TITLE II RELATED AGENCIES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

FOREST SERVICE FOREST RESEARCH

Ainendiilent No. 73: Appropriates $200,130,000 for forest research instead of $201,780,000 as proposed by the House and

$198,076,000 as proposed by the Senate. The decrease below the a1nount proposed by the House consists of an increase of $200,000 for the research foundation progra:m in LA; and decreases of

$250,000 for recycl·ng research and $1,600,000 for Forest Plan

ecosystems research.

While not directing the Forest Service to allocate specific funding to the Bolle Center, MT, the n1anagers encourage the Forest Service to continue the research curr ~ntly being done at the Illul- tiple use econoiilics progran1 of research unit INT-4802 in Mis-

soula, MT.

The $300,000 eat·tnarked frolll the Forest Plan in the House report for the University of Washington landscape management project should be provided fro:m tintber Dlanagelllent funds under the National Forest Systent account.

STATE AND PRIVATE FORESTRY

Ainendntent No. 74: A propriates $161,264,000 for State and private forestry instead of 158,664,000 as proposed by the House and $161,511,000 as proposed by the Senate. The increase over the arnount proposed by the House consists of increases of $600,000 for rural developiilent, $2,000,000 for Pacific Northwest contmunity as- sistance, and $500,000 for old growth diversification projects; and a decrease of $500,000 to the stewardshi incentives prograrn.

The Illanagers have provided an ad itional $2,000,000 over the arnount recoDliilended by the House for Pacific NW contDlunity as- sistance. Because of the ntill closures in Alaska, the managers agree that $500,000 of this arrtount ntay be provided in Alaska on a one-tirr1e basis only.

The eat·rnarks contained in both the House and Senate reports for urban forestry, forest stewardship, and stewardship incentives are Dlaintained, except that the $500,000 for the northeastern Pennsylvania progran1 in stewardship incentives is one-tillle funding only. Under the forest legacy prograrn, any political subdivision within New York State m.ust agree to include itself, in order to par- ticipate in the prograrn. A subdivision is defined as a village, city,

town, or cot1nty. .

Within econolllic action rograms, $2.6 ntillion is specifically for continuation of the Rur Developn1ent through Forestry prograrn in the Northeast and Midwest at the level available in fiscal year 1994. Other initiatives, such as AineriCorps, shall not be funded frolll this initiative unless approved by the Committees through a reprograrr1m.ing action. The managers note that no funding for AineriCorps was pro osed in the fiscal year 1995 budget, and the reprograntnting gui elines provide specific direction about initiating new prograrns through the use of reprograrnmings. This direction ap lies to the national Forest Systeiil appropriation account as we as the State and Private Forestry account.

NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM

Ainendlllent No. 75: A pro riates $1,345,112,000 for the national forest systeiil instea of 1,348,162,000 as proposed by the House and $1,334,857,000 as proposed by the Senate. This arnount is decreased by a $12,000,000 rescission included by both the House and Senate. The decrease below the arnount proposed by the House consists of increases of $1,000,000 for recreation management (including $400,000 for the Hells Canyon Illanagelllent plan,

$400,000 for the Spring Mountain management plan, and $200,000 for handicapped access in Region ^1), and $500,000 for timber sales manageiilent; and decreases of $1,000,000 for ecosystem planning, inventory and Illonitoring, and $850,000 for wildlife and fish management, including $500,000

to

anadromous fish and $350,000 to threatened and endangered species, $500,000 to rangeland management, $1,000,000

to

soil, water and air management, $1,000,000 to road m.aintenance, and $200,000 to general administration.

The n1anagers have not included revised nu:mbers for various NFS line ite:ms, which were subnritted by the Forest Service in order to correct errors in the revised budget structure agreed to by both the House and Senate. The n1anagers are concerned that the nu:mbers were not internally verified before sub:mission

to

the Co:m- Dlittees, and expect the Forest Service to sub:mit a reprogra rnnting

request as soon as the correct nuntbers have been deter·nrined.

The Colll:mittees have agt·eed to a m.odified budget structure for the Forest Service. The ecosystem., planning, inventory and m.on- itoring (EPIM) line-itent was created by reallocating funds frolll other activities within the various National Forest System. progra:ms. In so:me instances, the resources transferred to the EPIM line-ite:m represented a significant portion of a prograrn area's funding. The Jllanagers expect the Forest Service to develop language in its budget instructions that ensures field units are able

to :maintain, to the fullest extent possible, continuity in the progra:ms which contributed to the EPIM line-iteDl. The new budget structure, and the change in benefitting function concept, are in- tended to help the Forest Service nrinim.ize the duplication of effort and enhance efficiency. In addition, where possible, infor·ntation gathered in conjunction with activities associated with one prograrn should be used as n1uch as possible where needed for other pro- grants.

