Cutting the Fat: What Federal Budget Cuts Mean for Conservation

Hey everyone,

This week, we’re tackling a tough subject: federal budget cuts and what they mean for hunters, land managers, and public lands. As a certified wildlife biologist and founder of Whetstone Habitat, I’ve spent my career fighting for conservation, but I’ve got a take that might ruffle some feathers: it’s time for a reality check.

These cuts hurt, but they’re part of a bigger financial reckoning we can’t avoid.

Lately, I’ve seen conservationists raising hell over cuts to natural resource agencies like the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Meanwhile, many hunters and anglers cheer when the axe falls on programs like USAID, the Department of Education, or IRS agents—but when it’s our agencies? Suddenly, it’s a crisis. I get it—our lands matter. But we can’t act like this is a one-sided issue. Tough times demand tough decisions.

One of my closest mentors works for the USFS, and his job is on the chopping block. When I asked him how he felt, he didn’t sugarcoat it:

That hit me hard. So, let’s unpack what’s happening to the Forest Service, why it’s messy, and where we go from here.

The Forest Service Cuts: 3,400 Jobs Gone

The USFS just cut 3,400 jobs—about 10% of its workforce—primarily probationary employees. This isn’t speculation; these cuts were confirmed in February 2025 as part of the federal spending rollback. Firefighters were spared (thankfully), but trail crews, biologists, and timber staff weren’t so lucky.

To understand why this stings, we need to rewind.

For years, the USFS relied on temporary, seasonal workers (called “1039” employees, after their 1,039-hour cap). These were six-month gigs—no benefits, no job security. I was one of them in 2019 when I worked as a 1039 biologist tech at Lincoln National Forest. But that was always the deal. You took the job knowing it was seasonal. You worked hard and gained experience, and if you wanted more stability, you moved into the private sector or found another way forward. That’s exactly what I did.

Then, the Biden administration expanded the system. Between 2021 and 2024, around 1,300 to 1,400 of these temporary workers were converted to permanent seasonal roles—better pay, health insurance, and retirement benefits—not because they suddenly deserved it but because the administration wanted to grow the federal workforce. They used money from the 2021 Infrastructure Law and the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act to fund it, knowing full well that Congress hadn’t committed to long-term support.

And here’s the kicker: why should taxpayers foot the bill for health insurance year-round while these seasonal employees go work a second job in the off-season? That’s the reality—many of them take other jobs when their federal gig wraps up, yet they still draw benefits on the taxpayer’s dime. And retirement benefits for seasonal employees? No private company runs that way.

By 2025, the money dried up. And those “permanent” jobs? Many were still within their probationary period when Trump’s administration tightened the budget.

Now, we’re facing the reality of potential trails going uncleared, campgrounds potentially closing, and a heightened risk of wildfires.

Do I wish the USFS and NRCS had avoided the axe? Probably. But I’d rather rip the Band-Aid off now than let a bloated bureaucracy keep growing unchecked.

The Bigger Picture: Debt vs. Land Management

Here’s a reality check: in fiscal year 2025, the U.S. government is projected to spend $952 billion on national debt interest payments.

Now, compare that to the combined annual budgets of the U.S. Forest Service, NRCS, and the Bureau of Land Management—about $4.5 billion total.

That means we spend over 200 times more on debt interest than on agencies that manage millions of acres of public land.

If we’re serious about conservation and the stewardship of our public lands, we must also be serious about managing our national finances. The massive expenditure on debt interest not only limits our ability to fund essential services but also jeopardizes the long-term sustainability of programs vital to hunters, land managers, and conservationists alike.

Sustainable Timber Harvesting: A Smarter Approach

But there’s an even bigger issue: Why are we importing timber from Canada while leaving our forests unmanaged? In 2023, the U.S. imported approximately $11.5 billion worth of wood products from Canada—sawn wood, particle board, and plywood. That’s money leaving our economy while our own forests remain underutilized.

Sustainable timber harvesting in the U.S. does far more than reduce wildfire fuel. Many of our favorite game species—whitetails, wild turkeys, ruffed grouse, and countless songbirds—depend on disturbed habitats and diverse age structures within forests. Responsible logging creates an open understory, promotes young forest growth, and enhances biodiversity by providing food and cover.

Beyond wildlife benefits, well-managed forests sequester carbon more efficiently, contribute to a healthier climate, and generate revenue that can fund conservation efforts instead of relying on taxpayer dollars.

The truth is that actively managed forests are healthier forests. If we’re serious about conservation, we must stop treating our woodlands like museums and start managing them for what they are—dynamic ecosystems that thrive on disturbance.

The Bottom Line: Tough Love Works

We’re in for some short-term struggles—overgrown trails, shuttered sites, increased fire risks—but hunters and land managers are problem-solvers. We adapt.

• The private sector can absorb the best of these skilled workers.

• The USFS can get back to multiple-use management.

• The public needs to recognize that a sustainable budget benefits conservation long-term.

This isn’t about politics—it’s about securing the future of our wild places. If we stay the course, we’ll come out leaner, stronger, and better equipped to pass on lands worth hunting, hiking, and exploring for generations.

So, to my fellow conservationists: We can’t have it all, but we can fight for what truly matters. A solvent nation can afford to invest in public lands—but only if we make the hard choices now.

Let’s stay sharp, push for smart solutions, and keep our edge.

— Zack