US Forest Service firings decimate: entire generation of talent and passion lost
The U.S. Forest Service laid off about 3,400 employees, worsening staffing shortages and raising concerns about its ability to manage public lands and respond to climate-related disasters amid legal challenges.
Read original article
The U.S. Forest Service is facing a significant staffing crisis following the layoff of approximately 3,400 employees, about 10% of its workforce, as part of cost-cutting measures by the Trump administration. This move has been described as "catastrophic" by environmental advocates, who warn that the agency, already struggling with chronic understaffing, will be unable to effectively manage public lands and respond to climate-related disasters. The layoffs primarily affected probationary employees, many of whom were recently hired and had shown promise in their roles. Former employees report that the agency has been losing staff steadily over the past decade, leading to increased workloads for remaining employees and a decline in essential services such as trail maintenance and wildfire management. The National Federation of Federal Employees is challenging the legality of the layoffs through multiple lawsuits, arguing that the terminations undermine the agency's operational capacity. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has defended the layoffs, stating they were necessary to cut spending and improve efficiency. The situation raises concerns about the future of public land management and the ability of the Forest Service to fulfill its responsibilities, particularly in relation to tribal nations and environmental stewardship.
- The U.S. Forest Service has laid off about 3,400 employees, exacerbating existing staffing shortages.
- The layoffs primarily targeted probationary employees, impacting the agency's operational capacity.
- Environmental advocates warn that the cuts will hinder the agency's ability to manage public lands and respond to climate disasters.
- Legal challenges are being mounted against the layoffs by the National Federation of Federal Employees.
- The U.S. Department of Agriculture defends the layoffs as necessary for budgetary efficiency.
Related
The Forest Service Is Losing 2,400 Jobs–Including Most of Its Trail Workers
The U.S. Forest Service plans to cut 2,400 jobs, mainly seasonal workers, due to a budget shortfall, suspending 2025 hiring and worsening maintenance backlogs, causing employee frustration and uncertainty.
When the U.S. Forest Service's budget shrinks, who pumps campground toilets?
The U.S. Forest Service faces significant budget cuts, risking essential services and exacerbating staffing shortages. Nonprofits are stepping in to assist, highlighting reliance on them amid uncertain national forest management.
US Forest Service and National Park Service to fire thousands of workers
The Trump administration is cutting about 4,400 jobs at the US Forest Service and National Park Service, raising concerns over park conditions, wildfire management, and firefighter recruitment amid funding freezes.
Firing of USFS workers raises concerns about wildfires in Oregon, the West
The Trump administration's firing of 2,000 Forest Service employees raises concerns about wildfire management in the West, impacting fire suppression efforts and visitor services amid a hiring freeze by Biden.
Mass federal firings imperil plant and animal inspections
Mass firings in federal agencies, especially the USDA and CDC, threaten food security and public health, creating uncertainty among remaining employees and hindering responses to agricultural threats and health issues.
21 comments[Edit] polymarket bet on if federal land will be sold/auctionned within 2 years? Anyone?
The little money that we as a country are saving (and we're not actually saving any money, it's being redirected to a large border security budget) is by no means conmensurate with the large amount of damage we are doing long term.
But if all you care about is extracting natural resources from our environment, then the USFS, BLM etc. are just a thorn in your side.
Despite the common "wisdom" that the federal government is universally bloated, there's little evidence to suggest the forest service has an excessive number of employees given the size of their job. For context they're less than half the size of Facebook, and my non-expert hot take is that managing all that federal land sounds like the more complicated and labor intensive job. If they were running pretty lean already, firing 10% of the workforce could potentially result in job functions with no one to do them, and that goes downhill pretty fast.
The firings were also exclusively focused on firing new employees, regardless of role or performance, simply because they were easy to fire. That makes the forest service (and every other federal agency) as unattractive employer, which will make it much harder to recruit new employees as people naturally retire or leave. That 10% reduction is going to snowball into a larger number over time, even if more people don't get fired, which I suspect they will.
Less important but worth noting is that while the stated goal is to "drain the DC deep state swamp" or whatever, what that apparently really translates into is firing forest service employees, who are spread out all over the country and not what most people think of when it comes to "the deep state". In the name of fighting the bureaucratic boogeyman, they're hurting people like this.
"Trump Quietly Plans To Liquidate Public Lands To Finance His Sovereign Wealth Fund"
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/trump-quietly-plans...
All while proposing to cut the Interior Dept budget by $1.5B.
https://www.npr.org/2017/04/04/522518472/trump-donates-salar...
It's funny how the politicians say they're going to create jobs but usually due to their policies, jobs evaporate. When will we call bullshit on these claims? FDR understood that the only way for a government to create jobs was to hire people. Neo-liberal conservatives love magic thinking like creating jobs through giving money to the rich when just hiring poor people with that money is more efficient (and obvious).
> tribal relations specialist
???
"some 3,400 workers who had been targeted for layoffs — an estimated 10 percent of the workforce"
10% doesn't meet the traditional usage of the term 'decimate' (as few use the term only when it meets the dictionary definition).
Related
The Forest Service Is Losing 2,400 Jobs–Including Most of Its Trail Workers
The U.S. Forest Service plans to cut 2,400 jobs, mainly seasonal workers, due to a budget shortfall, suspending 2025 hiring and worsening maintenance backlogs, causing employee frustration and uncertainty.
When the U.S. Forest Service's budget shrinks, who pumps campground toilets?
The U.S. Forest Service faces significant budget cuts, risking essential services and exacerbating staffing shortages. Nonprofits are stepping in to assist, highlighting reliance on them amid uncertain national forest management.
US Forest Service and National Park Service to fire thousands of workers
The Trump administration is cutting about 4,400 jobs at the US Forest Service and National Park Service, raising concerns over park conditions, wildfire management, and firefighter recruitment amid funding freezes.
Firing of USFS workers raises concerns about wildfires in Oregon, the West
The Trump administration's firing of 2,000 Forest Service employees raises concerns about wildfire management in the West, impacting fire suppression efforts and visitor services amid a hiring freeze by Biden.
Mass federal firings imperil plant and animal inspections
Mass firings in federal agencies, especially the USDA and CDC, threaten food security and public health, creating uncertainty among remaining employees and hindering responses to agricultural threats and health issues.