Jobs in the Woods Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Perez, Marie Gluesenkamp [D-WA-3]
- Committees
- Education and Workforce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 21, 2025
Bottom line
The Jobs in the Woods Act creates a federal grant program to boost forestry sector employment and training in rural, economically disadvantaged communities.
What it actually does
This bill mandates the Secretary of Agriculture to establish a competitive grant program aimed at developing the forestry workforce. It authorizes $10 million annually for fiscal years 2026 through 2030 to fund career pathway training programs in forestry operations and products industries, specifically targeting eligible entities in nonmetropolitan, low-income areas with broadband access and populations of 50,000 or fewer.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that this bill is crucial for revitalizing rural economies by addressing critical workforce shortages and an aging labor force in the forestry sector. They contend that by providing targeted training and career pathways, the bill will create sustainable job opportunities, encourage youth to remain in or return to these communities, and support the long-term health and productivity of forest resources.
Opponents contend
Critics might express concerns about the effectiveness of federal grant programs in addressing localized workforce needs, suggesting that market-driven solutions or state and local initiatives might be more efficient. Some may also question the administrative overhead associated with establishing and managing a new federal grant program, or argue that the authorized funding is insufficient to make a significant impact across all eligible areas.
The bill is short and clearly written, making it highly accessible for a reader to understand its core provisions and implications quickly.
Section 2(a)
Establishment of Forestry Workforce Development Grant Program
This provision requires the Secretary of Agriculture to create a competitive grant program within one year of the bill's enactment. The program will award grants ranging from $500,000 to $2,000,000, for a period of up to four years, to eligible entities. These grants are specifically for developing and implementing career pathway training programs in the forestry sector.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that establishing a dedicated grant program is essential to provide the necessary financial resources and strategic direction to address the documented workforce shortages in the forestry industry, particularly in rural areas.
Critics contend
Opponents might argue that creating a new federal grant program adds to bureaucratic complexity and could duplicate existing state or private sector initiatives, potentially leading to inefficient resource allocation.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances the need for federal intervention to address a national workforce issue with concerns about potential federal overreach into local economic development. It aims to stimulate growth in a critical industry while managing administrative costs.
Section 2(b)
Application Requirements and Priority Criteria
This section outlines what eligible entities must include in their grant applications, such as demonstrating capacity, need, projected reach, sustainability, and an implementation plan. It also sets priority for applications that propose to address issues like an aging workforce and youth migration, partner with secondary, vocational, or community colleges, and show an ability to assist with job placement and hiring in the forestry sector.
Section 2(d)(2)
Definition of 'Eligible Area'
This provision defines an 'eligible area' as a nonmetropolitan area that qualifies as a low-income community (as defined in the Internal Revenue Code), has access to or a plan for broadband service, and has a population of 50,000 or fewer inhabitants. This combination of criteria precisely delineates the geographic focus for the grant program.
Section 2(e)
Authorization of Appropriations
This section authorizes the appropriation of $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030 to carry out the grant program established by this Act. This authorization sets the potential funding level for the program but does not guarantee that the funds will be appropriated.
The definition of 'eligible area' combines three specific criteria: nonmetropolitan status, qualification as a low-income community (referencing 45D(e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986), access to or plan for broadband service (referencing 601 of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936), and a population of 50,000 or fewer inhabitants.
Section 2(d)(2)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to consolidate definitions, but the layered criteria require a careful reading to fully grasp the geographic scope of the program.
Case for: Proponents argue that by precisely defining 'eligible area' through multiple criteria, the bill ensures that resources are directed to truly underserved and economically vulnerable rural communities that are most in need of workforce development and where broadband access is either present or planned, ensuring program viability.
Case against: Critics might argue that the complex, multi-faceted definition could inadvertently exclude some rural communities with significant forestry needs that do not meet all specific criteria, or that relying on external definitions (like 'low-income community' from tax code) adds unnecessary complexity for applicants.
Estimated impact: This definition significantly narrows the geographic scope of the grant program, concentrating its potential impact on specific types of rural, economically disadvantaged communities.