On April 21 Forest Service Chief Vicki Christiansen recorded another in a series of what she calls “selfie videos” in which she gives her take on recent activities within the agency. The Chief has done this on a number of occasions. They are informal and are sometimes recorded on a cell phone.
She began the most recent edition by talking about the weather, volunteers, Earth Day, Administrative Professionals Day, and telework, before shifting to her testimony April 15 before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. The purpose of the hearing was to discuss with members of Congress the proposed budget for the Forest Service for the fiscal year that begins October 1, 2021. It was pointed out critically on this website on April 17 that during the hearing she had two clear opportunities to accept or ask for more funding in two very important inadequately budgeted areas, fuels treatment and aerial firefighting.
You can watch the complete video at the bottom of this article. The Forest Service provided a “lightly edited for clarity transcript”, a portion of which is below. The Chief started talking about the hearing at 6:15. The transcript below begins at 7:10 after she introduced the topic in general terms.
…So, it was a really great hearing, it was my opportunity to really showcase all the great work that you all are doing. And if some of you aren’t familiar with the budget process, it’s a little bit complex, especially this year with this new administration coming in. They didn’t have the time to develop a full budget proposal. So, last week, what’s called the budget blueprint came out, and it’s just the high-level funding that the administration recommends to meet the priorities of the administration. You may notice, if you’re paying attention, there are some initiatives that bump up the Forest Service’s proposed budget in that budget blueprint. They’re high level, and there’s not a lot of detail, but it’s around our work to create resiliency for wildfire, climate change work and additional science resources.
The full budget won’t be out until the middle of May, so it was a little bit of a unique time to have a budget hearing because I really couldn’t talk about the administration’s full proposal because it’s not out yet. And, oftentimes, people ask me, “Chief, why don’t you just ask for all the money we need?” and the process is: we’re part of a big family, all right? The Forest Service is a part of a big federal family, and just to give you context, there’s $769 billion of discretionary funds for non-defense spending for all of the federal government. So, all of the appropriations committees in Congress divvy that out and those subcommittees then help decide based on the administration’s budget proposals how they’re going to prioritize and then how they’re going to negotiate with the other chamber—in this case it would be with the Senate—on a final budget construct. So, we’re part of that bigger federal family. We certainly talk about what we can do, I talk about our science, I talk about the challenges we face, but we’re a part, again, of that bigger family budget that is delivered as one administration and, in this case, right now, we only have that blueprint.
So, in the hearing last week, I got a lot of great questions about how we could invest in making a difference on the landscape and in serving the American people. I highlighted how Forest Service has really risen to the challenge in a very difficult year, how important it is that we steward the nation’s forests and serve the American people, the wildfire crisis that is before us, and that we really need to have a paradigm shift, quite frankly, in matching the work that we need to do to create more resilience on the landscape at the scope and scale to meet the challenge. I talked about the infrastructure and, of course, the resources that Congress gave us last year through the Great American Outdoors Act and how important that is in being able to provide a better experience for the American people, but also to provide critical jobs: jobs near national forests, particularly in rural areas, and we were really mindful of the job creation of that important investment that Congress had made.
So, it’s conversational; it was a virtual hearing, I did go into my office. I did it from my office, and we’re really figuring out how to even do hearings virtually. It will be provided in a link from this selfie video if you do want to take the time to watch it. It’s about an hour-and-a-half long but you can, of course, speed through the parts you don’t want to hear. And there was also, by the way, some really good engagement about our state and private mission area; you know, providing the capacity and the resources through our state forestry agencies and other partners for urban forestry and stewardship forestry, forest health and all the rest. So, really good conversations about state and private and our need and how we show up with our really important science in the Forest Service. So, one down, three more to go. The other three will likely be after the full budget comes out, so that will be a little bit of a regular way that we would do budget hearings.
Probably more than you ever wanted to know about budget and budget processes, but I know folks ask me, “Why don’t you just ask for more money, Chief?” and I want to give you a little bit of how the process works. So, I talk about the great work you do and how we’re a good investment and what the needs are on the ground.
I just signed my leadership intent letter for wildfire for the 2021 season, so that will be hitting all of your mailboxes. Look for that, and I think I’m going to try to do a little selfie video to give some highlights about the 2021 wildfire letter. For now, I’m going to call it a wrap.
I hope you all have a great day and a great rest of your week. Thank you for what you do. Stay safe and be well.
(end of transcript)
The “Leadership Intent letter” mentioned by the Chief can be downloaded here. Not much is surprising in the two-page document, but she does refer to COVID-19:
We will continue to use the foundational risk management practices that enabled success in 2020, including consistent mask use, small dispersed fire camps, remote incident management, enhanced safety protocols in our logistical contracts, and continued COVID-19 screening and testing of firefighters.
She also said vaccinations are good, safety is good, sexual harassment is bad, fuel treatment is good, and the Cohesive Strategy is good.
Elite highly trained Wildland firefighters make $38K per yr while risking their lives to protect the public. Cal fire employees make $70K per yr. Mrs. Christiansen pay your Wildland Firefighters or step down. You are a disgrace to the uniform you are wearing.
It seems possible that we are not being informed of all of the reasons why the Chief did not advance a positive affirmation that yes, the USFS would appreciate and very much could use additional funding — to address the consequences of the warming climate as well as to address the billions $ in deferred maintenance on structures and trails, and cleaning recreation spaces.
