools received the 

counties payment for FY20 1 7 in tl1e amount of $7,265:65 .. They were appreciative, however they 

fairly pointed out that Hardy County has previously received approximately $65,000 per year of 

SRS funds. That's a decrease of$57,735 or.88 percent. 

This is in an area of our state that has also expetience a steep decline in coal production and the 

resulting decline in jobs and econornic activity. 

Questions: 

a. You have seen a decline in payments; please describe what smt of meastires yo)JI 

community has to take due to the decrease in fi.111ds? 

b. What are the implications of these cuts, and who do these cuts impact the most? 
466 

Ripchensky, Darla {f.nergxl 

From: 

Sent 

To: 

Subject: 

Attachments: 

Darla, 

Gordon Cruickshank 

Thursday, May 11, 2017 10:36 AM 

Ripchensky, Darla (Energy) 

Road Department Response to Questions on SRS funding inquired by Senator Joe 

Manchin Ill 

5-8-17 Effect on Boise County if no SRS Funding.docx 

Please see below comments from my Road Superintendent replying to the questions of Senator Manchin. 

I would also like to point out that when Valley County had working sawmills processing the harvested 

timber in my region there was a certain portion of a stable economy with payroll happening consistently. 

Now with relying more on Recreation to sustain our region the certainty is not there. People do like to 

recreate however only when they have the extra funding to do so. This creates a certain amount of 

caution for businesses to operate and they only pay service wages which do not come close to the wages 

paid when the sawmill was operating. Today the only stable job positions are supported by tax dollars for 

Local Government, Schools and the Forest Service which are the biggest employers In my region. Yes SRS 

helps us in our road maintenance and schooling of the children however it doesn't work on the economic 

stability of the region except in the short term. That is why with 88 percent Public lands which grows 

trees faster than we harvested in prior years this is a viable revenue source to support rural counties. We 

all agree that we don't need to harvest like we did in other years however we can do 

responsible/sustainable harvest that supports the region, the state and the United States when products 

are produced and taxes are paid. A Win Win for all of us. 

I have also attached a letter supplied by a neighboring Boise County when I asked the same questions to 

them. 

Again if you need something further please let me know. 

Thank you for the opportunity to provide some additional thoughts. 

Commissioner Gordon Cruickshank 

Valley County, Idaho 

Comments from Jeff McFadden, Superintendent, Valley County Road Department 

1. You have seen a decline in payments; please describe what sort of measures your community has 

to take due to the decrease in funds? We be haVing to run older equipment which cost more 

in maintenance and that directly effects how much road work we done Snow 

removal to meet We be having to put road are 

are about to the end of their service life, so with 

roads become gravel roads again. 

1

2. What are the implications of these cuts, and who do these cuts impact the 

most? Downsizing our workforce to meet budget requirements. That directing affects 
467 

the services we provide to the citizens of the County. Snow removal will be one of the 

first demands to be cut back on. The County has an obligation to provide safe roadways 

throughout Valley County. If we downsize our workforce, there will be cutbacks on our 

road maintenance. The dept. Employees will not be getting sufficient pay, so employees 

will be looking for other job opportunities which leaves the County short on its 

workforce, that means projects will have to be delayed or dismissed and snowplow 

routes will not be all done in a reasonable time frame. 
468 

BOISE COUNTY ROAD & BRIDGE DEPARTMENT 

39 BROWNLEE ROAD 

HORSESHOE BEND, ID 83629 

TELEPHONE: (208) 793-2380 

The loss of the Secure Rural Schools Funding will have an extremely adverse effect on living and working 

in Boise County. The SRS funds make up approximately 40% of the Road .and Bridge Department's 

budget. With the.currentfunding, the Road and Bri(fge Department has been struggling just to maintain 

the road system of284.6 miles. If the SRS is not reauthoriz~d there will be a minimum of a 50% loss of 

the current workforce. Because of the 50% reduction ofthe current 12 Equipment Operators, the road 

and bridge maintenance services will reduce by approximately SO% as well. Services include grading, 

pothole patching, cleaning culverts, roadside vegetation control, chip sealing, paving and winter 

maintenance; Many loW volume roads will no longer have snow removal and all roads will have reduced 

services. This will impact residents in Boise County considerably. Access to certain parts in the touhty 

will be reduced to one Way in and one way out, creating a significant public safety concern if a 

catastrophic event were to occur. Schools, Emergency Medical Services, Fire and Law Enforcement will 

all have to adapt, especially in the winter months. There. will be significant additions in response time or 

possibly, emergency services may not be able to respond at all. School bus routes will have to change 

and residents will be forced to drive their children considerable distances to attend school and 

unfortunately many ofthe roads will not be plowed in time for th.e commuting public. Because of the 

reduction of snow removal, this is going to cause a hardship ori the residents traveling to their places of 

employment outside the county. The majority of the roads in Boise County access Federal land. Reduced 

County services will impact basically all people trying to access Federal land that is within Boise County. 

The businesses in Boise County will also feel the .economic impact due to the reduced servicestothose 

traveling to Boise County for the purpose of recreation. There could be devastating effects on the 

housing market causing a decrease in value if the county services to roads arereduced .. A decline in 

property taxes will result in a deficit of county wide services that rely on the taxes to fund the various 

Boise County Departments. Employees continue to live with the stress of not knowing the future of their 

employment and the devastation that will result from the loss. of a job. Many of the employees 

previously worked in the logging industry and experienced the decline in logging. Boise CQunty lacks 

employment opportunities and work will need to be found out of the county and possibly out of state. 

Every paycheck that is cut from payroll will result in a decrease in taxes paid to the Federal and State 

taxes. 
469 

Ripchensky, Darla (Energy) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Daf"la.r 

Gordon Cruickshank ...::gk55@frontlercom> 

Thursday, May 11, 2017 10:17 AM 

Ripchensky, Darla (Energy) 

Response to Questiqns on SRS funding impacts by Senator Joe Mahchin ll1 

I reached out to the two school districts in my county with the questions Senator Manchln Inquired about. 

Below are the responses to the two questions by the School Superintendents. 

If you need further information please do not hesitate to ask. 

Thank you, 

Commissioner Gordon Cruickshank 

Valley County, Idaho 

Comments from Cascade School Distrlct Superintendent 

1. Our school and community must attempt to pass a supplemental levy every 2 years. We are 

taxing our home owners for a higher amount than we would from the decrease in funds we receive 

from the SRS. Coming from a lower socio-economic area we must taxpatrons more money even 

though their income may make that difficult. Rural schools are not in a position to generate enough 

funding to maintain a quality school due to funding being related to Average Daily Attendance. 

2. The funding cutbacks affect students and families. If we cannot generate enough funding, we 

attempt to ask our patrons to help and assist in many areas. In an attempt to offer more curriculum for 

our Secondary Students we need to hire more staff than the state will allow to pay for from the size of 

our school. We are considered "over-staffed" in our high school. The typical programs that get cut 

are, Art, Music, Shop Classes or what is considered elective classes. Those are the same classes 

that students enjoy and take pride in. For rural schools the lack of funding is forcing schools to teach 

only the core classes. If we cut teachers it hurts the small town economy and the school. 

Comments from McCall/Donnelly School District Superintendent 

1. SRS funding has been instrumental in a series of one time infrastructure improvements. They have 

supported capital construction projects, technology upgrades and facility renovation. 

2. Without SRS funding the school district would at some point need to seek additional funds to 

support these efforts. This would likely come in the form of local taxes through levies. In the City of 

McCall, residents already see significant assessments due to basic infrastructure needs, like sewer, 

water and roads. In my opinion, any increase on taxes. will impact the median income families the 

most. However, it impacts the entire community. 
470 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 2, 2017 Hearing: Federal Payments to Local Governments Provided through 

the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act and the Payment 

in Lieu of Taxes Program and the Need to Provide Greater Fiscal Certainty for 

Resource-Dependent Communities with Tax-Exempt Federal Lands 

Questions for the Record Submitted to the Honorable Mike Manus 

Questions from Senator Joe Manchin III 

Questions: I have received several letters from school superintendents, teachers, and business 

managers from counties that receive SRS funds. Just last month I received a letter from the 

Finance Director of the Pocahontas County Board of Education, who is grappling with difficult 

decisions needing to be made from the reduction in SRS funds. This year Pocahontas County 

received $72,000 in SRS, a sharp reduction from prior year amounts $750,000. Right now, 

Pocahontas County is in a budget shortfall of$300,000. Already, through attrition or reduction 

in force reduced staff by 14 people. 

This is what she says will be the impacts of these cuts: 

a. Buildings will not have adequate staff to clean them. 

b. Two bus runs have been eliminated creating longer bus routes. Approximately half of 

their students average a bus ride longer than a half hour. 

c. Principals are teaching classes each day. 

d. A cook is required to cover two schools. 

e. The food coordinator will be teaching halftime at one of the schools. 

f. The curriculum coordinator has been cut, the central office staff will assume these 

duties. 

g. A Title I teacher is retiring, another Title I teacher will have assignments at two 

schools which are 26 miles apart from each other. 

And, I recently received another letter notifying me that Hardy County Schools received the 

cow1ties payment for FY2017 in the amount of $7,265.65. They were appreciative, however they 

fairly pointed out that Hardy County has previously received approximately $65,000 per year of 

SRS funds. That's a decrease of$57,735 or 88 percent. 

This is in an area of our state that has also experience a steep decline in coal production and the 

resulting decline in jobs and economic activity. 

Questions: 

a. You have seen a decline in payments; please describe what sort of measures your 

community has to take due to the decrease in funds? 

b. What are the implications of these cuts, and who do these cuts impact the most? 
471 

Pend Oreille County 

Board of Commissioners 

Karen Skoog 

District#l 

Mike Manus 

District#2 

Stephen Kiss 

District# 3 

Rhonda Cary Phone: 509-447-4119 PO Box 5025 

Clerk of the Board FAX: 509 447-0595 Newport, WA 99156-5025 

E-mail: commissionerso(fice@pendoreille.org 

June 23, 2017 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

RE: Response to Questions for the Record 

Honorable Senators of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee: 

This letter addresses the negative impacts to Pend Oreille County as a result of the deficiency of 

federal funding through the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) Act. The shortfall we are experiencing 

in Pend Oreille County due to the lack ofSRS funding for 2016 is far reaching. In our county, 

we have 3 small school districts as well as the Pend Oreille County Road Department being 

affected by this decision to not fund SRS. Below is what I have learned from the school 

districts as well as my county road department. 

Newport School District was short $220,000 for their budget for 2017 due to SRS funds 

and short $300,000 total which they are in the process of making those adjustments to their 

budget for next year. The areas being affected are listed below: 

a. Larger class sizes grades 4 - 12 

b. Reduced staffing for Certificated employees (Teachers) 

c. Reduced staffing for Classified employees (Janitors, teacher's aids. kitchen staff, etc.) 

d. Fewer remedial services 

e. Total lay off will be 5 employees 

Selkirk School District budgeted for $60,000 and received $12,000, a shortfall of $48,000 

and will be cutting 1-2 Classified Stall' members 

Cusick School District budgeted for $60,000 and received $11,069.64, a shortfall of $48,930 

and is currently looking for other grants to make up for the funding shortage. 

Pend Oreille County Road Department budgeted $375,000 and received $75,325 in SRS 

funding. This was a shortfall of $299,675. We had 2 road projects scheduled for this year 

with plans to use the SRS funds as match for grants received on the projects. W c received 

$500,000 grant for our Sandy Shores safety project, planning to use $100,000 of SRS as a 

match. This project postponed until next year with hopes of getting li.mding as we have already 

spent $75,000 and would need to return the money to repay the grants. We received $2,000,000 

in grants for our Fertile Valley Road Safety project planning to use $200,000 SRS money for 
472 

our match for this $2.2 Million project. This project is too important to cancel and we will be 

scrambling to find the funding needed to complete. We may need to lay off 2 deputies to 

accomplish this. 

In addition to the shortfall in SRS funding we had severe weather and spent $225,000 more than 

was budgeted in snow removal. We also have had many landslides and road washouts in the 

county to the cost of over $1,000,000 which we have no money to fill the void in that area. 

Below are the areas we must cut to balance our budget: 

a. Layoff of I road employee, 1 FTE 

b. Not replacing l employee retiring 

c. Moving sign Technician back to road employee to fill one vacancy 

d. Layoff of I mechanic, I FTE 

c. Reducing our Chip seal program for next 2 years 

f. Extending the life of all road vehicles by one year, includes road graders, trucks, pickups, 

loaders, etc. 

g. Reducing our striping program from $150,000 to $75,000 for 2017. A safety concern! 

h. Reducing our roadside vegetation program for 2017 and eliminating in 2018. Another 

safety concern. 

This is only the tip of the iceberg for our county road department in regards to funding shortfalls. 

l appreciate your attention to this critical issue and request you reauthorize the Secure Rural 

Schools funding. 

Sincerely, 

Mike /XL~ Manus:C0111111iSSi0J1 

Pend Oreille County 

Newport, Washington 
473 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 2, 2017 Hearing: Federal Payments to Local Governments Provided through 

the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act and the Payment 

in Lieu of Taxes Program and the Need to Provide Greater Fiscal Certainty for 

Resource-Dependent Communities with Tax-Exempt Federal Lands 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Mark Haggerty 

Question for the Record from Chairman Lisa Murkowski 

Question: Can you explain why an endowment model might be beneficial to say, Ketchikan 

Gateway Borough in Alaska, and other rural resource dependent communities over a longer-term 

reauthorization of Secure Rural Schools paired with forest management reforms? 

Questions from Senator Debbie Stabenow 

Questions: In your testimony, you indicate a potential loss of more than $2.2 million to 

Michigan counties if the Secure Rural Schools program is not reauthorized and the 

Administration's proposed cap on PIL T payments is enacted. In fact, based on your data, fifteen 

Michigan counties would cease receiving federal payments under this scenario. 

Recent census data has shown that people in rural counties in Michigan are older and youth in 

these areas are increasingly moving to urban centers. In addition, job growth has lagged in many 

of these areas, and in rural communities nationwide. 

Outside of Congress authorizing a permanent endowment system that provides the funding 

stability the annual discretionary funding lacks, has your analysis provided any insights on other 

creative solutions that could help struggling rural communities? As Ranking Member of the 

Agriculture Committee, I would be interested to hear if you have any suggestions on policies we 

might incorporate in the next Farm BilL 
474 

May 23,2017 

Senator Lisa Murkowski 

c/o Darla Ripchensky, PMP 

Chief Clerk 

HEADWATERS 

ECONOMICS 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

304 Dirksen Senate Office Building 

Washington, DC 20510 

Dear Senator Murkowski, 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify at the May 2, 20 17 U.S. Senate Committee on Eners'Y 

and Natural Resources hearing on federal payments to local governments provided through the 

Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (SRS) and the Payments in Lieu 

of Taxes program (PIL T). 