The m.anagers agree that the Forest Service should include in the 1996 request infor'ntation on the criteria used

to

allocate Na- tional forest systen1 funds a 1nong the regions. Within the funds provided is $63,657,000 for law enforcen1ent. The decrease to road maintenance should be allocated on a nationwide basis, and the :managers expect work to proceed in 1995 on the Koocanusa Bridge

project in MT.

With respect to the tin1ber sales reparation progran1, the managers have agreed to an additional 500,000 in 1995 over the level proposed by the House. The entire mix of the tin1ber sales progra rn for fiscal year 1995 will be deter·1nined by the Forest Serv- ice upon review of the dollars provided in this account, as well as for road construction. In addition, a change in the n1ix of the pro-

gratn between new, or green sales, and salvage tin1ber sales, n1ay be necessary as a result of the severe fire season which ravaged the West this sun1U1er. Further in1pacts on the accom.plishm.ent of the ti1Ilber sales prograDl in different regions of the country n1ay result due to reductions in Federal staffing. Thus, the distribution of the tintber sales progra1n contem.plated when the budget was subnritted :may no longer be appropriate. The managers have provided changes to the budget structure and lllodified reprograrn1ning pro- cedures to enhance the Forest Service's ability to engage in ecosystem Dlanagentent, and expect the new guidelines· to be followed in detern1ining the progra1r1 n1ix for fiscal year 1995.

The IIlanagers also understand that the likelihood of success- fully completing the planned tin1ber sales prograrn proposed for fiscal year 1995 differs significantly a1nong forests and regions across the country. Som.e forests and regions are far below their capacity

to offer sales in fiscal year 1995 and den1and for tintber sales in sollle of these forests is very strong. In other instances, projected sales ntay not be attainable in fiscal year 1995 due to the need for

41

increased environn1ental review, watershed assesslllent or other pre-sale planning activities. The managers expect the Fdrest Serv- ice to take all of these factors into consideration when determining the allocation of the timber sales preparation dollars for fiscal year 1995. The managers expect the Forest Service to allocate carefully all resources available for timber sales ^to accoiilplish the lllost feasible sales level in fiscal year 1995, consistent with 2cosysteii1 lllan- agem.ent objectives. In particular, the managers are concerned that allocations of scarce resources not be .directed to areas with low probability of success at the expense of areas with significantly higher probability of success.

In lieu of the last paragraph on page 76 in the Senate report, the managers request the Forest Service ^toreport by February 15, 1995 on the effect of IIleeting certain requirelllents of section 705(a) of ANILCA and NFMA, such as establishing habitat conservation areas for goshawk and wolves, on seeking ^to provide a timber sup- ply to n1eet the annual and forest planning cycle market demand in the Tongass NF. the managers are aware of the needs for n1an- agen1ent of the Tongass which have arisen subsequent to the De- partm.ent's budget process for fiscal year 1995, including funds to reforrrtulate long ter·n1 tiiilber sales into sn1all business and inde- pendent sales; for the Tongass Land Managen1ent Plan ^(TI~MP) process ^to incorporate new inforn1ation into the TLMP revision;

and to lilake tilllber available ^to replace volume in conflict with proposed n1anagen1ent Illeasures. As these needs are further defined, the Forest Service should ntake the Illaximum feasible arrtount of resources available ^to llleet thent, and should submit a reprograrnrning request if determined necessary at the earliest possible date for itents that will stress studies for ecologically sound timber lllanageiilent, expediting the land tnanagentent planning process, and transitional n1easures associated with recent develop- ments. In addition, the managers recoJJtrnend that the Forest Serv- ice meet with interested ntentbers of the public, such as the tilllber purchasers and others, to explain the costs, benefits, and details of using watershed analysis in the Tongass.

The lllanagers are aware of needs for inventory and species as- sessm.ent activities on the Tongass NF, AK, and urge the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Forest Service to consider these require-

ments when allocating funds in fiscal year 1995. If additional resources are necessary by either agency, a reprograllliiling should be submitted.

