PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 17, 2015
Catastrophic Wildfire Prevention Act of 2015
Directs the Department of Agriculture (USDA), with respect to National Forest System lands, and the Department of the Interior, with respect to public lands, to implement authorized wildfire prevention projects in at-risk forests and on threatened and endangered species habitat in a manner that focuses on surface, ladder, and canopy fuels reduction activities.
Requires projects carried out on threatened and endangered species habitat to: (1) provide enhanced protection from wildfire, including catastrophic wildfire, for the endangered species, threatened species, or their habitat; and (2) comply with applicable recovery plan guidelines.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires projects carried out in at-risk forests to move the federal land from condition class II or III toward condition class I, as those classes were developed by the Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station in a specified general technical report.
Permits use in a project of: (1) domestic livestock grazing to reduce surface fuel loads and to recover burned areas; and (2) timber harvesting and thinning to reduce ladder and canopy fuel loads for the prevention of wildfire, including catastrophic wildfires.
Directs USDA and Interior to review public petitions for, and make determinations with respect to, the designation of federal lands as at-risk forests or as threatened and endangered species habitats.
Requires notice in the Federal Register of proposed projects and final designated projects and permits public comment on projects as specified.
Instructs USDA and Interior to prepare an environmental assessment for projects that include timber harvesting or grazing.
Instructs USDA and Interior to research what impact any listing of a species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 would have on both forage and timber forest fuel loads. Requires endangered species recovery plans and critical habitat determinations to include a wildfire risk assessment analysis.
People & committees
Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Introduced in Senate
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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 S.2286 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 S.2286 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 S.2286 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 S.2286 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.