And thank you for your question for the record seeking an explanation of how an endowment 

model along with a longer-term reauthorization of SRS and forest management reform could 

benefit rural communities in Alaska, including places like Ketchikan Gateway Borough. 

Ketchikan Gateway Borough and the Tongass National Forest offer a good example of why 

forest management reform is important to sustain rural communities and to address forest health, 

but may not be, by itself, a solution to provide fiscal certainty to counties. 

Ketchikan Gateway Borough also serves as a good example of how the endowment model could 

work here and for similar rural communities across the U.S. that are dependent on these 

payments. The key topics include: 

• In the short term, Ketchikan Gateway Borough and school district are dependent on SRS 

and PILT. 

• Revenue sharing payments are made on a seven-year rolling average basis. A longer-tenu 

commitment to appropriations is required to keep counties whole during a transition away 

from dependence on SRS. 

• Commercial receipts from the Tongass National Forest can be significant, but not in 

every year. 

• A permanent trust would capture and invest revenue in years with relatively high cut 

values to build a sizeable endowment and stabilize payments over time. 

• A ten-year extension of SRS and establishing an endowment for the Forest Service would 

have a net cost ofless than $200 million annually to the federal Treasury. This cost could 

be reduced by a quarter to a half in ten years. 

Headwaters Economics 1 P.O. Box 7059 1 Bozeman, Montana 59771 1406.570.5626. 

https://headwaterseconomics. 
475 

In the short term, Ketchikan Gateway Borough and its schools are dependent on SRS. 

Ketchikan Gateway Borough is highly exposed to federal decisions about managing the Tongass 

National Forest and decisions about how to fund payments that compensate for the non-taxable 

value of federal land. Federal public lands make up 96.7 percent of the land area in the 

Borough. 1 

In 2015, local governments in Ketchikan Gateway received total payments from SRS and PIL T 

of $2,300,877 (see Table 1, adjusted to 2016 $s). 2 The total was made up from an SRS Title I 

payment of $1,005,596 that was shared between local schools (75%) and the Borough (25%). 3 

An additional $177,458 in Title II funding went to the Ketchikan Resource Advisory Committee 

(RAC) and the Borough received a PILT payment of$1 ,117,822. 

Table l: Federal Land Payments to Local Governments in Ketchikan Gateway Borough, 

Alaska 2016 

~~ 

FY 2015 Payment 

SRS Title I $251,399 $754,197 $1,005,596 

SRS Title II $177,458 $177,458 

PILT $1,117,822 $1,117,822 

Total $1,369,221 $754,197 $177,458 $2,300,877 

FY 2016 Payment 

SRS Title I $21,254 $21,254 $42,507 

SRS Title II $0 

PILT $1,115,667 $1,115,667 

Total $1,136,921 $21,254 $0 $1,158,174 

Change from FY 2015 to FY 2016 

-$232,301 -$732,944 -$177,458 -$1,142,702 

-17% -97% -100% -50% 

In FY 2016, local governments in Ketchikan Gateway received total payments of$1,158,174, 

about half of the total payments received in FY 2015. The payment to local schools declined 

from $744,789 to $21,254, a 97 percent reduction. No Title II payment was made for the RAC. 

If SRS is reauthorized and funded, payments will effectively return to FY 2015 levels, restoring 

funding to the Borough, school district, and for the RAC. If SRS is not reauthorized, payments to 

local governments in Ketchikan Gateway would remain at or near the FY 2016levels. 

Reauthorization of SRS is required to keep local governments in Alaska and across the U.S. 

whole, particularly school districts, until a longer-term solution is implemented. 

PIL T is not a part of the solution for Ketchikan Gateway Borough, which is limited by the 

current PIL T formula. 

Headwaters Economics 1 P.O. Box 7059 1 Bozeman, Montana 59771 1406.570.5626. 

https:/lheadwaterseconomics. 2 
476 

Nationally, if SRS is not reauthorized, the total PILT authorization would increase from about 

$452 million in FY 2016 to more than $522 million by FY 2018, a $70 million increase 

(Headwaters Economics estimate). 

Ketchikan Gateway Borough's authorized PIL T payment would not rise, however, because the 

Borough's payment is established at the floor payment amount and this status does not change 

without SRS. 4 

If the new PILT authorization is not fully funded, however, the Borough's PILT payment would 

decrease. 

For example, the recent budget proposal from the Administration would to limit the PIL T 

appropriation from an estimated $522 million in FY 2018 to about $366 million (the ten-year 

average of payments from FY 2007 to FY 2016l The lower appropriated amount would be 

shared proportionately among eligible governments. 

Without SRS, Ketchikan Gateway Borough's payment would fall from $1.15 million in FY 2017 

to an estimated $718,099, a 36 percent decline (Headwaters Economics estimate). 

Ironically, in a scenario where SRS is reauthorized but PILT funding is limited, Ketchikan 

Gateway Borough's PILT payment would decline by a lesser amount (to $718,099 without SRS 

compared to $830,080 with SRS). That is because without SRS, rural boroughs and counties 

limited by the PILT formula would receive a relatively smaller share of the total PIL T 

authorization, and would receive smaller payment if the PIL T appropriation is limited. 

PIL Tis not a part of the long-term solution for the smallest and most dependent local 

governments. Less than full funding for PIL T would hit these places hardest. 

Revenue sharing payments are made on a seven-year rolling average basis. A longer-term 

commitment to appropriations is required to keep counties whole during a transition away 

from dependence on SRS. 

Forest management reform that results in higher commercial receipts would result in a larger 

revenue sharing payment. In reality, because revenue sharing payments are made on a seven-year 

rolling average value of receipts, commercial activities would have to be increased and sustained 

over several years before payments to local governments would reflect higher levels of annual 

revenue. 

In this scenario, it is likely that Congress would need to continue appropriations many years 

before revenue sharing payments would offer a viable replacement for appropriations. 

Establishing an endowment over these years would provide for greater certainty and higher 

payments at the end of a ten-year authorization of appropriations at a relatively low additional 

cost. 

Headwaters Economics 1 P.O. Box 7059 1 Bozeman, Montana 59771 1406.570.5626. 

https://headwaterseconomics. 3 
477 

Commercial receipts from the Tongass National Forest can be significant, but not in every 

year. 

Data back to 1977 for the Tongass show the volume of timber harvest has declined steadily from 

a high of 480 million board feet in 1980. The value of the cut was far more volatile, falling from 

nearly $20 million in 1980 to only about $250,000 in 1985, before peaking again at $25.7 million 

in 1990 (all values are adjusted for inflation to 2016 dollars). 

Receipts are highly volatile due to national recessions, uncertain export markets, and the 

relatively remote location of the Tongass 6 These factors resulted in significantly different sales 

prices for timber, which have a significant impact on commercial receipts. Average prices 

received by the Forest Service for timber cut off the Tongass have varied from $2 per MBF in 

1985 to $197 per MBF in 1996. 

Figure I: Timber harvest volume, value, and average price on the Tongass National Forest, 

1977-20167 

Figure 2: Inflation-adjusted gross receipts by type on the Tongass National Forest, 1986-

20158 

A permanent trust would capture and invest revenue in years with relatively high cut 

values to build a sizeable endowment and stabilize payments over time. 

A U.S. permanent trust for federal land counties, boroughs, parishes and their schools could 

stabilize revenue generated from land management activities and build a sizeable endowment 

over time. The endowment would eventually replace the need for appropriations to compensate 

Headwaters Economics 1 P.O. Box 7059 1 Bozeman, Montana 59771 1406.570.5626. 

ht!ps:llheadwaterseconomics. 4 
478 

counties for non-taxable federal lands, and guarantee counties predictably rising payments over 

time. 

How quickly a permanent trust would grow depends on the value of receipts and other revenues 

deposited into the trust, the performance of the investments, and the timing and size of annual 

distributions from the trust. 

Current receipts from federal lands are relatively anemic compared to historic levels. However, 

establishing an endowment now would set up the framework to capture these revenues if and 

when receipts increase from forest management reforms or other new sources of revenue from 

federal lands, including renewable energy. 

For example, receipts from the Forest Service and BLM O&C lands were about $75 million in 

FY 2016. Even modest increases in receipts could deposit about $1 billion in a trust over ten 

years. 

An endowment would also increase in value more quickly if investment returns are held in trust 

for a period of time before making distributions. For example, North Dakota established the 

Legacy Fund in 2011 and all the income from investments will have been reinvested for six years 

before the Fund begins making distributions in 2017. 9 

Congress also should consider capitalizing the trust up front with discretionary deposits or with 

other sources of revenue. 

An endowment ought to be managed to preserve the principal balance in perpetuity. The Alaska 

Permanent Fund Corporation recommends a strategy that aims to earn a five percent return, net 

of inflation, and distributions equal to five percent of the ending fund balance each year, 

inflation-proofing the fund. 10 

The bottom line is that any revenue invested into a trust would provide for permanent and 

predictable payments benefitting Ketchikan Gateway Borough and other communities across 

Alaska and the U.S. 

A ten-year extension of SRS and establishing an endowment fot· the Forest Service would 

have a net cost of less than $200 million annually. This cost could be reduced by a quarter 

to a half in ten years. 

The net cost to the federal treasury of extending Forest Service SRS payments at 2015 levels is 

about $144 million annually. 

The additional cost of establishing a new permanent trust for the Forest Service is $54 million 

annually (the value of revenue sharing payments in 2016 that would otherwise be delivered to 

counties or returned to the federal treasury to offset the cost of appropriations). 

In a model where a permanent trust is established along with a ten-year reauthorization of 

appropriations, rising commercial receipts from forest management reform would increase 

Headwaters Economics 1 P.O. Box 7059 1 Bozeman, Montana 59771 1 406.570.5626. 

https:/lheadwaterseconomics. 5 
479 

distributions to the trust and build the principal more quickly without increasing the cost of a tenyear authorization of SRS. 

In a model where a permanent trust is established without a ten-year reauthorization of 

appropriations, appropriations equal to the value of forgone revenue sharing payments would 

still be required. In this model, rising commercial receipts from forest management reform would 

increase the cost of appropriations made to replace these receipts that would be invested into the 

pennanent trust instead of being distributed directly to counties. 

Congress could also capitalize the trust with a one-time appropriation or identify additional 

sources of revenue for distribution to the permanent trust. Doing so would decrease the amount 

of time it would take for the endowment to replace revenue sharing payments or long-term 

appropriations, but at a higher short-term cost to the federal Treasury. 

A trust that could grow to $1 or $2 billion over ten years by investing annual commercial 

receipts and identifying other revenue to capitalize the trust would reduce the annual cost of 

long-term appropriations authorized to allow the trust to build by a quarter to a half, and would 

eventually eliminate these costs altogether. 

Permanent trust funds have worked for nearly every state in the West, including Alaska, 

and many foreign nations, most notably Norway. 

The most relevant model for an endowment that might be established to benefit local 

governments adjacent to non-taxable federal lands are the numerous state trusts funded with 

royalties and fees generated from commercial activities on state-owned land, including timber 

harvests. 

Beginning in 1803 with Ohio's statehood, the federal government transferred to new states a 

portion of the public domain not yet claimed by homesteaders or granted to railroads or for other 

purposes. In most western states, the federal government transferred two sections in each 

Township upon statehood. The lands were intended to generate revenue for local schools and 

other purposes. 

Initially, states often sold lands to generate revenue and spent the proceeds of sales as they came 

in. The unsustainability of this practice soon led states to establish permanent trust funds that 

would receive the proceeds of sales to benefit schools in perpetuity. Later, the federal 

government began to mandate that state lands be held in trust (not sold). States continued to 

invest the proceeds ofland management activities from "Trust Lands" into permanent trust 

funds. Today, states manage funds with total value of more than $100 billion. 

The Act of 1908 established a fiscal relationship between newly reserved-and tax exemptfederal lands and local governments. This relationship was based on an annual revenue sharing 

agreement instead of the permanent trust fund model that was common practice for states by that 

time. 

Headwaters Economics 1 P.O. Box 7059 1 Bozeman, Montana 59771 1406.570.5626. 

https:l/headwaterseconomics. 6 
480 

By the late 1960s and early 1970s, the annual volatility and inequity of annual revenue sharing 

payments was a growing concern for Congress. Instead of adopting the permanent trust model 

utilized by the states, Congress created a new appropriation from Congress-Payments in Lieu 

of Taxes-in 1976 to extend payments to local governments where revenue sharing receipts 

were relatively modest, and to stabilize compensation to counties where receipts were significant 

but uncertain from year to year. 

When commercial receipts from Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) O&C 

lands fell through the 1990s, Congress again turned to appropriations to stabilize payments, first 

through the "spotted owl" transition payments made under the 1993 Northwest Forest Plan, and 

later through transition payments authorized nationally through SRS in 2000. 11 

The total value of timber harvests from Forest Service land since 1908 is about $80 billion (in 

2016 $s). 12 Had Congress established a trust fund in 1908, it would distribute between $3 and $4 

billion today to counties and schools, three to four times larger than the maximum revenue 

sharing payment made in 1977. 

Had Congress established a trust fund in 1977, instead ofPILT, it would be worth $11.9 billion 

in FY 2013 and would have distributed payments equal to $594 million in the same year 13 Had 

Congress established a trust fund in 2000 along with SRS, today it would be worth $1.2 billion 

and would be able to make annual distributions equal to or greater than the revenue sharing 

payment made in FY 2016. 

Commercial receipts from federal lands remain at relatively low levels. Establishing a permanent 

trust today would take time to build a significant endowment That said, establishing a trust 

today combined with forest management reform would create the framework to capture future 

receipts and stabilize revenue over time. 

Norway's experience offers a useful example. 14 Oil production began in Norway's North Sea 

waters in 1971. Price spikes in oil in 1979 and 1980 generated significant revenue to the 

government, and the government spent that money on an annual basis. Norway's economy grew 

rapidly with rising wages, spending and borrowing in the public and private sector. When prices 

subsequently collapsed in 1986, the economy's dependence on annual oil revenue quickly 

precipitated a fiscal crisis. 

In 1990, while the country was still suffering high unemployment and persistent cuts in 

government spending, Norway established its permanent trust as a forward-looking fiscal tool 

that would help the country do better if and when the oil price rose again. The trust was designed 

to buffer the economy from the annual uncertainty in oil revenue and build a lasting endowment 

from oil wealth to benefit future generations. The fund was set up in 1990 but no money was 

available to invest into the fund until 1996 when oil prices began to recover. Today, Norway's 

trust fund is worth about $900 billion. 

Implementing an endowment model along with a longer-term reauthorization of SRS and 

forest management reform requires several steps. 

Headwaters Economics 1 P.O. Box 7059 1 Bozeman, Montana 59771 1406.570.5626. 

https:l/headwaterseconomics. 7 
481 

l. Establish an endowment first. Establishing the endowment first creates the framework 

to build a significant fund and stabilize payments over time, even if no revenue is 

available to deposit in the fund in the short-term. 

2. Secure long-term appropriations that would allow receipts to be invested into the 

fund. Even if appropriations are only authorized for one- or two-year periods, use the 

agreement to extend payments for any duration as an opportunity to invest in the 

permanent trust. 

3. Work on forest management reform with jobs and forest health in mind and build 

receipts over time. 

4. Be creative about funding for the endowment. Look beyond existing revenue sharing 

programs to make discretionary deposits into the trust and identify new sources of 

annual revenue that can be appropriated to a permanent trust. 

Thank you again for your interest in the endowment model as a way to improve fiscal certainty 

for local governments with tax-exempt federal lands. I look forward to continued conversations 

and any additional questions you may have. 

Sincerely, 

Mark Haggerty 

Headwaters Economics 

406-570-5626 

mark@headwaterseconomics.org 

Headwaters Economics is an independent, nonprofit research group whose mission is to improve 

community development and land management decisions in the West. 

https ://headwaterseconomics. org 

Endnotes 

1 Testimony of David Landis, Mayor of the Ketchikan Gateway Borough before tbe U.S. Senate 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, May 2, 2017, Washington, D.C.. 

https://www.energ;-.senate.gov/public/indcx.cfm/hearings-and-busincss-mcetings 01D=2DAE5654-0EF0-

47A 7-9915-D671CB265F25. 2 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Serrice. Additional payment information, ASR 18-L Secure 

Rural Schools Act Titles I, II and III Report, Washington, D.C., https://mvw.fs.usda.gov/pts/; U.S. 

Department of Interior, Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PIL T), 2016 Annual Report, Washington, D.C., 

https :/!lnvw. doi. gov /pi It/resources/ annual-reports. 3 Hoover, Katie and Cassandra L. Foley, January 27,2015, Forest Service Payments to States: 

Distribution S):stem, Congressional Research Service Memorandum, Washington, DC. 

Headwaters Economics 1 P.O. Box 7059 1 Bozeman, Montana 59771 1406.570.5626. 

hltps://headwaterseconomics. 8 
482 

4 Com, Lynnnc M., December 3, 2015, PJLT (Payments in Lieu ofTc7xes) Somewhat Simplified, 

Congressional Research Service Report RL31392, Washington, D.C. 5 Daniel, Daria, Eryn Hurley, and Jack Peterson, Major changes for counties under 1/·ump budget, March 

20,2017, County News, National Association of Counties, Washington, D.C., 

http://www.naco.org/articles/major-changcs-counties-undcr-trump-budgct. 

6 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Tongass National Forest: Forest Service's Actions Related to 

Its Planned Timber Program Transition, GA0-16-456, April25, 2016, Washington, D.C., 

http://www.gao .gov/products/GA 0-16-456. 1 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Cut and Soldfrom the National 

Forests and Grasslands, Washington, D.C. Accessed from Headwaters Economics, National Forest 

Timber Sales and Timber Cuts. FY 1980-2015, Bozeman, MT, 

https:l!head\vatcrscconomics.org/dataviz/national-forests-timbcr-cut-sold/. 

8 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Additional pa)nlent information, ASR 04, Receipts 

Summary, Washington, D.C. Accessed from Headwaters Economics, National Forest Gross Receipts 

fi'om Commercial Activities, FY 1986-2015, Bozeman, MT. 

https :/ !hcadwaterscconomi cs.org/ dataviz/nati anal-forests-gross -receipts/. 0 The Office of the North Dakota State Treasurer, North Dakota Government Funds. Legacy Fund, 

Bismarck, N.D., http://www.nd.gov/treasurer/north-dakota-govemment-funds/. 10 Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation (APFC), ''An Alaskan's Guide to the Permanent Fund" (2009), 

dovvnloadcd from http://www.apfc.org/homc/Media!publications/2009AlaskansGuidc.pdf 11 Gortc, Ross W. Reauthorizing the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Detcnnination Act of 

2000.Congressional Research Service (CRS-R41303). Jm1c 20!0. Washint,>ton, D.C. 12 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Cut and Sold from the National 

Forests and Grasslands, FY 1905-2016 National Summary Cut and Sold Data and Graph, Washington, 

D.C., https://vvww.fs.fcd.us/forcstmanagcmcnt/products/cut-sold/index.shtml. 

Based on a scenario in which receipts from O&C lands and the U.S. Forest Service arc invested into a 

pennanent tmst beginning in 1977, the investment performance is identical to the actual performance on 

an annual basis for the Wyoming Permanent Mineral Tmst Fund over the same period, and the trust 

makes an ;mnual distribution of five percent. 14 For a good overview, see Rosalsky, Greg, How Can Tiny Norway Afford to Buy So Many Teslas?, 

Podcast, Freakonomics Radio, October 16, 2014, http://freakonomics.com/podcast/how-can-tinv-norwavafford-to-buy-so-manv-teslas-a-ncw-freakonomics-radio-podcast/. 

Headwaters Economics 1 P.O. Box 7059 1 Bozeman, Montana 59771 1406.570.5626. 

https:llheadwaterseconomics. 9 
483 

May 25,2017 

Senator Debbie Stabenow 

c/o Darla Ripchensky, PMP 

Chief Clerk 

HEADW.ATERS 

ECONOMICS 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

304 Dirksen Senate Office Building 

Washington, DC 20510 

Dear Senator Stabenow, 

Thank you for your question for the record stemming from the May 2, 2017 U.S. Senate 

Committee on Enerb'Y and Natural Resources hearing on federal payments to local governments 

provided through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (SRS) and 

the Payments in Lieu of Taxes program (PILT). 

Headwaters Economics' analysis of rural economies and county payments programs have led to 

several insights that may be relevant to the next Farm Bill, including reforms to county payments 

and stewardship contracting authorities. 

As I discussed at the May 2 hearing, our analysis recommends moving from an annual 

appropriations model versus an annual revenue sharing model to an endowment model that 

builds on each of these approaches to stabilize payments and provide greater fiscal certainty to 

counties with non-taxable federal lands. 

That said, rural communities also are seeking ways to leverage economic opportunities from the 

stewardship of forests, rangelands, and watersheds. The May 2 hearing revealed broad support 

for forest management reforms that would help sustain rural communities and improve forest 

health. 

Forest management reform that increases the pace and scale of commercial timber harvests also 

would increase the value of commercial receipts that would result in larger direct revenue 

sharing payments or would build an endowment and replace appropriations more quickly. This 

relationship between commercial harvests and county payments can provide useful incentives for 

local governments to collaborate with and push the agencies to manage federal lands in particular 

ways. 1 

Our research, and a growing body of academic literature, shows that rural communities are 

remarkably diverse, pointing to a need to broaden the incentives delivered by county payments to 

meet the needs of different types of communities and their different opportunities related to 

public lands. 

Headwaters Economics 1 P.O. Box 70591 Bozeman, Montana 59771 1406.570.5626. 

hltps:l/headwaterseconomics. 
484 

Headwaters Economics explored an idea several years ago that would expand the incentives 

delivered by revenue sharing payments by valuing the accomplishments generated by 

stewardship contracts, including commercial timber, watershed restoration, wildfire risk 

reduction, and recreation accomplishments 2 We estimated the value of the accomplishments of 

stewardship contracts in FY 2009 at more than $1.7 billion. 

Stewardship contracting is an existing, permanent program authorized in the Farm Bill that can 

be used to meet the needs of more rural communities by expanding the services for which 

communities are compensated. Our analysis shows that "stewardship" values exceed the more 

narrowly prescribed commercial values associated with stewardship contracts, but are not shared 

with communities directly under the current stewardship contracting program. 

One common concern with stewardship contracts, made more acute with the expiration of SRS, 

is that the commercial values traded in exchange for services and retained receipts are not shared 

with counties through the permanently authorized Forest Service and BLM revenue sharing 

payment programs. Stewardship contracts reduce the potential value of these revenue sharing 

payments, and some counties are asking for a change that would share a portion of the proceeds 

from stewardship contracts. 

In FY 2009, the total value of commodities produced by stewardship contracts-including the 

value of commodities traded for services and retained receipts-was $24 million, only 6.8 

percent of total receipts produced by traditional timber sales and other forms of commodity 

production ($182 million)3 

Had 25 percent of commercial receipts been shared with counties in FY 2009, the benefit to 

counties would have been relatively small (about $6 million nationally). The tradeoff of 

delivering these revenues to counties is a reduction in the amount of additional stewardship work 

that would reduce the value of accomplishments. 

Exploring avenues in the Farm Bill to compensate counties for the commercial value associated 

with stewardship contracts and for the larger values associated with project accomplishments 

could create new and broader incentives for communities. These incentives would allow 

communities to collaborate with the Forest Service and the BLM to increase the pace and scale 

of activities that meet their unique needs and opportunities, including commercial timber, 

watershed restoration, addressing wildfire risk, and improving access and recreation 

opportunities on public lands. 

Ideally, a new incentive program would be integrated with the proposed endowment model for 

county payments, a wildfire funding fix, forest management reform, and USDA Rural 

Development and Farm Bill programs related to rural economic development. Integrating these 

efforts, and better aligning them with the diverse needs of different rural communities, could 

build a strong framework for sustaining rural communities in Michigan and across the U.S. 

Headwaters Economics 1 P.O. Box 70591 Bozeman, Montana 59771 1406.570.5626. 

https://headwaterseconomics. 2 
485 

Thank you again for your interest in the county payment programs and in broader rural economic 

development efforts through the Farm Bill. I look forward to continued conversations and any 

additional questions you may have. 

Sincerely, 

Mark Haggerty 

Headwaters Economics 

406-570-5626 

mark@headwaterseconomics.org 

Headwaters Economics is an independent, nonprofit research group whose mission is to improve 

community development and land management decisions in the West. 

https:!/headwaterseconomics.org 

Resources on County Payments: 

Commercial Activities on National Forests 

Headwaters Economics produced two interactive maps that help users better understand the 

commercial activities on National Forests such as the timber economy-gross receipts, timber 

harvest sales, and timber cuts-at a variety of scales. https:!/headwaterseconomics.org/countypayments/historv-context/commercial-activities-national-forests/. 

County Payments: History, Context, and Policy 

Headwaters Economics maintains interactive maps that show how federal land payments are 

distributed to counties and states. Explore both the Payments History maps as well as the Policy 

Options maps which project what happens if SRS is not reauthorized or ifPILT is reformed into 

a single payment to counties. https://headwaterseconomics.org/dataviz/county-payments/. 

Economic Profile System: Federal Land Payments 

Download socioeconomic reports of communities, counties, & states, including aggregations and 

comparisons. The Economic Profile System (EPS) uses federal data sources, including the 

Bureaus of Economic Analysis, Census, & others. EPS is also known as the Human Dimensions 

Toolkit by the Forest Service. The Federal Land Payments report shows local government detail 

on payments made to compensate for non-taxable federal lands, including Payments in Lieu of 

Taxes, federal mineral revenue sharing payments, and other payments from the Forest Service, 

Bureau of Land Management, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

https:!/headwaterseconomics.org/tools/economic-profile-system/. 

Federal Land Payments to Counties: Background Analysis, History, and Context 

Headwaters Economics 1 P.O. Box 7059 1 Bozeman, Montana 59771 1406.570.5626. 

https://headwaterseconomics. 3 
486 

Research on the history and context of county payments which play an important role in many 

rural communities--influencing public lands management, economic development, and funding 

for local schools, roads, and public safety. https://headwaterseconomics.org/countypayments/history-context/reforming-federal-land-payments-to-counties/. 

Endnotes 

1 United States Public Land Law Review Commission, 1970, One third of the Nation's land: a report to 

the President and to the Congress, Washington, D.C. 

'Headwaters Economics 20 l 0. County Payments, Jobs, and Forest Health: Ideas for Reforming the 

Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Detennination Act (SRS) and Payments in Lieu of Taxes 

(PILT). Bozeman, MT. https://head,vaterseconomics.org/wpcontcnt/uploads/Refonn Countv Payments WhitePaper LowRes.pdf. 3 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2009. Servicewide Automated Timber Sale Accounting 

(ATSA) tables, Stewardship Contracting Regional Summary, Fiscal Year 2009. Washington, D.C.: and 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2009. Statement of Receipts by Region, ASR 13-1, Fiscal 

Year 2009. Washington, D.C. 

Headwaters Economics 1 P.O. Box 70591 Bozeman. Montana 59771 1406.570.5626. 

hllps://headwalerseconomics. 4 
487 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 2, 2017 Hearing: Federal Payments to Local Governments Provided through 

the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act and the Payment 

in Lieu of Taxes Program and the Need to Provide Greater Fiscal Certainty for 

Resource-Dependent Communities with Tax-Exempt Federal Lands 

Questions for the Record Submitted to the Honorable Mark Whitney 

Questions from Senator Joe Manchin III 

Questions: l have received several letters from school superintendents, teachers, and business 

managers from counties that receive SRS funds. Just last month I received a letter from the 

Finance Director of the Pocahontas County Board of Education, who is grappling with difficult 

decisions needing to be made from the reduction in SRS funds. This year Pocahontas County 

received $72,000 in SRS, a sharp reduction from prior year amounts $750,000. Right now, 

Pocahontas County is in a budget shortfall of $300,000. Already, through attrition or reduction 

in force reduced staff by 14 people. 

This is what she says will be the impacts of these cuts: 

a. Buildings will not have adequate staff to clean them. 

b. Two bus runs have been eliminated creating longer bus routes. Approximately half of 

their students average a bus ride longer than a half hour. 

c. Principals are teaching classes each day. 

d. A cook is required to cover two schools. 

e. The food coordinator will be teaching half time at one of the schools. 

f. The curriculum coordinator has been cut, the central office staff will assume these 

duties. 

g. A Title I teacher is retiring, another Title I teacher will have assignments at two 

schools which are 26 miles apart from each other. 

And, I recently received another letter notifying me that Hardy County Schools received the 

counties payment for FY2017 in the amount of $7,265.65. They were appreciative, however they 

fairly pointed out that Hardy County has previously received approximately $65,000 per year of 

SRS funds. That's a decrease of$57,735 or 88 percent. 

This is in an area of our state that has also experience a steep decline in coal production and the 

resulting decline in jobs and economic activity. 

Questions: 

a. You have seen a decline in payments; please describe what sort of measures your 

community has to take due to the decrease in funds? 

Should Secure Rural Schools (SRS) not be reauthorized, Beaver County will face 

an 84% decrease in payments from the Forest Service. The first cuts will come to 

emergency services and road construction. In sparsely populated counties like 

miue, reducing emergency services will increase emergency response times. This 

could be the difference between life and death for Beaver County residents and 
488 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 2, 2017 Hearing: Federal Payments to Local Governments Provided through 

the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act and the Payment 

in Lieu of Taxes Program and the Need to Provide Greater Fiscal Certainty for 

Resource-Dependent Communities with Tax-Exempt Federal Lands 

Questions for the Record Submitted to the Honorable Mark Whitney 

visitors to public lands. Road construction and maintenance cuts will also 

negatively impact residents and visitors alike. Reduced road quality reduces 

appeal to tourists, degrades vehicle quality, and further worsens emergency 

response times. Every office within Beaver County's government will be forced 

to make cuts and lay off staff. 

