On February 21, the United States Senate rejected an amendment that would have re-hired thousands of employees recently laid off from jobs at National Forests and Parks across the county. The firings happened on Valentine's Day weekend, sparking outrage and concern among public-land advocates and conservationists who say the axed workers performed essential duties on lands that—in many cases—are already chronically underfunded.
The initial layoffs occurred across several federal land-management agencies: The United States Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the United States Fish & Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service were all affected. At least 3,400 workers were fired at the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), and approximately 1,000 in the National Park Service (NPS), according to the Associated Press. The layoffs are part of the Trump Administration's pledge to scale back the federal bureaucracy, spearheaded by billionaire Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
Some groups, however, fear the cuts will prove costly to hunters and anglers in the long run. “The staffing cuts recently made at the Department of the Interior and U.S. Forest Service severely impact agencies that represent less than one percent of the federal budget, and they aren’t just line items,” said Kaden McArthur, Director of Policy & Government Relations for Backcountry Hunters & Anglers, in a prepared statement shared with Field & Stream. "These positions are responsible for managing the invaluable natural resources vital to millions of Americans who rely on our public lands for hunting, fishing, and outdoor recreation opportunities.”
The amendment—aimed at reinstating the public-land workers via a "deficit neutral reserve fund"—failed after a vote of 48 yeas and 52 nays. The vote broke down almost entirely along party lines, with Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski joining 48 Democrats as the only Republican to vote yes. "With growing pressures on our public lands, including increased visitation, spread of invasive species, and wildfires, the long-term consequences of this decision, if not immediately addressed, have the potential to cause devastating damage to the already understaffed agencies and the natural resources they steward,” McArthur said.
All told, more than 5,000 employees within the Department of the Interior and the Forest Service (which is managed separately by the U.S. Department of Agriculture) lost their jobs during the layoffs. For the Forest Service alone, the cuts amounted to a 10 percent decrease in the overall workforce, according to Reuters.
"The firings were done without regard for staff roles or performance, but rather targeted individuals with 'probationary status' who were hired or switched federal jobs within the last year, as well as veterans hired through non-competitive processes within the last two years," BHA wrote in a press release. "This is a devastating blow to the ability of the federal government to soundly manage our public lands and natural resources. For decades public land management agencies have suffered from skeletonized staff and reduced capacity to do restoration projects, maintain vital infrastructure, and provide emergency response – this action will severely exacerbate this issue. These are not government agencies that are fat with bureaucratic waste."
On Feb. 26, Forest Service Chief Randy Moore announced that he will be retiring from his 45-year career with the agency, effective March 3. In a letter to the entire Forest Service staff, Moore addressed recent layoffs and said the fired workers “successfully contributed to [the Forest Service’s] mission” and were valued members of the Forest Service team. “These decisions are being made at a level above our organization," Moore added in his letter.
Field & Stream has reached out to several hunting and fishing conservation groups that partner with the affected agencies to preform habitat work on public lands that benefit waterfowl, deer, elk, upland birds, and other game species. All of the groups expressed uncertainty about the future of their habitat improvement programs in the face of the recent layoffs, but none were ready to talk about the potential impacts on the record.
Public Lands At Risk
The firings and failed amendment come amid mounting challenges to federally-managed lands across the West—and it's adding to a growing sense of unease among some who utilize the areas for hunting, fishing, hiking, and camping. A lawsuit in Utah, for example, targeted some 18 million acres of BLM land for "disposal", and a January rule change in the House of Representatives made it easier for the federal government to sell public lands outright.
Earlier this month, state lawmakers in Wyoming narrowly rejected a bill that tried to transfer all federal lands and mineral rights in the Cowboy State over to state management, omitting only Yellowstone National Park. On Feb. 19 in Helena, Montana, hundreds of residents from across the state, many hunters and anglers among them, gathered at the State House to protest the Valentine's Day layoffs and show support for keeping federal lands—like USFS, BLM, and USFWS—squarely under federal management.
Related: Are National Monuments Back on Chopping Block?
A recent survey of voters in 8 western states showed that respondents overwhelmingly oppose budget cuts to America's public-land agencies. It also said that "Westerners prefer public land conservation over oil and gas development at the highest margins ever measured in the poll's 15-year history; and that 87 percent of voters across all party lines believe professionals like biologists, fire fighters, and rangers—not political appointees—should make decisions about public lands, water, wildlife and other natural resources. With last week's failed amendment to re-instate the terminated employees, it seems unlikely that they'll be in a position to make such decisions. How this will affect public lands and habitat management going forward is an ongoing story that we will continue to report on.
