Federal budget cuts could take toll on New Mexico forest workers

About 670 trailheads, picnic sites and campgrounds run by the U.S. Forest Service across the country could close due to federal budget cuts. According to a statement from the U.S. Department of Agriculture — the Forest Service’s parent agency — specific sites have not yet been selected for closure. “We do estimate, however, that there will be an across-the-board temporary closure of 670 campgrounds, trailheads and picnic sites around the country in peak use season in the spring and summer, but we are still determining which, exactly, those areas will be,” the statement says. “The closing of these recreation sites would likely result in loss of the opportunity for 1.6 million visitors to national forests.” The Santa Fe National Forest has 23 campgrounds, 13 picnic areas and 1,002 miles of trails, according to its website. The Department of Agriculture said funds for fighting wildfires also will decrease. “The 5.2 percent reduction caused by sequestration will reduce the agency’s initial attack capability which will increase the probability of larger, costlier fires,” a statement says. “The reduction of funds could result in 500 fewer firefighters and 50- 70 fewer available engines, and will impact aviation assets.” The statement goes on to say that a severe fire season is expected this summer...more

 “The 5.2 percent reduction caused by sequestration will reduce the agency’s initial attack capability which will increase the probability of larger, costlier fires,” a statement says.

Damn, there it is again.  I tried to sort this out here on Wednesday.  You recall a 1995 policy saying, "Wildland fire, as a critical natural process, must be reintroduced into the ecosystem", the 2012 Hubbard memo saying "safe aggressive initial attack is often the best suppression strategy to keep unwanted  wildfires small and less costly" and the 2013 Tidwell memo which doesn't repeat the initial attack language, resulting in the Let It Burn headlines.

However, reading today's article would have one conclude it has nothing to do with "policy" or "guidance" because it is a result of the sequestration.  Which is it guys?

I tried to help the Forest Service out yesterday, but this sequestration scare stuff is pure bullshit.