As Trump Attempts to Reform Federal Government, Hunters and Anglers Face ‘Unintended Consequences’
If hunters and anglers look at hits to America’s conservation infrastructure over the last two months, it’s easy to spot the wreckage.
The wholesale firing of U.S. Forest Service personnel has reduced field staff to just one or two employees to manage visitation and timber sales, and to enforce laws on entire National Forest districts. Remaining National Park Service crews say they won’t be able to handle the crush of summer visitors that support the billion-dollar recreation economy for gateway communities. Cuts to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s black-footed ferret recovery program could doom the species.
While some of those early staffing cuts are being reviewed and reversed by courts, the Trump administration is reportedly preparing for an April 14 announcement to consolidate and relocate agencies and further reduce the federal workforce. Those plans reportedly include a 30 percent payroll reduction at the National Park Service.
A former director of the USFWS appointed by a Republican, Steve Williams calls the administration’s sweeping cuts “a breathtaking level of incompetency” that will take years and maybe even decades to repair. That’s due to the loss of institutional knowledge and plunging confidence in conservation institutions.
But insiders say the turmoil that the Trump administration has injected into conservation delivery is an unfortunate casualty of wider governmental reform and that the chaos will settle after another disruptive few weeks. Besides, says a source who lobbies on behalf of conservation organizations, if advocates can make a compelling case that their project or agency aligns with administration priorities, it will survive staff and funding cuts relatively unscathed.
“The key term is ‘unintended consequences,’” says the source, who asked not to be named because they don’t have permission to speak on behalf of their clients. “When we can prove that DOGE [Department of Government Efficiency] cuts and funding cuts have had harmful unintended consequences for our ability to deliver on the things that Trump cares about, then the [cabinet] secretaries have found ways to [restore budgets or avoid cutting].”
That’s the case with a portfolio of habitat-stewardship projects approved by Congress and funded during the Biden administration. Called “keystone partnership contracts,” they have directed over $100 million in federal funds to non-governmental conservation organizations, including the National Wild Turkey Federation, Mule Deer Foundation, and Ruffed Grouse Society, among others. The conservation NGOs use those funds, much of which was authorized in the Inflation Reduction Act, to hire private contractors to reduce wildfire risk while enhancing wildlife habitat. These projects have the dual benefit of keeping some species, sage grouse among them, away from federal protection while also injecting revenue in rural economies.
While some of those stewardship projects were initially paused, they’ve resumed, say sources. Mark Hatfield, NWTF’s director of conservation, says that the Turkey Federation’s $50 million master stewardship work has continued unimpeded.
For many retired federal employees, however, the outlook is dire. For current federal employees, the situation is so uncertain and fraught that most contacted for this story were unwilling to comment, even on background. Non-governmental organizations are working to remain in good standing with the administration in order to continue their conservation mission.
“Calling out this administration doesn’t work, especially because they’re lame ducks” who don’t have to worry about facing voters in four years and are therefore unresponsive to popular discontent, says an insider who works with conservation groups and federal land-management agencies. “If you attack them publicly all you’re doing is taking yourself off the battlefield for the next four years.”
Implications to conservation infrastructure fall into three main categories: staffing cuts achieved by DOGE reforms, budget cuts required by spending limits imposed by the Trump administration, and executive orders signed by President Trump. Here’s how each is shaping the outlook for hunting, fishing, wildlife conservation, and outdoor recreation so far in the Trump presidency.
The Price of Personnel Cuts
Steve Williams, the former USFWS director appointed by George W. Bush in 2002, says the wave of firings, offers of early retirement, and worries over the elimination of positions are paralyzing the USFWS and other conservation-oriented agencies.
“The structures and mechanics to deliver conservation in America took a century to build, and they’re being torn down in a month or two,” says Williams, who also served as secretary of the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks and later as president of the Wildlife Management Institute. “Durable conservation is built on the successes and failures of the past. There doesn’t appear to be any process, any plan, any research, or analysis. It’s just chopping positions and programs and grant programs. Efficiency implies that there’s some positive return on action taken. I don’t see any positive return.”
Staffing and funding cuts will hamstring the National Wildlife Refuge System, says Ron Cole, the retired manager of Oregon’s Upper Klamath National Wildlife Refuge. Upper Klamath, along with Lower Klamath, was established in 1908 by President Theodore Roosevelt as the first American refuge dedicated to waterfowl conservation.