Furthermore, Beaver County will take an even bigger financial hit because PIL T 

and SRS are intertwined. Many rural counties receiving PIL T could face 

reduced payments because the previous year's SRS payments would no longer 

be deducted under the PIL T formula. This would completely change the PIL T 

funding calculation from the U.S. Department of the Interior, leaving the same 

amount of PIL T funds to effectively cover both programs. Counties would be 

fighting for slices of a smaller pie. 

Factoring in the cuts to Beaver County's PIL T payment, we would theulose 

almost $400,000 total. There is uo way to make up that lost revenue with so little 

taxable land and a small population. 

b. What are the implications of these cuts, and who do these cuts impact the most? 

These cuts impact Beaver County residents and visitors alike. Longer emergency 

response times leave vulnerable individuals waiting for first responders to arrive 

on the scene impact their ability to recover or even survive. Federal lands 

counties are required to provide emergency services on public lands. If the 

federal government pulls the rug out from under us by reducing or eliminating 

payments, like the SRS program, counties will not be able to meet their core 

functions. We rely on these payments to provide services to all people within our 

county. 

Additionally, delaying maintenance and construction of county roads will reduce 

the quality of life within rural counties and the tourism appeal of federal lands 

counties. Decreased infrastructure also limits a county's ability to attract 

investment dollars from outside companies. This makes it harder to grow our 

county's already limited tax base. 

2 
489 

JOE SHIRLEY, JR. CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD 

DISTRICT I 

P.O. Box 1952, Cllinle, AZ 86503 

ALTON JOE SHEPHERD MEMBER OF THE BOARD 

DISTRICT II 

P.O. Box '.194,Ganado,AZ 86505 

DOYEL SHAM LEY VICE CHAIR OFTliE BOARD 

DISTRICT III 

P.O. Boll 428, St. Jollm, AZ 85936 

May 2, 2017 

The Honorable Jeff Flake 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

OF APACHE COUNTY 

P.O. BOX418 

ST .. JOHNS, ARIZONA 85936 

TELEPHONE: (918) 317~ 7503 

FACSIMILE: (918) JJ7~2003 

Senate Russell Office Building 413 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Apache County Urges Congress to Fully Fund PIL T and SRS 

Dear Senator Flake, 

DELWJN P. WENGERT, MANAGER-CLERK 

ST, JOHNS, AZ 85936 

As Congress works to finalize the FY 2017 appropriations process, we write on behalf of Apache 

County to express concern that the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program, which expired on 

September 30, 2015, has yet to be reauthorized for FY 2016 and beyond. Additionally, we urge 

Congress to fully fund the Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) program in FY 2017 and into the 

future. 

Congress plays an important role in setting policies to guide the management of our nation's 640 

million acres of federal public lands. Sixty-two percent of counties nationwide have federal land 

within our boundaries and federal lands policies have a direct impact on the quality of life and 

economic wellbeing of our local communities. 

Apache County is comprised of 11,218.42 square miles, which equals 7,179,788.8 acres, of 

which 763,681 are PILT acres, held by the federal government and unavailable for economic 

development and not part of the property tax base. 

Secure Rural Schools 

We strongly urge you to enact a long-term legislative solution for continued revenue sharing 

payments to forest counties through the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program. The SRS program 

expired in September 2015 and has not been reauthorized for FY 2016 or beyond. Forest 

counties received their last authorized SRS payments (FY 2015) in calendar year 2016 and the 

availability of future SRS payments remains in jeopardy. 

Because Congress has failed to renew the long-standing federal obligation to forest counties and 

to the lands managed by the federal government by not improving forest management and 

reauthorizing the SRS program, counties across the United States are facing dramatic budgetary 

shortfalls. When the authorization for SRS lapsed in FY 2014, federal forest payments to 
490 

counties decreased by over 80 percent on average. Further, Congress should reform forest 

management practices to improve forest health, increase production and ensure robust revenue 

sharing to all forest counties. 

Payments in Lieu of Taxes 

The PIL T pro gram provides payments to counties and other local governments to offset losses in 

tax revenues due to the presence of substantial federal land acreage within our jurisdictions. 

Because local governments are unable to tax the property values or products derived from federal 

lands, PIL T payments are necessary to support essential local government services (mandated by 

law) such as education, emergency services, transportation infrastructure, law enforcement and 

health care in over 1,850 counties across 49 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico 

and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

We appreciate that Congress appropriated the full $452 million necessary to fund PILT for FY 

2016. However, many counties, including Apache County, have already begun to execute our 

FY 2017 budgets. Although the current continuing resolution extends funding for PILT at $452 

million dollars, the U.S. Department of the Interior has estimated that $480 million will be 

necessary to fully fund PILT in FY2017. Without the certainty of full funding for the PILT 

program in FY 20 I 7 and beyond, counties across the nation will be unable to provide essential 

services such as education, law enforcement, search and rescue, road maintenance and public 

health to residents and millions of federal lands visitors alike. 

Thank you for the strides made with this appropriation, and I ask for your continued support and 

work for the advancement of the PIL T and SRS funding. 

Sincerely, 

Cc: Doyel Sharnley, Vice Chairman of the Board 

Alton Shepherd, Supervisor, District II 

Delwin Wengert, County Manager 

Craig Sullivan, Executive Director, County Supervisors Association 
491 

Cochise County 

Board of Supervisors 

Public Programs •• .Peroonal Service 

WVM.cochise.az.gov 

The Honorable Senator Jeff Flake 

United States Senate 

Senate Russell Office Building 413 

Washington, DC 20510 Via email to: Chuck Podo!ak@flake.senate goy 

ANN ENGLISH 

Chairman 

Distnct2 

PATRICK G. CALL Vloa-Chalrman 

Dlstrtct 1 

PEGGY JUDD Supervisor 

District 3 

Cochise County Urges Congress to Fully Fund PIL T and SRS 

Dear Senator Flake: 

EDWARD T. GILLIGAN 

County Administrator 

ARLETHE G. RIOS Clell< of the Board 

As Congress works to finalize the FY 2017 appropriations process, we write on behalf of Cochise County to express 

concern that the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program, which expired on September 30, 2015, has yet to be 

reauthorized for FY 2016 and beyond. Additionally, we urge Congress to fully fund the Payments in Lieu ofTaxes 

(Pill) program in FY 2017 and into the future. 

Congress plays an important role in setting policies to guide the management of our nation's 640 million acres of 

federal public lands. Sixty-two percent of counties nationwide have federal land within our boundaries and federal 

lands policies have a direct impact on the quality of life and economic wellbeing of our local communities. 

The Pll T acreage of 901,148 in Cochise County does not Include Fort Huachuca or the Willcox Bombing range, both 

military establishments totaling another 107,873 acres under federal control. 

Secure Rural Schools 

We strongly urge you to enact a long-term legislative solution for continued revenue sharing payments to forest 

counties through the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program. The SRS program expired in September 2015 and has not 

been reauthorized for FY 2016 or beyond. Forest counties received their last authorized SRS payments (FY 2015) in 

calendar year 2016 and the availability of future SRS payments remains in jeopardy. 

Because Congress has failed to renew the long-standing federal obligation to forest counties and to the lands 

managed by the federal government by not improving forest management and reauthorizing the SRS program, 

counties across the United States are facing dramatic budgetary shortfalls. When the authorization for SRS lapsed in 

FY 2014, federal forest payments to counties decreased by over 80 percent on average. Further, Congress should 

reform forest management practices to improve forest health, Increase production and ensure robust revenue 

sharing to all forest counties. 

1415 Melody Lane, Bu"ding G Bisbee, Arizona 85603 

520-432-9200 

520-432-5016 fax board@cochlse.az.gov 
492 

Payments In Lieu of Taxes 

The PILT program provides payments to counties and other local governments to offset losses in tax revenues due to 

the presence of substantial federal land acreage within our jurisdictions. Because local governments are unable to 

tax the property values or products derived from federal lands, PILT payments are necessary to support essential 

local government services (mandated by law) such as education, emergency services, transportation infrastructure, 

law enforcement and health care in over 1,850 counties across 49 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto 

Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

We appreciate that Congress appropriated the full $452 million necessary to fund PILT for FY 2016. However, many 

counties, including Cochise County, have already begun to execute our FY 2017 budgets. Although the current 

continuing resolution extends funding for PILT at $452 million dollars, the U.S. Department of the Interior has 

estimated that $480 million will be necessary to fully fund PIL T in FY 2017. Without the certainty of full funding for 

the PILT program in FY 2017 and beyond, counties across the nation will be unable to provide essential services such 

as education, Jaw enforcement, search and rescue, road maintenance and public health to residents and millions of 

federal lands visitors alike. 

22.5% of Cochise County is covered under this program, which in 2015 equaled 52,325,000. In 2015 we received 

$1,951,000. Funding is never secure and we never know for certain if it will be funded each year. Most importantly, 

we rarely get the full funding due to federal budget issues (i.e. sequestration). This revenue is vital for use in 

supporting public safety, health care, and transportation for our residents. In terms of our budget, each $45,000 

lost is one employee position we lose, yet we still must maintain these critical programs for our residents. The need 

for a sustainable long term funding mechanism is crucial to protect this revenue for our rural County. 

Sincerely, 

A~h~.s··· -~''1·/7 

~~ 

CC: Senator John McCain 

Representative Martha MeSally 

State Senator Gail Griffin 

State Representative Becky Nutt 

State Representative Drew John 

County Supervisors Association 

Arizona Associations of Counties 

Patrick G. Call 
493 

County Supervisors Association of Arizona 

May 2, 2017 

The Honorable Jeff Flake 

U.S. Senator 

Senate Russell Office Building 413 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Dear Senator Flake: 

On behalf of Arizona's fifteen counties, we respectfully request your leadership and support in urging the United 

States Congress to provide full funding for the Payment-In-Lieu-of-Taxes (PILT) program. 

Arizona is the sixth largest state in the United States by area. Of the state's 113,998 square miles, only 17.7 

percent is private land. This leaves a significant amount of land that is unavailable for economic development and 

is excluded from the property tax base. Nevertheless, Arizona's counties are required to provide law enforcement, 

search and rescue, emergency services, road building and maintenance, and other community services on, or 

associated with, tax-exempt federal public lands. 

As you know, the PILT program was established in 1976 to offset costs incurred by counties for services provided 

to the federal government and to the users of federal lands located within each county. The average Arizona state 

PILT payment in Fiscal Year 2016 was approximately $0.80 per acre, far below the amount federals lands would 

return through both value-based taxation and economic development. 

Without PILT funding, counties and their taxpayers are faced with the large, unsustainable burden of providing 

services on, or associated with, federal lands, while the presence of those federal lands create barriers to further 

land development and economic opportunities. 

The failure of Congress to provide full PILT funding to Arizona's counties in a timely manner would critically impact 

their budget process and structural solvency, and substantially compromise each county's ability to provide 

essential services. 

Senator, we thank you for your continued hard work and leadership, and we very much appreciate your 

consideration of Arizona counties' perspective on the critical need for continuation of the PILT program. If 

needed, we would be happy to provide any additional information you may require. 

Sincerely, 

~·e/?U· Tommie C. Martin 

President Executive Director 

Supervisor, Gila County, Arizona 

1905 W. Washington St. · Suite 100 · Phoenix, Arizona 85009 

(602) 252.5521 ·Fax (602) 253.3227 

www.countysupervisors.org 
494 

Mayl,2017 

The Honorable Lisa Murkowski, Chair 

Energy and Natural Resources Committee 

United States Senate 

304 Dirksen Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

The Honorable Maria Cantwell, Ranking Member 

Energy and Natural Resources Committee 

United States Senate 

304 Dirksen Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

P.O. Box 800 Craig, AJaska 99921 

www.craigschools.com 

Phone (907)826.3274, FAX (907) 826.3322 

Statement For the Record: Hearing to examine federal payments to local governments provided through 

the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act and the Payment in Lieu of Taxes 

program and the need to provide greater fiscal certainty for resource-dependent communities with taxexempt federal lands- May 2, 2017 

Dear Senator Lisa Murkowski, Chair and Senator Maria Cantwell, Ranking Member and Members of the 

Senate Energy and National Resources Committee, 

For the record, my name is John Walsh (Jack) PO Box 444, Craig, AK 99921, and I currently serve as the Craig 

City School District Superintendent. Craig is a community on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska 

surrounded by the Tongass National Forest. Our families include staff members of the National Forest Service, 

loggers and those who work in the support industries that make logging possible. Anoilier part of our school 

community are Alaska Native families who live or maybe work on Native lands, as they have for 

generations. Our school and our community need the funding iliat has been provided by ilie Secure Rural 

Schools (SRS), and fue Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PlLT) Programs, for over the past 100 years. 

These funds assist our community in meeting an obligation for a local contribution and investment in education, 

and the funds help our school district continue to support the types of quality programs our students need and 

deserve. As one of the 20 plus districts in Alaska who had been receiving iliese funds, and one of over 775 

counties across the nation that serve more than 9 million students in public schools, we know that these funds 

fill a significant need in our rural communities and are counted on since we cannot otherwise tax these 

resources. 

Across the nation our schools and communities are seeing cuts from state and local funding sources, and the 

impact on schools is significant. Currently, our annual budget is about $7,000,000. In Craig, this funding 

amounts to nearly $500,000 on average and that is over 7% of our total budget. In simple terms, the difference 

in having a few teachers and other necessary program supports, or not. To reduce that amount to the 1908 
495 

levels would be devastating to this district and others. I encourage you to reconsider this decision and to fully 

support the continuation of the SRS and PILT Programs as funded over the last decade. 

Congress must continue the historic national commitment established in 1908 to the 775 rural counties and 

4,400 schools serving over 9 million students in rural commnnities and school districts served by the SRS 

program. Without immediate Congressional action to fund SRS short term and to establish forest policy, forest 

cmmties and schools face the loss of irreplaceable essential fire, police, road and bridge, community and 

educational services. This is something which none of us can afford. 

Thank you for your time and consideration of our concerns from Craig. Thank you for your commitment to our 

country and your service as legislators. 