With respect to the possibility of a 10-year contract, the Forest Service should explore this option in the context of the Tongass land use ntanagentent plan revision process. The m.anagers expect the Forest Service to provide a draft plan and tentative schedule for such a contract and whether it should be done apart from. the TLMP process. The managers on both sides are interested in seeing the TLMP revision com.pleted expeditiously. .

In preparing the fiscal year 1996 budget, the Forest Service should consider budget allowances which will help to address the costs associated with contract cancellations and n1odifications.

The managers understand that the $200,000 earmarked in the Senate report for the conversion of roads to trails will be used in

•

as Illany forests as possible in Region 6, with the Gifford Pinchot NF being the first priority.

The Illanagers have not provided a specific eartnark for inland fish activities at Walker Lake, Toiyabe NF, NV. However, the man-

agers recognize the intportance of this effort, and expect the Forest Service to proceed with the required work related to the Lahontan cutthroat trout to the ntaxin1un1 extent feasible. Any related activi- ties which involve recreation iDlproventents should be funded frolll the recreat5on use line iten1.

The n1anagers recognize the Grande Ronde Model Watershed efforts undertaken in northeast Oregon and encourage others to foster such collaborative endeavors. The Regional Forester and the Forest Service East Side Ecosysten1 project are ex ected to cooper-

ate to the fullest extent practicable with waters ed-based State/

local habitat restoration initiatives such as that underway in the Grande Ronde.

The House and Senate reprogralll:ming guidelines are revised to include the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Colll:mittee under ite:m 9(a) (notification of Con1n1ittees before changing re- gional boundaries, abolishing any region, or :moving or closing any regional office).

The lllanagers note that in recent years, funds have been pro- vided for additional land acquisition on the Green Mountain NF, VT. The classification of these lands through the forest plan proc-

ess, which involves public CODlDlent, is not yet contplete. As a re- sult, the Forest Service is not able to ntanage these lands actively for the appropriate resources.

Within funds provided to the Green Nlountain NF, the Forest Service is encouraged to undertake the analysis, inventory, and public involveillent necessary to identify the appropriate lllanage- Dlent classificat.ion of recently acquired lands so that these lands n1ay be integrated into the forest plan. To the extent allo\·ved under existing authorities, the Forest Service is encouraged to undertake these actions using funds provided in the land acquisition account for the Green Mountain NF.

Ainendlllent No. 76: Provides that tiinber volullle authorized for sale during fiscal year 1994 but · which reiilains unsold shall be offered for sale during fiscal year 1995 to the extent possible as proposed by the Senate.

FOREST SERVICE FIRE PROTECTION

Ainend:ment No. 77: Appropriates $159,590,000 for Forest Service fire protection instead of $160,590,000 as proposed by the House and $156,908,000 as proposed by the Senate. The decrease frolll the a:mount proposed by the House is $1,000,000 for fuels :manage:ment. While the remaining increase of $3,000,000 for fuels lllanagernent is not eai'titarked, the :managers agree that the Forest Service should note the high priority areas included in the Senate

report, and should also place a high priority on the natural fuels treat:ment initiative in Region 5.

The Illanagers co:mlllend the Depart:ment of Agriculture for es-

tablishing a task force to review the causes, effects, and severity

of the wildfires in the Western United States. The managers expect

the Departiilent to n1ove expeditiously to restore and rehabilitate

burned-over areas, and reduce excessive fuel load in areas highly susceptible to wildfire. The goals of the Departntent in undertaking such efforts should be to reduce the risk of loss of life and property;

minin1ize the costs associated with future outbreaks of fire; reduce the risk of post-fire flooding; and enhance the health and sustain- ability of forest ecosysten1s.

The Dlanagers also urge the Forest Service to expedite the planning and execution of grass seeding, revegetation, and tree planting operations in forest areas affected by the 1994 wildfires, such as in the State of Washington, in order to avoid potential floods and landslides. The Illanagers encourage the Forest Service

to given consideration, ^tothe best of its ability, to dislocated ti:mber workers when ern.ploying individuals for the replanting, revegetation, and reseeding work.