“The refuge system as a whole has taken a 30 percent staffing hit over the past 10 to 15 years,” says Cole. “Now between actual cuts and people taking an early out, that’s another 20-25 percent. That doesn’t count those federal employees who are too scared to do their jobs. Overall, it means fewer hands on deck, but you’re also losing folks who steer the ship, and who make the ship go. On Klamath, you’re talking about losing people who move water at critical times of the year. You will definitely see a hit to the resource, either birds that don’t stay on the refuge or that aren’t available for hunters or closures of visitor centers and reduction in access.”
Conservation Funding on Hold
State agencies that depend on funding from the wildlife and fisheries restoration accounts, called Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson, respectively, are reporting stoppages or slow-downs in payment, say directors of two wildlife agencies who asked not to be named. Both PR and DJ funds are collected and distributed to state and tribal fish-and-wildlife programs by the USFWS. These funds are critical for supporting state habitat work, public-land acquisitions, stocking programs, hunter education, new shooting ranges, and much more.
“There’s a trickle-down effect” of this stymied conservation funding, says Williams. “The [federal] folks who review projects and grants can’t keep up because of staffing cuts, which means reimbursement to state agencies for work that has already been done will be delayed. That means that states’ projects for habitat work or access acquisition or basic wildlife management will suffer. Ultimately, hunters and anglers are going to pay the price in less access, less opportunity, and less service from state agencies.”
Beyond staffing cuts at USFWS, conservation grant money is being held in limbo because of two new review mechanisms, says a Department of Interior employee who was not authorized to talk to the media. The first is a red-flag word list that all open grants (including those submitted last fall) are being checked against. If language within a grant application includes words on the list, it gets flagged for additional review.
However, this automated process will erroneously flag grants, says the DOI source. For example, a grant that uses the term “biodiversity” could be flagged because it includes the word “diversity.” It’s unclear how long these flagged grants will remain under review.
The second reason for the hold up is that conservation grants are now subject to extra layers of tracking and require a higher level of approval. If grants are delayed much longer, it could create serious issues on the ground for state wildlife agencies, says the DOI source.
“Under previous administrations the states would be submitting their invoices, we’d be reviewing them, and states would be getting their money within 30 days. Typically those invoices are coming in at regular intervals throughout the year. It’s a very predictable pattern of when money is released to them,” the DOI source says. “We are in a position right now where money has not been obligated to the states since October 1 [in at least one of our regions]. So we’re well beyond what a normal return time would be for the states. And we’re rapidly approaching the point where many states have their fiscal year starting, which is July 1.”
A potential federal government shutdown only makes the timeline more uncertain.
But this much is certain: If grant money does not start flowing by the start of states’ new fiscal year, any state wildlife agency that relies mostly on PR, DJ, and license dollars for their revenue will have to make some tough choices. Federal grant money funds not only state conservation projects and programs, but also state agency staff positions.
“So the outcome would include people potentially not receiving salaries because those salaries are tied to federal grants, as well as the work itself not getting done. It’s hard to do a prescribed burn when you don’t have the funding to pay for the personnel and equipment that it requires,” the DOI source says.
Williams speculates that even programs as popular and effective as hunter education could be affected.
“Some folks in Washington may interpret hunter education as a DEI program,” he says. “What? It’s a program designed to be more inclusive of the folks who hunt. It’s hard to imagine that DEI would trip up hunter education, but that’s the level of nonsense we’re dealing with.”
The DOI source says that hopefully the Trump administration will soon recognize that the wildlife and fisheries restoration accounts are self-funding and historically successful.
“The entire PR and DJ apparatus is self funded by hunters, anglers, and recreational shooters,” says the source. “Any cuts to PR, DJ, or the programs that administer them will have no bearing on the national budget or national deficit. All they will do is make more work for the people who are left and slow things down for the states.”
Funding Cuts
Apart from the impacts of staffing cuts are the elimination of conservation programs or reductions in the capacity of programs.
Beyond the USFWS’s black-footed ferret program, work to update operational guidelines for the seven-state Colorado River management plan has reportedly been suspended, not only because of deep staffing cuts but because the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act earmarked $4 billion for water management in the region. That funding has been paused by executive order.
Most cooperative research grants that provide federal funds to universities have similarly been ended or paused.
“Those cooperative research units represent the direct connection between all partners in conservation, to deal with real-world, applied problems,” says Williams. “I don’t know who will fill that gap. Well, sure I do. There isn’t anybody to fill that gap.”
Executive Order Implications
President Trump signed at least 73 executive orders in his first month in office, and many of them have direct impacts to conservation funding and programs.
Two of those EOs, to rescind Biden administration actions and to end diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs and preferences, have had their own “unintended consequences,” says the governmental-affairs lobbyist.
