Forest Service: Culture, History, Morale, Organization, Future

The National Association of Forest Service Retirees, better known by the acronym NAFSR, followed up on the OneUSDA concept, which we previously covered here. As most of you know, changing the Forest Service name or logo in any way shape or form is a highly touchy subject with many retirees.

I was told that NAFSR had reached out to the Department and were told that Secretary Perdue’s OneUSDA vision is focused on increasing the effectiveness and efficiency in the Department to better serve the American people. He outlined four objectives dealing with review of policies, processes, directives, awards, telework. They were told none of these objectives included changing the name of the Forest Service. I’d like to thank NAFSR for their work and encourage retirees to join. You can also check out their website for items of interest (including some stuff about the “improving NEPA” effort). When I was trying to get a handle on Wildfire Bills, I found their analysis very helpful. It’s not that easy to get relatively unbiased analyses of legislation, and I appreciate that also.

Hello, everyone.

Earlier this week, I introduced to you a broad vision called OneUSDA.
We are one family working together to serve the American people. And if we are to fulfill our mission – to make USDA the most effective, most efficient, most customer focused department in the entire federal government – we must function as one single team.
You all may know that I love sports and frequently use sports examples to explain concepts. One of the best came from the story of an underdog basketball team from a tiny Indiana high school that makes it all the way to the state championship game, portrayed in the movie, Hoosiers. Coach Norman Dale, for the longest time, never let his players shoot the basketball in practice, opting instead to focus on fundamental drills and what it meant to move together. At one point he tells them the whole point: “Five players on the floor functioning as one single team: team, team, team. No one more important than the other.”

And that’s us. Team, team, team USDA. We are all important to one another and to all Americans.

So every change we detail today and in the weeks and months ahead is to make us function as one single team.

I will be forthright with you. Some of these changes may be drastically different than the old way of doing things, and that’s okay.

All of them point to our first strategic goal: to ensure our programs are delivered efficiently, effectively, and with integrity.

To that end, today I am directing USDA to:

· Restore sanity and commonsense to a cumbersome, labor-intensive, and costly departmental directive review process;

· Enhance the Secretary’s Awards and Recognition Program so that we can properly celebrate our accomplishments toward achieving all of our strategic goals;

· Amend our telework policy to one that works for the American taxpayer and for our colleagues who come to the office each day; and

· Review a wide array of directives – through Human Resources and the General Counsel’s Office – to create policies and processes that are transparent and consistent for the employee, the supervisor, and the American citizen.

And this is just the start. I am serious about holding everyone accountable, but most especially every leader and every supervisor, and that starts with me. OneUSDA only works if, like Coach Dale did with his players, we turn the focus on the fundamentals. Are we doing right by the taxpayer? Are we doing right by our colleagues?

I hope that you will join me and approach this change as something exciting, something that reorients our mission, and something that helps us be OneUSDA.

Thank you very much and happy New Year.

Sonny Perdue
Secretary

My dream at the time, (in the mid-90’s) was to collect stories that reflected organizational culture and put them in a book for new employees. I received many stories through the Data General (email for FS folks at the time), and still have many of them. I plan to post them here as time and space allow. If people would like to contribute some now, we can post them here. My idea was that you would tell the story and then reflect on what you think the story tells about the culture.

Recently, I ran across this piece in Forbes:

The eclipse of storytelling in the 20th Century
Anthropologists always knew that storytelling is a universal feature of every country and every culture, even if, for most of the 20th Century, storytelling got very little respect. As so-called scientific approaches to life became dominant, mechanistic, machine-like thinking was everywhere triumphant. Analysis was king. Narrative was seen as either infantile or trivial.

The phenomenon didn’t just affect storytelling. In retrospect, the 20th Century can be seen as a giant experiment by the human race to find out what could be accomplished if organizations treated people as things and communicated to them in abstractions, numbers and analysis, rather than through people-friendly communications such as stories.

Employees became “human resources” to be mined, rather than people to be minded. Customers became “demand”, or “consumers” or “eyeballs”, to be manipulated, rather than living, feeling human beings to be delighted. Storytelling was only one of many elements that suffered “collateral damage.”

