Land management agency impact stories...
- Thread starter BuzzH
- Start date
Justabirdwatcher
Well-known member
So here's the deal with the probies right now - any of them who made news like this, or who exercised their 1A rights while they were "fired" are now potential targets for the re-boot of the valentine's massacre. Handing the authority to OPM to fire other agency's employees subverts the district court judge's complaint - that they didn't have the authority. Well, now they do. So, I guess we'll see how for how long, and which ones, survive the 2nd round.
I have a feeling this is about to get much, much worse. We're only just entering phase 2 of ARRA land.
As I said before, the disposition of the probationary employees will be a foreshadowing of the midterm strategy.
I have a feeling this is about to get much, much worse. We're only just entering phase 2 of ARRA land.
As I said before, the disposition of the probationary employees will be a foreshadowing of the midterm strategy.
Hunting Wife
Well-known member
The DOI weekly newsletter to employees this week is interesting. Typically it highlights DOI’s “big accomplishments”, and is a decent pulse check of what the administration’s priorities are. During Trump 1.0, it was 90% energy/resource development stories. During Biden, it was 80% DEI and social justice stories, 20% conservation related stories. Today’s issue is 30% energy/resource development, 20% pay increase for firefighters, and 50% divestitures of public lands.
In case anyone cares what the administration is full steam ahead on…
In case anyone cares what the administration is full steam ahead on…
sclancy27
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2022
- Messages
- 730
I wouldn't call the weekly newsletter "big accomplishments", it's more like "hey this is what is happening at Interior this week". The divestiture is the HUD program and the recent land sale around Vegas, which were both big in the news, so not really surprising.
The week before it was energy and mineral development, renamed wildlife refuges, a new power line approval and a Sea-wall rehab project....
Nameless Range
Well-known member
The Elkhorn Working Group sent this letter to Montana's congressional delegation this week. I know in the age of modern politics, it's easy to just dismiss criticisms of current policy as political. That said, knowing many members of this group I can say with certainty that politics doesn't really play into it. Rather, these are just folks who live, work, and rely on the Elkhorns and have been involved in their management for decades (most members are ranchers), and because this group requires unanimous agreement for actions like this, I think it speaks to something.
We are writing you on behalf of the Elkhorn Working Group (EWG), a citizen collaborative advisory group consisting of ranchers, hunters, anglers, recreation, and business people who share an interest in the management of Elkhorn Wildlife Management Unit.
We do so to express our concern and strong disagreement with the recent staff reductions in the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Natural Resource Conservation Service and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. We believe that the staff reductions were done without adequate process and evaluation of the important roles these personnel play and the far-ranging consequences for both good resource management as well as effects on the economy and the values we Montanans embrace. We are also concerned about the freezing of funding that has simultaneously occurred, resulting in the setting back, if not totally eliminating, a number of important field projects planned for this year as well as long-term initiatives. We are troubled about the consequences of these reductions and funding actions to all of our partner federal resource agencies.
The Elkhorn Working Group was originally sanctioned in 2002 by the US Forest Service Region 1 and the Montana Fish & Wildlife Commission. Our work has been to develop and provide collaborative recommendations on wildlife, livestock and natural resource management strategies in the Elkhorn Wildlife Management Unit (EWMU) in the Helena-Lewis & Clark Forest, the only such entity in the entire National Forest System. The EWMU is devoted to the management and enhancement of the unique public natural and wildlife assets within its boundaries. The EWG has worked in partnership with federal, state, and county agencies charged with the management of the Elkhorns. The EWG encourages and promotes good stewardship through collaboration, coordination and cooperation among agencies, permittees and the general public in the management of natural resources on public lands.
For many years, the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) have struggled to address the ever-evolving and increasing demands of land management, coupled with the current huge increase in public uses for recreation. The agencies have had to do so in spite of funding and staff cutbacks. These current reductions in staff and the freezing of funds serve only to exacerbate those reductions and set those efforts back even further.