“The keystone [habitat] agreements had a little bit of a problem because those forest-products contracts had boiler-plate language that said the government would not discriminate in awarding contracts based on race, identity, or gender,” they say. “Well, that got rolled up in DEI and contracts got identified in a keyword search and kicked out that ultimately are consistent with administration policy to reduce ladder fuels, make healthier forests, and increase timber production.”
When those goals were pointed out to the administration, those specific contracts were approved, even though some are in apparent disagreement with executive orders. Adding to the turnabout was a federal judge’s ruling that the Trump administration must make payments to foreign aid contractors even after the president shut down the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The government is similarly on the hook to conservation organizations that have already paid stewardship contractors through keystone agreements.
Sources confirmed that payments made through Forest Service agreements resumed last week after a brief shutdown. Stewardship payments made through BLM agreements remain unpaid, says a source familiar with the details.
Executive Order 14154, titled Unleashing American Energy, immediately pauses the “disbursement of funds appropriated through the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.” That order also held up stewardship funds, which were ultimately restored after lobbyists and critter-group CEOs navigated personal relationships on Capitol Hill and within the White House.
EO 14154 has a further worry for conservationists. It eliminates regulatory barriers to energy and mineral production on lands and waters. Its language “narrows the scope of what science may be used and carefully avoids the use of terms like ‘best available science’ which carry legal meaning through regulations and years of established case law,” observes The Wildlife Society’s Cameron Kovach in a wide-reaching analysis of Trump’s executive orders.
Another EO, 14156, declares a national energy emergency and allows the Interior Secretary to suspend or modify enforcement of the Endangered Species Act in order to expedite energy-related projects and activities. Significantly, it requires the ESA Committee to meet no less than quarterly. Sometimes called the “God Squad,” this group of bureaucrats has congressional authority to overrule the ESA in order to approve specific projects. The God Squad has met only a handful of times in the 52-year history of the ESA. Given its required frequency of meetings and the number of energy projects that have previously been constrained by ESA concerns, this EO could upend five decades of conservation successes, say sources.
Combined with EO 14192, “Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,” and a handful of other executive orders, the administration seeks to shrink the country’s regulatory framework by requiring that any time an agency proposes a regulation “it shall identify at least 10 existing regulations to be repealed.”
The Wildlife Society’s Kovach notes that the cumulative impact of these orders “could soon have significant effects on environment regulations through the elimination of various protections and standards related to air and water quality, forever chemicals, endangered species, migratory birds, and more.”
Transactional Politics
The conservation lobbyist says that the first months of the Trump administration have been an exercise in retail politics.
“First, you have to know someone in the administration who will take a meeting,” they say. “Second, you have to have your talking points in order. You have to collect, synthesize, and quickly deploy information to inform their future decisions or retract their past decisions, but it’s a guessing game because administration priorities are not being rolled out in a principled or objective way.”
But the lobbyist is optimistic that many conservation priorities will ultimately prevail, both because they align with Trump’s small-government agenda and because they reflect values of the rural voters who elected him.
“Understand that this administration is full of very metric-driven people,” they say. “Once they get through this first phase of reductions and efficiencies, they’re going to have unrealistic, ridiculous metrics for agencies to hit to achieve their statutory mission. In order to meet those goals, [agencies] are going to have to rely on partners, like Pheasants Forever, Ruffed Grouse Society, Mule Deer Federation, and RMEF to deliver. These groups can contract faster. They can get NEPA [National Environmental Policy Act reviews] done faster, they can get categorical exclusions approved more quickly. So there’s going to be an increased reliance on established partners that have proven to be bipartisan, that have been willing to work with the past Trump administration, and that have a track record of delivering conservation benefits.”
In other words, we may be approaching a golden age for non-governmental conservation groups, so long as they play by the administration’s rules. Conservation delivery may shift from the public sector to the private sector under Trump’s watch.
Read Next: How Seriously Should We Take the Sale of Federal Lands? Very Seriously, Experts Say
Will that work bolster or erode the conservation infrastructure that’s been carefully built and maintained over the past century?
“I’d ask the average hunter and angler that question that you hear every presidential election cycle: Are you better off than you were four years ago?” says Williams. “It may be too early to tell, and some of these changes may take a year or so to show up. But I’m a hunter and a fisherman, and you can bet I’ll be watching. If things go to hell, I know who I’m going to blame.”
The post As Trump Attempts to Reform Federal Government, Hunters and Anglers Face ‘Unintended Consequences’ appeared first on Outdoor Life.
Source: https://www.outdoorlife.com/conservation/federal-government-cuts-affecting-hunting-fishing/