The whole experiment can be seen as a success to the extent that the material standard of living of a proportion of the world’s population for a time improved. But the experiment was an abysmal failure in most other respects. It made human beings people miserable. And organizations steadily became less and less productive, as the need for innovation grew.

Regular readers know that stories, personal experiences, photos and scientific studies are all fair game for commenting and discussion on this blog. For new readers, as we discuss topics like sexual harassment or government shutdowns or whatever, let it be known that stories are honored and valued here.

Denise Downie was kind enough to send this cartoon in.. “This was drawn by Rex Norman, retired public affairs officer on the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit. I watched Rex draw this cartoon during the 2005 planning transition meeting at Lied Lodge in Nebraska.”

Our recent discussions have caused me to reflect on the role of Chief and the expectations of people in the FS. Certainly there is a strong cultural meaning to that position (and not Associate Chief, nor Deputy Chief for Research, nor Regional Forester in Alaska) that perhaps resonates differently in the cultural FS DNA than, say, the BLM Director does to BLM folks. In some ways, perhaps, it resonates more as a wise elder or a spiritual leader than a CEO.

Take a look at this article about Chief Thomas’ bumpy ride. Maybe you will shed a tear, laugh out loud, or say a prayer to or for JWT. For those of you who weren’t there. you might be surprised!

I’ve excerpted the section about what we usually talk about on this blog..note that there are several quotes from our own Andy Stahl.

Thomas dismisses criticism phlegmatically. He hasn’t changed, he says; the critics “just got to know me.”

The timber industry still resents Thomas’ role in the Northwest Forest Plan but has warmed to him personally. Industry lobbyist Crandall says “a lot of people in the industry that work with him respect him and trust him, including me.”

As for the administration, Lyons and White House officials make no bones about their resistance to Thomas’ broad policy proposals that are opposed by environmental groups.

Lyons sat on Thomas’ proposal to streamline forest planning, saying it would dilute the same wildlife “viability” rule that led to the shutdown of federal logging in the Northwest. The rule calls for ensuring that all native vertebrate species remain viable throughout their range. Thomas claims that the rule is impractical and favors using indicator species and their habitat.

Lyons also watered down Thomas’ 1994 Forest Health Initiative, which included more salvage logging than environmental groups wanted. And the undersecretary stymied Thomas’ bid to fold several laws on environmental compliance into one coherent statute, eliminating overlapping and sometimes contradictory language.

Katie McGinty, Clinton’s top environmental adviser, said Thomas is correct to suggest that “it is time to start looking at” a revised and streamlined environmental compliance statute.

But she doesn’t want this Congress to do it.

“It would be a dangerous prospect at the very least to unleash many of these members on environmental laws,” she said in an interview. “They’re not going to improve the laws, but to repeal them.”

….

But Thomas’ Forest Service gets low marks from advocates on both sides. Environmental groups say it has slid back toward destructive logging. Industry officials charge that it is unable to make decisions and is nearing collapse.

“Decisions are being made by the political system or the legal system,” said Crandall of the AFPA, which has aggressively used both. Agency officials, he said, “are losing their authority to make decisions.”

“If things don’t change,” Crandall said, “the Forest Service as an agency, as we know it today, isn’t going to survive this.”

The strife should come as no surprise to Thomas. Before becoming chief, he wrote that “land-use planning based on an adversarial approach inevitably produces results that please none of the participants.” And in a passage that seems even more appropriate today, he wrote:

“The fighting goes on and even accelerates in frequency and intensity. The people and the forest are bruised and battered in the process. The gladiators never tire of the fight — it is what they do.”

My favorite quote, as a person who spent many cubicle hours working on Ecosystem Management was “Never before in my memory has a term of public discourse gone from virtual anonymity to meaninglessness without an intervening period of coherence,” from Mark Rey,

Anyway, remember that quotation from Santayana “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”? I’d say “those who cannot remember the past find it easier to say “this is the worst ever”. We all survived it, despite what Doug thought at the time. Please feel free to post your own reflections or memories.

I couldn’t help but notice that this site had a lot of hits to the story about Tony Tooke. Of course, a sex scandal draws a lot of interest :). Some have asked whether it’s an appropriate topic for this blog.. and here is why I think it is. Of course, it’s easy not to read these posts if you prefer, you should be able to tell by the title of the post.

