Continuing Resolutions: No Resolution at all

February was a busy month for people interested in national forest management. The Forest Service finally released their Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) proposing a revised forest planning rule, Congress took up debate on funding the government for the remainder of 2011, and the president released his budget for fiscal year 2012. I’ll focus here on the FY11 and FY12 budgets, for more information about the planning rule, see “A Look Down the Trail” on page 2.

Congressional Budget Shenanigans

The US government operates on an October 1- September 30 fiscal year, and if all goes according to schedule, Congress adopts a new budget well before September 30 rolls around. They’ve been missing this deadline more frequently, however, forcing them to adopt “continuing resolutions” (also called “CRs”) to keep the government operating. The November 2010 election and related political jockeying were partly to blame for the failure to adopt an FY11 budget on time last year, and while Congress came close to
adopting a budget during the lame duck session, they didn’t get it done. (We wish they had, as the provisions we care most about were well-funded in two of the three proposals that were on the table back in December.) The fiscal austerity drumbeat became louder as the new Congress took office, resulting in the political theater we’ve been forced to endure since then.

If we count the pre-election negligence and the lame duck sessions as Acts 1 and 2, then we’re probably in the midst of Act 3. The House, bowing to incoming freshman fiscal conservatives, adopted a bill with severe cuts to discretionary spending. The bill targeted many things Wildlands CPR considers critical from a broadbased social welfare and environmental perspective, but it also included cuts to two things that we  specifically focus on: off-road vehicle enforcement and the Legacy Roads and Trails Remediation program. Neither these nor many of the other cuts proposed make any sense, but then not much seems to make sense in the halls of Congress these days.

If you’ve been reading the The Road-RIPorter for a while, you’ve probably heard us talk about the ABC’s of Travel Planning. Subpart A requires the agency to identify a minimum road system, subpart B directs them to identify roads, trails and areas for off-road vehicle recreation, and subpart C deals with snowmobile planning. We’re making huge progress on subparts A and B, (see Annual Report, this issue) which will result in profound improve to land and water quality on national forests. So what did the House of Representatives do in the budget they adopted? They approved the “Herger Amendment” Amendment 177, introduced by Rep. Wally Herger (R-CA)), which would prevent the Forest Service from spending any money on implementing or enforcing subpart B of travel planning. Interestingly, the agency has no specific line item for this work, it’s part of their general law enforcement budget, which Herger did not propose cutting, thus fully illustrating that this has nothing to do with cutting spending.

As of December, 68% of the national forests had finished subpart B and issued Motor Vehicle Use Maps designating where off-road vehicles can travel. If Herger’s amendment becomes law, then the agency cannot enforce the designations on those lands, and off-road vehicles can effectively drive anywhere. On the remaining lands, where planning is nearly done, the Forest Service would have to stop the planning process, at least until the next fiscal year. On these forests, since subpart B isn’t finalized, it’s possible the agency could continue to enforce whatever off-road vehicle rules they had in place, but that remains unclear.

The Herger Amendment is purely ideological – promoting off-road vehicle recreation above all other uses – non-motorized recreationists, wildlife and water be damned. Two weeks after passage, however, we’re seeing some cracks in this ideological wall. The new Chairman of the House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, Congressman Mike Simpson (R-ID), has changed his mind and is now opposing the amendment. At a budget hearing in mid-March, both Simpson and Forest Service Chief Tom Tidwell said that defunding subpart B makes no sense. Tidwell is quoted in an article from Environment and Energy Daily (FOREST SERVICE: House chairman blasts amendment to halt agency’s OHV planning (03/11/2011)) as saying, “Not allowing us to go forward with this planning is not going to be helpful to the motorized recreation community in the long term,” while Simpson stated that stopping the process is not the right way to deal with any controversy the process has generated. Let’s hope this means the amendment won’t see the light of day in any final FY11 bill or CR when the House and Senate finally pass a budget.

While the Herger Amendment may die, we probably can’t say the same for proposed cuts to the Forest Service Legacy Roads and Trails Remediation Program (LRT). The CR adopted by the House would cut Legacy Roads and Trails funding nearly in half for the remainder of FY11 (from $90 million in FY10 to $50.6 million). According to the House budget documents we reviewed, LRT was cut more than any other Forest Service program. The only explanation we can find is that Congress had been funding LRT at a much higher level than that proposed in the President’s budget.

The budget documents compared the proposed FY11 budget to the proposed President’s budget, where LRT was only funded at $50 million. So perhaps it was an easy cut for the House to make. And that brings us to the little bit of light we do see on the budgetary horizon…

The FY12 Budget

While the news was generally all bad on the FY11 front, that’s not the case with FY12. If our assessment is right and the House cut LRT to match the FY11 President’s budget, then that makes the President’s FY12 budget even more important. In it, LRT was increased from $50 to $75 million. While this is still a decrease from FY10’s $90 million, nearly every program will decrease in FY12, and this cut seems more manageable than that proposed in the FY11 CR. But there are some other budgetary changes worth noting.

The Forest Service has, once again, proposed integrating many budgetary line items into one large fund called “Integrated Resource Restoration” or IRR (see RIPorter V.15.1). This year, unlike last year, they moved Legacy Roads and Trails into the IRR. While IRR is one huge fund, it includes three sub-line items – one of which is LRT. The second sub-line is an $80 million fund for “Priority Watersheds and Job Stabilization,” which includes road reclamation and culvert work – possibly increasing available funds. The third sub-line item relates to the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Restoration Program (CFLRP), at $40 million, which is focused on hazardous fuels. Many CFLRP projects, however, also include road reclamation and stormproofing. While we’re not thrilled about LRT being a sub-line item, we’ve been assured that the agency would still be able to account for the program. We’ve also been assured that road projects could move forward whether they are part of a larger “integrated” project or not.

We were adamantly opposed to IRR last year, but the agency has made significant changes that make it more viable. They still have a ways to go to ensure accountability, and we continue to discuss this with them, but their proposal is gaining some traction with Congress, so we wouldn’t be surprised to see it adopted – if, that is, Congress actually adopts an FY12 budget in a reasonable time frame.

We’ll continue to monitor developments with both budgets and keep you posted about what happens to LRT and whether or not the Herger Amendment lives or dies. We’re hopeful for a positive outcome for many threatened programs that will benefit fish, wildlife, municipal drinking water, public health, jobs, and more. We hope that Congress stops playing games and starts doing their job again soon, but we’re not holding our breath.