CONSTRUCTION

Atnendn1ent No. 78: Appropriations $203,186,000 for construction instead of $191,740,000 as proposed by the House and

$219,234,000 as proposed by the Senate. The increase over the amo11nt proposed by the House consists of a decrease of $400,000 for trail construction (including $300,000 for Badin Lake, Uwharrie NF, NC and $100,000 for the Wayne NF, OH), and increases of

$1,102,000 for facilities construction and $10,744,000 for road con-

struction. ^r

The increase for facilities consists of increases of $800,000 for Green Mountain NF facility purchase, $232,000 for Hudson Prairie Center, NE, $785,000 for Multnon1ah Falls sewer systeiil, OR,

$1,150,000 for Colun1bia River Gorge Discovery Center, $871,000 for Winding Stair Mountain, OK, $635,000 for Ketchikan Visitors Center, AK, $1,400,000 for Seneca Rocks Visitors Center, WV,

$260,000 for Caney Lake, LA, and $753,000 for Mount St. Helens

NVM, WA; and decreases of $2,777,000 for adn1inistrative facilities outyear planning and design, $300,000 for Stubblefield Recreation Area, TX, $125,000 for Wayne NF, OH recreation projects, $69,000 for the Red Bluff carr1pground, CA $150,000 for the Applewhite Area, San Bernardino NF, CA, and $2,363,000 for outyear planning

and design for recreation facilities.

With regard to the outyear planning for both facilities and roads (recreation and general purpose), the Illanagers have provided half of the atnounts requested for regionwide Ianning and design, to be used for new projects costing less than 250,000 and for rehabilitation projects costing less than $500,000. Any projects with outyear costs exceeding these levels should be specifically jus- tified in the 1996 budget justification before any planning funds are obligated. Under adnlinistrative facilities, $120,000 is provided for the Boulder, CO office, which has been started with previous

funding. ·

For road construction, the increase over the arnount proposed by the House consists of increases of $12,500,000 for timber roads,

$283,000 for the Hudson Prairie Center, and $488,000 for Mount St. Helens; and decreases of $263,000 for general purpose roads and $2,264,000 for recreation roads, both for outyear planning and design. If the arnount provided for timber road construction proves not to be adequate during fiscal year 1995, the Forest Service

•

should submit a reprograrnllling request to the Appropriations Cornlllittee for consideration.

No funding is ear111arked for the Longleaf Vista Trail Area, Kisatchie NF, LA. Within the total of $390,000 provided for the Taft Tunnel project, $114,000 of this funding should be provided frorn recreation facilities funds. Within trail funds, there is $57,000 for Winding Stair recreation area, OK.

Within the funds included in the budget for region 6 survey and design, construction engineering, and prograrn adlllinistration to be allocated to Washington, the Forest Service should use

$100,000 to plan projects needed to provide public access through Federal land and to provide recreation opportunities at Bead Lake, Colville

NF,

WA. The Illanagers encourage the Forest Service to include the funds necessary to construct the access and facilities in the 1996 budget request, and to ensure that all activities are car- ried out in accordance with all environlllental laws and with full public participation.

Atnendrnent No. 79: Provides $71,443,000 for facilities construction instead of $70,341,000 as proposed by the House and

$70,367,000 as proposed by the Senate. The difference front the a1nount proposed by the House is discussed under Atnendlllent No.

78.

Atnend:ment No. 80: Provides $131,743,000 for constr~ction of roads and trails instead of $121,399,000 as proposed by the House and $148,867,000 as proposed by the Senate. The difference front the alllount proposed by the House is discussed under Atnendm.ent No. 78.

LAND ACQUISITION

Atnendrnent No. 81: Appropriates $65,436,000 for land acq~lisi

tion instead of $61,131,000 as proposed by the House and

$60,541,000 as proposed by the Senate.

The n1anagers agree to the following distribution of funds:

Area Amount

Alpine Lakes Management Area, WA ... $3,105,000 Apalachicola National Forest, FL ... 1,500,000 Appalachian NST ... ... ... ... ... 2,000,000 1\JrapGlllo ~' (j<:) ... 300,000 Big Sur./I..,os Padres ~' CA ... 2,000,000 (jaribbean N a tiona! Forest, PR .. ... .. .... .... ... .... .. ... ... ... ... . ... .. .... .. .. .. .. 500,()()() Cha ttooga WSR, N C., S(j . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, 7 50,000 Cibola National Forest, NM . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 650, ()()() Cleveland National Forest, CA . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . 2,500, ()()() Colorado Wilderness, Cc:> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, ()()(), ()()() Columbia Gorge NSA, c:>R, WA . . . . .. .. .. . .. . . .. .. . . . . .. .. . . . .. . . .. . . . .. .. . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . .. . . .. 1,400,000 Daniel Boone National Forest, KY . . . . . . . .. . 1,500, 000 Finger Lakes National Forest, NY . ... .... .. .. ... ... .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. ... 1,200,000 Flathead National Forest, MT ... 750,000 Francis Marion National Forest, SC ... .. ... .... .... .. .. ... .... .. ... .. .. .. .... .. ... .. .... 1,150,000

