Forestry Research Facilities to Close Despite Low Operating Costs
The U.S. Forest Service has been a crucial support system for cities like Baltimore, where the agency's scientists have been instrumental in turning dead trees into a revenue source for the city. These trees are recycled into products like furniture and flooring instead of being dumped into landfills. The brain behind this operation, Shaun Preston, confessed that without the expertise of the Forest Service, this project would have collapsed.
Forest Service's National Reach
Across the country, the Forest Service operates hundreds of Research and Development facilities, employing over 1,000 people. These employees are stationed in greenhouses, laboratories, and cabins in both urban and rural areas. They manage projects ranging from restoring native trees in Hawaii to preventing wildfires in Montana. They partner with local organizations to achieve their goals, creating the largest forestry research network globally.
Impending Facility Closures
However, the Forest Service has recently announced a reorganization plan that involves closing down many of these research facilities, including the one in Baltimore. This decision came alongside a proposed budget that allocated zero funding for Forest Service research, a significant drop from the previous year's funding. Over 100 facilities are now on the chopping block, with 229 employees potentially affected by this decision.
The Forest Service insists these closures aren't designed to force employees to quit, instead suggesting that staff from the closing facilities will be consolidated into one location in Colorado. But the real impact of these closures may not be so simple.
The Cost of Closing
Many of the agency's research undertakings are local and inexpensive, and shuttering these facilities could lead to increased costs and a loss of valuable workers. Most of the facilities earmarked for closure are owned by the government. Some of the remaining leased buildings cost the government less than a dollar a year. Maintaining these buildings does incur a cost, but the agency also owns more expensive assets that require maintenance. Therefore, closing the research facilities won't necessarily result in significant savings.
Relocation Concerns
Among the buildings that the agency doesn't own is the proposed new location for researchers in Fort Collins, Colorado. This building costs the agency a million dollars a year for rent, while many of the buildings slated for closure have minimal rental costs. Some of the leases, like the one in Hilo, Hawaii, cost the federal government a one-time fee of $1 for a 65-year term.
There's also concern about the impact on ongoing research projects. For instance, some research projects are location-specific and cannot be easily moved. One such project involves studying the growth of oak trees in Baltimore over a 30-year period. If the research location changes, the project will be disrupted.
Employee Exodus
Many current Forest Service employees have stated that they will leave the agency if forced to move. They argue that their work is location-specific and cannot be effectively carried out from a new location. These employees believe that closing their offices will result in the loss of irreplaceable data sets containing vital information gathered over the years.
Federal employees' unions argue that the agency's proposed reorganization violates a law requiring advance notification and approval by House and Senate appropriations committees for any reprogramming of government funds. They believe the lack of this approval, combined with the potential loss of employees and the proposed changes, could cause the system to collapse.
The Future of Forestry Research
If the proposed reorganization is carried out, it will mark the end of a strong science legacy, according to current employees. Some have called it a "death blow" to research. They warn that the public would receive less information on maintaining national forests, protecting communities from wildfires, and preserving urban green spaces.
One long-serving researcher mentioned that the cuts to research would cause long-term damage to public lands. Given the Forest Service's role in managing nearly 200 million acres of national forest system land, losing the world's largest forestry research organization could have severe impacts.
The U.S. Forest Service has been a crucial support system for cities like Baltimore, where the agency's scientists have been instrumental in turning dead trees into a revenue source for the city. These trees are recycled into products like furniture and flooring instead of being dumped into landfills. The brain behind this operation, Shaun Preston, confessed that without the expertise of the Forest Service, this project would have collapsed.
Forest Service's National Reach
Across the country, the Forest Service operates hundreds of Research and Development facilities, employing over 1,000 people. These employees are stationed in greenhouses, laboratories, and cabins in both urban and rural areas. They manage projects ranging from restoring native trees in Hawaii to preventing wildfires in Montana. They partner with local organizations to achieve their goals, creating the largest forestry research network globally.
Impending Facility Closures
However, the Forest Service has recently announced a reorganization plan that involves closing down many of these research facilities, including the one in Baltimore. This decision came alongside a proposed budget that allocated zero funding for Forest Service research, a significant drop from the previous year's funding. Over 100 facilities are now on the chopping block, with 229 employees potentially affected by this decision.
The Forest Service insists these closures aren't designed to force employees to quit, instead suggesting that staff from the closing facilities will be consolidated into one location in Colorado. But the real impact of these closures may not be so simple.
The Cost of Closing
Many of the agency's research undertakings are local and inexpensive, and shuttering these facilities could lead to increased costs and a loss of valuable workers. Most of the facilities earmarked for closure are owned by the government. Some of the remaining leased buildings cost the government less than a dollar a year. Maintaining these buildings does incur a cost, but the agency also owns more expensive assets that require maintenance. Therefore, closing the research facilities won't necessarily result in significant savings.
Relocation Concerns
Among the buildings that the agency doesn't own is the proposed new location for researchers in Fort Collins, Colorado. This building costs the agency a million dollars a year for rent, while many of the buildings slated for closure have minimal rental costs. Some of the leases, like the one in Hilo, Hawaii, cost the federal government a one-time fee of $1 for a 65-year term.
There's also concern about the impact on ongoing research projects. For instance, some research projects are location-specific and cannot be easily moved. One such project involves studying the growth of oak trees in Baltimore over a 30-year period. If the research location changes, the project will be disrupted.
Employee Exodus
Many current Forest Service employees have stated that they will leave the agency if forced to move. They argue that their work is location-specific and cannot be effectively carried out from a new location. These employees believe that closing their offices will result in the loss of irreplaceable data sets containing vital information gathered over the years.
Federal employees' unions argue that the agency's proposed reorganization violates a law requiring advance notification and approval by House and Senate appropriations committees for any reprogramming of government funds. They believe the lack of this approval, combined with the potential loss of employees and the proposed changes, could cause the system to collapse.
The Future of Forestry Research
If the proposed reorganization is carried out, it will mark the end of a strong science legacy, according to current employees. Some have called it a "death blow" to research. They warn that the public would receive less information on maintaining national forests, protecting communities from wildfires, and preserving urban green spaces.
One long-serving researcher mentioned that the cuts to research would cause long-term damage to public lands. Given the Forest Service's role in managing nearly 200 million acres of national forest system land, losing the world's largest forestry research organization could have severe impacts.