PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 29, 2010
Forest Ecosystem Recovery and Protection Act - Directs the Secretaries of Agriculture (USDA) and of the Interior to designate 25 demonstration project forests in the states of Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
Requires the Secretaries to identify specific project sites within the project forests and to develop pine beetle prevention, mitigation, or forest restoration projects for those sites. Directs the Secretaries to enter into stewardship contracts that meet the needs of each project site.
Authorizes grants to support the forest products industry: (1) participation in pine beetle prevention and mitigation and forest restoration activities at the sites, as specified; or (2) use of forest materials derived from those activities.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Makes permanent the stewardship end result contracting authorities available to the Forest Service for the performance of services to achieve land management goals for the national forests that meet local and rural communities needs.
Authorizes on National Forest System or public land the: (1) designation of insect or disease emergency areas from which dead and dying trees may be removed in response to threats to human health and safety; (2) use of state foresters to provide forest, rangeland, and watershed restoration and protection services; and (3) removal of dead and dying trees from rights-of-way held by a state department of transportation, state or federal public utility commission, or private utility company.
People & committees
Rep. Lummis, Cynthia M. [R-WY-At Large] · R–WY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Referred to House Natural Resources
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 House Agriculture
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: 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.5192 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.5192 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.5192 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.5192 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.