Late Tuesday afternoon, with the subtlety of a wrecking ball and the morality of a foreclosure notice, the Trump administration announced the most devastating attack on the U.S. Forest Service in the agency’s 121-year history. Not a budget cut. Not a policy shift. Not a “reorganization.” An execution.

They’re ripping the headquarters out of Washington and shipping it to Salt Lake City, Utah — the beating heart of the anti-public-lands movement in America. They’re shuttering every single one of the ten regional offices that have governed this agency since Gifford Pinchot built the system over a century ago — and with them, the career professionals who spent entire lifetimes earning the expertise and the authority to push back when politicians came calling with bad ideas and worse motives. They’re destroying more than fifty research facilities across thirty-one states, labs that house decades of irreplaceable long-term science, the kind you literally cannot restart once it’s gone. And they’re replacing all of it — the offices, the scientists, the institutional knowledge, the professional independence — with fifteen political appointees called “state directors,” embedded in state capitals alongside the very governors, legislators, and industry lobbyists who have spent their careers demanding that the Forest Service log more, protect less, and get out of the way.

  • quips@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Can you provide a source for research being shut down? Only thing I’ve seen stated is research being moved to a centralized location, but nowhere has anyone stated whether any research is being shut down, and that would thus he speculation

    • aquovie@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      22 hours ago

      They are closing the labs where the work is happening. You can’t just throw your experiment in the back seat of your car and drive to Colorado.

      And how can you centralize research when so much of it is location specific? It’s costs more money to fund “off site” long distance research on a temporary basis versus having something local and long term.