House Bill 2653 would authorize counties to enter into shared stewardship agreements with federal land management agencies, including the U.S. Forest Service, to maintain and manage fuel breaks on federally owned land near roads
Legislation sponsored by Rep. Kevin Waters would give Washington counties new tools to reduce wildfire risk along major roadways while ensuring local governments are fairly compensated for their work managing federal forestlands.
House Bill 2653 would authorize counties to enter into shared stewardship agreements with federal land management agencies, including the U.S. Forest Service, to maintain and manage fuel breaks on federally owned land near roads. Under the bill, counties could manage forestlands up to one mile on either side of a roadway, including interstate highways, state highways, and other roads selected by the county.
“Wildfires don’t stop at jurisdictional boundaries, and counties are often on the front lines of prevention and response,” said Waters, R-Stevenson. “This bill would ensure counties can be real partners in forest management while also protecting taxpayers and critical transportation corridors.”
While shared stewardship agreements already exist at the federal level, Waters said many of those programs fail to allow counties to share in revenue generated from forest management activities. HB 2653 would address that gap by requiring any shared stewardship agreement entered into by a county to include a revenue-sharing provision. Under the bill, counties would retain proceeds from timber sales resulting from fuel reduction and forest health work performed under the agreement.
“For rural counties, timber revenue has declined sharply over the years, and federal forest payments are less reliable than they once were,” Waters said. “At the same time, counties are being asked to do more to prevent catastrophic wildfires, and much of the timber they cut down is going to waste. This bill would balance those responsibilities by allowing counties to recoup some of the costs through responsible timber management.”
The legislation would especially benefit rural counties with large amounts of federal forestland. By allowing counties to retain timber sale proceeds, the bill could help stabilize local budgets, support essential county services, and ease financial pressure on rural school districts affected by the loss of traditional timber revenues.
“This is about smarter forest management, safer communities, and stronger partnerships between local and federal governments,” Waters said. “House Bill 2653 would move us in that direction.”
The bill awaits a public hearing in the House Local Government Committee.
Information provided by the Washington State House Republicans, houserepublicans.wa.gov
Also read:
- POLL: Should councilors serving on boards be required to vote the way the full council decides?
A new poll asks whether Clark County councilors serving on boards should be required to vote in line with the full council’s position or retain independent judgment. - VIDEO: Washington lawmakers clash over bills directed at limiting ICE officers
A heated House committee hearing on legislation aimed at limiting ICE officers in Washington was temporarily recessed after sharp exchanges between lawmakers over testimony and procedural disputes. - Stung by a court ruling, WA looks to clarify what is an ‘election’
Washington lawmakers are moving to clarify the legal definition of an election after a court overturned a felony conviction for voting in both Washington and Oregon on the same day. - Opinion: Olympia wants a 4-day work week. It won’t work out as the politicians think it will
Mark Harmsworth argues that House Bill 2611’s proposed 32-hour workweek would raise costs, strain small businesses, and undermine Washington’s economic competitiveness. - Republicans celebrate school choice in US Senate hearing, while Dems question fairness
Republicans and Democrats clashed during a U.S. Senate hearing over school choice, with supporters praising expanded options for families and critics warning the policies could deepen inequities in public education.
