The US Forest Service (USFS), a division of the US Department of Agriculture, is the federal agency responsible for managing public lands in national forests and grasslands. The US forest system includes 155 national forests and 20 national grasslands, as well as 122 research and experimental forests and other areas, covering more than 192 million acres of public land. The agency maintains and cultivates these lands for public use and national interests through various activities ranging from scientific research and development to firefighting, recreation maintenance, wilderness and wildlife protection, ecosystem management and timber production. USFS policy was historically centered around timber production, but over the years evolved into a system based on a principle of “multi-use,” including recreation, wilderness, minerals, water, grazing, fish and wildlife. In recent years, ecosystem management and sustainability have increasingly formed a basis for USFS policy. In addition to the structure, funding and management of USFS, a number of issues have been the subject of debate or controversy for some time, including fire management policy, logging practices and the timber industry, ecological sustainability and environmental protection, road building, wilderness and wildlife policies, watershed protection, and state/county ownership issues.
The US Forest Service (USFS) is embedded in American cultural history, easily recognized by the iconic image of “Smokey Bear.” Its past has been an integral part of the cultural landscape as it transformed with the post-World War II housing boom that gave rise to increased American interest in leisure and recreational activities.
Before there was the Forest Service there was the US Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Division of Forestry, established in 1881. The forestry division at first was charged with providing information about national forestlands by conducting assessments. Three years later, scientific experimentation was added to the division’s responsibilities. In 1891, the Forest Reserve Act, motivated in part by a drive to protect national forests from “timber thieves and profiteers,” established the first national forests (known then as forest reserves). The act allowed President William Henry Harrison to establish the first timber land reserve, which he placed under the control of the General Land Office in the Department of the Interior, rather than the Division of Forestry. In 1901 the division was renamed Bureau of Forestry.
In 1905, legislation was adopted that established the US Forest Service in the Department of Agriculture. The same law also transferred jurisdiction over the national forest reserves from the General Land Office to the Agriculture Department. Early debate focused on whether the Forest Service should remain in USDA—as its first director, Gifford Pinchot, advocated—or be transferred to the Department of the Interior to create a broader Department of Conservation.
In 1907, the reserves were renamed National Forests, and the following year six district (regional) offices were organized in the West for administering fieldwork. The Office of the State and Private Forestry Cooperation was also established that same year, as was the first Forest Experiment Station at Fort Valley, AZ. In 1911, President William Howard Taft signed the Weeks Law, which created a National Forest Reservation Commission and established the Eastern District.
By 1934, USFS included 10 regions: Northern, Rocky Mountain, Southwestern, Intermountain, California, Northern Pacific, Eastern, Southern, North Central and Alaska. (There are now nine regions, as North Central was eliminated). The agency continued to expand and consolidate National Forests, regional offices and research stations. The USFS is also charged with the administration of several national monuments inside National Forests.
The early mission of the USFS, according to insiders, was clear: supply timber, then considered a crop, to meet the material needs of an expanding national economy. Especially with an increased demand for timber in the post-WWII era, USFS began to harvest more aggressively and the management philosophy changed from protective to one based on commodity production. In the 1980s timber production saw a rise, as the multi-billion dollar industry kept a tight hold over Congress, which controls the purse strings of USFS.
However, over the years, the principle of “multiple use” and recreation became increasingly central to management, and more recently ecological sustainability has come to define the agency’s mission. This transition to a focus on ecosystem preservation was notably ushered in with President Bill Clinton’s 1993 appointment of Jack Ward Thomas as USFS chief. Thomas was the first scientist ever to lead the agency—which, according to critics, has a long history of ignoring its scientists and is defined by a schism between its “ologists” (biologists and other scientists) and the old-style foresters who have traditionally ruled the agency, putting budgets and timber cut counts ahead of responsible forest management. Previously, Thomas, as the agency’s senior wildlife biologist had developed Clinton’s plan to help protect the northern Spotted Owl in the Pacific Northwest, where intensive logging of old-growth forests had been driving the bird to extinction. (A federal judge who issued an injunction to stop the logging in 1991 placed blame at the feet of the USFS, accusing the agency of refusing to comply with the laws protecting wildlife).
