Anonymous reports:
“USFS regional leadership stated on a call this week that the USFS budget issues are worse than previously disclosed, they still have over a $1 billion deficit for 2025 and are considering a RIF.”
Can anyone validate and/or add more information?
************
I have received a few stories of “how bad it is.” If you would like to share yours, please email me and I will combine and remove any specific identifiable information. sharon at forestpolicypub.com.
I assume RIF = Reduction in Force?
Sorry Chelsea, yes.
I only have another question —
What happened to the 3.5 billion dollars in Infrastructure and Jobs Act funding for forest management?
We don’t know, but I think it’s likely that while TSW has been unable to get an answer, Congressfolk may be able to do better. So stay tuned.
Perhaps the GAO could find out something…
“We don’t know” ummm……
Let us start with this from the USDA site:
“The Bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 provides the Forest Service $5.5 billion and the authority to tackle the most pressing issues facing our natural resources and associated infrastructure, such as trails, roads and bridges.”
Which if you go out to the Act breaks down to more detail for FY22-26:
In Million Dollars:
Forest and Rangeland Research 10
State and Private Forestry 1,527
National Forest System 2,854
Capital Improvement and Maintenance 360
Wildland Fire Management 696
Total 5,447
The Act is very specific in how the money is to be spent and has a requirement to report back to congress on how it was spent.
There is a huge chunk that are grants so the money is only funneling thru the FS to outside entities. For the chunks that stay with the FS most is directed to to wildfire/wildfire mitigation efforts.
The 10M Research money is all about Wildfire Risk Reduction
The State/Private money has 608M for grants and 718M for Wildfire Risk Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration (which is almost totally grant based spending.)
National Forest System money is mostly Wildfire Risk Reduction and recovery. This does have a big chunk for fire hire and salary increases (480M). But I also includes 500M as grants to states for fire safe community work plus other grant based expenditures,
The Capital Improvement and Maintenance is basically for deferred roads expenses and access improvement for wildfire response (again this is mainly money going to outside entities as contract work.)
And Finally the Wildland Fire Management money – wildfire risk reduction.
So basically wildfire Risk Reduction. Look at the FY25 FS budget justification to congress and I think it basically lays it out as clearly. No magic man behind the curtain funneling money elsewhere. The fuels treatment per forest is fairly well documented in the FACTS database. I think Congress is well informed how the money was spent. I can’t say that the money that stayed in the FS is 3.5 billion but….
Now to the real issue – why the hire freeze and no seasonals? Well just look at the FY Justification document and it is clear. Due to Supplementary Appropriations Full Time Equivalent head count:
FY22 484
FY23 2240
FY24 3085
FY25 3292
While Discretionary and Mandatory Appropriations head count stayed flat (~28500) and money remained flat.
Even if you assume the final FY25 appropriations is the House Bill (which basically the same as FY24’s) there is not a $1 Billion shortfall.
So the equation is how to support the 3300 extra employee hired to assist in spending the $5.5B thru FY26. Anyone thinking the FS would spend 5.5 billion with the headcount we had in 2021/22 is dilutional. Senior leadership knew it was going to be difficult to spend the additional supplemental appropriations and not run the risk of headcount issues or RIF when the money ran out. They tried to tread the needle and sort of missed.
There are other issues also.
So “We Don’t Know” – We do, it’s not in one spot, or in a tidy report or a tidy public data set, but again it not a hidden man behind the curtain thing 🙂
Thanks for hunting up these numbers, Carl! Retirees like me are very sympathetic to how hard it would be for the Agency to get large sums of money for activities that take a long time, knowing that the bucks would run out.
We are also in touch with people who think unnecessary permanent positions were hired at the Regional and WO levels (“hiring spree”) and wonder why the FS is handing out millions to externals currently while employees have to go through layers to get approval to buy paperclips. Which is not the “why” of the budget crisis, but the “how” of getting out.
Also, if there is a simple story as you suggest by looking at budget docs, why not have public affairs DC tell the public the story (and not refer me to the media folks in USDA who don’t answer emails? Transparency and accountability build trust.
Sharon… beyond my comprehension…
From the outside looking in it seems like a major Albuquerqe failure. CFO should have alerted Randy months ago he was in jeopardy..
Lyle, I’m sure there is a good explanation/story/narrative there somewhere but we don’t have it yet.
At the midterm elections, who do you think the voters are going to blame for all the coming gridlock? (Someone didn’t fix it!)
The official response to Sarah’s question may come next February, when the new adminstration submits its budget. The Forest Service’s budget justification should include some info on how the $3.5b was spent. That said, anyone who has dealt with the federal budget process knows that these budget documents are often “based on a true story.” But that will at least be a starting point for further inquiry.
And Larry raises a critical practical question. Whatever the next admin wants to do, they have no more than 2 years to do it before the methane-laced-solids hit the fan.