More fallout.

[dave54]

How to post this without getting political?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/06/clim ... ticleShare

[maverick]

How to post this without getting political?

By talking about the impact it will have on the Sierra and not our dislike or disgust about the policymakers themself. I will say that if things start to go off the rails, I will lock the thread and/or give warnings and/or ban offenders. Thank you

[JayOtheMountains]

We like our parks. I would argue that we love our parks. In many cases we love our parks to death. Writer and historian Wallace Stegner famously said, “National parks are the best idea we ever had”. Stegner believed that national parks are democratic, reflect the best of America, and are an important part of the “geography of hope” that binds us together as a nation. What is the balance required to both conserve and provide these landscapes for public use? The systems we've built, regardless, were meant to help preserve the authenticity of our visits. Now we are seeing those systems being eroded for political gain; and we're seeing careers and future opportunities lost... for political gain.

I fear those who are driving policy really do not understand what public land is. How important access is, and how important preserving these resources are for public benefit. The people do make the place. The people who live, breathe, and work there understand something that the average tourist misses in their one to two week visits; regardless of whether they're park employees or concessionaires. They makeup the heartbeat of our parks like Yosemite, Yellowstone, the Ditch, Stonewall, New River Gorge, and others. They are an invaluable resource of knowledge and caring and with the time and experience requirements it takes for coveted jobs to be filled, we are losing such a valuable resource.

The entire Government workforce is on edge. All of us. We are a robust, experienced, knowledgeable group of individuals who feel strongly about our individual places in the civil service. Policy makers who have little to no understanding of what government does or how to leverage the human resources effectively are driving this conversation. With banner visitation numbers every year there is a bonified need for additional resources. Now that the reservation system is gone and we're with fewer employees I fear we're going to see destruction; definitely overcrowding; and an uptick in rescues. All things that were being effectively managed or with new strategies planned for implementation that are now severely at risk.

As long as they're not sold off we will see things rebound and recover. Look at Yellowstone and the bounce-back from the destructive fires from 1988, they're doing alright up there. It took some time, but things are doing well.

[balzaccom]

As always, making sure our voices are heard. Politicians of every stripe are sensitive to public pushback, and the more, harder, and louder we pushback, the more likely we are to mitigate the impacts on our national parks. It is crucial we do this.

[John Harper]

As always, making sure our voices are heard.

A few voices with lots of money have completely obliterated the voices of the majority.

John

[dave54]

I have to stop doomscrolling. It is getting too depressing and making me angry.
The California Coastal Commission is now under attack.

[maverick]

I have to stop doomscrolling. It is getting too depressing and making me angry.

Please keep this thread strictly updated with news about Sierra. Thank you.

[dave54]

Rumor is the Forest Service is considering axing or severely gutting the entire research branch to meet the quota of cuts.

[dave54]

More details emerging.

The Forest Service will reduce the number of Regions from 9 to 3. California is currently Region 5 (Hawaii is also Region 5, but there is minimal FS presence there). Unknown as of now where the three regions will be. My speculation is West (Sierra Nevada and Cascade Ranges, including Alaska), Rocky Mountains, and the East (Appalachians and south). Some National Forests will be consolidated. Details are not yet available.
This will create span of control problems, and I predict there will be less policy uniformity across a region or between forests.
As mentioned earlier. the Research branch is being gutted. State and Private may be shifted the Natural Resource Conservation Service (S&PF coordinates and provides technical assistance to states. tribes, and private landowners).

Fire looks like it will become its own agency, unknown whether it will be in Interior or DHS.

This will leave the Forest Service with a huge land base with too few people to manage it effectively. Trails will be unmaintained. Campgrounds fall into disrepair. Wildlife and fisheries habitat will not be enhanced. The Government will be an absentee landlord until an area can be harvested. For forests without commercial timber (i.e. Southern California) there will not be a reason for the FS to even exist.

Another side effect of the cuts are the Forest Service pack stock program may disappear. The Forest Service currently has several hundred pack animals for backcountry work. Speculation is there will be too little work to justify keeping the animals. Once eliminated, it is highly unlikely a future administration could resurrect the program. The animals will be sold, and some are saying the most likely end for the animals is a dog food factory in Mexico.