This bill would bar the Secretary of Agriculture from closing any research and development facility operated by the Forest Service. It would mainly affect Forest Service scientists, technicians, and the communities that rely on federal forestry research. The practical effect is to preserve existing federal research capacity for wildfire science, forest health, habitat management, and related work. No dollar amount is specified in the bill title and actions provided, but the measure would constrain USDA’s ability to consolidate or shut down these facilities.
What This Bill Does
- Bars the Secretary of Agriculture from closing any Forest Service research and development facility
- Applies to Forest Service science and technical facilities, not all USDA offices
- Would preserve existing research capacity on wildfire, forest health, and land management
- Limits USDA’s ability to consolidate or relocate federal forestry research operations
Who This Bill Affects
This bill would matter most to Forest Service researchers, forestry workers, and communities near existing federal research centers. If you depend on those facilities for local jobs, wildfire science, forest-health projects, or collaboration with federal land managers, the bill would help keep that activity in place and reduce the chance of a facility closure. If you are a taxpayer concerned about agency flexibility and administrative costs, it could also mean fewer options for USDA to consolidate operations.
See how this bill affects you — sign in for a personalized analysisWho Supports & Opposes This
- Forest Service scientists and research staff They would likely argue that closing facilities would disrupt long-term research, scatter specialized teams, and weaken the agency’s ability to respond to wildfire and forest-health problems. Keeping facilities open preserves expertise and continuity in federally funded science.
- State and local land managers They may support the bill because Forest Service research informs how states, counties, and landowners manage forests, reduce fire risk, and protect watersheds. Stable facilities make it easier to maintain partnerships and access region-specific data.
- Timber and forestry communities These stakeholders often depend on federal research for better forest management, disease control, and productivity. They may see the bill as protecting a public asset that supports jobs and long-term planning in the forestry sector.
- Budget watchdogs and government efficiency advocates They may argue that the bill ties USDA’s hands and prevents the agency from closing underused or duplicative facilities. In their view, managers should retain flexibility to reorganize research operations based on changing needs and costs.
- Agency administrators USDA leadership could view a blanket prohibition as limiting their ability to align research infrastructure with current priorities, staffing, and geographic needs. They may prefer case-by-case authority rather than a categorical ban.
- Taxpayers concerned about overhead spending Some may worry that protecting every facility could keep open buildings that are expensive to maintain or no longer central to the agency’s mission. They might prefer that resources be redirected to field research, staffing, or modernization instead of facility upkeep.
Key Implications
-
““prohibit the Secretary of Agriculture from closing any research and development facility””
This is the core restriction. It would prevent USDA from shutting down Forest Service research sites, even if the agency wanted to consolidate operations or reduce facility costs.
-
““any research and development facility of the Forest Service””
The language is broad, covering all Forest Service research facilities rather than just one region or one type of lab. That means the policy would apply across the country wherever those facilities operate.
-
““Secretary of Agriculture””
The decision-making authority targeted here sits at the cabinet level, so the bill directly limits executive-branch management discretion within USDA.
-
““Forest Service””
The measure focuses on the federal agency responsible for managing national forests and conducting forestry research. Its real-world effect would be felt in science, land management, and wildfire preparedness.
Official Source & Bill Facts
BillBoard checks this page against public Congress.gov metadata, then adds plain-English analysis where available.
- Bill
- HR 9464
- Congress
- 119th Congress
- Official title
- To prohibit the Secretary of Agriculture from closing any research and development facility of the Forest Service.
- Policy area
- Agriculture
- Latest action
- Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture. (June 25, 2026)
- Last updated
- June 26, 2026
Latest Status
June 25, 2026
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
Related Bills
Take Action
Get more from BillBoard
Free tools to understand, respond to, and track this bill.
Ask AI about this billData sourced from api.congress.gov.