It’s a question of how much of the decision process the Chief is permitted to run with, she may be under constraints from people up the command chain whose motivations and policies may not be fully in accord with what the USFS openly discusses as their strategic goals for administering public lands. She has to live in a world where policy makers above her trump — to various degrees — the needs and desires of the public who own the lands, and the offices which report to her. We rarely get all the facts of such decisions and funding issues.
It does appear that the USFS has ramped-up its science-based approach to wildland protection, the USFS has once again embraced science in a big way, and had for about the past 30 years now, to various degrees.
Sexual harassment continues to be an issue, from what I understand, among fire crews who get fielded, but the USFS has been open and proactive in working on mitigating such problems.
This lady punts more than the Denver Broncos….
No one asked her “wHy DoN’t YoU tAkE mOaR mOnEy!”
People are asking her why she turned down 2 opportunities to accept funding for an already underfunded sector of the agency.
She can conflate like a with the best bureaucrats out there.
I’d recommend that everyone take a read of Jack Ward Thomas’s book “The Journals of a Forest Chief” to get an appreciation of the political tightrope that the Chief must walk.
I agree with Chuck! We need a new Chief!!!
Time for new Chief.
Time for a new ,more pro-active USFS CHIEF? While she sits at her desk Ms. Vicki ;does not seem to have her employees backs!
She is out of touch with her own agency ! From a age old pay scale, constricting sufficient numbers of personnel, to not even able to pay for required boots, to a dumb decision of not letting 10 yr contracts on aircraft to allow companies justify big bucks to develop new age aircraft. It just goes on and on and on.
She should at the least change the classification of her people to FIREFIGHTERS !
Respect is given when Respect is Deserved ! NOPE !
They can’t even make a simple decision on ebike use on usfs land! It will soon be a year since public input and still no new directive as promised! I know the government works slow but this is pathetic!
So the reason that she didn’t accept more funding when offered (for necessary and neglected responsibilities of the agency) is that there are other agencies in the whole of the government and she’s looking out for everyone else’s budget? She can’t give a good answer, because not accepting more money is fundamentally not looking out for the agency’s responsibilities. The sprawling lecture with a patronizing tone is a great way to lose your employees’ respect
A new bill just introduced by Senator Bennet, the Outdoor Restoration Partnership Act
assigns administration, management, and reporting responsibility to the Secretary of Agriculture and a council for the $60B fund. The USFS is conspicuously absent in the Bill’s language. The bill is cosponsored by other Senators and Representatives. Why would a bicameral sponsored bill that supplants existing programs need to work around the USFS?
https://www.bennet.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3/7/37eef326-3c62-4370-9957-205235d6951c/53F15CEF3488F337518C2B0EE23492CB.bennet-outdoor-restoration-partnership-act-flo21367-13-.pdf
Hmmmmm, “our work to create resiliency for wildlife” she says.
I’m not sure what is “intended” with this choice of words. It sounds good but what does it mean?
There is never enough appropriated monies to create such resiliency; there’s never enough money for fuel reduction work to create resiliency; so, perhaps, this statement has to do with “managing wildfire” and that’s “creating resiliency for wildlife?” How does one go about doing that with “suppression money?” Does the Congressional markup language “allow for using suppression dollars to create wildlife resiliency?” If so, that’s a whole new “take” on such monies.
“Lightly edited for clarity” when compared to the actual verbage from the Chief simply means someone with more tact got a hold of the transcript, and smoothed out the more patronizing tone she took when addressing the FS minions in an internal email. While there’s some cover for her not being able to solicit funds directly in the Committee forum, there are ways to emphasize how badly the Agency needs funds, personnel and material to get the job done properly. Two Committee members attempted to walk her down that path, but she flatly refused, or failed to recognize the opportunity – both options are a failure of leadership. But as noted, she did confirm that all the intersectionality training and COVID excuse making will continue for the foreseeable future, so there’s that. #priorities
I really take exception with this statement: “I highlighted how Forest Service has really risen to the challenge in a very difficult year,”
Virtually every USFS office has been closed to the pubic for the last year. At times, every campground in some districts have been 100% closed for months on end. And in some states, entire forests have been closed to public use because of the fear catching covid in the great outdoors.
Salaried staff have been retained and paid, while hourly and seasonal people have been furloughed or laid off. And that goes for the NPS and BLM, too.
I’m not sure what challenge the chief is talking about, other than surrendering to fear. Meanwhile my local supermarkets and Home Depots have remained open, with proper safety protocols. It’s time the USFS (and the US government as a whole) gets their collective s**t together and stop being reactive to fear.
“Surrendering to fear” — we have over half a million dead Americans thanks to people who do not take science and directly-observed reality seriously. The USFS applies science, they were absolutely right in reducing the number of dead Americans by closing recreation spaces where humans crowd together.
What she should have said.
We are facing an unprecedented climate crisis that is burning up the forests of this country. We need 5000 addition firefighters to protect our forests and communities near the forest from catastrophic fires…….( you get the drift).
Fire continues to get the lion’s share of the funding pie, Recreation has seen deferred maintenance of structures, facilities, and hiking trails, even as the number of recreating public rises. It would have been nice had the Chief at least affirmed that yes, we need funding to address not only the warming climate but also to address the growing $ BILLIONS $ in deferred maintenance which would fix crumbling recreation infrastructure on National Forest land.