Clinton, for his part, left behind a memorable forest legacy. Legend has it that, after being shown a mark up of the national forests under Teddy Roosevelt’s tenure alongside a measure of those under his own, Clinton declared almost 60 million acres (about one-third) of national forest protected from road-building and most logging activities. It was one of the last things he did before leaving office. One of the first things the Bush administration did was to attempt to reverse this policy. After failing at the federal level, the White House circumvented the problem by announcing it was allocating greater jurisdiction over roadless lands to state governors.
The Bitterroot Controversy
(by Martin Nie, University of Montana)
The US Forest Service (USFS) is a quasi-decentralized agency that delegates control to regional and district managers who carry out USFS responsibilities to allow for flexibility and response to local needs. The 155 National Forests (covering 8.5% of the country) in USFS jurisdiction are each composed of several ranger districts. There are more than 600 ranger districts with staffs of 10-100 personnel. District rangers and other personnel manage lands for recreational uses such as camping and hiking, patrol wilderness areas, regulate grazing, and maintain vegetation and wildlife habitats. Forest supervisors are in charge of the forests themselves, which usually cover a number of districts. District rangers act as support for the Office of the Forest Supervisor (National Forest Headquarters), which coordinates activities between districts, allocates budgets and provides technical support. At the regional level, there are nine regional offices, labeled 1-10 (Region 7 was eliminated), each run by a regional forester whose office is supported by forest supervisors and coordinates activities between national forests.
Currently, America’s forests include more than 504 million acres that are considered productive timberlands, of which the USFS and other government agencies own and manage around 29%. A decade earlier, national forests provided less than five percent of the nation’s timber. However, national forests are home to almost half of the country’s “soft wood” timber (pines, firs, etc.), which is prime construction material, as well as almost all the nation’s old-growth forests. (Old-growth timber commands higher market value). Thus the pressure to cultivate this wood has been intense and has created a powerful tripartite political power flow—among Congress, which sets the USFS budget; the USFS, which gets more money if it allows more trees to be cut; and the timber industry.
Adding to this is the fact that the USFS usually sells its timber at below market value. Old-growth trees can net thousands for a timber company, and, although most are exported whole, many are processed by domestic mills—whose communities have come to depend on national forest trees. Local counties have come to depend on the 25% of USFS gross timber sales they receive for essential services.
Recent divesture in timberlands has caused alarm for communities dependent on the system, as well as environmentalists. The latter group has scrambled to buy up lands and implement conservation efforts and are even partnering with traditional adversaries, like the timber industry, as well as homeowners, to initiate sustainable ecological timber cultivation practices.
The USFS carries out forestry-related research and development through a network of forest and range experiment stations (there are seven Regional Research Stations), as well as the Forest Products Laboratory, established in 1910. Researchers work in the biological, physical and social sciences to analyze and manage forest ecosystems, and their findings continually inform agency management and policy decisions.
Fire management policy is a founding objective of the USFS and has increasingly played a controversial role in the agency’s politics. (see Controversies)
The agency also provides funding and technical assistance to non-federal landowners through a branch called State and Private Forestry (urban and community forests, tribal relations, etc.)
USFS also cooperates on a number of international projects with the US Agency for International Development, the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the State Department, as well as non-governmental and aid organizations.
Background Reading
Organizations
National Forest Foundation
(NFF)—nonprofit partner of USFS. Conservation-oriented, community-based projects and national programs, administers private gifts and funds to benefit national forests.
The US Forest Service spent $7.8 billion on contractors from 2000-2008, according to USAspending.gov, the federal website that reports on contracts issued by Executive Branch agencies. During this period, the service contracted with more than 46,000 companies and organizations.
