WASHINGTON — At an Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee hearing on President Trump’s Fiscal Year 2026 (FY26) budget request, U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) pressed U.S. Forest Chief Tom Schultz on visiting the Pecos Watershed in Northern New Mexico, DOGE procedures causing trash to pile up on public lands, and Trump’s budget eliminating funding for the New Mexico Forest and Watershed Restoration Institute at New Mexico Highlands University.
Heinrich’s questioning follows a letter he sent yesterday, in his capacity as the Ranking Member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Brooke Rollins on the harmful impacts of the “Department of Government Efficiency’s” (DOGE) actions on the United States Forest Service (USFS). Heinrich’s letter stressed that operational failures that are now occurring at the USFS, such as accumulating garbage at recreational sites and a lack of firefighting equipment ahead of fire season, are due to new layers of red tape required by DOGE.
On Forest Chief Schultz visiting the Pecos Watershed in Northern New Mexico:
Heinrich began, “The Santa Fe National Forest manages the vast majority of the headwaters of the Pecos watershed, which is one of the most important watersheds in the state of New Mexico. And for decades, this is a community that has really worked very hard with very few resources to try to recover from historic pollution and protect that resource from future pollution. This is a river that supports traditional farming, recreation, fishing, fisheries and many other uses that are economically critical to that that community. But we still have legacy pollution from a pretty disastrous mines spill some 30 years ago.”
Heinrich continued, asking, “I know I communicated with you recently, I sent you a letter, inviting you to visit this community and meet with my constituents. Is that something that you can commit to doing?”
Schultz responded, “Senator, thank you for the question. So, my staff is looking at that request, and we're trying to figure out if we can make that work. So that's something we're actively working on right now.”
Heinrich underscored the importance of visiting the Pecos Watershed, “I hope you can make that a priority. I think it's really helpful to get that community perspective. . . And so, I would very much welcome you to join us in New Mexico for that and I will make any logistics that you need help with a priority.”
On the DOGE contract approvals process causing trash to pile up on public lands:
Heinrich stated, “I'm all for making government more efficient, but one of the things I'm concerned about is that there are some things that DOGE seems to be making less efficient. And one of those has been contract approvals and that seems to be having real consequences in the [Forest] Service: trash piling up at recreation sites, bathroom challenges, equipment not getting replaced in a timely way.”
Heinrich highlighted his efforts to keep our public lands safe and accessible, asking, “I sent you and Secretary Rollins a letter on this yesterday. But can you give me a sense, why is it taking so long to get simple things like a contract extension for custodial services authorized?”
Schultz responded, “So what I will tell you is initially, when we first started looking at some of the existing contracts that we had for prior obligations, there was a process we had to get in place — and I think we've worked through all of the existing obligations. There should not be anything that's hung up there. When it comes to new obligations, we, as the Forest Service, instituted our own policies and procedures in addition to review from the Department and from the Efficiency folks. So, we have put a process in place to make sure that it's thorough and responsive when it comes to certain things like toilets and cleaning up toilets, which has been a huge issue that I've weighed in on in numerous cases.”
“We have figured out that process and some of that is on the Forest Service, for the process that we put in place it is going to slow somethings down, but it's something that we have addressed. And there should not be toilets that are not being cleaned at this point in time. So, if you're hearing about that, please let me know, because we've really jumped on this issue,” Schultz continued.
Schultz then turned to contracting in general, stating, “I think there is a review in place for contracts, grants, and agreements. It's not just contracts; it's all three of those. And that's something we are looking at, how we make that process more efficient, but there is a very thorough review. You're absolutely right, and is it different than it has been historically? Yes, it is, because there's more attention to detail in those contracts, but we're looking to make that process more effective and more timely than it has been over the last month. But it is something that — we have a new process we just instituted about a month ago, and we're working on making that better.”
Heinrich responded, “I understand the need for analysis and review. I just want to make sure that we're not, you know, adding layers of bureaucracy in the name of efficiency.”
On Trump’s FY26 budget eliminating funding for the Southwest Ecological Restoration Institutes (SWERI) and the Forest Service decreasing FY25 funding, which includes the New Mexico Forest and Watershed Restoration Institute at New Mexico Highlands University:
Heinrich highlighted that, “The Southwest Ecological Restoration Institutes — in New Mexico, Colorado and Arizona — these are institutes that offer unique opportunities for dedicated research in forest science and watershed health. They represent the future of science for our forest management. Yet, this plan cuts the institutes’ budget by more than 50% and that’s just not a number that they could swallow in a single year.”
“Why did you decide to reduce the funding for the institutes this year, and what is your plan for them in FY26?” Heinrich asked.
Schultz responded, “Okay, so I think first of all, the FY25 budget is what your question is. I think on the first one, so we did cut $3 million in FY25. So, for this budget, they currently have $23 million on hand in prior appropriation dollars. So, that was part of the consideration. So, we're trying to align the FY25 budget as we move toward the FY26 president's budget. So, we're moving in that direction. So, the ‘why’ is: We're trying to align this year's FY25 budget with where we're going in FY26. In FY26, it does not include resources to provide funding for SWERI. So, there are resources this year, they are reduced, but next year — in the FY26 budget — there are none. That's correct. And that's tied to R&D's overall look. And the reason that R&D is treated differently in the FY26 budget: There's going to be a greater reliance on the states and the universities. So, a lot of the land grant universities — and I'm a — was a member of the advisory board.”
Heinrich asked, “That institute is at Highlands University?”
Schultz responded, “Yes, sir, I understand. Yes, sir. My point is, though, that the funding in the future is going to have to come more from those universities themselves and other grant opportunities. The Forest Service is going to be shifting its funding away from R&D in general in the budget.”
Heinrich pressed Schultz on the Forest Service eliminating funding for the Southwest Ecological Restoration Institutes by emphasizing, “I think that's a mistake. And I think these institutes have really provided the Forest Service an enormous amount of science at a time when management has needed to change because conditions have been changing. And so, I hope that as we approach the appropriations process that we consider this President's budget as it should be considered: Advisory.”
###