COMMENTARY: Public is sure to feel ripple effects of Forest Service firings

The U.S. Forest Service and other land management agencies haven’t said how efforts by President Donald Trump and Elon Musk to cut federal employment will be felt by people like you and me.

I can think of a few ways it might.

The Forest Service already fails to keep up with needed road and trail maintenance. There was a time that every district on individual national forests had at least one trail crew. Those were the good old days. Trails, even those that led to remote places, were brushed out on a regular basis and windfall that can turn open paths into impossible thickets was cleared.

In recent years, it’s been more typical for multiple districts to share a single crew. With so much ground to cover, they struggle to keep even the so-called system trails — those akin to main thoroughfares — clear and in good shape. The agency has come to increasingly rely on outside nonprofit organizations like the Selway-Bitterroot Frank Church River of No Return Foundation and the Montana Conservation Corps to keep trails open.

Today, it’s not unusual for campgrounds to open late because the agency lacks adequate staff to complete required tasks like hazard tree assessments and drinking water quality tests on a timely basis.

It’s hard to imagine that firing thousands of workers will make that better and every reason to assume it will make it worse.

Again, individual forests haven’t told us how many local folks have been fired in the name of government efficiency, but news reports indicate that, at least nationally, they appear concentrated in the entry-level ranks and among those who are employed temporarily.

Those tend to be the boots-on-the-ground folks, the people who spend more time in the field clearing trails, cruising timber and keeping campgrounds open, than those who spend their time in offices and meetings.

According to the White House, public safety and firefighting forces won’t be affected. I have my doubts. Because of a government-wide hiring freeze, the agency is already behind on its annual uptake of firefighters and other temporary employees. In addition, firefighters depend on logistical support from an army of employees whose ranks likely have been thinned.

Likewise, work to mitigate fire danger — a major effort by the Forest Service in recent years — depends on legions of folks to complete required environmental analysis to ensure thinning and prescribed fire projects do more good than harm. Fewer workers will likely slow an already slow process.

Forest Service leaders aren’t the only ones who’ve been quiet since the firings. Idaho’s Congressional delegation, ardent supporters of the president, have said little publicly about DOGE and Musk. Does that mean they support the reduction in the federal workforce and inevitable reduction in services? You’ll have to ask them. I have and so far, it’s crickets.

Barker is the outdoors editor of the Lewiston Tribune. He can be contacted at ebarker@lmtribune.com.