Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Committee split on adding "forest health" to Water Development projects; motion fails on tie

November 06, 2025 | Agriculture, State & Public Lands & Water Resources Committee, Senate, Committees, Legislative, Wyoming


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Committee split on adding "forest health" to Water Development projects; motion fails on tie
Lawmakers on the Select Water joint panel considered a draft (26LSO181) to add “forest health” as an eligible category of project in the Wyoming Water Development program but did not sponsor the measure after a tie vote.

The proposed amendment would have added forest health projects — defined to include activities on state, local government and private forest land designed to enhance water yield or quality, reduce catastrophic wildfire risk, improve habitat, or increase production of forest products — to the list of eligible Water Development projects. The State Forester and stakeholders testified that adding forest health to the Water Development toolbox could enable cross‑boundary projects and better integrate watershed protection with water‑supply planning.

Water Development Office director Jason Mead supported the concept but stressed the program’s limited capacity. He said that, while the office had approximately $30–$35 million available this year, long‑term recurring revenues (from severance taxes and interest) could amount to as little as $13–$14 million per year after existing obligations. During public comment and committee discussion, members emphasized that the Water Development program currently faces high demand from aging irrigation and municipal infrastructure and that a new eligibility category could increase competition for constrained resources.

Vote: On a roll call to sponsor 26LSO181, the committee recorded 5 yes and 5 no votes with two members excused, producing a tie and causing the motion to fail. Several members said they supported the policy but preferred that forest health funding be provided through a different, non‑Water Development appropriation.

Next steps: Supporters and agency staff said the topic could be pursued again if separate funding sources are identified or if the Water Development program’s funding is increased in future budget cycles.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting