Trump staff cuts force firefighters to clean toilets, critics say
The agency, which oversees the nation's largest wildland firefighting force, rejected those claims, saying it has sufficient resources.
However, more than a dozen active and retired U.S. Forest Service employees said the agency is struggling to fill critical roles after approximately 5,000 employees — roughly 15% of its workforce — quit in the past five months.
Accounts from firefighters in Oregon and New Mexico, as well as a fire chief recruiting support staff in the Pacific Northwest, said the vacancies have led to personnel held back from supporting front-line firefighting because of administrative duties.
The crew leader on an Oregon blaze said her team went hungry for several days, ran short of medical supplies, and had to scrounge for chainsaw fuel after support staff quit the agency during two rounds of "fork in the road" buyouts.
Visitors gather at Mather Point on the southern rim of the Grand Canyon as smoke from the Dragon Bravo Fire on the northern rim rises at dawn on July 15. |
Bridget Bennett / The New York Times
"I had guys who were going to bed hungry after working 16 hours," said the crew leader on the Alder Springs Fire, who asked not to be named for fear of losing her job.
National and local USFS officials say, however, the force is ready for what is expected to be a worse-than-average fire year in California, the Pacific Northwest, and the northern Rockies, according to National Interagency Fire Center forecasts.
"Our fire staff feels very confident in our staffing levels going into this fire season," said USFS public affairs officer Isabella Isaksen, who represents USFS operations in central Oregon.
Isaksen said food problems on the Alder Springs Fire were due to a new caterer and were quickly resolved. She said medical, chainsaw, and other supplies were available on the 1,376-hectare blaze that triggered evacuations in two counties.
'They are not ready'
The Trump administration pledged not to cut firefighting positions and other public safety jobs in firings, voluntary resignations, and early retirements meant to raise efficiency at the USFS, which manages 78 million hectares, roughly the size of Texas.
USFS employees interviewed for this story said the loss of thousands of foresters, biologists, trail builders, and campground managers was having a knock-on effect on firefighters.
A firefighter works to tackle the Madre Fire near New Cuyama, California, on July 3. |
REUTERS
Not only are firefighters having to cover empty positions at ranger stations, but they also have lost hundreds of peers who each year switched from regular jobs to take on firefighting support roles during the fire season, which typically runs from spring to fall, these people said.
USFS chief Tom Schultz on Wednesday told agency managers to make all of these fire-qualified, so-called "red-carded" staff available for what he called an "extremely challenging" fire year, according to a memo. Year to date, wildland firefighters have been called to nearly 41,000 blazes, by far the highest number in federal data going back to at least 2015. Wildfires have burned 1.2 million hectares so far this year, below the 10-year average of 3.3 million acres.
Last month, Schultz told a U.S. Senate committee he was trying to temporarily hire back some 1,400 fire-qualified, red-carded support staff who took buyouts.
"I do believe they are ready," Schultz said when asked about preparedness for the 2025 fire year.
Firefighters mow lawns
Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, who oversees the USFS, said in June at a meeting of Western state governors in New Mexico that the agency was on target to hire 11,300 firefighters by mid-July, outpacing hiring over the past three years.
As of June 29, 11,236 or 99% of that number had been hired, slightly below last year's level, according to the most recent data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
The USDA disputed claims that staff shortages are endangering communities, forests and firefighters.
Firefighters work to put out the Madre Fire on July 3. |
REUTERS
"Any suggestion that firefighting responsibilities are being delayed or deprioritized is simply incorrect," a USDA spokesperson said. "This is not a secondary mission — it is the core of our public safety work, and every decision reflects that urgency."
New Mexico Sen. Martin Heinrich has criticized the Trump administration's firing and rehiring of 3,400 USFS probationary staff, three-quarters of whom were red-carded, as well as what he called its indiscriminate, agency-wide staff buyouts.
"Wildfire season is well under way, and thanks to DOGE and Donald Trump, the U.S. Forest Service is being gutted, leaving communities ill equipped to fight deadly wildfires," Heinrich said in an emailed statement on July 11, referring to the Department of Government Efficiency.
The Forest Service says it does not have enough wildland firefighters for the country's "wildfire crisis" and relies on red-carded staff to "boost wildland firefighting capacity."
Not everyone close to the Forest Service sees problems.
Steve Ellis, chairman of the National Association of Forest Service Retirees, said his checks with fire staff in Oregon turned up no reports of firefighters going hungry or other support issues.
Residents embrace as they evacuate following powerful winds fueling devastating wildfires in the Los Angeles area, at the Eaton Fire in Altadena, California, on Jan. 8. |
REUTERS
But Riva Duncan, a fire duty officer on a New Mexico blaze, said even firefighters were being used to plug gaps left by job losses, exacerbating longstanding shortages of personnel to operate fire engines.
"They're answering phones at the front desk, or cleaning toilets at campgrounds or mowing the lawn at administrative sites," said Duncan, a retired USFS fire chief who reenlists during fire season and helps run Grassroots Wildland Firefighters, a federal firefighter advocacy group.
