May 14, 2025

Senate Agriculture Committee Discusses Wildfire Legislation

wildfires in tree care

Image/Pixabay

On March 6, 2025, the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition & Forestry’s Subcommittee on Conservation, Forestry, Natural Resources and Biotechnology held a hearing to review H.R. 471, the Fix Our Forests Act (FOFA). The hearing allowed committee members and witnesses to discuss several provisions related to wildfire mitigation that could impact tree care companies’ hazard-tree clearance work and exposure to wildfire-
related liability risks.

Background of FOFA
FOFA was introduced by Representatives Bruce Westerman (R-AR) and Scott Peters (D-CA), and is aimed at increasing the nation’s resiliency to catastrophic wildfires. Westerman is a forester by trade with a master’s in forestry from Yale University. Peters was an environmental lawyer for 15 years.

The bill expedites forest restoration, reduces regulatory barriers to forest-management projects and improving wildfire mitigation through the establishment of high-risk fire-management areas. It seeks to improve interagency coordination and streamline environmental-review processes.

The bill also seeks to harden utility infrastructure by encouraging more active management of hazardous trees. Specifically, the bill includes language to amend the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) by expanding the definition of a “hazard tree” to include trees that, if they failed, would come within 150 feet of a utility line – a significant increase from the current 10-foot threshold.

FOFA moved quickly in the House after it was introduced. One week after it was introduced, the House passed FOFA by a vote of 279 to 141. The bill was then sent to the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition & Forestry.

TCIA video snippetTCIA’s position
TCIA submitted a letter for the record for the subcommittee hearing. In the letter, TCIA expressed appreciation for the bill’s focus on wildfire mitigation and urged the subcommittee to consider establishing a federal standard of care for pre-inspection of hazard trees in vegetation-management plans. Specifically, the letter asks that Congress implement this federal standard based on the ANSI A300 Industry Consensus Standard to ensure consistency and accuracy in pre-inspection programs, which would help mitigate instances of utility-related ignitions and support sustainable risk exposure for contractors.

The letter encourages a holistic approach to vegetation management that clearly defines the roles and responsibilities of contractors, utilities and property owners, and cautions that any expansion of hazard-tree definitions should carefully consider the implications for liability, workforce capacity and implementation feasibility.

Looking ahead
The future of FOFA in the Senate is uncertain. The full Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, & Forestry needs to mark up FOFA and pass it out of Committee to advance the bill to the Senate floor, though the Committee has not set a timeline for this. If passed out of Committee, the full Senate would then need to vote on the legislation, but it would need to garner at least 60 votes from Republicans and Democrats to bypass a potential filibuster. At this time, it is unclear whether there is enough bipartisan support for FOFA as currently written to receive 60 votes.

TCIA continues to monitor for updates and advocate on behalf of the industry for legislation and regulations related to wildfire-mitigation policy.

Bailey Graves is a senior associate with Ulman Public Policy, TCIA’s Washington, D.C.-based advocacy and lobbying partner.

2 Comments

  1. Daniel May 16, 2025 at 10:27 am - Reply

    Bailey, I just want to confirm that wasn’t a typo when you said the definition of a hazard tree was changing to trees within 150′? Moving from 10′ to 15′ makes sense but to take it all the way to 150′ seems like an odd jump. If that truly is the case, what is the reasoning behind that change?

    • Bailey Graves May 16, 2025 at 11:26 am - Reply

      Hi Daniel, the language in the bill does expand the definition of hazard tree to include trees that come within 150 feet of an electric power line – a significant departure from 10 feet. The intent is to strengthen existing expedited authorities with respect to rights-of-ways to allow the clearing of hazard trees within 150 feet of utility lines instead of just 10 feet.

Leave A Comment