Spending Bill and The Forest Service

[Mule Deer]

I'm happy to hear that congress has finally fixed fire spending within the forest service, but I'm not really all that knowledgeable on how the budget works for them.

With the Axing of fire borrowing, does this essentially increase the budget of the forest service for non fire programs? How so if you know how the budget works?

http://mtpr.org/post/montana-delegation-praises-forest-management-changes-omnibus-bill

 

[Big Fin]

I'm happy to hear that congress has finally fixed fire spending within the forest service, but I'm not really all that knowledgeable on how the budget works for them.

With the Axing of fire borrowing, does this essentially increase the budget of the forest service for non fire programs? How so if you know how the budget works?

http://mtpr.org/post/montana-delegation-praises-forest-management-changes-omnibus-bill

Probably not. It would require Congress to appropriate enough money for the other parts of the USFS budget. Given this fix is not what some wanted, any additional funding for USFS budget will be an uphill battle. It will provide some consistency that what does get appropriated for other programs is not likely to get raided for wildfire funding, but probably not an increase for those other programs.

This has been a crazy week for folks working on the conservation issues attached to this bill. A lot of really good solutions were agreed to behind the scenes, but for the ugly reason of politics, some of those good ones were dropped or the period of the fix was shortened, or the good idea was watered down to "meh." Until it is passed by both houses and signed by the President, I'm still holding my breath.

 

[Mule Deer]

Probably not. It would require Congress to appropriate enough money for the other parts of the USFS budget. Given this fix is not what some wanted, any additional funding for USFS budget will be an uphill battle. It will provide some consistency that what does get appropriated for other programs is not likely to get raided for wildfire funding, but probably not an increase for those other programs.

This has been a crazy week for folks working on the conservation issues attached to this bill. A lot of really good solutions were agreed to behind the scenes, but for the ugly reason of politics, some of those good ones were dropped or the period of the fix was shortened, or the good idea was watered down to "meh." Until it is passed by both houses and signed by the President, I'm still holding my breath.

Appreciate the insight.

 

[CampRipleyLF]

Probably not. It would require Congress to appropriate enough money for the other parts of the USFS budget. Given this fix is not what some wanted, any additional funding for USFS budget will be an uphill battle. It will provide some consistency that what does get appropriated for other programs is not likely to get raided for wildfire funding, but probably not an increase for those other programs.

This has been a crazy week for folks working on the conservation issues attached to this bill. A lot of really good solutions were agreed to behind the scenes, but for the ugly reason of politics, some of those good ones were dropped or the period of the fix was shortened, or the good idea was watered down to "meh." Until it is passed by both houses and signed by the President, I'm still holding my breath.

Great insight! Didn't seem to be anything that special in the bill....

 

[1_pointer]

Probably not. It would require Congress to appropriate enough money for the other parts of the USFS budget. Given this fix is not what some wanted, any additional funding for USFS budget will be an uphill battle. It will provide some consistency that what does get appropriated for other programs is not likely to get raided for wildfire funding, but probably not an increase for those other programs.

This has been a crazy week for folks working on the conservation issues attached to this bill. A lot of really good solutions were agreed to behind the scenes, but for the ugly reason of politics, some of those good ones were dropped or the period of the fix was shortened, or the good idea was watered down to "meh." Until it is passed by both houses and signed by the President, I'm still holding my breath.

There are things I'd like to see changed, but that improved consistency is a big deal for the agency, IMO. Long term planning and project completion can be easier with a smaller, consistent budget than a larger, volatile one.

 

[Old Ranger]

Soooo... What is your definition of "improved consistency"?

DOI and USDA Budget allocations in non-Fire Suppression Resource Mgt. areas to the BLM and USFS have been smaller "consistently" through the past four Administrations. And now the current situation with this one. Just Saying.....

 

[Ben Lamb]

It's signed.

This was a significant win for conservationists. Other items in the Omni were an increase to LWCF (from $400 million last year to $425 this year), Reversing the Cottonwood decision, and $65 million for grouse conservation (NRCS).

After hearing how this all came about, we all owe a huge thanks to the majority and minority leaders in both houses, and while a lot of good stuff didn't get in, a lot of bad stuff didn't either.

As for consistency - I think the fire fix will be very helpful in getting ground-level projects moving forward, since the service will no longer need to be paid back their own money, allowing them to put it on the ground much faster. I'd still like to see increased budgets, but overall, the omnibus was a solid win for conservation.

 

[icebreaker12]

It's signed.

This was a significant win for conservationists. Other items in the Omni were an increase to LWCF (from $400 million last year to $425 this year), Reversing the Cottonwood decision, and $65 million for grouse conservation (NRCS).

After hearing how this all came about, we all owe a huge thanks to the majority and minority leaders in both houses, and while a lot of good stuff didn't get in, a lot of bad stuff didn't either.

As for consistency - I think the fire fix will be very helpful in getting ground-level projects moving forward, since the service will no longer need to be paid back their own money, allowing them to put it on the ground much faster. I'd still like to see increased budgets, but overall, the omnibus was a solid win for conservation.

Not near as important with this with this crowd, but it also saw increases to the USFWS and increases to NAWCA. Some pretty good things in here.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Not near as important with this with this crowd, but it also saw increases to the USFWS and increases to NAWCA. Some pretty good things in here.

Yep & FLTFA reauthorization as well.

 

[hank4elk]

A faint ray of hope.

 

[1_pointer]

Soooo... What is your definition of "improved consistency"?

DOI and USDA Budget allocations in non-Fire Suppression Resource Mgt. areas to the BLM and USFS have been smaller "consistently" through the past four Administrations. And now the current situation with this one. Just Saying.....

My definition is that the budget, especially those tied to on the ground projects, doesn't have to be reduced at the last minute due to an unplanned for fire. And FWIW, I am familiar with the shrinking of the budgets over the last 3 administrations. I've also had projects delayed or scrapped because of budget issues related to fires. Just saying...

 

[Cav1]

This is still very helpful. I used to work Trails and then Rec in the USFS. I recall once we had been saving our pennies in a separate kitty to refurbish one of the rental cabins. It was a bad fire year and come August every other department got the word, "Sorry, all your remaining budgets just went to Fire."

Whenever there was a budget crunch, anything that might actually benefit the public always seemed to get the axe first...roads, trails, and recreation.

 

[hank4elk]

Oh they will link it to the effing wall funds..........