Respectfully,~ 

~''"'"" 
496 

Tommie C. ~1artin. District I 

610 L Hv .. y :!60. Pay<;.on. ;i\55-P 

!92H) 474~202Q 

tmart!nfa gilacountvaz.gO\ 

Tim R .. Jlumphrey. District II 

(02RJ-102~R753 

thumphrevfa oi!acountyaz.go~ 

Woody Cline. Distrid III 

(02S) ~02-4401 

\\Ciinc(a gilacountyaz.g<n 

The Honorable Jeff Flake 

United States Senate 

885 Russell Senate Office Building 

Washington, DC 20510 

GILA COUNTY BOARD OF Sl"PER\'ISORS 

!..J(IIlE":.·\sh.":ltrc-:1 

Gl0be. '\nwn.n S550l 

May 09, 2017 

Gila County Urges Congress to Fully Fund SRS and PILT 

Dear Senator Flake, 

.John F. :"iclson 

County ,\bnagcr 

('l2Xl 402-42)'7 

tm:+.unw gtlacountvaz..no\ 

'-lari~tn Sheppard, 

Clerk of the Board of Supervison 

{Q2fll-W2~K7)7 

1~l:t.~pnard1a oilacount\<:t(.£SH 

LCcopy 

As Congress works to finalize the FY 2017 appropriations process, the Gila County Board of 

Supervisors would like to express concern that the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program, which 

expired on September 30, 2015, has yet to be reauthorized for FY 2016 and beyond. Additionally, 

we urge Congress to fully fund the Payments in Ueu of Taxes (PILT} program m FY 2017 and into the 

future. 

Secure Rural Schools 

At this time, the Appropriations Bill does not mclude a Secure Rural Schools (SRS) 

appropriation. Th1s means that states and counties only recetve fundmg under the 

1908 Act which is based on a share of the calculated timber sales and grazing fees 

known as the 25% payments. The concept of 25% payments at one time could have 

been an appropriate and adequate funding method to help support rural schools and 

counties; back when the federal !and was managed for multiple uses and t1mber 

harvesting and grazing were thriving businesses. Just 1n grazmg alone, the reduction in 

allowable livestock numbers in Gila County from 60,000 permitted head m 1980 to an 

estimated 10,000 permitted head today has a direct effect on the amount of the 25% 

payments. 

In FY2015, the last year that Secure Rural Schools funding was appropnated, Gila 

County received $1.4 million in Title I and $368,000 in Title II funding. Tttle I funding is 

almost entirely allocated to local rural school districts whose district boundanes mclude 

forest lands. This aids the local districts in helping to ease the burden on local taxpayers 

m providing educational opportunities to local students. In Fiscal year 2016, without 

SRS authorization, Gila County local schools rece1ved $278,000.00 in 25% payments. 

Without the reauthorization of the SRS funding, there rs an additional burden on the 

backs of Gila County taxpayers to provide adequate funding for rural schools and roads, 

which histoncal!y were funded by the revenues from the multiple uses of those federal 

lands. 
497 

We strongly urge you to enact a long~term legislative solution for contmued revenue sharing 

payments to forest counties through the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program. 

Payment in Lieu of Taxes 

Gila County is comprised of just over 3 milllon acres, of which 57% are held by the 

federal government, another 38% are Amencan Indian tnbal lands, and 1% are State 

of An zona lands, a !I of wh1ch are unavailable as part of the property tax base. Th!s 

leaves only 4D/o (123, 196 acres) 1n pnvate (taxable) ownership. The 4% pnvate land 

raises $20 million !n property tax revenue, whr!e the 57% of federal land generates 

$3.48 million in PILT. 

Gila County IS required to provide law enforcement, search and rescue, emergency 

services, road building and maintenance and other commun1ty serv1ces on, or 

associated with tax~exempt federal lands. A lack of PILT funding places the large 

unsustainable burden of providing services on federal lands squarely on the back of Gila 

County taxpayers, while the presence of that federal land creates barners to further 

economic opportunities. 

Without the certainty of full funding for the PILT program in FY 2017 and beyond, counties across 

the nation will be unable to provide essential services such as education, law enforcement, search 

and rescue, road maintenance and public health to residents and millions of federal lands visitors 

alike. 

Thank you for your consideration, 

Respectfully submitted, 

Tommie C Martin 

Chairman, 

Gila County Board of Supervisors 

ATTEST 

Manan Sheppard 

Clerk of the Board 

Gila County Board of Supervisors 

Date 

Date 
498 

Kate Dean, District l 

May 1, 2017 

The Honorable Maria Cantwell 

United States Senate 

31 1 Hart Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Dear Senator Canl\•;ell, 

Board of County Commissioners 

1820 Jefferson Street 

PO Boxl220 

Port Townsend, W A 98368 

David SuHivan, District 2 Kathleen Kfcr, District 3 

We are writing to thank you for your ongoing support of the Secure Rural Schools and SelfDetermination Act (SRS) and urge your continued leadership on this important matter. It is vital 

to Jefferson County that Congress act as soon possible to retroactively reauthorize SRS for Fiscal 

Year (FY) 2016 and provide sufficient funding for this ftscal year and beyond. 

Since its inception, the SRS program has been critical to Jefferson County's ability to provide 

basic services to our constituents. Until 2008, Jefferson County received about $1.3 million per 

year for roads maintenance and construction purposes, while an additional $1.3 million went to 

schools from Jefferson County's SRS allocation. To put this in perspective, that level of funding 

is equal to what the County receives in annual motor vehicle fuel tax allocations. In fact, the SRS 

payment represented about 25% of our regular operating budget for county roads. Unfortunately, 

in subsequent years the SRS payment decreased to only $400,000 per year under this program, 

and the last payment the County received was for FY2015. To deal with the dramatic cutback, 

the County has continued to defer maintenance on pavements, bridges, and culverts and has 

eliminated several positions that went along with this work. 

While reduced funding levels present significant challenges, not having the SRS program at all is 

simply unsustainable. Jefferson County will face dramatic budgetary shortfalls that, without an 

SRS extension and funding, will require us to forego even the most basic maintenance and 

repairs to avoid bankruptcy. 

The events of the winters of 2014 and 2015 demonstrate the predicament we are in. During that 

time period, Jefferson County bore the brunt of repeated storms in our region. As you can see 

from the attached photos a number or our roads were severely damaged. Coincidentally, every 

one of these roads is also a "federal lands access" road meaning they provide direct access to 

federal resource and recreation lands including Olympic National Park, the famed Hoh River 

Rainforest, and Olympic National Forest. All of these roads are also "sole access" roads 

meaning there is no other way in or out when they fail, and so they required immediate repairs in 

order to maintain access. SRS funding in the past has provided much of the financial resource to 

respond to these types of events, which unfortunately are not all that unusual in our county. 

Phone (360) 385-9100 Fax (360) 385-9382 jdfbocc@co,jefferson.wa.us 
499 

With assistance from your office, Jefferson County ultimately received reimbursement for repair 

of some of these damage sites through sources including FEMA and the FHW A-ER program; 

however, the availability of funding through these programs is typically only known months after 

the events occur with no guarantee at the time of the event that any assistance will be available. 

With budgets strained to the breaking point, there is no assurance that the County will have the 

financial resources in the future to respond to these types of events without a predictable and 

fully funded SRS program in place. 

As you know, timber counties such as ours have been seriously affected by the dramatic 

reduction in harvests on federal land. In Jefferson County, nearly 65% of the total land area is 

federally owned. The SRS program was critical to offset the loss of revenues for local 

governments like ours. A continued lapse in payments would cripple our ability to serve our 

constituents. We ask that Congress simply make good on the commitment it made to timber 

counties and enact a long-term, sustainable, and retroactive extension of SRS right away in 2017. 

With all the recent discussion about infrastructure funding, we believe that funding an existing 

infrastructure program like SRS should fit right in with current priorities. 

We applaud your attention to natural resources and infrastructure issues critical to Jefferson 

County and across our great state and look forward to working with you and your staff going 

forward. Please do not hesitate to contact our office if you have any additional questions. 

Sincerely, 

Kate Dean 

Jefferson County Commissioner, District 1 

2 
500 

Damage to the Upper Hoh Road, November 2014 

Damage to Undi Road (Landslide), 2015 

3 
501 

Oil City Road, November 2015 

4 
502 

Dosewallips Road, December 2014 

5 
503 

MOHAVE COUNTY BOARD of SUPERVISORS 

2001 College Drive, Suite 90 

lake Havasu Crty, AZ. 86403 

IOhnsbd@frontrernet net 

May I, 2017 

Committee Members: 

Telephone (928) 453~0724 

Fax (928) 453-0717 

1-888~ 735-3711 

BUSTER D. JOHNSON 

SUPERVISOR DISTRICT 3 

As you are aware, PILT funding is extremely important to Arizona counties. With federal lands encompass nearly 

50% of our state; Arizona counties are poised with the task of providing services on these lands. Mohave County 

alone encompasses nearly 90% of federal land which we cannot tax, but yet still have to provide services for 14,500 

square miles. As you know, ifPILT is not fully funded. Arizona counties will be forced to cut important services 

that would affect the health and safety of Arizona citizens. 

Arizona counties received over $34 million in PILT revenue with Mohave County receiving roughly $3.4 million. 

PlLT currently helps counties recover costs associated with mandated services such as road maintenance, law 

enforcement and search and rescue on federal lands. Federal regulations require counties to provide these services. 

Because counties are not allowed to collect property taxes on these lands nor allowed to let private economic 

development occur, the PIL T payments help counties offset those loses. Without PIL T funding, Arizona counties 

will be forced to shift federal responsibilities to local tax payers or drastically cut essential services. 

For over 40 years, the PIL T program has provided funding to counties and other local governments. Counties across 

the nation. including Mohave, are wmking on budget planning for next year. Without the certainty that Congress 

will act and appropriate the full funding for PIL T, it is going to be hard to plan for a balanced budget. Should 

Congress not fund PILT this upcoming fiscal year, Mohave County would take a cut of $:3.4 million to our general 

plan. Mohave County is already asking every department to cut 5% from their budget due to the state balancing 

their budget on the backs of counties. We cannot afford to have the federal government do the same. 

Without full funding, several counties. such as Greenlee County where PIL T represents one-third of their general 

fund, would essentially go bankrupt. Our neighboring county of La Paz is already facing hard financial times and 

just as recent as last week laid otf one-third of their workforce. 

I am urging Congress to find a long term funding solution for PIL T and SRS. While Mohave County does not 

benefit as much when it comes to SRS. due to the funding formula should SRS not be reauthorized we face losing 

nearly $1 million of our PILT money. 

I look forward to working with you in the upcoming year to find a permanent solution for this lifeline counties 

depend on. 

Buster D. Johnson 

Mohave County Supervisor 

District Ill 
504 

Stephen Q. Miller 

Chairman, District 3 

\lay 2, 2017 

The Honomble Jeff Flake 

United States Senate 

-l13 Senate Russell Office Building 

\\'ashington, DC 20510 

Dear Senator Flake: 

PINAL•COUNTY 

widtapmapp<~rtunity 

_/\..s c:hairman of the Pinal County Board ofSupcn~isors, I am \Vriting to express rny strong support 

for your efforts in Congress to fully fund the Payment-in-Lieu-of-T:Lxes Program (PILl). 

:\s you know, much of Pinal County consists of federally owned lands that cannot be put to 

productiYc economic use to help fund County government scryices, such as la\v enforcement, 

infrastructure and education. Congress created PU:r to help offset the loss of revenue from federal 

land ownership and it has been funded for 40 years. _\!though it docs not offset all the lost re\·enue, 

nor pay for the critical services proYided on these lands, PIT.;[' is an essential part of the County's 

budget. Unless and until these lands are returned to the County, the federal gcwernment should 

continue to fully fund the program. 

Your continued le1dership and support for PILT is greatly appreciated, and I am confident that your 

efforts '-Vill ultimately help maintain full funding for this necessary program. I look fon..vard to 

continuing to '-''ork with you on this and other in1portant matters to Pinal County and its residents. 

Sincerely, 

Stephen Q. :\!iller. Chairman 

Pimll County Board of Supervisors 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

135 North Pin-a! Strnet, Building A, PO Box 827 Florence, AZ 85132 T 520~866-6220 FA.EE 888-431-1311 F 520-866-6355 

\W'N'/.pinalcountyaz.gov 
505 

MOHAVE COUNTY BOARD of SUPERVISORS 

P.O. Box 7000 

700 West Beale Street 

Kingman, Arizona 86402-7000 

Telephone {928) 753-0722 

TDD - (928) 753-072 

Website- WNW.mohavecounty.us 

May 8, 2017 

The Honorable Jeff Flake 

United States Senate 

Gary Watson, Supervisor District 1 

Senate Russell Office Building 413 

Washington, DC 20510 

RE: Funding for Secure Rural Schools (SRS) and Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) 

Dear Senator Flake: 

As Congress works to finalize the FY 2017 appropriations process, we write on behalf of Mohave 

County to express concem that the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program, which expired on 

September 30, 2015, has yet to be reauthorized for FY 2016 and beyond. Additionally, we urge 

Congress to fully fund the Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PIL n program in FY 2017 and into the 

future. 

Congress plays an important role in setting policies to guide the management of our nation's 640 

million acres of federal public lands. Sixty-two percent of counties nationwide have federal land 

within our boundaries and federal lands policies have a direct impact on the quality of life and 

economic wellbeing of our local communities. The federal lands within Mohave County 

boundaries is currently documented as 6,421,650 acres. 

Secure Rural Schools 

We strongly urge you to enact a long-term legislative solution for continued revenue sharing 

payments to forest counties through the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program. The SRS program 

expired in September 2015 and has not been reauthorized for FY 2016 or beyond. Forest counties 

received their last authorized SRS payments (FY 2015) in calendar year 2016 and the availability 

of future SRS payments remains in jeopardy. 

Because Congress has failed to renew the long-standing federal obligation to forest counties and 

to the lands managed by the federal government by not improving forest management and 

reauthorizing the SRS program, counties across the United States are facing dramatic budgetary 

shortfalls. When the authorization for SRS lapsed in FY 2014, federal forest payments to counties 

decreased by over 80 percent on average. Further, Congress should reform forest management 

practices to improve forest health, increase production and ensure robust revenue sharing to all 

forest counties. 
506 

The Honorable Jeff Flake 

May 8, 2017 

Page Two 

PIL T is a critical piece of our county budget, accounting for approximately 5% of our general fund. 

Failure to reauthorize these funds will jeopardize our ability to fulfill our statutorily mandated 

functions and place an unfair burden on the backs of local property owners. 

Payments in Lieu of Taxes 

The PIL T program provides payments to counties and other local governments to offset losses in 

tax revenues due to the presence of substantial federal land acreage within our jurisdictions. 

Because local governments are unable to tax the property values or products derived from federal 

lands, PIL T payments are necessary to support essential local government services (mandated by 

law) such as education, emergency services, transportation infrastructure, law enforcement and 

health care in over 1,850 counties across 49 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico 

and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

We appreciate that Congress appropriated the full $452 million necessary to fund PIL T for FY 

2016. However, many counties, including Mohave County, have already begun to execute our FY 

2017 budgets. Although the current continuing resolution extends funding for PIL Tat $452 million 

dollars, the U.S. Department of the Interior has estimated that $480 million will be necessary to 

fully fund PIL T in FY 2017. Without the certainty of full funding for the PIL T program in FY 2017 

and beyond, counties across the nation will be unable to provide essential services such as 

education, law enforcement, search and rescue, road maintenance and public health to residents 

and millions of federal lands visitors alike. 

