{"id":12399,"date":"2026-05-01T09:17:59","date_gmt":"2026-05-01T09:17:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/2026\/05\/01\/trumps-new-conditions-on-dei-immigration-could-cut-off-states-wildfire-funding-stateline\/"},"modified":"2026-05-01T09:17:59","modified_gmt":"2026-05-01T09:17:59","slug":"trumps-new-conditions-on-dei-immigration-could-cut-off-states-wildfire-funding-stateline","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/2026\/05\/01\/trumps-new-conditions-on-dei-immigration-could-cut-off-states-wildfire-funding-stateline\/","title":{"rendered":"Trump\u2019s new conditions on DEI, immigration could cut off states\u2019 wildfire funding – Stateline"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

A new effort to force states to affirm the Trump administration\u2019s views on DEI, transgender athletes and immigration when signing contracts with the U.S. Forest Service is threatening millions of dollars in wildfire grant funding and fire reduction projects on federal lands.<\/p>\n

Some liberal states can\u2019t sign the documents because the policies clash with state law, forestry experts say.<\/p>\n

Already, at least one state is reporting that the new rules have stalled work to reduce wildfire risk and assist with projects on national forest lands. Other states say the requirements are so vague that they don\u2019t know how to follow them. And some timber industry leaders believe the standoff could cut into their revenues.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe\u2019re kind of at an impasse,\u201d said Washington State Forester George Geissler. \u201cIt\u2019s already starting to slow down or shut down work.\u201d<\/p>\n

The update to the requirements governing federal partnerships comes even as many Western states brace for a brutal wildfire season, following a winter that brought record high temperatures and a paltry snowpack.<\/p>\n

On Dec. 31, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins with little fanfare issued<\/a> new general terms and conditions governing partnerships for the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Spelled out in dozens of pages of fine print are new restrictions<\/a> that require partner organizations to pledge compliance with President Donald Trump\u2019s executive orders.<\/p>\n

The new conditions apply to all USDA agencies, but the department hasn\u2019t yet said whether it will enforce them for food assistance programs.<\/p>\n

\n

Forest Service plan to close research stations stokes fear as wildfire season approaches<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The agency, in a news release announcing the changes, framed the new terms as an effort to streamline regulations, protect national security and \u201celiminate radical left ideology.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Department of Agriculture and the Forest Service did not grant Stateline interview requests.<\/p>\n

At the Forest Service, which is housed within USDA, the new policy applies to a wide range of grants and contracts aimed at reducing wildfire risk, restoring forest health and boosting timber production.<\/p>\n

Forestry veterans say the new conditions have created an impasse with some Democratic-led states.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is significantly disruptive,\u201d said Robert Bonnie, who served as undersecretary of agriculture for natural resources and environment during the Obama administration. \u201cIt\u2019s clearly targeted at Democratic states and Democratic partners.\u201d<\/p>\n

A coalition of 20 states and the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit<\/a> in March, claiming that the restrictions are unlawful. The lawsuit has largely focused on federal food assistance programs provided by the agency, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and the Women, Infants, and Children Nutrition Program.<\/p>\n

In an April court filing<\/a>, Rollins said the new conditions had not yet been applied to food assistance programs, and that the agency had not made a \u201cfinal decision\u201d to cut off nutrition funding for states that don\u2019t comply.<\/p>\n

Forest Service programs<\/h4>\n

But the policy is already having an impact on some programs managed by the Forest Service.<\/p>\n

Washington state has been unable to issue the latest round of Community Wildfire Defense Grants, a federal program that helps neighborhoods and towns reduce fuels and fortify homes in wildfire-prone areas.<\/p>\n

Geissler, the state forester, said roughly 10 communities in Washington were set to receive large grants under the program, but the federal funding has been held up by the state\u2019s refusal to sign the new terms and conditions.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is another example of the federal administration cutting off its nose to spite its face,\u201d said David Perk, coordinator of the Washington State Lands Working Group, a coalition that weighs in on state forestry policies. \u201cTo add the additional layer of denying wildfire funding, that\u2019s insult to injury.\u201d<\/p>\n

The stalemate also threatens work that the U.S. Forest Service increasingly relies on states and other partners to do in national forests. The agency has leaned heavily on tools, such as the Good Neighbor Authority, that enable state agencies to carry out wildfire mitigation, restoration and timber projects on federal lands. Many observers believe the recently announced Forest Service reorganization signals<\/a> that states will play an even bigger role in the years ahead.<\/p>\n

But now those partnerships are in jeopardy. According to Geissler, Washington state can\u2019t sign new Good Neighbor Authority agreements due to the new conditions.<\/p>\n

\n

Forest Service shake-up will boost states\u2019 role \u2014 but even supporters have concerns<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\u201cWe\u2019re trying to sign off on agreements for another chunk of work, and we can\u2019t get it signed,\u201d he said. \u201cIf you are looking for work to be done by the state on federal lands, we\u2019re not doing it. If we\u2019re not able to sign, both sides lose.\u201d<\/p>\n

