The Trump administration is considering a significant reorganization of the nation’s wildland firefighting resources, aiming to consolidate them under one department. This proposed change, however, has drawn criticism from several quarters, with concerns about potential increased fire risks and financial implications.
Under this proposal, the Federal Wildland Fire Service would be created within the U.S. Interior Department, bringing together efforts currently managed by five different agencies across two departments. This restructuring would relocate numerous employees from the U.S. Forest Service to the new agency, even as the fire season is already underway. The financial ramifications of such a shift remain unspecified in the budget documents.
Historically, the Trump administration had already implemented measures that impacted wildfire readiness, including a temporary suspension of funding for wildfire prevention and a reduction in the federal firefighting workforce. As a result, the Forest Service and the Interior Department saw a significant decrease in their firefighting personnel, with over 1,600 and several hundred positions lost, respectively, according to the National Association of Forest Service Retirees and Democratic legislators.
Climate change continues to exacerbate fire conditions, making them more severe by increasing temperatures and drying out landscapes. The previous year saw over 65,000 wildfires that scorched nearly 9 million acres across the U.S.
Doug Burgum, the Interior Secretary, presented the case for the proposed agency during a House Appropriations Committee testimony. He stated, “We want more firefighters on the front lines and less people trying to make manual decisions on how to allocate resources and personnel.” Burgum highlighted the inefficiencies of current structures and the potential improvements with the new setup.
Despite these arguments, some firefighter organizations and former Forest Service officials warn that reorganizing firefighting efforts mid-season could lead to costly disruptions. They argue that the focus may shift from fire prevention strategies, like forest thinning and controlled burns, to primarily fire suppression, which might not always yield the best outcomes.
Steve Ellis, chairman of the forest service retirees group, emphasized, “You will not suppress your way to success in dealing with catastrophic fires. It’s going to create greater risk and it’s going to be particularly chaotic if you implement it going into fire season.”
The group’s concerns are echoed in a letter to lawmakers, cautioning that such consolidation could heighten the probability of large, catastrophic fires, thus jeopardizing communities, firefighters, and resources.
As the nation braces for another intense fire season, with predictions of above-normal temperatures, more than 1 million acres have already been consumed by fires in states like Arizona, Minnesota, and California.
The proposal has found some bipartisan support, with legislation sponsored by California Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla and Montana Republican Sen. Tim Sheehy mirroring the administration’s intentions. Notably, Sheehy has a background in aerial firefighting through his company, which benefits substantially from federal contracts.
Burgum noted that the administration is not waiting for legislative approval to begin coordinating efforts with Agriculture Sec. Brooke Rollins for the current fire season.
Earlier workforce reductions were part of a broader initiative led by billionaire Elon Musk to cut federal expenditures, which affected the Forest Service and other agencies. A public backlash and legal actions have led to some rehiring, but concerns remain about the adequacy of current staffing levels.
The Forest Service aims to expand its firefighting staff to 11,300 by mid-July, up from the 9,450 available as of early May. Meanwhile, the Interior Department’s firefighting personnel, which includes workers from various sub-agencies, is estimated at about 6,700, though precise figures post-cutbacks are unclear.
State officials in Washington and Oregon have expressed that the reduction in federal firefighter support complicates planning for the wildfire season. The exact numbers of those laid off and rehired have not been disclosed by the administration.
Additionally, the Trump administration has rolled back environmental protections around logging projects in national forests, affecting over 176,000 square miles of land. This move is intended to mitigate fire risks but has sparked further debate about its environmental implications.
Such forests, which face high wildfire risks, are also threatened by other factors like insect infestations and disease. The previous Biden administration had also advocated for increased logging to address fire risks, although timber sales did not see significant increases.
—
Read More Arizona News
