PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation, Energy, and Forestry.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 15, 2011
Wallow Fire Recovery and Monitoring Act - Requires the Secretary of Agriculture to conduct and report on a hazard tree and commercial timber evaluation that identifies timber resources appropriate for removal within the Wallow Fire Area in Arizona and New Mexico not later than the date that is the earlier of: (1) 30 days after the completion of the burned area emergency response for the Wallow Fire Area; or (2) 45 days after the date of containment of the Wallow Fire.
Requires the Secretary to: (1) exclude from areas identified for tree removal high fire-severity burned areas on steep slopes, slopes with an incline greater than 40%, riparian areas, and fragile erosive sites, unless tree removal in those areas is necessary to address public health and safety concerns; and (2) limit the removal of trees under a timber removal project under this Act to hazard trees and trees that are already down, dead, or severely root-sprung, such that mortality is highly probable.
Provides that: (1) nothing in this Act authorizes new permanent road construction for timber removal, and (2) it is the intent of Congress that all timber removal projects carried out under this Act be completed within 18 months of this Act's enactment.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Secretary, in the case of a timber removal project to be conducted in a Community Protection Management Area, to prepare an environmental assessment for the proposed agency action under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA).
Subjects timber removal projects carried out under this Act to the special administrative process and judicial review process under the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003.
Requires amounts collected from a timber removal project carried out under this Act to be available for expenditure by the Secretary for forest restoration treatments in the Wallow Fire Area.
People & committees
Rep. Gosar, Paul A. [R-AZ-1] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation, Energy, and Forestry.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
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 consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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 consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2562 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2562 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2562 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2562 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.