~Glllatin ~, ~ ... 5,000,000

~reen Mountain NF, VT ... 2,250,000

Hoosier~' IN ... 500,()()() Jefferson National Forest, VA ... 750,000 Kisa tchie National Forest: LA . . . 400,000 Michigan Lakes and Streams, MI ... .. ... ... .. .. ... ... ... .. ... .. ... 1,300,000

1v.lillll. WilclerneE;~a~1r, ~ ... f>OO,OOO North Fo1rk American WSR, CA ... 1,000,000

<:>co nee N a tiona! Forest, ~A . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . 5()(), ()()() c:>lympic National Forest, WA ... .. .... .... .. ... .... ... .. .. .. .. .... .. . ... ... .. .. 1,000,0()()

Area

<:>~~<>Il lJttln~e; ~' c:>18t ....... .

<:>sce<>la N a ti<>nal F<>rest, FL ... . Ouachita N a ti<>nal F <>rest, AR, c:> K ... . Pacific Cr~e;t NST, CA, W A ... . Pacific N<>rtllw~st Str~ams, WA, c:>R ... . Presc<>tt N ati<>nal F<>rest, ~ ...... . Ri<> Grand~ NF, Cc:> ...... .

~s~"~lt NF, Cc:> ...... .

~~ l3~~aur<iill<> NF, CA ........ .

~lt1i~t ~SR, WA .......... .

1r~~d~~a NF, ~ ... .

T<>i~al>~ NF, ~ ... .

Uwha.rri~ Nati<>Ilal F<>r~st, NC ... .

~aJfll~ Na1=i<>n~ F<>r~st, <:>~ ... .

~~ lv.l<>tlll~n NF, ^~'^lv.l~ ... .

~~ Salm<>n ~SR, W~ ... .

~isc<>~in NFs, ~ ... .

Em~rg~ncy ~cquisi ti<>llS ... .

~ild~r11~ss Acquisiti<>~ ... .

Cash Equalizati<>n ...••...

Acqwsi ti<>n Manag~m~n t ... .

Amount

250,000 500,000 600,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 750,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 1,100,000 300,000 2,500,000 500,000 1,000,000 500,000 440,000 500,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 8,491,000

T<>~ ... 65,436,000

The $300,000 for the Arapaho National Forest, Colorado is for land acquisition in the Kawuneeche Valley area of Colorado. These lands are to be lllanaged for their value in protecting the head- waters of the Colorado River and the viewshed of Rocky Mountain

National Park. ,

Within the $750,000 provided for the Jefferson National Forest acquisition, $450,000 is for the first phase of the Cripple Creek tract and the relllaining funds are for acquisition at the Guest River Gorge and other Mount Rogers acquisitions.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS, FOREST SERVICE

Ainendnlent No. 82: Deletes House language on the Shawnee NF and inserts Senate language prohibiting the use of funds for clearcutting or even aged n1anage1I1ent in hardwood stands on the Shawnee NF to the greatest extent possible and in accordance with the Shawnee NF plan.

Ainendnlent No. 83: Deletes language proposed by the Senate lirniting the a rr1ount of rei1Ilburselllent to the Agricultural Sta- bilization and Conservation Service for adlllinistrative costs under

the Stewardship Incentive Prograrn to no lllore than 10 percent of the prograrn level. The language is not necessary because it is cov- ered under existing general Departlllent-wide policy.

Ainendn1ent No. 84: Deletes bill language proposed by the Sen- ate which would have authorized the use of $10,600,000 of Na- tional Forest Systelll funds to prepare and offer additional tilllber sales in four regions of the Forest Service, with the borrowed funds to be repaid from. tilllber receipts if total receipts reached a certain level. The Forest Service has stated that it would be difficult if not impossible to offer any tilllher sales in 1995 under this authority because of the uncertainty of whether receipts would reach the specified level; and the uncertainty of whether any NFS funds would rem.ain available to be used for this purpose once it is determined that sufficient receipts have been received. The Illanagers

are aware of concerns about the tilllber sales prograrn in various

Dalam dokumen Excerpt from, Appropriations for the Department of the Interior and related agencies, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1995, relating to the Smithsonian Institution. (Halaman 38-53)