A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Hearings held.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The "Save Our Sequoias Act" aims to improve the health and resiliency of giant sequoia trees. The bill establishes a shared stewardship agreement between federal agencies, the State of California, and the Tule River Indian Tribe. It codifies the Giant Sequoia Lands Coalition to conduct health assessments and maintain a public dashboard for tracking progress. The legislation creates an emergency response framework to allow for quick protection projects like fuel management and tree removal. Additionally, it establishes a reforestation and rehabilitation strategy to restore impacted groves. Finally, the act provides for collaborative restoration grants and an emergency protection fund to support these conservation efforts.
Yes· 3 of 13
- Scored +7
Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests?
The bill streamlines emergency actions and multi-agency cooperation to protect giant sequoias on federal lands.
- Scored +6
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The legislation establishes proactive measures, funding, and strategies to protect and restore giant sequoia groves.
- Scored +6
Would Native Americans be better off under this?
The legislation formally includes the Tule River Indian Tribe in shared stewardship and dedicates funding for Tribal management.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
Exempting certain protection projects from NEPA reduces formal public environmental review and due process procedures.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Enhanced Resource Management: The bill establishes a Giant Sequoia Lands Coalition to facilitate information sharing, research, and the development of educational materials regarding the threats to giant sequoia groves (Section 4).
-
Improved Ecological Health: Through "Protection Projects," the bill allows for hazardous fuels management, mechanical thinning, and the removal of dead or dying trees to mitigate risks from wildfires, insects, and drought (Section 6).
-
Support for Tribal Communities: The legislation involves the Tule River Indian Tribe in shared stewardship agreements (Section 3) and mandates that at least 15 percent of funds from the Giant Sequoia Emergency Protection Fund be used to support Tribal management and conservation (Section 12).
-
Economic and Job Opportunities: Collaborative restoration grants are designed to prioritize entities that create or support jobs, particularly in rural areas (Section 9).
-
Increased Transparency: The creation of a website and searchable database will allow the public to track the status of protection projects, reforestation activities, and federal environmental reviews (Section 5).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Reduced Environmental Review Requirements: The bill allows certain protection and reforestation projects to be categorically excluded from the preparation of environmental assessments or environmental impact statements under the National Environmental Policy Act (Section 6).
-
Restricted Public Access to Meetings: While the Coalition must provide for public observation at one meeting annually, it is permitted to close portions of meetings if the discussions involve sensitive law enforcement, security, emergency response, or confidential information (Section 4).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — The bill streamlines emergency actions and multi-agency cooperation to protect giant sequoias on federal lands. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The legislation establishes proactive measures, funding, and strategies to protect and restore giant sequoia groves. Does this invest in rural communities? — The bill enhances rural economic opportunities via grants and forest management contracts. Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change? — Vegetation management and wildfire mitigation help prevent massive carbon releases from high-severity wildfires.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The legislation formally includes the Tule River Indian Tribe in shared stewardship and dedicates funding for Tribal management. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Rural communities benefit directly from local job creation, small business grant priorities, and wildfire risk reduction. Would business owners be better off under this? — Small business contractors benefit from prioritization in restoration grants and forestry projects.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Grants prioritize small businesses and Tribal entities, especially in rural areas. Is this likely to create jobs? — The bill supports local job creation through collaborative restoration grants and specialized strike teams. Is this likely to grow the economy? — The bill provides modest economic support for rural forestry businesses and grant recipients.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill mandates public dashboards, coalition reporting, and accessible tracking of environmental reviews and project costs. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands federal emergency authorities and directives regarding forest management. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — Exempting certain protection projects from NEPA reduces formal public environmental review and due process procedures.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into scientific research? — The bill encourages insect monitoring technology and incorporates best available science into assessments.
- 9/16/2026
- Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Hearings held.
- 3/16/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S1056)
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
John CurtisRepublican · Utah