A while back Matthew asked “how do you know things?”- this is a good example of trying to figure that out. First of all: what media carried it? Could they have a political or policy reason? Or even a salacious therefore increased number of clicks reason? (This blog does not have advertising) Who talked about it to the media, what were their motives? Of course, there’s “what really happened and how do we know?” and finally and perhaps most important “what meaning do the stories associate with those facts and how clear are they about the links between facts and interpretation?” We could also investigate “what science has to say about this” in terms of evolutionary biology and older/younger human relationships.

I think that this story would also be interesting to current employees. What are the rules and who follows them or not? If we have a rule about cell phone use while driving (or chock blocks or ….) (I don’t know if this is still a rule), and the “leader” does not follow it- that’s not a good thing because it’s not a good example for others. It could even confuse employees as to whether there was a rule or not. But who is a leader? Everyone with supervisory responsibility, or just line officers, or all of you? My original point in the first post is that based on the information, Tony wasn’t following the rules about “in the chain of command.” Does everyone know these rules? Do only some people get reprimanded for not following them at your unit?

What I like about this E&E story compared to the previous Daily Caller story is that it gets to what I think is the crux of the issue.

“The retiree complained to Isakson’s office that Tooke shouldn’t be in charge of an agency that’s trying to come to terms with a history of sexual harassment — a part of the agency’s past he tried to confront shortly after taking command earlier this year.”

I respectfully disagree with the retiree making that link between consensual breaking of agency rules and being unable to lead a harassment effort. There is a very serious problem with sexual harassment (more on that later) that different administrations have struggled with, including the Clinton administration (’nuff said). I do like the ideas of retirees taking an active role, but once the facts are out, I feel that this should be an open discussion.

Here’s the link to the E&E News (kudos to them for clear and fair reporting). Unfortunately there is a firewall (but if they are paid well and do good work, can I really complain?). They also mention the potential political angle by talking to a forest policy person.
Here’s a snippet.

A Forest Service spokeswoman today referred E&E News to Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue’s office, which didn’t immediately respond to a message seeking comment. The agency told The Daily Caller, “Tony Tooke has a clean personnel record and there is nothing in his employment record reflecting complaints against him of this nature.”

The Daily Caller reported that a USDA lawyer responded to Isakson that the issue had been “properly addressed” at the time of the relationship.

According to the article, the retired employee said that Tooke advocated for the woman with whom he was involved to receive a promotion to a newly created position at the Forest Service, and that he continued to contact her after their relationship ended, and after he’d been directed by a supervisor not to do so.

Tooke moved to the agency’s headquarters and eventually became regional forester for the Southern Region, before taking the chief’s job in Washington.

A lobbyist for a forest policy group that has supported Tooke lamented that the issue could distract from important policies the new chief is trying to pursue, and questioned the motivations of the person who made the complaint.

But questions are being raised if Tooke is the person to change the culture. Approximately 12 years ago, Tooke, who was married at the time and Deputy Forest Supervisor for the National Forests in Florida, carried on an affair for approximately two years with an entry-level employee, according to a retired Forest Service employee.

The retired USFS employee, who rose to region chief and worked in the same region as Tooke, asked not to be identified because the person still has family working at the USFS and worry they’ll be retaliated against.

A second former USFS employee told The Daily Caller that Tooke’s mistress told them directly about the affair at the time.

After Tooke was named USFS chief last summer, the former region chief sent a letter to Congress detailing her claims.

“Initiated prior to 2005, the sexual misconduct involved a two-year affair between Mr. Tooke, then Deputy Forest Supervisor in Florida and a student from the SCEP program, who was newly converted to a permanent position in Florida, where Mr. Tooke was assigned,” the retired employee wrote Aug. 31, 2017.

“Mr. Tooke occupied a position of power, as the Deputy and second in charge for the National Forests in Florida.”

“The young female employee was an employed on the National Forests in Florida. The employee’s direct supervisor was the Public Communications Staff Officer, who in turn was supervised by the Forest Supervisor and Deputy Forest Supervisor, Mr. Tooke, per the Chain of Command.”