Some of the agencies largest expenditures were for fighting forest fires ($2.4 billion), road maintenance and repair ($387 million), construction of structures and facilities ($248 million) tree thinning services ($242 million) and maintenance and repair of computer equipment ($220 million).
The Forest Service’s top 10 contractors are:
|
IBM $391,892,840
|
|
Aero Union Corp. $170,560,984
|
|
River City Helicopters Inc $142,764,505
|
|
Bristol Bay Native Corp. $116,211,689
|
|
Helicopter Transport Services Inc. $113,167,375
|
|
Columbia Helicopters, Inc. $93,654,756
|
|
Dell Inc. $92,149,136
|
|
EAC Holdings $89,746,704
|
|
Stewarts Firefighters Food Catering $78,512,549
|
|
Robert Ochoa $75,790,986
|
Forest Service Approves Use of Treated Sewage to Create Ski Area on Native American Sacred Mountain
Forest Service Rule Change Sparks Idaho Battle
A portion of Central Idaho’s scenic mountains became a battleground in 2003 that pitted the state’s agricultural heritage against recreation, biodiversity and endangered species. In response to growing concerns about the impacts of cattle grazing on streams, wetlands, sensitive plant and animal species, as well as on recreation, the Forest Service proposed to reduce the size and scope of grazing allotments on the east slope of the White Cloud Mountains by roughly half.
Then Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) said the Forest Service was taking the easy way out and should try harder to manage the area within existing parameters. A local recreation and wild lands advocate said grazing should be eliminated from the area altogether. The area’s cattle ranchers and the state’s cattle industry advocacy group were silent on the issue.
Forest Plan Draws Controversy
The Forest Service proposed new rules that could lead to fundamental changes in the way it develops its long range land management plans. The agency completed an environmental review of a 2005 planning rule and concluded that new forest plans no longer need detailed environmental impact statements. The proposal to list the land use plans as a “categorical exclusion” was then published in the Federal Register. This decision ignited a firestorm of opposition. Among those unhappy with the proposed change were key Democrats, such as Rep. Nick J. Rahall II, (D-WV) chairman of the House Resources Committee.
Bush Administration Sell-off of Forest Land
In February 2006, the Bush administration proposed selling off $800 million worth of Forest Service lands to fund a rural schools program. The plan encountered sharp criticism from lawmakers in Congress, including Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR). The plan played “Russian roulette” with rural communities who rely on the program and would send some “off an economic cliff,” said Wyden. The legislation at the center of the controversy was the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act, which was developed to stabilize the level of federal payments to counties that historically relied on timber revenues from adjacent national forest lands.
Report Accuses Forest Service of Lying and Corruption
A 2004 report found widespread corruption and lying at the Forest Service as it strove to give away public resources, not just at below their market value, but actually at a cost to the taxpayers.
Forestry Official Avoids Jail Time
In February 2008, US Agriculture Undersecretary Mark Rey, the Bush administration’s top forest official, avoided going to jail when a federal judge cleared him of contempt and withdrew a threat to jail Rey or ground all fire retardant air tankers until the agency evaluated the environmental impact of the chemical slurry.
Environmentalists File Suit to Stop Uranium Mining near Grand Canyon
In March 2008, three conservation groups filed a lawsuit to stop uranium exploration outside of the Grand Canyon. The Kaibab National Forest granted British firm Vane Minerals approval to conduct exploratory uranium drilling on national forest lands along the park’s southern boundary with no public hearing and no environmental review. It was the first of five such projects slated for the area.
Other Controversies:
Clearcutting/Logging
Road Building/Wildfires
States' Rights
Ecosystem Management/Sustainable Forestry
U.S. Forest Service official becomes lobbyist
(Associated Press)
Fire Management Policy
USFS fire management policy has generated significant debate in recent years, resulting in a sharp political divide. Whereas, initially, the agency’s fire mission and management was clear—to protect forests from fire, with a focus on suppression—an apparent ineffectiveness in managing fires and their ecological consequences has led some to question the approach.
