Forest Service to move HQ out of DC, shutter regional offices in sweeping overhaul

The U.S. Forest Service is moving its headquarters out of Washington and closing dozens of facilities across the country in a move the agency said will streamline its work but that employees cautioned could lead to a mass exodus of staff. 

The Agriculture Department agency will shift around 260 employees to its new headquarters in Salt Lake City, Utah, and move around a to-be-determined number of employees in soon-to-be-shuttered regional offices. The reshaping of the agency is part of a larger USDA reorganization that will see 2,600 employees shifted from the capital region into new regional hubs around the country.

USFS leadership said it was shifting from its decades-old regional-based model to one organized around states, though it will maintain only 15 state directors and many of them will oversee multiple states. The Forest Service will maintain 20 research and development stations across the country, while closing 57 others. It will close all nine of its regional offices and 130 employees will remain in Washington. 

“​​Moving the Forest Service closer to the forests we manage is an essential action that will improve our core mission of managing our forests while saving taxpayer dollars and boosting employee recruitment," USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins said.

Employees experienced various stages of grief upon learning the news, according to those who spoke to Government Executive on the condition of anonymity. 

“Reactions range from crying to anger to silence,” one midwest-based employee said after Tuesday's announcement. 

Washington-based employees will receive information about timelines for relocations in “the coming days and weeks,” USFS Chief Tom Schultz told employees in an agency-wide email. The full reorganization and office closures will play out over the next year. Schultz promised “clear guidance to employees and partners” along the way. 

“I know this transition raises questions about roles, locations, reporting structures, and timelines,” Schultz said. “Change of this magnitude affects people, families, and communities--not just organizational charts. We are committed to approaching this work with transparency, empathy, respect, and an understanding of the real impacts on your lives.”

Employees told Government Executive those words offered little comfort due to the remaining uncertainty and potentially life-altering impacts. Staff across the country who were in the field without access to computers missed the announcement and various town halls offering additional information. 

“We have no clue how this will affect us on the ground,” said one employee based in a northwestern regional office. “I have no idea what is in store for my program.” 

While USFS is eliminating all of its nine regional offices, it will maintain facilities in most existing locations and the bulk of those employees will not have to relocate. In regions six, eight and nine, however—located in Portland, Ore., Atlanta and Milwaukee, respectively—the facilities themselves will shutter and employees will have to move, according to a notice obtained by Government Executive. The exact locations for the staff there has not yet been determined, employees said, but management told staff they will be placed in Utah, Colorado or New Mexico. 

Government Executive first reported plans for this reorganization were underway last April and USDA made the official announcement in June, though it told employees on Tuesday the makeup for the restructured Forest Service “is currently being developed.”  

“Your position is subject to reorganization, and your duty station will change,” Schultz told regional staff set to be relocated in an internal memorandum. “You will be relocated to a new duty station to one of the locations identified above. The specific details, exactly where, when, and into what position, have not yet been determined.” 

In a statement, Schultz took a less conciliatory tone. 

"Effective stewardship and active management are achieved on the ground, where forests and communities are found—not just behind a desk in the capital,” Schultz said. 

Rollins added the changes would enable boosted timber production, a key priority for the Trump administration. 

Employees will relocate between this summer and next, with bargaining taking place with unions in the coming months. Schultz said the agency will hold informational sessions in the coming months and all employees required to relocate more than 50 miles will receive assistance to do so. One employee said they were told to expect “individual assignment letters” in May or June. 

“There is a position in the restructured Forest Service for every permanent employee willing to accept reassignment,” Schultz said, though he added there may be opportunities for buyouts or early retirements. USDA shed more than 15,000 employees last year through various incentive programs. 

Employees reassigned to a new location must either accept it or lose their job. Some USFS employees will be assigned jobs in Fort Collins, Colo., another of the new "hubs" USDA is establishing. The others, in addition to Salt Lake City, will be in Raleigh, N.C.; Kansas City, Mo.; and Indianapolis. 

The Forest Service plans previously received particularly negative feedback during the public comment period from lawmakers, employees and local governments on the larger USDA reorganization, as well in meetings the department held with tribal governments. Tribal leaders, for example, said the elimination of USFS regional offices would diminish working relationships, lead to the loss of institutional knowledge related to treaty obligations and result in less coordination with agency leadership. 

Employees expressed skepticism that most relocated staff would agree to stay with the agency. Trump in his first term relocated two USDA’s offices to Kansas City, which resulted in the loss of more than half of their staff and significant drops in productivity.

“Most I've talked to will not move, but we'll see when it's time to make their final decision,” one staffer said. 

In a separate email to staff, Schultz acknowledged the value of the existing regional structure, noting it “served the agency well” for decades and “helped us form strong relationships and carry out a mission that has only grown in importance.” Growing budget constraints and demands on employees, he added, have made it more valuable for staff to move closer to the constituencies they serve and for the agency to empower local leadership to make more decisions. 

The northwest-based employee, however, said it was “obvious” to employees on the ground that the plan was poorly thought out.   

“It is a completely pointless exercise that is going to cause more problems than there already are,” the employee said. 

Another western employee said he found the larger reorganization “incoherent,” but said the push to move employees out of the nation’s capital was prudent. Still, he called the elimination of regional structure a “radical change.” 

“The regions are where the real work gets done and those reporting chains will be totally upended by the new state forester system,” the employee said.