“In my brief read of the ‘Justia’ website article for Defending Charges of Sexual Misconduct I found, ‘It is important to recognize that consent maybe a defense,’” the letter stated. “However, if sexual misconduct arises from a position of power, consent may not be a legal defense, the abuse of power is a crime, even if the subordinate appeared to consent.”

Tooke is also alleged to have pulled strings to get a plum promotion for his paramour.

I’m liking the idea that consensual relationships between higher-ups and people who work directly or indirectly for them should not occur- too much potential for workplace drama. On the other hand, the peer pool can be mighty empty depending on where you work and how far it is to the next office. And of course extramarital affairs are different from dating. Like the rest of this complex issue in other workplaces, I don’t think anyone has the nuances figured out.

Thanks to Andy’s closer look I have updated this post, which originally said that the BLM had pulled ahead of the FS, but actually the FS has not been posted yet.

I always compare it to the BLM, which has a similar mission, and was 60.1 this year. BLM went up 4.3 points last year. I wonder if they did something workforce-wise, or ??? Many of the individual categories went up, as you can see in this chart, so it seems like something real is going on… ideas?

We’ll have to wait and how the FS did.

Here’s a link:

Five Priorities for Our Work

These five national priorities do three things: They give urgency and focus to critical needs; help foster the work environment we want for our employees; and set expectations for the manner in which we accomplish our work with citizens, partners, volunteers, and each other.

1. Uplifting and empowering our employees through a respectful, safe working environment.

I have enormous respect and admiration for the work every employee does. I am committed to ensuring our work environment is safe, rewarding, respectful, free of harassment, and resilient—that every one of you works in an environment where you are recognized and valued for your contributions. I want every employee to be empowered to continuously improve our work.

2. Being good neighbors and providing excellent customer service.

We will work with efficiency and integrity with a focus on the people we serve. I envision a broad, diverse coalition for conservation, working across boundaries and using all authorities available to us. We have a backlog of special use permits, range allotment work and deferred maintenance and other needs to address. To increase customer service, we must understand customer requirements, expand our use of best practices, apply innovative tools, and address barriers that get in the way of doing good work. Each and every visitor, forest or grassland user, contractor, partner, cooperator, permittee, volunteer, and citizen deserves our very best service.

3. Promoting shared stewardship by increasing partnerships and volunteerism.

We can’t do this alone and only on National Forest System lands. It takes others to help us make a difference on the whole landscape. We will work with all citizens—from rural and urban communities—as we pursue the work in front of us. Strengthening and expanding partner and volunteer programs around shared values is critical for a sustainable future.

4. Improving the condition of forests and grasslands.

About 80 million acres of the National Forest System are at risk from insect disease and wildfire. About one-third of these lands are at very high risk. Drinking water, homes, communities, wildlife habitat, historic places, sacred sites, recreation opportunities, and scenic vistas are among many of the values at risk of loss. Having sustainable, healthy, resilient forests and grasslands in the future depends on our ability to increase work on the ground and get increased outcomes. We will use all management tools and authorities available to us to improve the condition of our forests and rangelands. Improving the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) environmental analysis and decision-making processes will help us increase our capacity and ability to improve the condition of forests and rangelands. This work will also restore ecosystem function, deliver dependable energy, provide jobs and economic benefits for rural communities, and be responsive to the American taxpayer.

5. Enhancing recreation opportunities, improving access, and sustaining infrastructure.

Most Americans experience the national forests and grasslands through recreation activities. Although these lands offer some of the most valued outdoor recreation settings in this country, the settings and visitor experiences are increasingly at risk. Deteriorating recreation facilities and roads, eroding trails, and increasing user conflicts pose numerous challenges and a decline in the quality of the visitor experience. Currently, we can only maintain to standard half of our roads, trails, facilities, and other components of our infrastructure. Access to the National Forest System is more limited. We will take steps to address these challenges and create more enhanced, sustainable recreation opportunities, access, and infrastructure to better meet the needs of visitors, citizens, and users.

NEPA environmental analysis and decision-making improvements can help us achieve goals and objectives for enhanced recreation, improved access, and a more sustainable infrastructure.

The Chief also asks:

My questions for you are: What do you see standing in your way? What are you experiencing that we can collectively learn from?

I’d be interested in how folks on the blog might answer this question, just substitute “they” for “we” if you’re not an employee.