Thank you for your continued efforts to secure funding that is critical to Mohave County operations 

and our ability to provide mandated services. 

xc: Chuck Podolak@flake.senate.gov 
507 

ASSOCIATION NATIONALN~Co 

~/COUNTIES WIR WESTERN 

INTERSTATE 

REGION 

The Honorable Mitch McConnell 

Majority leader 

United States Senate 

U.S. Capito! Building, Room: 5~230 

Washington, DC 20510 

The Honorable Paul D. Ryan 

Speaker 

United States House of Representatives 

U.S. Capito! Building, Room: H-232 

Washington, DC 20515 

April 25, 2017 

The Honorable Charles Schumer 

Minority leader 

United States Senate 

Hart Senate Office Building, Room: 419 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi 

Democratic Leader 

United States House of Representatives 

U.S. Capitol Building, Room: H-204 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Majority leader McConnell, Minority Leader Schumer, Speaker Ryan, and Minority Leader Pelosi, 

On behalf of the National Association of Counties (NACo), the only national organization representing a!! 

3,069 counties across the United States, I write to request Congress provide urgent relief to counties 

with significant percentages of federal land within their jurisdictions by fully funding the Payments In 

Lieu of Taxes program (PILT) and reauthorizing the Secure Rural Schools program (SRS). 

As you know, Congress plays a key role in guiding the management of the 640 million acres offedera! 

public lands. Sixty-two percent of counties nationwide have federal land within their boundaries, and 

federal lands policies have a direct impact on the quality of life and economic wellbeing of public lands 

counties. Many counties have vast swaths of untaxable federal land, leaving a sizable portion of their 

revenues subject to the federal legislative branch. 

As Congress develops appropriations legislation for FY2017, we strongly encourage you to keep the PILT 

and SRS programs in mind, and ensure that federal public lands counties receive the full funding they 

need. 

Payments In Lieu of Taxes 

Nearly 1,900 counties, boroughs, and parishes in 49 states rely on PILTto make up for lost property tax 

revenue from tax-exempt federal public lands. PILT provides an important safety net so counties can 

reliably provide essential services to their constituents. 

In FY2016, Congress appropriated the necessary $452 million to fully fund PILT, which counties greatly 

appreciated. For FY2017, the U.S. Department of the Interior requested $480 million in mandatory 

funding for PILT. Unless and until Congress guarantees full funding for PILT, counties will not be able to 

provide public services such as emergency management, law enforcement, education, healthcare, and 

road maintenance to residents and federal lands visitors. 

Counties therefore urge Congress to fully fund PILT for FY2017 and eliminate the annual funding 

uncertainty faced by PILT counties in the long-term. 

660 NORTH CAPITOL STREET NORTHWEST I SUITE 400 

WASHINGTON. DC 200011202 393 6226 FAX 202 393 2630 I www NACo org 
508 

Secure Rural Schools 

The SRS program provides counties with significant U.S. Forest Service lands with funding to make up for 

the shortfall resulting from declining timber sales off federal forestlands beginning in the early 1990s. 

SRS was last reauthorized retroactively for FY2014 and FY2015 with final payments going to counties 

and schools in spring 2016. Currently, over 720 counties and 4,000 school districts in 41 states count on 

SRS funds to provide a quality education to nine million students. 

While NACo supports better federal forest management policies, including timber harvesting on public 

lands to increase revenues to local governments and schools, until needed land management reform 

becomes law, rural counties will be left with a major revenue shortfall if SRS lapses. 

Should the Congress not reauthorize SRS, county forest payments will revert to the permanently 

authorized 25 percent revenue sharing payments under the National Forest Revenue Act of 1908 (16 

U.S.C. 500). This will negatively impact county government revenues. When SRS authorization expired in 

FY2014, county payments nationwide decreased by a staggering 80 percent. Another revenue cut like 

this will force many public lands counties and schools to lay off vital employees, including 

schoolteachers. Additionally, some counties receiving PILT payments may see a reduction as SRS 

counties would no longer be required to deduct SRS payments under the PILT formula. 

NACo commits to working with Congress to ensure robust funding for county governments in FY2017 

and in the years ahead. County governments are responsible for implementing a broad array of services, 

such as educating our nation's youth, responding to emergency calls, and maintaining public 

infrastructure. Counties across the nation urge you to protect vital revenue streams that ensure these 

public services will not be interrupted in the coming year and in the long-term. 

Sincerely, 

Matthew D. Chase 

Executive Director 

National Association of Counties 

Joel Bousman 

President 

Western Interstate Region 

cc: U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

U.S. Senate Committee on Agrictulture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related 

Agencies 

U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources 

U.S. House Committee on Agriculture 

U.S. House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related 

Agencies 

The Honorable John Cornyn, Majority Whip, U.S. Senate 

The Honorable Richard Durbin, Minority Whip, U.S. Senate 

The Honorable Kevin McCarthy, Majority Leader, U.S. House 

The Honorable Steny Hoyer, Democratic Whip, U.S. House 
509 

Grral PublicSclwals 

forEveryStudenr 

May 1, 2017 

1201 16th St.,");."\\' Washington. rx:: 20036 Phon0: (202) 833~4000 

United States Senate 

Energy and Natural Resources Committee 

Washington, DC 20510 

Dear Senator: 

Lily Eskdsen Gan.:ia 

President 

Rebecca S. Pringle 

nee President 

Princess R Moss 

SecrC'tary-Treasurer 

John C. Stocks 

Executive Director 

On behalf of our three million members and the 50 million students they serve, we thank you for 

the opportunity to submit these comments in connection with tomorrow's hearing on payments 

pursuant to the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act (SRS) for schools 

and community services in 775 rural counties located near national forests in 41 states. 

Historically, this law provided critical support for over 9 million students in 4,400 schools. 

Funding for many of these schools had dropped dramatically due to declining revenues from 

timber sales-in some cases, to less than ten percent of historic levels. Students suffered as 

educators were laid off, extracurricular programs eliminated, and desperately needed building 

repairs postponed. 

SRS expired on September 30, 2015 and in March 2016 the last authorized payments were 

distributed. Based on the original 1908 law, the National Forest Service paid 25 percent of 

timber receipts to affected states in March 2017-far less than they had been receiving. As a 

result, rural counties across the country are now facing draconian cuts in education programs and 

student support as well as essential road, fire and safety services. The cuts adversely atfect 

everyone who lives in- or visits- the affected areas. 

Time is of the essence. We urge you to support reauthorizing SRS and stand ready to work with 

you to make that happen. Thank you for the oppmiunity to submit these comments. 

Sincerely, 

Marc Egan 

Director of Government Relations 
510 

Subje<:t: FW: Governors to Congress: Restore Rural Funding in Continuing Resolution 

From: Dussan, Sylvana [mailto:SDussan@NGA.OR§] 

Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 9:30AM 

Subject: GOVERNORS TO CONGRESS: RESTORE RURAL FUNDING IN CONTINUING RESOLUTION 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

April26, 2017 

Contact Elena Waskey, 202-624-7787, ewaskevralnga.OlJl 

GOVERNORS TO CONGRESS: RESTORE RURAL FUNDING IN 

CONTINUING RESOLUTION 

WASHINGTON---The National Governors Association (NGA) today released a statement regarding reduced federal 

payments to states and counties under the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program: 

"'Governors caU on members of Congress to uphold their longstanding commitments to rural studen~ and communities by 

restoring funding to the SRS program at FY 2015 levels and finding a permanent funding solution for the Payment in Lieu 

of Taxes (PILT) program. 

The pillars of SRS--education, transportation and public safety-are also the pillars of state and local governments. States 

and the rural communities they serve depend on every dollar of SRS to mitigate the financial burden caused by lost tax 

revenue from timber harvests on federal lands. 

Congress let SRS expire last year and as a result~ rural communities have experieoced draconian cuts, with the program 

reverting to a fundlng formula set in 1908. 

Since March 7. many rural communities and school districts that depend on these payments to provide essential services to 

their residents are struggling to absorb the unplanned cuts. Additionally, since 1976, PILT has provided payments to states 

and counties to offset losses in tax revenue, which support essential government services that necessitate funding certainty. 

In the forthcoming FY 2017 Continuing Resolution, Congress should prioritize rural Americans' security by restoring SRS 

funding at FY 2015 levels and extending the program through FY 2018." 

### 

The National Governors Association (NGA), founded in 1908, is the collecth•e voice of the nation's governors and one of Washing/on, 

D.C. 's most respected public policy orgcmi::atlons. Its members are the governors of the states, territories and common·wealths. NGA 

provides governors and their senior ~·ta.ff. members with sen' ices that range from representing states on Capitol Hill and before the 

A dministrution on key federal issues tu developing and implemenJing innovative solutions to puhlic polk:')-' challenges through the NGA 

Center for Best Practices. For more i'!formation, visit www.nga.org, 
511 

\V\V\V.nga.org! @NatlGovsAssoc 

\NWw. faccboo~xom/nationalgDvemorsassociatlon 

The information contained in this electronic transmission, including any attaclm1ents, is for the exclusive use of 

the intended recipient(s) and may contain infmmation that is privileged, proprietary, and/or confidential. If the 

reader of this transmission is not an intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended 

recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication 

is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender 

and delete this message. 

You are currently subscribed to [reps] as sam.ricketts@gov.wa.gov. 

To unsubscribe, send a blank email to leave-256002-

175449,173277c8c270e6ec797b23t30324a4a0@(alk.nga.org. 
512 

NAVAJO COUNTY 

Board of Supervisors 

Jack Sr. • Jesse Thompson • Jason E. Whiting • Steve WilHams • Dawnafe Whitesinger 

"We are Navajo Couuty" 

May 1, 2017 

Honorable Jeff Flake 

2200 East Camelback Rd. 

Suite 120 

Phoenix, AZ 85016 

Dear Senator Flake, 

I write to you today on behalf of the Navajo County Board of Supervisors to thank you for your 

continued support of the full-funding for the Payment in Lieu of Taxes Program (PTL T). The 

sustainability ofPILT, including a permanent full funding solution is essential for counties such 

as Navajo that are hugely impacted by large amount of federally managed land. 

The current uncertain status of PIL T funding, designed to patti ally offset the lost revenue and 

additional cost for services, including law enforcement, search and rescue, emergency services and 

road maintenance associated with the large amount of tax-exempt federal public lands is troubling. 

PILT is a critical piece of our county budget and failure to reauthorize these funds will imperil our 

county's ability to fulfill our statutorily-mandated functions, serving the public interest 

Thank you again for your understanding of the issue and support of finding a real solution for PILT 

funding. It is our hope that the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, along with the full 

Senate, the House and President will work together in a bi-partisan manner to tind a fair and 

dependable solution for PJLT funding. 

Appreciate you and your service to our State. 

Respectfully, 

Jesse Thompson, Chairman 

Navajo County Board of Supervisors 

• 928.524.4053 • Fax: 928524.4239 • P,O, Box 668 • Holbrook, AZ 86025 • 

• wwvv.navajocountvaz.gov • 
513 

PETERSBURG 

ALASKA 

Written Testimony For The Record 

By 

The Honorable Mark Jensen 

Mayor 

Petersburg Borough, AK 

Before 

The U.S. Senate Committee On Energy & Natural Resources 

Requesting the Committee 

Examine Federal Payments to Local Governments 

Provided through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination 

Act and the Payment in Lieu of Taxes Program and the Need to Provide Greater 

Fiscal Certainty for Resource Dependent Communities with TaxExempt Federal Lands 

May 2, 2017 

Chairman Murkowski and Ranking Member Cantwell, please accept the following statement for 

the hearing record on behalf the Petersburg Borough, Alaska. 

Petersburg is a resource-dependent community based in Southeast Alaska in the heart of the 

Tongass National Forest. Our population numbers close to 3,200 people, the majority of which 

depend on commercial fishing for their livelihood. We have tourism as well, mostly in the summer, 

with small cruise ship visitation and other ecotourism. While we are not timber-reliant as some 

other Southeast Alaskan communities, we support efforts to expand timber harvests in the 

Tongass in both an economic and environmentally-sustainable way. This includes support for 

legislation sponsored by Chairman Murkowski, Senator Sullivan and Rep. Young to facilitate 

multiple land swaps between the Alaska Mental Health Trust and the U.S. Forest Service in the 

region. We realize even with enactment of this legislation and separate legislation passed by the 

House in the last Congress that seeks greater balance in timber management on Federal lands, 

we are unlikely to see a return of the level economic activity from timber production and 

corresponding State revenue sharing payments that will make up for the loss of Secure Rural 

Schools funds. 

We have almost 1.8 million acres of Federal land within the Borough's borders. This ownership 

of such a large amount of land by the Federal government, almost all of it in the hands of the 

Forest Service, affects almost every activity we undertake. Whether it's permitting for construction 

of a road or dock, building on adjacent private property, or carrying out such routine local services 

as trash collection or snow removal, we must take into account the federal land ownership. 

Perhaps the biggest impact is what we are not able to do- use that land for economic development 

and appropriately derive revenue to fund the Borough's government and operations. 

Borough Administration 

PO Box 329, Petersburg, AK 99833- Phone (907) 772-4425 Fax (907)772-3759 

www .petersburgak.gov 
514 

Ostensibly, where the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) and Payment-In-Lieu Taxes (PIL T) programs 

become important is to compensate communities such as ours for the loss of economic 

opportunity and revenue derived from private property ownership. Last year, the Borough 

received just over $550,000 in PIL T funding. Our final SRS payment before the program expired 

totaled $577,000. Combined they form over 13 percent of our annual operating budget, with the 

majority of funding going toward our school district for paying teacher salaries, funding school 

sports and extracurricular activities, and building maintenance and operation. It has been very 

difficult for our Borough to plan and count on funding from these programs. We must watch from 

year-to-year as Congress comes down to the wire on whether the programs will be extended, 

only to learn with disappointment last year that Congress failed to continue the SRS program. 

However, we appreciate your steadfast and long-standing support for both programs and for 

seeking a solution for future funding. If that necessitates trying new, more creative approaches 

in order for both programs to be continued in a more sustained and long-term way, then we are 

fully supportive. 

In coming up with such creative approaches, including combining all Federal land revenuesharing programs into one Federal natural trust program as some have proposed, careful 

consideration must be given to the different formulas used. This is especially true for communities 

such as ours that are reliant on both programs. For example, PIL T uses a formula with a 

population-based metric. While Federal acreage is factored into the calculation of community 

payments, its population component can significantly skew payments in absolute terms to larger 

population communities. For example, Santa Barbara County received $1.8 million in PIL T 

funding in FY 2016, three times Petersburg's payment despite having less than half the Federal 

acreage within its borders. 

