Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program Reauthorization Act of 2025
HB3361, the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program Reauthorization Act of 2025, would amend the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 to extend and update the federal Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program (CFLRP). The bill keeps the program in place through 2034 and revises the criteria for selecting projects so they can better address wildfire risk, ecological restoration, watershed health, drinking water sources, and threats from species or pathogens. It also adds language encouraging standardized monitoring, conflict resolution and collaborative governance, and the use of innovative implementation tools such as conservation finance agreements and good neighbor agreements.
The bill would also require a federal staffing plan to support local collaboratives and expand the program’s funding authorization from $4 million to $8 million. In addition, it increases the number of projects that may be selected under the program from 10 to 20 and raises the number of projects that may be selected in a single region from 2 to 4. Overall, the measure is aimed at strengthening landscape-scale forest restoration efforts across federal, state, tribal, and private lands, especially in the wildland-urban interface.
HB3361 would amend 16 U.S.C. 7303, the statutory section governing the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program, by extending the program’s authorization, broadening eligible project priorities, and increasing funding and project capacity. The bill would affect federal land management agencies, local collaborative groups, and project partners working on forest restoration, wildfire mitigation, watershed protection, and related cross-boundary conservation work. It would also reinforce the role of state, tribal, and private land coordination in federal restoration planning.
The available context suggests generally positive, bipartisan support for the bill’s goals. The bill was introduced by Representative Neguse with cosponsors including Representative Zinke, indicating cross-party backing for reauthorizing and strengthening the program. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no evidence in the supplied material of formal opposition or divided sentiment. The measure appears to be framed as a practical reauthorization and expansion of an existing forest restoration program rather than a controversial policy shift.
The main policy questions raised by the text are about scale, funding, and implementation. The bill increases authorized funding and expands the number of projects, which could draw scrutiny from budget-conscious members or those concerned about federal program growth. It also emphasizes innovative financing, good neighbor agreements, and collaborative governance, which may prompt discussion about how much discretion agencies and local collaboratives should have in selecting and managing projects. Another possible point of debate is the broadened focus on wildfire risk reduction, watershed health, and cross-ownership restoration, which could raise questions about priorities among competing land management objectives.