High Sierra Topix

Check out the proposals for Dept of Interior and Forest Service.

https://whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploa ... equest.pdf

Transferring smaller and lesser used Parks to states. Roll back National Monuments designations.
Forest Service funding anything not related to timber production, grazing, or minerals is gutted. Slashing matching funds to community wildfire defense programs.

Can you provide a reference?

I mean, you started off with "check out the..." I can't check it out since you didn't point me anywhere useful.

OOPS! Added link.

Sounds like someone is trying to keep federal spending down. In general, I like that idea.

The impact: https://www.sfgate.com/national-parks/a ... 307194.php

FrankPS wrote: ↑Fri May 02, 2025 4:38 pm Sounds like someone is trying to keep federal spending down. In general, I like that idea.

I think most Americans feel this way, but it doesn't feel like making cuts in public land management moves the needle at all. It's already such an infinitesimal part of our nation's budget, and its spent almost entirely on bare bones infrastructure investment like campground maintenance, roads, and trails. Even if you're looking at this from strictly an economic perspective, when access to parks is made more difficult, it has a major financial impact of nearby small businesses that rely on tourism.

Then the other issue is the lack of a coherent plan to manage proposed cuts. For instance, I used to work as a ranger at J-Tree, and stay in touch with a few former co-workers. During the first round of budget cuts to the NPS, a decent portion of the staff was let go. However, for reasons entirely unclear, they were all rehired two months later, and given two months of back pay for doing absolutely nothing. This doesn't strike me as very fiscally responsible.