The EWG has been involved in numerous cooperative projects over its 23-year history, ranging from weed inventories and mitigation and major public information initiatives to restoration of native westslope cutthroat throat and formal wildlife research, most recently involving the trophy elk herds of the Elkhorns. All of these were in partnership with the Forest Service and BLM, where the agencies have contributed both funding and staff in their accomplishment. The reductions in staff, coupled with the freeze in project dollars will certainly affect work in the Elkhorns as well as across the Helena- Lewis & Clark National Forest. These shortfalls will surely cause resources that might otherwise be dedicated to the Elkhorns to be diverted in an attempt to make up for dwindling agency-wide operational resources at a time when public interest, use and demand is at record highs. This is not to mention the impact on partner state agencies and their work with these agencies.
We are concerned that the loss of personnel will also come at the cost of the ability to perform important collateral duties, not the least of which is wildfire response. Many of those who lost their positions also played important roles in fire operations, providing a wide range of responsibilities on a local scale in first response to wildfire incidents. Their significant contribution in this area was apparently not factored in when the force reductions were made and will not only constitute a loss locally but in the over wildfire program overall. These decreases come at a particularly bad time as they have interfered with and put on hold the annual recruitment efforts for both fire and other field projects, again setting back adequate planning for training and “boots on the ground” work.
There were approximately 360 Montana USFS employees and an unknown number of BLM employees let go, many with multiple years of experience, skills and knowledge, in roles that are critical to good forest and resource management. These are our neighbors and friends, several of whom are stationed in small rural communities across Montana. As a result, there will undoubtedly be economic impacts to Main Street Montana — the stores, the service and hospitality businesses, local contractors, schools — effects that will resonate across our state given its modest total population. Add to this the potential for negatively affecting Montana’s important tourism industry when campgrounds are closed, unattended or unmaintained and resources for visitors are cut back.
We need not remind you of Montana’s proud outdoor heritage, one deeply rooted in livelihoods and recreation and embraced as a benchmark of our identity. We value our public lands and those who are dedicated to their management. At the same time, we certainly concur with the need to reflect on how that management is done and, through careful and methodological analysis, develop ways to revise how that work is accomplished and the resources dedicated to it. Organizations such as our can provide insight and perspective from the ground level which could lead to good decision-making and sound resource management. We stand ready to contribute our knowledge, skills and experience to that effort. Meantime, we hope as budget discussions continue, you offer your influence to reverse these decisions in favor of a careful review and new ideas to offer a solid investment in the Forest Service’s and BLM’s missions and work.
We look forward to your response.
Joe Cohenour, chair, Elkhorn Working Group. Michael Korn, vice-chair, Clancy; Darrell Baum, Winston; Dave Baum, Helena; David Brown, Helena; Ryan Fetherston, East Helena; Bret Lian, Jefferson City; Josh Pallister, Boulder; Patti Russ, Clancy; Brud Smith, Boulder; Travis Vincent, Helena; Kim Watne, Winston; Tom Williams, Toston
We are writing you on behalf of the Elkhorn Working Group (EWG), a citizen collaborative advisory group consisting of ranchers, hunters, anglers, recreation, and business people who share an interest in the management of Elkhorn Wildlife Management Unit.
We do so to express our concern and strong disagreement with the recent staff reductions in the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Natural Resource Conservation Service and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. We believe that the staff reductions were done without adequate process and evaluation of the important roles these personnel play and the far-ranging consequences for both good resource management as well as effects on the economy and the values we Montanans embrace. We are also concerned about the freezing of funding that has simultaneously occurred, resulting in the setting back, if not totally eliminating, a number of important field projects planned for this year as well as long-term initiatives. We are troubled about the consequences of these reductions and funding actions to all of our partner federal resource agencies.
