FOFA Is the Wrong Approach — Here’s a Real Solution for Wildfire Protection

By Jennifer Mamola | December 4, 2025

Rushed and Risky: Why FOFA Would Fuel More Dangerous Wildfires

On December 1, Bloomberg Government reported that the bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act (“FOFA”, S. 1462) could reach the Senate floor this month. A related version, H.R. 471, passed the House in January after members politicized the LA fires — which did not start in forests. FOFA’s logging-heavy approach would not have prevented those disasters, and would intensify future wildfire events and put human communities at greater risk from fires. It continues to treat our public lands as logging opportunities, not as fire-adapted landscapes that support native plant and animal communities.

If S. 1462 passes the Senate, it returns to the House, where peeling off the 64 Democrats who voted for H.R. 471 would be difficult. Stopping it in the Senate is critical.

Why FOFA Shouldn’t Pass

Focuses on backcountry forests and large-scale logging, not home protection
Overrides environmental laws, reducing oversight and allowing the U.S. Forest Service and logging companies to implement logging projects that would increase threats of fires to towns, while avoiding environmental analysis that would disclose those threats.
Ignores the Home Ignition Zone (0–100 ft) where 80–90% of structure loss occurs (Cohen, 2000; 2010)

FOFA doesn’t protect homes. It prioritizes backcountry logging while removing public oversight and environmental review, giving federal agencies unchecked authority — all without ensuring communities are actually safer.

Amendment to the Healthy Forest Restoration Act (HFRA) — A Real Solution

A member could offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute to actually protect communities while preserving fire-adapted ecosystems.

Home Ignition Zone Approach:

Prioritize 0–100 feet around structures
≥75% of funds for home hardening, defensible space, evacuation routes, smoke-resilient community centers, and emergency communications
Prescribed fire as an additional community buffer, near homes or evacuation routes, after home hardening and defensible space work
No mechanical thinning or logging >100 feet from homes

This amendment aligns HFRA with modern fire science, protects homes where risk matters most, and retains prescribed fire without destructive backcountry logging.

Even $500 million in IIJA-funded Community Wildfire Defense Grants — touted by Rep. Neguse and Sen. Wyden — largely supports backcountry logging on public lands rather than life-saving home protection, the very gap FOFA would exacerbate.

Senate Math — Who Holds the Line

41 votes needed to block passage
Six Democrats voted to advance the bill out of committee: Klobuchar, Welch, Luján, Slotkin, Fetterman, Warnock
Excluding Padilla (CA) and Hickenlooper (CO), original sponsors of the bill, the remaining votes are critical

If a senator offers our HFRA/Home Ignition Zone amendment in the nature of a substitute:

It provides a real path to protect communities rather than logging backcountry forests.
If the amendment fails, the bill proceeds as written, removing public participation and environmental oversight while prioritizing logging over protecting homes and lives from fire.
That makes holding the line with at least 41 senators even more urgent — every vote matters to stop FOFA from passing.