The fire staff officer in the Pacific Northwest said support staff had been told by managers they had to meet the Trump administration's increased timber sales and oil and gas production targets, with fewer employees, before helping firefighters.
"They can claim we get all the support we need, but in reality, it isn't even close," said the fire chief who asked not to be named for fear of retaliation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Times
2 hours ago
- Japan Times
Trump is trying to build a far-right international alliance
Until recently, the specter of an international far-right alliance of populist parties in democracies around the world has been just that: any appearance of cooperation was a form of self-promotion, rather than an expression of true solidarity. Few far-right figures have made any sacrifices for one another or seriously interfered in other countries' internal affairs to prop up allies. And efforts to unite the far right in the European Parliament have fallen dismally short. But that may be changing. U.S. President Donald Trump's threat to impose punitive tariffs on Brazil, with the explicit goal of protecting its far-right former president, Jair Bolsonaro, from a 'witch hunt,' marks a significant shift in tactics. What's more, Trump's meddling in other democracies in the name of 'free speech' serves powerful interests in the United States: tech companies that do not want to be regulated by foreign governments. The international far right is often said to be a contradiction in terms. After all, every far-right leader is a nationalist, which would seem to preclude, by definition, an international alliance. But this view shows little philosophical sophistication or, for that matter, historical awareness. In 19th-century Europe, liberals like Giuseppe Mazzini helped one another in their various struggles for freedom and independence from imperial powers. At the time, no one complained that there was a deep contradiction embedded in a liberal international alliance devoted to national self-determination. By the same token, today's far-right populists can claim that they form a united front against 'globalists' and supposedly illegitimate 'liberal elites.' This rhetoric — and the attendant conspiracy theories, often tinged with anti-Semitism — has easily crossed borders. Far-right politicians have also copied from one another what scholars have called 'worst practices' for undermining democracies. Just think of the proliferation of laws that force civil-society organizations to register as 'foreign agents,' or other thinly veiled repressive tactics. The far right also has a transnational ideological infrastructure. To be sure, there is no populist Comintern issuing binding interpretations of doctrine. But collaboration is real: for instance, Hungarian institutes lavishly endowed by Viktor Orban's government are now allied with the Heritage Foundation in the U.S. So far, though, there has been a lack of concrete solidarity among populist leaders. When Trump fraudulently claimed to have won the 2020 U.S. presidential election, his international allies, from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, could have refused to recognize Joe Biden as president. Instead, they congratulated Biden on his victory, choosing pragmatism over ideological affinity. But Trump is changing that in his second term, embracing an ideologically driven approach to confronting other countries that obviously undermines long-standing international norms. In the case of Brazil, he is using the threat of a 50% tariff to pressure the government into ending the federal criminal trial against Bolsonaro for seeking to engineer a coup after losing the 2022 presidential election. Unlike Trump, who was never held accountable for his role in the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, Bolsonaro — often called the 'Trump of the Tropics' — has already been banned from running for office until 2030. In his letter to the Brazilian government announcing the levy, Trump also accused it of 'insidious attacks on ... the fundamental Free Speech Rights of Americans,' including the censorship of 'U.S. Social Media platforms.' This highlights another dimension of Trump's economic bullying: his administration's crusade against efforts to prohibit hate speech and regulate the digital sphere. In February, Vice President JD Vance berated Europeans for their supposed lack of respect for 'free speech.' Meanwhile, the State Department has reportedly targeted the prominent Brazilian judge Alexandre de Moraes, who at one point blocked Elon Musk's X in Brazil and is taking the lead in holding Bolsonaro criminally accountable for his conduct. Big Tech is clearly displeased with the extensive regulations that the European Union and Brazil have placed on its industry. As in other areas — notably its attacks on higher education — the Trumpists are weaponizing free speech to exert power over supposed political adversaries. The hypocrisy is apparent: while advocating for deregulation of platforms ostensibly to protect free speech, the U.S. government is snooping around in the social-media accounts of foreign nationals for speech it dislikes (and then refusing a visa or entry on this basis). Pious talk of defending democracy as a shared Western value sits uneasily with the abject disrespect for other countries' right to determine their own approach to platform regulation. Whereas far-right leaders of smaller countries are limited by realpolitik, Trump can use America's might to advance his punitive-cum-populist agenda at will. After all, a pliant Republican Party will not question his abuse of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act. True, the courts may ultimately decide that his desire for political revenge hardly constitutes an 'emergency,' but the damage will have been done. As in other areas where his administration has taken plainly illegal actions, many of those being targeted will seek a deal rather than a fight. Solidarity is costly, but not for Trump. [/bio]Jan-Werner Mueller, professor of politics at Princeton University, is the author, most recently, of "Democracy Rules" (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2021). © Project Syndicate, 2025[/bio]
Asahi Shimbun
