Photo credit: www.govexec.com
Executive orders from President Donald Trump aimed at reducing the federal workforce have made notable exceptions for public safety employees, particularly those involved in wildland firefighting. Despite this, funding cuts, freezes, and hiring restrictions have significantly weakened the already stretched firefighting workforce by affecting essential support staff required for preventing and combating wildfires.
In a particularly detrimental move, around 700 employees from the Forest Service were dismissed in what has been dubbed the “Valentine’s Day massacre” in mid-February. These employees are red-card-carrying staff, confirmed an agency spokesperson to ProPublica. Although these workers hold full-time roles within the agency, they have been trained to assist firefighting teams by providing logistical support during emergencies. They also play a critical role in conducting prescribed burns, which help mitigate larger fire risks by reducing combustible vegetation. However, these burns cannot occur without a sufficient number of qualified personnel to manage them, as non-firefighting staff cannot undertake these responsibilities.
Frank Beum, a member of the National Association of Forest Service Retirees and a veteran of over four decades with the agency, emphasized that these red-card-carrying employees are vital to the firefighting framework. He stated that their absence would significantly impair operational capabilities, especially during peak fire seasons when the demand for firefighting resources is immense.
In conversations with personnel from across the Forest Service, which oversees land equivalent to nearly twice the size of California, it became evident that the recent staffing changes have adversely impacted various agency functions. Employees expressed concerns that the cuts, which extend to the agency’s recreation, wildlife, and IT divisions, signal a troubling pivot away from environmental stewardship towards a stronger focus on industrial interests and firefighting demands.
Despite Trump’s clarifications on safeguarding fire-related personnel, the more than 10,000-member firefighting force is grappling with the consequences of these cuts. Recruitment efforts have stalled due to inadequate staffing levels to onboard new hires, leading to confusion regarding hireable job titles. This has also resulted in the cancellation of training programs and prescribed burns that are essential for preemptive fire management.
The chaotic environment within the agency was underscored by a Forest Service employee, who remarked, “It’s all really muddled in chaos, which is sort of the point.” Another added, “This agency is no longer serving its mission,” highlighting a growing sentiment of frustration among the workforce.
Forest Service representatives did not provide detailed responses regarding the broader impact of the cuts, though they confirmed the number of terminated employees. A spokesperson indicated that approximately 2,000 probationary employees—typically new hires or those recently promoted—were laid off in February. However, some internal sources suggested that the initial number of terminations was as high as 3,400, with a decrease likely due to the reinstatement of some workers in areas like timber sales.
Requests for comments from the White House and the Department of Government Efficiency went unanswered.
In early March, a federal review board mandated the Department of Agriculture, which oversees the Forest Service, to reinstate over 5,700 terminated probationary employees for a duration of 45 days. Many of these individuals, including Forest Service staff, found themselves on paid administrative leave with no designated work during their initial reinstatement period.
As the administration and DOGE navigate ongoing layoffs amid legal challenges, rumors circulated within the Forest Service indicating that leadership had compiled lists containing the names of thousands more employees at risk of future layoffs.
Moreover, understaffing within the agency’s information technology unit presents additional risks for firefighting efforts. An employee noted that the branch chief responsible for IT related to fire and aviation left in December, and although the Department of Agriculture advertised the vacancy, it was removed the day after Trump took office, leaving the position unfilled.
These ongoing staffing issues complicate the training and onboarding processes for new firefighters. A Forest Service firefighter articulated the severity of the backlog, stating, “We are really, really behind onboarding our employees right now.”
The staffing challenges exacerbate pre-existing issues that have persisted beyond recent administrations. In an effort to manage a significant budget shortfall, the Forest Service under President Joe Biden temporarily halted the hiring of seasonal workers—with the exception of wildfire personnel. Recent budget measures have also resulted in a permanent pay increase for these firefighters through an approved spending bill.
However, many permanent staff members, including firefighters, work on a seasonal basis and find themselves in unpaid status when demand is low. The uncertainty within federal employment has triggered a shift, with some employees seeking other job opportunities.
One employee shared, “Some of our people have taken other jobs. People aren’t going to wait around.”
Furthermore, cuts to the agency’s legal division are poised to hinder its capability to manage forest resources and combat wildfires effectively. Essential projects such as large prescribed burns require extensive environmental review processes, which are often subject to legal challenges from environmental advocacy groups. A reduction in legal staff could lead to fewer such projects being approved, potentially raising the risk of catastrophic fires over time.
A lawyer who previously worked on Forest Service initiatives cautioned that losing legal battles would stall projects temporarily, stating, “Every time we lose a case out West, it means the Forest Service can’t do a project, at least temporarily.” They added that with fewer legal resources, the agency could see an increase in litigation against its practices.
The long-term implications of these staffing and funding changes remain to be seen, but the immediate effects are already influencing the Forest Service’s ability to manage one of the most critical aspects of public safety: wildfire prevention and response.
Source
www.govexec.com