Colorado’s congressional delegation in Washington, D.C., is calling on the U.S. Forest Service to continue its partnerships with Rocky Mountain communities amid the crisis. freeze on the hiring of seasonal employees by the agency.

Colorado Senators Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper and Colorado Representatives Joe Neguse and Brittany Pettersen wrote a letter Monday, October 28, to U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Thomas Vilsack.

In particular, the letter takes issue with the fact that the Forest Service is applying the hiring freeze not only to positions funded by the federal budget, but also to positions supported by local funding.

The Forest Service, which falls under the Department of Agriculture, did not respond to a request for comment Monday.

“We are deeply concerned by the Forest Service’s announcement regarding the agency’s budget shortfall and subsequent freeze on the hiring of all temporary seasonal employees other than firefighters,” the letter said. “Colorado’s forests are among the most visited in the country and provide critical infrastructure for Colorado.”

One-fifth of Colorado is land owned by the U.S. Forest Service. In places like Summit County, where the White River National Forest makes up 85 percent of the county, the federal government manages the majority of local lands.

Traditionally, seasonal Forest Service crews perform on-the-ground work in many of these communities, ranging from maintaining trails to patrolling campgrounds, educating visitors, and performing field work. the land.

But U.S. Forest Service Chief Randy Moore announced in September that the federal agency would not hire any seasonal workers, other than seasonal firefighting positions, in the 2025 fiscal year.

Moore explained on a call with Forest Service employees that the hiring decision was made when the agency was planning for the “most conservative funding opportunity.” The Forest Service is currently uses House Interior Subcommittee funding levels proposed for fiscal year 2025 to guide its hiring decisions. A spending bill recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives gave the federal agency about $500 million less than it requested.

Meanwhile, the federal agency has exhausted additional funding it received through the Inflation Reduction Act and the bipartisan Infrastructure Act, Moore said. The rising cost of living also contributed to the budget crisis, he said.

“We simply cannot accomplish the same amount of work with fewer employees,” Moore told Forest Service staff. “In other words, we’re going to do what we can with what we have. We’re not going to try to do everything that’s expected of us with fewer people.”

But the Forest Service’s seasonal staffing is so crucial that many Western Slope governments have dedicated local funds to support the federal agency’s seasonal staffing levels. Yet across Colorado, the Forest Service has indicated it will not even hire positions funded by city and county budgets.

In Summit County, for example, voters in 2018 passed Ballot Measure 1A, known as the Strong Futures Initiative, approving an increase in local property taxes to help fund wildfire mitigation, as well as other local needs.

In 2023, nearly $750,000 in taxpayer funds raised through the Strong Futures Initiative was dedicated to seasonal wildfire mitigation and Forest Service education in Summit County, much of it of that money going directly to the federal agency to hire seasonal staff.

“Summit County voters passed (the Strong Futures Initiative) because the White River National Forest was so understaffed that these critical functions were not being met,” Summit County Commissioner Tamara Pogue said. to Summit Daily News last week. “We literally paid them because the federal government is not doing its job.”

But Donna Nemeth, regional press secretary for the Forest Service, said only two positions supported by the Strong Futures Initiative will be hired next summer because they are considered “fire series” employees. The remaining positions funded by those local dollars are “recreational technicians” who focus on fire prevention and education, and who currently will not be hired next summer, Nemeth said.

Other local governments – including Eagle, Pitkin, Chaffee counties and the cities of Vail and Aspen – have also provided local funds intended to support seasonal Forest Service hiring that could be affected by the hiring freeze .

The congressional delegation wrote in its letter that the Forest Service’s Rocky Mountain region, which includes Colorado, “typically accepts millions of dollars from external partners to hire seasonal employees.”

“The current hiring freeze puts these partnerships at risk, putting hundreds of jobs at risk and leaving resources on the table,” Colorado’s congressional delegation wrote.

The letter also notes that some of the funds the Forest Service receives from local governments are generated through voter-approved tax measures that limit how the funds can be used. The congressional delegation says some local governments have expressed concerns that the Forest Service might use local funds for purposes other than those for which they were dedicated.

“In Colorado, the Forest Service developed these fees and partnerships in close coordination with local communities, who supported their implementation, with the understanding that funds would be used for specific local recreation and visitation pressures,” indicates the letter. “Using the funds for any other purpose would be a violation of their trust.”

In the letter, Colorado’s congressional delegation urges Vilsack to find “creative solutions” to allow the Forest Service’s partnership with local governments to continue as the programs were intended.

“Extending the seasonal employee hiring freeze to external partnership agreements and user fees is unacceptable,” Colorado’s congressional delegation wrote in its letter. “This will leave critical funding on the table for the Forest Service and Colorado communities without services they desperately need.”