While also using Federal acreage in its formula, SRS payments factor in community per capita 

income, which can have significant impact in the size of county payments. Petersburg faced a 

major cut in our last SRS payment due to recent Census Bureau information that placed our per 

capita income above the national average. Yet the SRS formula does not factor in cost of living. 

If the income-based component of the formula is retained in any future SRS legislation, then 

inclusion of a cost of living index would be a fair way to calculate SRS payments for high cost-ofliving communities such as ours and elsewhere in Alaska. 

In closing, on behalf of the Petersburg Borough, we thank you for your support of the PIL T and 

SRS programs and for seeking to find a more stable solution for their continuance. We appreciate 

your consideration of these views and your interest in our community. 

Respectfully, 

Mark Jensen /lr!~ 

Mayor 

Borough Administration 

PO Box 329, Petersburg, AK 99833- Phone (907) 772-4425 Fax (907)772-3759 

www.petersburgak.gov 
515 

Senator Sanders Statement for The Record: Hearing to Examine Federal Payments to 

Local Governments Provided through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self 

Determination Act and the Payment in Lieu of Taxes Program and the Need to Provide 

Greater Fiscal Certainty for Resource-Dependent Communities with Tax-Exempt Federal 

Lands. 

Thank you Chairman Murkowski and Ranking Member Cantwell for holding this hearing. It is 

vital that we support rural localities and areas with high concentrations of federal lands. Many of 

these communities face planning uncertainty and budgetary shortfalls due to the inaction of 

Congress. 

The Payment In Lieu of Taxes (PIL T) program was designed to compensate local governments 

that cannot collect tax revenue because ofF ederalland designation but still must provide vital 

services to residents and visitors. These vital services include law enforcement, first responders, 

road and bridge maintenance, and more. 

Similarly, the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination (SRS) Act was enacted 

in 2000 to provide funding to rural counties and school districts impacted by reductions in timber 

harvest revenue. In fiscal year (FY) 2015, when SRS was last funded, it provided $278 million 

to 732 mainly rural counties across our nation. 

Without full funding for PIL T and a reauthorization of SRS, half of Vermont's 14 counties will 

face serious funding shortfalls. In total, according to the National Association of Counties 

(NACo), Vermont stands to lose close to $300,000. 

I am pleased to see that the 2017 spending bill included $465 million in PILT funding, but we 

must put the program on a path to long-term stability. 

We must ensure that we are addressing the unique needs of rural America, and provide certainty 

to states and localities in meeting the needs of their citizens. This week, I was proud to 

cosponsor bipartisan legislation introduced by Senators Wyden and Hatch that would provide a 

two-year reauthorization of SRS. I will continue to work toward reforms to SRS and PIL T to 

ensure that we don't shortchange our rural communities. 
516 

SERRC Board of Directors Resolution No.: 2017-01 

Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (SRSCSDA) 

Reauthorization 

WHEREAS, the 18 public school districts in Southeast Alaska reside in land comprised 

of 95% Tongass National Forest; and 

WHEREAS, more than 100 years ago a partnership was created between the Federal 

Government and communities to compensate communities financially impacted by the 

placement of timber reserves into federal ownership; and 

WHEREAS, SRSCSDA is critically important to 24 of Alaska's 54 school districts; and 

WHEREAS, many national forested counties and school districts have limited ability to 

generate local tax revenue to support schools and roads; and 

WHEREAS, the impact of a National Forest that no longer provides adequate revenue 

to help support local schools and roads places an onerous burden upon local citizenry 

that cannot be ameliorated without federal assistance; and 

WHEREAS, if not reauthorized Alaska will lose $11.2 million dollars in revenues, mostly 

tied to education; and 

WHEREAS, as there is a year lag time for most districts, a reduction in funding of this 

magnitude will have significant impacts on districts and create significant hardships; 

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the SERRC Board of Directors, comprised 

of the 18 Southeast Alaska superintendents and 3 SERRC Advisory Board members, 

superintendents from other regions of the state, urges the Alaska congressional 

delegation (Senator Murkowski, Senator Sullivan and Representative Young) to do all in 

their power to effect the reauthorization and funding of the Secure Rural Schools and 

Community Self-Determination Act retroactively and going forward, and to work towards 

multi-year reauthorization and mandatory funding. 

Adopted February 3, 2017. This resolution is effective upon signing. 

~-tJ5r,h Robert Boyle (:! ~ . Chairman of the Board of Directors 

SERRC, Alaska's Educational Resource Center 

www.serrc.org 210 Ferry Way • Juneau, Alaska 99801 • (901) 586~6806 • Pax (901) 463~3811 

805 W. Jrd Avenue • ADchorage, Alaska 99501 • (907) 349~0651 • Fax {907) 349-0652 
517 

'Yavapai County (}3oard of Supervisors 

HOO Orchard Court Dewey, AZ 86327 

1015 Fair Street Room 310 Prescott, AZ 86305 

May 1, 2017 

The Honorable Senator Jeff Flake 

Senate Russell Office Building 413 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Dear Honorable Senator Flake, 

Jack R. Smith, Member 

Yavapai County Board of Supe:nrisors 

Repn-senting District 5 

I am writing to thank you for your continued support for the Payments in Lieu of Taxes 

(PILT) program and to respectfully request that you work, in the next Congress, for a 

sustainable, long-term funding mechanism for PILT. Without prompt action, Yavapai 

County will face budget shortfalls that will impact our ability to provide essential services 

to residents and visitors. 

Yavapai County is deeply concerned about the uncertain funding status of PILT, which 

as you know is designed to offset the lost revenue and additional cost for services 

provided on, or associated with tax-exempt federal public lands, including law 

enforcement, search and rescue, emergency services, road building and maintenance, and 

other community services. After last year's funding of PILT much uncertainty still exists 

moving forward into FY2018. PILT is a critical piece of county budgets used to stabilize 

cash flow from July, the beginning of the fiscal year, until property tax revenue is 

collected in the October-November timeframe. A failure to secure a long-term solution 

for these funds will continue to imperil Yavapai County's ability to fulfill our statutorilymandated functions and place an unfair burden on the backs of local property owners. 

Again, thank you for your efforts in the past and your continued support of this 

important issue and of the Yavapai County taxpayers. I would encourage you to work 

with leadership to secure funding for PILT for FY2018 and to work towards a sustainable, 

permanent full funding solution. Your action is greatly appreciated. 

Sincerely, 

/-/--// 

Jack R. Smith 

Yavapai County Board of Supervisors 

Phone: 928-771-:1209 Fax: 928-583-1237 

Web.bos.district5@yava.paius 
518 

April 28, 2017 

Senator Murkowski Chair, Senator Cantwell, Ranking Member 

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee 

Madame Chair, Madame Ranking Member and Members of the Committee: 

Stevenson-Carson School District in Stevenson, W A, a forest county community surrounded by federal 

land, relies on the critical support the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act 

provides for its operations. 

SRS funding is crucial to be able to provide a well-rounded education for our students. The StevensonCarson schools also serve as centers of the community. Without the continuation of the SRS funding, 

the school district's budget will be reduced by 12 percent. This spending cut is on top a 33% reduction 

in the budget over the last six years. 

For the Stevenson-Carson School District, the next round of cuts began last Wednesday. The night 

before, our community failed the school district's request for a levy to replace the SRS funding. The 

community understands that it is the federal government's duty to make up for the loss of timber 

revenues to replace local tax revenues-- a pledge dating back to 1908 --not the community's duty. The 

community, at the ballot box, showed that it is not their responsibility to make up this difference if the 

federal government is not keeping its commitment through the Secure Rural Schools program and 

through its original 1908 commitments when local lands were first taken to create the national forests. 

The recent trend of reduced federal funding through SRS has resulted in the closing of the middle 

school, placing middle school students in the high school with older students. The district has also 

closed our alternative learning school-- for students who didn't find success in the traditional school 

and needed something different. Those students are now back in the brick and mortar schools without 

the resources and attention to assist their success. Some sports teams which build student confidence 

and bind the community together have been eliminated. In the fall, all sports teams will be gone. 

Since 2010 administrators, teachers and other sta!Tpositions have been reduced. There has been a 

reduction in art exploration opportunities and the entire family and consumer sciences program 

completely eliminated. There has been an increased adult: student ratios, along with the elimination of 

counselor and certified librarians. 

Today the teachers don't even have all the basic materials needed to teach-- they bring in materials 

purchased personally over the weekend out of their own pocket book. 

Without SRS dedicated funding for FY16 and FY 17, the district is facing even deeper reductions. 
519 

As a superintendent, I'm doing work that no one should have to endure. After already reducing the 

budget by over 33% in the last six years- I am forced to trim again. The fat has been trimmed, yet the 

lack of SRS funding is causing me to go deeper. I am forced to eliminate the culture of the schools: 

sports, music, band, business, clubs and more. For the first time, my Educational Service District is 

assisting in preparing R!F notices --reduction in force notices they have never had to do this work 

before this week. The loss of SRS will cause school employees, community members, to become 

unemployed. Next week, I will be scheduling meetings with my middle school and high school ASB 

clubs to let them know that they won't have many, if any, clubs or extracurricular opportunities 

beginning in September. 

This morning, I e-mailed my athletic director and said, "We need to talk." I will be laying off our 

athletic director and all coaches --all sports eliminated. This year we had more than half of our student 

body parricipate in one or more sports. Even though we all know that the extra-curricular activities are 

crucial in providing a well-rounded education. The district is now forced to cut sports programs which 

is another negative blow to community identity. Several teachers, several paraeducators, and other staff 

from across all departments, all residents and members of the local community, will be cut. 

The entire business program which is connected to the local business community will be eliminated. 

Classes like ceramics, beginning band and theatre which contribute to the community may end. These 

notices are to be delivered on May 15th, based on Washington State laws. 

I wish that I could deliver this story to you and the Committee myself and I'd explain that it isn't just 

my 930 students suffering. My district is just one example of a district suffering from the loss of SRS 

funding. Similar experiences will be happening in over 4400 school districts across the country 

including districts in Alaska, Washington, Utah, California, Idaho, Montana, Colorado, Arizona, New 

Mexico, Oregon, Mississippi, Texas, Arkansas, Maine and in 41 states. 

Come to my community and walk around the school grounds with me. You can look into the eyes of 

students and said, "Seriously, without the SRS funding this spring, you will not get to play football in 

September." "I know you were hoping for a music scholarship. Yes, it will be hard to get without 

music being offered." To a staff member, you could help me explain, "I'm sorry that you just purchased 

a house in our school district, we will not have a position for you in the 17-18 school year. Yes, I 

realize you are one of our superstars, but we simply can't keep you." I'm emotionally frustrated, I'm 

angry and I cannot believe that you won't keep your promise to my students. 

These were promises made by Congress through the Secure Rural School Program and previous 

commitments to forest communities such as Skamania County. We need to keep those promises. 

Karen Douglass 

Superintendent 
520 

Participating 

Representation from 

the following: 

CALIFORNIA 

Amador • Butte 

Calaveras 

Del Norte 

ElDorado 

Glenn • Humboldt 

lnyo 

Lassen 

Madera • Modoc 

Nevada 

Placer 

Plumas 

Sacramento 

Shasta • Siskiyou 

Sierra 

Tehama 

Trinity 

Tuolumne 

Yuba 

OREGON 

Coos • Curry 

Douglas • Jackson 

Klamath 

Josephine • Lake 

NEVADA 

Nye 

WASHINGTON 

Skamania 

Aprill8,2017 

Sustainable Forest Action Coalition 

542 Main St., Placerville, CA 95667 

Organization Representatives 

Laurel Brent-Bumb: (530) 621 5885 

chamber@eldoradocounty .org 

Bill Wickman: (530) 283 0973 

billwickman@sbcglobal,net 

1 09 Cottonwood Ct. Quincy 

The Honorable Senator Diane Feinstein 

The Honorable Senator Kamala Harris 

The Honorable Senator Dean Heller 

The Honorable Congressman Doug LaMalfa 

The Honorable Congr~ssman Tom tvlcClintock 

l11c Honorable Congressman Ami Bara 

The Honorable Congrc~sman Jeff Denham 

The Honorable Congressman Kevin McCarthy 

The Honorable Congressman Devin Nunes 

The Honorable Congressman Jared Huffman 

The Honorable Congressman Nfark Amodei 

Dear Honorable Senators and Congressman: 

The Sustainable Forest Action Coalition (SFAC) suppot1s 22 counties in California, 

seven Counties in Southern Oregon and \Vcstcrn Nevada. We also work with groups in 

Idaho and \Vashington State. These supporters come from a large cross section of 

elected otTicia]s, Chambers of Commerce. Fan11 Bureaus, Fire Safe Councils, Timber 

Industry. \Vater Agencies. Education and individuals who have voiced an interest in our 

c!Torts, 

SFAC is hopeful that Congress will work with the Schools Coalition and snpport 

groups such as ours to not only continue your support of the SRS program. but to 

recognize the urgent need to address the efforts to make change in current regulations 

that restrict the proper management of our public lands. The Secure Rural Schools 

program was intended a.s a safety net for forest communities in 41 states. SRS 

payments arc based on historic precedent and agreements beginning in 190R remoYing 

federal lands from local tax bases and from full local community economic actiYity. 

The federal government and Congress were expected to develop a long term system 
521 

based on sustainable acti\'c forest management It is only through reasonable change in the current 

regulations that \·ve can all return our Forest to a healthy condition while also increasing rcYenues. creating 

jobs and revitalizing our local rural economics. Currently we continue to see an en~r increasing loss of these 

resources due to wildfire as well as insect am! disease, All to often. these fires and dramatic insect outbreaks 

due to the current over crowded condition of our forests. destroy the Ycry resource that historically has been 

the support base for our schools. On March 7, Congress failed to act on SRS and forest management. 

resulting in the National Forest Service issuing 25 1!/o payments ofti1nbcr receipts to states based on the 

original 1908 Act The 2016 payments, actually based on timber receipts. are well below Secure Rural 

Schools funding. They were also cut 6.9% by sequestration. 775 Counties and over 4,400 schools serving 9 

million students in 41 states now directly face the grim t!nancial reality of budget cuts and the loss of county 

road, fire and safety services. anU reductions in education programs and services for students. 

Congress must continue the historic national commitment to the 775 rum! counties and 4.400 schools in 

rural communities and school districts served by the SRS program. Without immediate Congressional action 

on forest management and SRS. fi.,rcst counties and schools face the loss of irreplaceable essential fire. 

police. road and bridge, community and educational services. 

Congress must also work in keeping or increasing the budgets for our natural resource agencies to address 

the fire and insect issues due to the unhealthy and oYer crowded conditions of our public land forests, It will 

be a certain death sentence for our counties if both SRS and the budgets for both the Forest Service and 

Bureau of Land Management arc reduced in both timber and fire management budget line items, Without 

maintaining the budget in these critical areas, the Agencies can not accomplish the needed restoration of our 

public forests and watersheds. This restoration and the revenue that can be generated through the products 

rcn1ovcd arc critical to the revenue flo'-V to our counties. 

