|
Have a look at these snippets from the appended article about a US Forest Service employee fired for failing stick to the script presented to her by her superiors:
When she described the reduced funding as "a problem," she said, her supervisor told her the talking points should say that "everything is fine out there in the forest, and there is no need for additional funds." She refused and was quickly removed from her public-relations job, Wenstrom claims.
"Local Forest Service officials are really under the gun to talk the party line," [San Bernardino National Forest's former supervisor] Zimmerman said then.
 Wherever I look, I see Forest Service people reading from the same few scripts — scripts that are usually disingenuous, if not downright dishonest. On occasion a FS employee will deviate from the script because their integrity requires them to do so. Those who do so risk being punished.
The USFS is rotten to the core. It is being squeezed from above by President
Bush, by his Office of Management and Budget, by Undersecretary Mark Rey and by it's top-level executives and managers.
I empathize with those who would, if they could, do their jobs with
integrity and thank those who are courageous.
Scott
--- begin quoted ---
Happy talk won't put out fires
09/14/2007
The allegations made by a fired U.S. Forest Service spokeswoman are
unsettling for all of Southern California mountain and foothill
residents.
Ruth Wenstrom, the nine-year public-affairs officer for the adjacent
San Bernardino National Forest, claims she was terminated July 2
because she refused last year to downplay the severity of the wildfire
danger in the forest.
She was subsequently transferred to another job, filed an Equal
Employment Opportunity complaint, was transferred again and then fired
for using her work computer for nonwork-related activities and other
listed violations of policy. We're not interested so much in the
personnel matter of Wenstrom's seeking reinstatement, which will work
itself out through channels, as we are in the specter of the Forest
Service's trying to mask danger with happy talk.
Wenstrom claims that in April 2006, National Forest officials were told
not to request budgetary augmentation funds, known as "severity
dollars," that they had sought and received in the past. As a result,
they would have to cut the number of fire engines staffed in the
forest, she said.
She was told to draft talking points to address the public's concerns
about having fewer firefighters and engines in the nation's most
urbanized forest, filled with millions of dead trees and drought-dried
brush.
When she described the reduced funding as "a problem," she said, her
supervisor told her the talking points should say that "everything is
fine out there in the forest, and there is no need for additional
funds."
She refused and was quickly removed from her public-relations job, Wenstrom claims.
Her boss, Matt Mathes, the Forest Service's regional press officer
based in Vallejo, was upbeat the next month about Forest Service
strategy, despite announced plans to cut the number of staffed engines
from 25 seven days a week to 15 on weekdays and 20 on weekends, with as
few as 12 engines staffed at times. "Oh, they're in great shape,"
Mathes said in May 2006. "I think they're in a situation where there's
one of two less fire engines in a certain location, but they'll be
moving resources around. We'll be able to bring in more engines when
there's a need."
But Gene Zimmerman, San Bernardino National Forest's former supervisor,
dismissed that rosy viewpoint at the time. "They can say what they want
about moving resources, but they won't be here in initial attack," he
said. "We need the resources here before the fires start. ... This says
we didn't learn very much in the fall of `03," when the deadly Old Fire
and Grand Prix Fire raged across local slopes.
"Local Forest Service officials are really under the gun to talk the party line," Zimmerman said then.
Differences of opinion on levels of danger and preparedness are to be
expected. What is not acceptable is any official whitewashing of
reduced firefighting capacity and lessened protection for the public.
Not when lives are at stake.
|
- Land management 