The Elkhorn Working Group was originally sanctioned in 2002 by the US Forest Service Region 1 and the Montana Fish & Wildlife Commission. Our work has been to develop and provide collaborative recommendations on wildlife, livestock and natural resource management strategies in the Elkhorn Wildlife Management Unit (EWMU) in the Helena-Lewis & Clark Forest, the only such entity in the entire National Forest System. The EWMU is devoted to the management and enhancement of the unique public natural and wildlife assets within its boundaries. The EWG has worked in partnership with federal, state, and county agencies charged with the management of the Elkhorns. The EWG encourages and promotes good stewardship through collaboration, coordination and cooperation among agencies, permittees and the general public in the management of natural resources on public lands.
For many years, the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) have struggled to address the ever-evolving and increasing demands of land management, coupled with the current huge increase in public uses for recreation. The agencies have had to do so in spite of funding and staff cutbacks. These current reductions in staff and the freezing of funds serve only to exacerbate those reductions and set those efforts back even further.
The EWG has been involved in numerous cooperative projects over its 23-year history, ranging from weed inventories and mitigation and major public information initiatives to restoration of native westslope cutthroat throat and formal wildlife research, most recently involving the trophy elk herds of the Elkhorns. All of these were in partnership with the Forest Service and BLM, where the agencies have contributed both funding and staff in their accomplishment. The reductions in staff, coupled with the freeze in project dollars will certainly affect work in the Elkhorns as well as across the Helena- Lewis & Clark National Forest. These shortfalls will surely cause resources that might otherwise be dedicated to the Elkhorns to be diverted in an attempt to make up for dwindling agency-wide operational resources at a time when public interest, use and demand is at record highs. This is not to mention the impact on partner state agencies and their work with these agencies.
We are concerned that the loss of personnel will also come at the cost of the ability to perform important collateral duties, not the least of which is wildfire response. Many of those who lost their positions also played important roles in fire operations, providing a wide range of responsibilities on a local scale in first response to wildfire incidents. Their significant contribution in this area was apparently not factored in when the force reductions were made and will not only constitute a loss locally but in the over wildfire program overall. These decreases come at a particularly bad time as they have interfered with and put on hold the annual recruitment efforts for both fire and other field projects, again setting back adequate planning for training and “boots on the ground” work.
There were approximately 360 Montana USFS employees and an unknown number of BLM employees let go, many with multiple years of experience, skills and knowledge, in roles that are critical to good forest and resource management. These are our neighbors and friends, several of whom are stationed in small rural communities across Montana. As a result, there will undoubtedly be economic impacts to Main Street Montana — the stores, the service and hospitality businesses, local contractors, schools — effects that will resonate across our state given its modest total population. Add to this the potential for negatively affecting Montana’s important tourism industry when campgrounds are closed, unattended or unmaintained and resources for visitors are cut back.
We need not remind you of Montana’s proud outdoor heritage, one deeply rooted in livelihoods and recreation and embraced as a benchmark of our identity. We value our public lands and those who are dedicated to their management. At the same time, we certainly concur with the need to reflect on how that management is done and, through careful and methodological analysis, develop ways to revise how that work is accomplished and the resources dedicated to it. Organizations such as our can provide insight and perspective from the ground level which could lead to good decision-making and sound resource management. We stand ready to contribute our knowledge, skills and experience to that effort. Meantime, we hope as budget discussions continue, you offer your influence to reverse these decisions in favor of a careful review and new ideas to offer a solid investment in the Forest Service’s and BLM’s missions and work.
We look forward to your response.
Joe Cohenour, chair, Elkhorn Working Group. Michael Korn, vice-chair, Clancy; Darrell Baum, Winston; Dave Baum, Helena; David Brown, Helena; Ryan Fetherston, East Helena; Bret Lian, Jefferson City; Josh Pallister, Boulder; Patti Russ, Clancy; Brud Smith, Boulder; Travis Vincent, Helena; Kim Watne, Winston; Tom Williams, Toston