Washington state has spent millions of dollars on projects to reduce wildfire risk and improve forest health on national forest lands. With the new ideology requirements, the feds are essentially turning away free help, said Bonnie, the former natural resources official. That\u2019s especially damaging, he noted, because Trump\u2019s cuts to the Forest Service\u2019s workforce and budget have further diminished what the agency can accomplish on its own.<\/p>\n

The Trump administration is \u201cdamaging their own constituents,\u201d he said. \u201cThere are a lot of conservative voters in rural Washington who want to see partnerships that reduce the probability of extreme wildfire. This will stop that. It makes absolutely no sense.\u201d<\/p>\n

Washington state is still working on Forest Service projects signed under previous agreements. But without new agreements, work on the ground could stall in six to eight months, Geissler said.<\/p>\n

State responses<\/h4>\n

Nearly 20 state forestry officials contacted by Stateline did not respond or declined interview requests, citing the ongoing litigation and the need to maintain a working relationship with the Forest Service.<\/p>\n

But one timber industry leader said Oregon was facing similar disruptions that prevented the state from signing new agreements with the Forest Service.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis will lead to reduced revenues for (state forestry agencies),\u201d Nick Smith, public affairs director with the American Forest Resource Council, a timber industry group, said in an email to Stateline. \u201cAs partners, our industry will be impacted if it disrupts or cancels current or future timber sales under these contracts.\u201d<\/p>\n

While most state forestry officials have been unwilling to publicly comment about the situation, several have filed legal declarations in support of the multistate lawsuit challenging the new terms and conditions.<\/p>\n

Scott Bowen, director of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, wrote in a declaration<\/a> that his agency has more than $87 million from active grants with the Forest Service. Those grants cover wildfire response, forest health, invasive species, urban tree canopy and revegetation, among other issues.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf these funds were withheld, DNR would have to shut down critical capabilities to assist rural communities with fire preparedness and response,\u201d Bowen wrote.<\/p>\n

Bowen added that the Forest Service has already said one program, a grant to protect environmentally important forests from being converted to a nonforest use, will be subject to the new terms and conditions.<\/p>\n

In the lawsuit, many state officials said that the new compliance requirements are so vague that they\u2019re nearly impossible to follow. Several of the legal declarations note that the new conditions do not explain what it means to \u201cpromote gender ideology,\u201d a practice the Department of Agriculture now seeks to ban.<\/p>\n

\n

You\u2019re going to see a bifurcation where you’ll have red states getting grants and blue states won\u2019t.<\/p>\n

\u2013 Kevin Hood, executive director of Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics<\/b><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

Many states also objected to the agency\u2019s requirement that no one in the country illegally obtain \u201ctaxpayer-funded benefits.\u201d Josh Kurtz, secretary of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, noted in a declaration<\/a> that it would be impossible to confirm that grants to reduce wildfire risk, expand urban tree canopy and improve forest health do not benefit Marylanders who lack legal immigration status.<\/p>\n

Kevin Hood, executive director of Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, a nonprofit that advocates for public employees, said the new terms are aimed at directing a greater share of federal funding to Trump\u2019s political allies.<\/p>\n

\u201cYou\u2019re going to see a bifurcation where you\u2019ll have red states getting grants and blue states won\u2019t,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

\u2018More questions than answers\u2019<\/h4>\n

In March, the National Association of State Foresters sent a letter to Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz expressing concerns about the new terms and conditions. Jason Hartman, the group\u2019s president and the state forester of Kansas, described a chaotic situation.<\/p>\n

\u201cTo date, the (Forest Service) has not provided adequate guidance or interpretation of the new (terms and conditions),\u201d he wrote. \u201cNational-level meetings between State Foresters and the Forest Service have resulted in more questions than answers. State Foresters around the country have been given differing instructions and interpretations in different geographic locations.\u201d<\/p>\n

Hartman noted at least one instance in which a timber sale totaling 80 million board feet was held up by the new conditions. (That\u2019s enough to build roughly 5,000 homes.) He asked the Forest Service to delay the effective date of the new conditions until the agency could provide more clarity.<\/p>\n

He also outlined another set of issues causing problems for states. One major complication, he said, is the requirement that states receive federal approval before issuing any subawards or contracts. That has created a massive bureaucratic hassle, he wrote, in \u201cdirect conflict\u201d with the Forest Service\u2019s reliance on state partnerships to cut red tape.<\/p>\n

The new terms also require environmental reviews for projects to be completed before partnership agreements can be signed. But Hartman noted that states often assist in those very environmental reviews, which they won\u2019t be able to do if they can\u2019t sign the agreements first.<\/p>\n

Wyoming State Forester Kelly Norris also noted that issue in an email to Stateline, saying she expected the Forest Service to update the environmental review section soon.<\/p>\n

Stateline reporter Alex Brown can be reached at [email\u00a0protected]<\/span><\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/a> <\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A new effort to force states to affirm the Trump administration\u2019s views on DEI, transgender athletes and immigration when signing contracts with the U.S. Forest Service is threatening millions of dollars in wildfire grant funding and fire reduction projects on federal lands. Some liberal states can\u2019t sign the documents because the policies clash with state […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":12400,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12399","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12399","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12399"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12399\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/12400"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12399"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12399"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12399"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}