According to Robert Nelson, wildfires have gone from high frequency, low intensity events—which can provide sustainability for certain ecosystems—to low-frequency, high intensity events that make suppression efforts futile. As a result of a prolonged absence of fire and the reduction in timber harvests, the abundance of dead and dying trees provide a high fuel load and conditions for high intensity fires that can cause enormous damage to soils, watersheds, fisheries and other ecosystem components. Environmental groups criticize suppression, claiming that it lacks scientific basis, and view natural fires as an integral part of ecosystem management.
On the other side of the debate are those who use Forest Service commodities—firefighters and people who own homes on forest land—all lobbying for fire suppression policy. The political polemic created by these competing interests groups at the federal level, many claim, has resulted in an embattled agency.
Wildland Fires: A Historical Perspective
(US Fire Administration, Topical Fire Research Series) (PDF)
|
Founded: 1881/1905
Annual Budget: $4.3 billion
Employees: 30,000+
|
United States Forest Service
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A native of New England, Abigail R. Kimbell has served as the 16th (and first female) chief of the US Forest Service since February 5, 2007.
Kimbell received a bachelor’s degree in forest management from the University of Vermont in 1974. She later earned a master’s in forest engineering from Oregon State University.
She began her federal career in Oregon with the Bureau of Land Management in 1974 and joined the Forest Service as a pre-sale forester in Alaska three years later. She then worked in Oregon as a logging engineer and a district planner. Kimbell served as a district ranger on the Colville National Forest (Kettle Falls, Washington) from 1985-1988 and on the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest (La Grande, Oregon) from 1988-1991.
She was forest supervisor of the Tongass National Forest in Alaska from 1992-1997 and the Bighorn National Forest in Wyoming from 1997-1999. From 1999-2002, Kimbell was forest supervisor for the Pike and San Isabel National Forests and Comanche National Grassland (all in Colorado) as well as the Cimarron National Grassland in Kansas. In 2002, Kimbell moved to USFS headquarters to begin her post as the associate deputy chief for the National Forest System. Under her tenure, Kimbell played a role in the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003, which was widely criticized by environmentalists as a give away to the timber industry. In 2003 Kimbell became the regional forester for the Northern Region (Montana).
To her numerous critics, Kimbell is known as a pro-timber placement and the person responsible for the largest reprisal action ever taken against agency whistleblowers. Under her watch as forest supervisor at the Bighorn National Forest in Wyoming, nearly half the agency’s staff was forced out during a standoff over concerns raised about USFS mismanagement, including violation of environmental laws. The controversy, which began in 1992 with Kimbell’s predecessor, included allegations of illegal timber sales and sweetheart concessions to favored timber companies; failure to meet reforestation commitments to restore habitat; and violation of wilderness protections and road construction through Native American sacred sites. In 1994, eight Bighorn employees wrote a letter to their regional forester in which they claimed that Kimbell’s predecessor had created a hostile work environment and was mismanaging the forest.
When Kimbell took office in 1997, she authored an agency reorganization that purged most of the original whistleblowers who had not yet been forced out by harassment or intimidation—in total, 30 of 44 employees who had raised concerns about mismanagement were purged from their jobs. Kimbell attributed the reorganization to necessary budgetary constraints, but in the end, the bureaucratic labor force at Bighorn increased from 74 to 108 employees between 1997 (when she took office) and 2003—and was marked by a trend of replacing environmental experts with office workers.
The Government Accountability Project (GAP) represented eight of the fired employees in a Whistleblower Protection Act lawsuit, and in 2003, after a prolonged investigation, the US Office of Special Counsel (OSC) announced that the act had been violated. The agency agreed to corrective action, including a $200,000 payment for damages, divided among the eight claimants and charges brought against the employees by Kimbell were dropped.
|
|
|
|