Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consid…
Directs the Secretary of Agriculture (through the Forest Service) to complete, within one year, a study evaluating the effectiveness of wildfire mitigation methods in shrubland ecosystems.
The study must assess hazardous fuels management, native ecosystem health practices, ember-ignition policies (including electrical infrastructure), conditions affecting method effectiveness, implementation barriers, and partnerships with non-Federal entities.
The Secretary must coordinate with Interior and internal Forest Service programs, may consult external experts, and submit a public report to specified Congressional committees within 90 days after study completion with best practices, research gaps, and coordination recommendations.
A short, non‑controversial study bill with low fiscal impact and collaborative language has a reasonable chance, though procedural obstacles remain.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused statutory directive to the Forest Service to conduct and report on a study of wildfire mitigation in shrubland ecosystems. It clearly defines purpose, covered ecosystems, study elements, responsible official, interagency coordination, and report contents, but it omits funding authorization, specific research methods, detailed sequencing, and contingency provisions.
Liberal emphasizes ecosystem restoration and community protections
The clearest budget scorecard attached to this bill: what it changes for direct spending, revenue, and the deficit.
As ordered reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources on March 5, 2026
Liberal emphasizes ecosystem restoration and community protections
Likely supportive of an evidence-driven examination of shrubland fire mitigation that includes ecosystem health and invasive-species controls.
Views the study as a first step toward protecting communities and restoring native ecosystems, while noting that study alone won't deliver funding or immediate action.
Generally favorable because it advances evidence-based policy and interagency coordination, while seeking clarity on timeline, duplication avoidance, and how findings will translate into funded action.
Cautious about study becoming a substitute for implementation.
Mixed; welcomes attention to fuels management and ember ignition causes, but wary that a Federal study could expand regulatory reach, delay on-the-ground treatments, or increase costs.
Prefers state, local, and private landowner roles emphasized.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
A short, non‑controversial study bill with low fiscal impact and collaborative language has a reasonable chance, though procedural obstacles remain.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberal emphasizes ecosystem restoration and community protections
A short, non‑controversial study bill with low fiscal impact and collaborative language has a reasonable chance, though procedural obstacle…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused statutory directive to the Forest Service to conduct and report on a study of wildfire mitigation in shrubland ecosystems. It clearly defines purpose, co…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.