Noteworthy conservation policymaking was at the forefront of congressional activities the week of April 13. Here are a few items of note from last week on the Hill:

Senate advances an unprecedented use of the Congressional Review Act to nullify a Public Land Order

The Senate nullified a Public Land Order that withdrew more than 200,000 acres of National Forest System lands in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness from mineral and geothermal leasing for a 20-year period. The Senate passed H.J.Res 140, using the Congressional Review Act to nullify Public Land Order (PLO) 7917. The conservation community has been advocating for the environmental significance of these lands since the joint resolution was first introduced in the House earlier this year; the Superior National Forest, which is involved in the PLO, contains 20% of the fresh water in the National Forest System.

PLOs are authorized under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) as a tool for the Secretary of the Interior to “implement, modify, extend or revoke land withdrawals.” Beyond the impacts of mining to this sensitive ecosystem, the use of the CRA to nullify a PLO sets a concerning precedent for upholding the authority of land management agencies and maintaining the integrity of public input in decisions governing public trust resources. This follows in the footsteps of a suite of joint resolutions passed earlier this year that nullified a series of BLM resource management plans.

Senator Martin Heinrich opposed the joint resolution. “These places [public lands]—this place that people like Teddy Roosevelt and Sigurd Olson and so many others fought to preserve—they are the anvil on which we have forged our collective identity as a country,” he said during floor proceedings. “They are the places we are still free … The public lands are the one thing, when I go home, that unites my constituents from left to right.”

U.S. Forest Service chief testifies on agency’s proposed budget for FY2027

Tom Schultz, chief of the U.S. Forest Service, testified before the House Interior and Environment Subcommittee on the administration’s FY27 budget proposal. Impacts to the USFS resulting from a proposed reorganization of the USDA have been the focus of recent headlines, especially the promised closure of USFS research stations across the country. In her opening remarks, Representative Pingree (ME) noted that the administration’s proposed budget failed to include detailed information on the proposed reorganization while speaking to the importance of U.S. Forest Service research and expertise.

“I’m also concerned about the effect of any further loss of expertise and what it could have on protecting and preserving our forests,” Pingree said, noting the loss of thousands of Forest Service employees due to the deferred resignation program last year. When asked questions about the goals of the reorganization proposal, Schultz referenced a desire to reduce regulations and operational policies being created by regional offices to “drive decision-making down to the men and the women on the ground that are doing the work.” He also mentioned a need to address the “surge of employees” that had been hired across the USFS with IRA funding that has since termed out, leaving the U.S. Forest Service with “too many people.”

Chief Schultz spoke to the environmental and economic significance of USFS lands in his opening remarks to the subcommittee. His written testimony noted the elimination of funding for Forest and Rangeland Research (FRR), with the Forest Inventory and Analysis program moved to the DOI’s Joint Fire Science program. The decision to eliminate FRR funding “supports fiscal responsibility and a return to the Forest Service’s core mission.” Schultz also emphasized the forthcoming focus of USFS efforts “to contribute to the domestic production of critical minerals for a stable supply of energy” through actions like requesting a stable budget for the agency’s Minerals and Geology Program.

Trends, emerging issues and policy considerations in scientific publishing

Members of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology met for a hearing on the current state of scientific publishing. This follows a moratorium on “the use of federal funds for expensive subscriptions to academic journals and prohibitively high publishing costs unless approved by federal statute or approved in advance by a federal agency,” which was included in the FY27 budget that the administration released at the beginning of April.

Members universally recognized recent challenges facing scientific publishing, noting issues like predatory journals, ‘paper mills,’ and a publish-or-perish culture affecting research institutions. There was also significant discussion on the use of artificial intelligence as both a tool for accelerating research and a source of fraudulent publications. Members referenced the issue of ‘hallucination citations,’ AI-generated citations included in publications with no connection to legitimate peer-reviewed sources.

Members and witnesses also discussed increasing distrust in scientific peer review processes and the role of open science in supporting science-based decision-making. Linking back to the administration’s budget proposal, Representative Sykes (D-OH) said, “Published research connects the public to scientific discovery, and without publication, the impact of researchers’ findings would be lost.” Cutting federal funds for publishing costs is only going to put further strain on our universities and researchers that are already under attack. This same budget request also cuts $2.7 billion from higher education programs and billions more in research funding. Research institutions foot the bill for these publication costs, meaning the true impact on scientific publishing is likely even more catastrophic.”

Want to learn more about scientific publishing and the importance of publishing in society journals? Check out this episode of Our Wild Lives featuring TWS journals staff.

Article by Kelly O'Connor