6 hours ago
- Asahi Shimbun
Hong Kong's CK Hutchison seeks Chinese investor to join Panama Ports deal
Workers carry out maintenance at the Pedro Miguel locks of the Panama Canal during routine upkeep in Panama City on May 30. (AP Photo) HONG KONG--A Hong Kong conglomerate that's selling ports at the Panama Canal said Monday it may seek a Chinese investor to join a consortium of buyers, a move that could please Beijing but bring more U.S. scrutiny to the geopolitically fraught deal. CK Hutchison Holdings' initial plan to sell port assets in dozens of countries to a group that includes U.S. investment firm BlackRock Inc. pleased President Donald Trump, who has alleged that China interferes with the critical shipping lane's operations in Panama. However, they apparently angered Beijing and drew a review from Chinese anti-monopoly authorities. A Beijing-backed newspaper posted scathing commentaries about the deal, with one describing it as a betrayal of all Chinese. Beijing's offices overseeing Hong Kong affairs have reposted some of these commentaries, widely seen as an indication of Chinese leaders' stance. A Hutchison subsidiary has operated ports at both ends of the Panama Canal since 1997. After months of uncertainty brought by tensions between Washington and Beijing, Hutchison said in a statement that the exclusive negotiations period with the consortium has expired. However, it added 'the Group remains in discussions with members of the consortium with a view to inviting major strategic investor from the PRC to join as a significant member of the consortium,' referring to the People's Republic of China. It said they needed to change the membership of the consortium and the structure of the transaction for the deal to be able to pass reviews by 'all relevant authorities.' The awkward position Hutchison found itself in for months highlights the challenges Hong Kong business elites face in navigating Beijing's expectations of national loyalty, especially when relations between China and the United States are strained. Hong Kong has overhauled its electoral system to ensure the city is run by 'patriots.' CK Hutchison is owned by the family of Hong Kong's richest man, Li Ka-shing. It announced March 4 that it would sell all its shares in Hutchison Port Holdings and in Hutchison Port Group Holdings to the consortium that also includes BlackRock subsidiary Global Infrastructure Partners and Terminal Investment Limited, a subsidiary of the Mediterranean Shipping Company. In May, Hutchinson co-managing director, Dominic Lai told shareholders that Terminal Investment was the main investor. Its parent company is led by Italian shipping scion Diego Aponte, whose family reportedly has a longstanding relationship with Li's. The initial deal, valued at nearly $23 billion including $5 billion in debt, would have given the consortium control over 43 ports in 23 countries, including the ports of Balboa and Cristobal, located at either end of the canal. That agreement also required approval from Panama's government. The deadline for their exclusive negotiation period ended on July 27.
Japan Times
6 hours ago
- Japan Times
Japan expects only 1% to 2% of $550 billion U.S. fund to be investment
Japan expects only 1% to 2% of its recently agreed upon $550 billion U.S. fund to be in the form of actual investment, with the bulk of it being loans, according to the nation's chief tariff negotiator, Ryosei Akazawa. At the same time, Tokyo would save roughly ¥10 trillion ($68 billion) through lower tariff rates in its deal with America, he said. The $550 billion investment framework will be a combination of investments, loans and loan guarantees provided by financial institutions backed by the Japanese government, Akazawa said on public broadcaster NHK on Saturday night. Of the total, investment would be worth 1% or 2% and the United States and Japan would split the profits of that investment at a ratio of 90-to-10, he said. Japan had originally proposed a 50-50 ratio, he added. The fund is a centerpiece of the deal announced by the two sides that will impose 15% tariffs on Japanese cars and other goods. But the details given by Akazawa suggest the Japanese may end up giving up much less than at first glance. The comments come as officials from countries with deals with the U.S. sift through the terms to explain to the public what they entail. "It's not that $550 billion in cash will be sent to the U.S.,' Akazawa said. "By letting the U.S. have 90% of the profits rather than 50%, I think Japan's loss will be at most a couple of tens of billions of yen. People are saying various things, such as 'You sold out Japan,' but they're wrong.' For the loans provided through the program, Japan will simply be collecting the interest payments, and for the loan guarantees, if nothing happens Japan will also be just collecting fees, Akazawa said. "For that part, Japan's just making money,' he said. Akazawa also clarified that the investment program won't be only supporting Japanese and U.S. firms. As a potential example, he cited a Taiwanese semiconductor firm building a factory in the U.S. "We'd like to put the $550 billion in place during President (Donald) Trump's term,' Akazawa added. Further details of the implementation of the U.S.-Japan deal remain unclear including when the new tariff rates would take effect and when the new investment vehicle would kick off. There's been no joint document signed by both sides for the deal, although the White House has published a fact sheet. "If you say something like, 'Let's create a joint document,' they will say, 'We'll lower tariffs after the document is created,'' Akazawa said. In order to not lose time, "we will demand that they issue an executive order to lower tariffs as soon as possible, regardless of a document.' Last week, Akazawa said he expects universal tariffs on Japan's shipments to be lowered to 15% on Aug. 1, while he said he wanted the car tariffs to be cut to 15% as soon as possible without specifying a date. The Trump administration has touted the deal with Japan as a potential model for others. On Sunday, the U.S. and European Union agreed on a deal that will see the bloc face 15% tariffs on most of its exports with the EU pledging to invest $600 billion in the U.S.