The SF AC requests your consideration. as stated above, for support and extension of the Secure Rural 

Schools and Community SeJt:Determination Act (SRS) program until such time that responsible changes 

can be made in current regulations. Such changes would allow for actively managing the watersheds and 

forests to assure that our ecosystems do not continue to burn up. but continue to produce the products and 

water that our State and Nation need. This is the only way that social and economic stability can be 

maintained. or increased vvithin our counties. 

It is the SFAC hope and desire that we can continue to work with all of you to bring awareness as well as 

rcconnncndations on the changes discussed above. 

Sincerely. 

Bill Wickman and Laurel Brent Bumb 

Co-Spokespersons for SF AC 
522 

WESTERN 

GOVERNORS' 

ASSOCIATION 

Steve Bullock 

Governor of Montana 

Chair 

Dennis Daugaard 

Governor of South Dakota 

Vice Chair 

James D. Ogsbury 

Executive Director 

Headmmrters 

1600 Brovdway 

Suite 1700 

Denver, CO 80202 

303-623-9378 

Fax 303-534· 7309 

w~shington. D,C. 

400 N. Capitol Street, N.W. 

Suite 376 

Washington, D.C. 20001 

202-624-5402 

Fax 202-624· 7707 

www.westgov.org 

May 1, 2017 

Honorable Lisa Murkowski 

Chairman 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

United States Senate 

304 Dirksen Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Honorable Maria Cantwell 

Ranking Member 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

United States Senate 

304 Dirksen Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Dear Chairman Murkowski and Ranking Member Cantwell: 

ln advance of the Comtnittee's May 2, 2017 henring to examine issues 

surrounding the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act 

and the Payment in Lieu of Taxes program, attached please find a copy of 

Western Governors' Association Policy Resolution 2017-03, Tax-Exempt Federal 

Lands and Secure Rural Schools. This resolution articulates the policy positions of 

Western Governors on these two important programs. 

Please contact me if you have any questions or require further information. In 

the meantime, with warm regmds and best wishes, I am 

Respe~tony0.1A~L.. / 

'S D ogsb~~r.,-o E e utiVe Director 

Attachment 
523 

Western Governors' Association 

Policy Resolution 2017-03 

Tax-Exempt Federal Lands and Secure Rural Schools 

WESTERN 

GOVERNORS' 

ASSOCIATION 

A. BACKGROUND 

1. The l=d ownership pattern in the West is a patchwork of federal, state, tribal and 

privately owned and managed lands. 

2. This ownership pattern results in part from the withdrawal of lands by the federal 

government for various federal purposes, including national parks, national forests, 

lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management, national wildlife refuges, 

national monuments, and military bases. 

3. The federally-owned lands arc exempt from property taxes, and recognizing the costs to 

states and counties from the presence of tax-exempt federal lands within their borders, 

in 1976 Congress enacted Public Law 94-565 to create the Payments in Lieu of Taxes 

(PlLT) program. 

4. Congress also enacted the Twenty Five Percent Fund Act of 1908 to share receipts from 

timber sales on U.S. Forest Service lands. Because of a dramatic decline in the amount of 

timber the U.S. Forest Service offered for sale starting in the late 1980s, Congress enacted 

the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (Public Law 106-393) 

as an alternative mechanism to compensate states and counties for timber sold on 

federal lands. Congress recognized that communities adjacent to federal lands still need 

to provide infrastructure and services (schools, roads, emergency response, etc.) for 

residents and visitors, including land managers, as well as to protect wildlife and 

natural resources despite the loss of shared timber sales receipts. Attempting to provide 

SRS funding levels through the 1908 law alone would require a 400 percent increase in 

logging on federal lands using 2015 U .5. Forest Service receipts- an unachievable shortterm outcome given current capacity planning and executing sales, appropriating 

sufficient funds, and local mill infrastructure. 

5. In recent years, funding for both of these historic federal-state-county agreements and 

programs has not kept pace with inflation, has been the target of budget cutbacks and 

has been subjected to sequestration under the Budget Control Act. 

Western Governors' Association Page 1 of2 Policy Resolution 2017-03 
524 

6. Sustained and predictable payments to local government under these programs is vital 

to ensure continued support for federal ownership and management of lands within 

western states. 

B. GOVERNORS' POLICY STATEMENT 

1. Western Governors believe that the federal government must honor its historic PILT 

agreement with states and counties in the West to compensate them for tax-exempt 

federal lands within their borders. 

2. Western Governors believe it is incumbent that the federal government ensure counties 

and states continue to receive predictable and adequate payments under the Secure 

Rural Schools program. These payments are vital to providing state and county public 

goods and services, such as roads, emergency response, and wildlife and natural 

resources protection in communities adjacent to federal lands. 

3. Western Governors encourage continuation of three important programs under the 

Secure Rural Schools program: 1) active management and restoration of federal forests; 

2) revenue sharing; and 3) collaborative processes (Title If & Ill) which facilitate 

gathering input from the general public, local government and other local community 

stakeholders to inform federal land management decisions. 

4. Payments to states and counties under these programs should not be subject to federal 

sequestration. Western Governors support legislation that clarifies the unique nature of 

these programs. 

C. GOVERNORS' MANAGEMENT DIRECTIVE 

1. The Governors direct WGA staff to work with Congressional committees of jurisdiction, 

the Executive Branch, and other entities, where appropriate, to achieve the objectives of 

this resolution. 

2. Furthermore, the Governors direct WGA staff to consult with the Staff Advisory Council 

regarding its efforts to realize the objectives of this resolution and to keep the Governors 

apprised of its progress in this regard. 

Western Governors enact new policy resolutions and amend existing resolutions on a bi-annual basis. 

Please consult www.westqov.org/oolicies for the most current copy of a resolution and a list of all 

current WGA policy resolutions. 

Western Governors' Association Page 2 of2 Policy Resolution 2017-03 
525 

WESTERN 

GOVERNORS' 

ASSOCIATION 

Steve Bullock 

Governor of Montana 

Chair 

Dennis DaugaarJ 

Govemor of South Dakota 

Vice Chair 

James D. Ogshury 

Executive Director 

Headquarters 

1600 Broadway 

Suite 1700 

Denver, CO 80202 

303-623-9378 

Fax 303-534-7309 

400 N. Capitol Street, N.W. 

Suite J76 

Washington, D.C 20001 

202-624-5402 

Fax 202-624-7707 

'\VWw.westguv.i.)rg 

March 16, 2017 

Honorable Lisa Murkowski 

Chairwoman 

U.S. Senate Appropriations 

Subcommittee on Interior, 

Environment, and Related Agencies 

131 Dirksen Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Honorable Ken Calvert 

Chairman 

U.S. House Appropriations 

Subcmnrnittce on Interior, 

Environment, and Related Agencies 

B-308 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Honorable Tom Udall 

Ranking Member 

U.S. Senate Appropriations 

Subcommittee on Interior, 

Environment, and Related Agencies 

125 Hart Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Honorable Betty McCollum 

Ranking Member 

U.S. House Appropriations 

Subcommittee on Interior, 

Environment, and Related Agencies 

B-308 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 205.15 

Dem Chairwoman Murkowski, Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member Udall, 

and Ranking Member McCollum: 

We respectfully request your active support and full funding of the 

Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) and Secure Rural Schools and Community 

Self Determination Act (SRS) programs for the remainder of Fiscal Year 

2017 and throughout Fiscal Year 2018. Western Governors have long 

advocated that the federal government must fulfill its obligation to fund 

these programs for rural counties with tax-exempt federal lands and for 

timber-dependent counties that rely on this funding to provide necessary 

government services to their citizens. That conunitmcnt was reiterated by 

the Governors through passage in December 2016 of WGA Policy 

Resolution 2017-03, Tax-Exempt Federal Lands and Secure Rural Schools. 

The PILT was enacted in 1976 to provide direct payments to nearly 1,900 

counties in 49 states and three U.S. territories to compensate them for the 

presence of non-taxable federal lands in their jurisdictions. These 

payments arc not a subsidy to local governments. PILT provides funding 

to offset the loss of property tax revenues, because federal lands cannot be 

taxed. These payments also help to fund critical services on lands, 

including Jaw enforcement, search and rescue, fire 1nanagcmcnt, solid 

waste management, and emergency medical services. \Nithout PfLT 

payments, local governments often lack even minimal resources to manage 

these important functions. 
526 

Honorable Lisa Murkowski 

Honorable Tom Udall 

Honorable Ken Calvert 

Honorable Betty McCollum 

March 16, 2017 

Page2 

Congress enacted the SRS Act in 2000 to compensate more than 700 forest counties and 

school districts for lost timber revenues due to changes in federal forest management 

policy. Title I of the Act authorizes SRS funding to be used for schools and roads. It also 

allows funding to be used for stewardship projects on federal lands to enhance forest 

ecosystems, watershed restoration, wildlife and fish habitat, and control of invasive 

species. Title !! funding can be used for restoration projects proposed by local resource 

advisory committees. Title Ill ftmding may be used to carry out activities under fhe 

Fire wise Communities program, reimburse counties for search and rescue and other 

emergency services, or to develop community wildfire protection plans. In short, these 

SRS funds provide critical funding for basic services while also providing an important 

funding source for responsible management activities on forests and rangelands in these 

counties. 

Local governments cannot provide needed educational and public safety services 

without adequate PlL T and SRS payments. As the next appropriations cycle 

approaches, we urge you to fully support these programs, as well as work together to 

find a permanent funding solution to end the annual authorization and appropriations 

uncertainty that interferes wifh planning and budgeting in these small communities. 

We thank you for your support of these two programs that are so important to Western 

states. 

Sincerely, 

Governor of Montana 

Chair, WGA 

!Jl-4v) 

Dennis Daugaard 

Governor of South D 

Vice Chair, WGA 

cc: Members, Senate and House Appropriations Subcommittees on Interior, 

Environment, and Related Agencies 

Members, House Committee on Natural Resources 

Members, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
527 

YAVAPAI COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

THOMAS THURMAN- Chairman 

District2 

wch bos.dtstrict2·'ti\avapai us 

ROWLE P. SIMMONS- Vice Chairman 

District( 

\Yeb bos.district l·d·\avapai us 

RANDY GARRISON- Supcnisor 

District3 

\\Cb.bos.district.3'(havapai.us 

CRAIG L. BROWN- Supervisor 

District_. 

\\ch.bos.Jistncl41dnlvnpai us 

JACK R. SMITH- Supenisor 

DistrictS 

\\ eb. hos. d istrict5·1d'V a vanni. us 

May 2, 2017 

Hon. Senator Flake, 

1015 FAIR STREET 

PRESCOTT, ARIWNA 86305 

PHONE: (928) 771-3200 

FAX: (928) 771-3257 

TDD: (928) 771-3530 

W\YW. vavapai. us 

PHIL BOURDON 

JACK FIELDS 

Assistant County 

Administrator 

inck l1dds'dvavapa1.US 

K!MKAPIN 

Clerk of the Board 

Special Districts Coordinator 

kim k<tpin:dvavnrai m: 

On behalf of the Yavapai County Board of Supervisors, we thank you for supporting and recognizing the 

importance of PILT to Arizona's Counties. Knowing how crucial budgetary certainty is to our shared 

constituencies, we urge you to continue to work toward finding a long-term solution to PIL T funding so that 

counties won't have the annual uncertainty of not knowing how to fund their budgets. 

However, we were dismayed to learn that that the 2017 Omnibus Bill did not include any funding for SRS. As 

you know, the SRS programs provides crucial support to local schools, transportation infrastructure, search and 

rescue and other county services in more than 720 counties and 4,000 school districts, impacting nine million 

students across 41 states. 

National policies limited revenue-generating activities within federal forests, but local governments are still 

expected to deliver services. SRS provides counties with law enforcement protection and transportation 

infrastructure. SRS funds these necessary services that local governments provide in federal forest lands. 

In December we wrote to express that the current revenue sharing payments were no longer sufficient to support 

the services forest counties must provide. We urge you Senator Flake to continue your work in support of finding 

a resolution and again thank you for your service. 

Sincerely, 

Thomas Thunnan, Chairman 

Yavapai County Board of Supervisors 

To n·aLh County Offices toll-irN' from the> followinp; ari'a<J, call: 

Verde Valky ... ......... 6.19-8100 Black Cmyon .. . . ............. ...J-95-8000 

(All othc•r areas call toU~frf'C' 1-800-771-2797) 
528 

OFFICE OF THE 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

198 Main Street 

Yuma, Arizona 85364 

SUSAN K. THORPE 

COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 

CLERK OF THE BOARD 

May 2, 2017 

The Honorable John McCain 

United States Senate 

241 Russell Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

The Honorable Jeff Flake 

United States Senate 

368 Russell Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Re: Support for PIL T 

Dear Senator McCain and Senator Flake: 

MARTIN PORCHAS 

DISTRICT 1 

RUSSELL MCCLOUD 

DISTRICT2 

DARREN SIMMONS 

DISTRICT3 

MARCO A. (TONY) REYES 

DISTRICT4 

LYNNE PANCRAZI 

DISTRICTS 

We respectfully request your consideration and support of full funding for the Payment-In-Lieuof-Taxes (PILT) Program. 

• The County of Yuma is comprised of approximately 3,430,846 total acres. Federal lands (tax 

exempt) account for 85.4% of these lands, while private (taxable) lands account for only 

8.8%. 

• While Yuma County cannot benefit from the development of these federal lands to generate 

tax revenue, we must still provide public safety services such as search and rescue, disaster 

relief and other services. The County Sheriffs Office also provides assistance directly to 

federal agencies in Yuma County. 

• In 2016, Yuma County received approximately $3.5 million in PILT payments, which 

represents nearly 5% of the County's General Fund revenues. 

• Yuma County has a workforce of approximately 1,400 employees. Loss of PIL T revenues 

would force the elimination and displacement of approximately seventy (70) workers in an 

area already suffering from an unemployment rate that averages around 20%, one of the 

highest rates in the nation. 

• Failure to provide mandatory PIL T funding to Arizona counties in a timely manner will 

critically impact the structural and financial solvency of Yuma County, and substantially 

compromise the county's ability to provide essential services. 
529 

For these and many other reasons, we urge your support of full funding ofPILT to Arizona 

counties. Pie not hesitate to contact us if you have questions. 

Supervisor, District 4 

/] 

1N'1 ~~v ,~-'r_.A .. ~'"'-

MARTIN PORCHAS 

Supervisor, District I 

Sup rvisor, District 5 

0 

RUSSELL MCCLOUD 

Vice Chainnan 

Supervisor, District 2 

{\_~e.~ DARREN R. SIMMONS 

Supervisor, District 3