PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 17, 2019
Special Forest Products Program Reauthorization Act of 2019
This bill directs the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to establish a program of charging and collecting fees for forest botanical products harvested on National Forest System (NFS) lands. Under the program, USDA may not permit forest botanical products to be harvested in excess of sustainable harvest levels.
Collected fees must be in an amount to recover a portion of the fair market value of the harvested forest botanical products and a portion of all of the costs incurred by USDA that are associated with the granting, modifying, or monitoring of the authorization for harvest of the products, including the costs of any environmental or other analysis.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
USDA must establish a personal use harvest level for each forest botanical product. The harvesting of a forest botanical product below that level by a person for personal use shall not be subject to the charges and fees under this bill.
USDA shall (1) conduct analyses to determine whether and how the harvest of forest botanical products on NFS lands can be conducted on a sustainable basis, and (2) establish procedures and timeframes for monitoring and revising the harvest levels established for such products.
Funds collected under the program shall be expended at NFS units to pay for the costs of conducting inventories of forest botanical products, determining sustainable levels of harvest, monitoring and assessing the impacts of harvest levels and methods, restoration activities, and authorizing harvest.
People & committees
Rep. Herrera Beutler, Jaime [R-WA-3] · R–WA
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 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 24, 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.4357 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.4357 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.4357 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.4357 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.