HR-3553-119
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Sponsored by Dave Min (D-CA)
What it does
This bill would direct the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Forest Service, to conduct a study within one year evaluating the effectiveness of wildfire mitigation methods in shrubland ecosystems — including chaparral, sagebrush, and coastal sage scrub. The study would examine fuel management techniques, invasive species control, ember ignition prevention, and public-private partnerships. Within 90 days of completing the study, the Secretary would be required to submit a report to Congress identifying best practices and opportunities for improved coordination between the Forest Service and non-federal entities.
Who benefits
Residents and homeowners in wildland-urban interface communities in the western United States, particularly in California, Nevada, Oregon, Idaho, and other shrubland-heavy states. Local governments and fire agencies that would gain evidence-based guidance. Wildland firefighters who may benefit from improved operational protocols. Researchers and academics in fire ecology. Native plant and ecosystem restoration organizations. Insurance companies seeking better risk data for properties in fire-prone areas. Utility companies (such as electric utilities) seeking clearer guidance on infrastructure-related ember ignition risks.
Who is hurt
No group faces direct, immediate harm from a study mandate. However, federal agency staff at the Forest Service and Interior Department would bear the administrative burden of conducting and coordinating the study. Taxpayers would bear any appropriated costs. Landowners or industries whose practices are identified as contributing to wildfire risk — such as electric utilities or developers in the wildland-urban interface — could face indirect reputational or regulatory pressure if the study's findings are used to justify future rulemaking.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that shrubland ecosystems like chaparral and sagebrush present distinct wildfire challenges that are underrepresented in existing federal research, which has historically focused on forested areas. They contend that the 2025 Los Angeles-area wildfires and other recent disasters in shrubland zones demonstrate an urgent need for evidence-based mitigation strategies tailored to these ecosystems. Supporters further argue that the bill's emphasis on public-private coordination and ember ignition — a leading cause of home ignition — addresses a critical and often overlooked gap in current Forest Service policy.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the federal government already funds substantial wildfire research through the Forest Service, the Joint Fire Science Program, and other agencies, and that this bill risks duplicating existing work without producing actionable policy change. They contend that a study-only mandate with no accompanying funding authorization or regulatory requirement is unlikely to meaningfully reduce wildfire risk, and that the resources spent on the study would be better directed toward on-the-ground mitigation activities in communities already known to be at high risk.