Deep Diving to Save our Planet

New Threats to our National Parks (Summer 2025)

How does the new H.R. 1 Bill of the Trump administration affect our National Parks? Listen to this important podcast by Richard Olsenius and Christine Olsenius as they discuss the impacts.

Drastic Cuts to our National Weather Service (NWS)

The Trump administration's proposed 2026 budget for NOAA would implement significant cuts, reducing the agency's funding by 27% (over $700 million) from current levels. Most notably, it aims to eliminate NOAA's Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR), which performs and coordinates climate research, and would terminate all funding for climate, weather, and ocean laboratories and cooperative institutes.

Impacts to our governments approach to public lands.

PODCAST COMING SOON

An American Journey

A Threat to our National Parks

Congress Passes the H.R. 1 Bill

H.R. 1 National Parks Summary by Richard Olsenius

Discussion on the impacts of H.R. 1 legislation on national parks, including budget cuts, staffing, maintenance, and cultural significance.

Highlights

1. Emotional and Cultural Significance of National Parks

• National parks are described as living symbols of shared heritage, offering solace, adventure, and connection to nature, with places like the Grand Canyon and sequoia trees evoking awe and a sense of vastness.

• Parks hold deep emotional and cultural meaning for families, veterans, and children, serving as spaces for memory-making, healing, and experiencing nature for the first time.

• Cuts to park funding are seen as undermining the collective trust and stewardship Americans feel toward these sacred spaces, potentially eroding the sense of shared responsibility and national character tied to their preservation.

2. Overview and Impacts of H.R. One Legislation

• H.R. One, also called the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," includes provisions that could significantly affect national parks, particularly through Title VIII (Federal Lands) and Title V (Energy and Natural Resources).

• Subtitle C of Title VIII introduces "rescissions," which involve pulling back previously allocated funds, targeting unobligated balances meant for the National Park Service (NPS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

• Title V includes Section 5305, which cuts $267 million earmarked for staffing, including rangers, emergency crews, curators, and scientists, as well as $12 million intended for climate resilience projects addressing floods, fires, and storms.

3. Immediate Operational Impacts on National Parks

• Rescissions and budget cuts shrink the current operational capacity of parks, affecting day-to-day maintenance, ongoing projects, and staffing levels.

• Reduced staffing could lead to fewer ranger-led programs, longer waits for assistance, reduced visitor center hours, and diminished access to expert guidance during visits.

• Maintenance backlogs may worsen, with damaged trails and campgrounds potentially remaining closed indefinitely, lowering the quality and accessibility of park experiences.

4. Equity and Accessibility Concerns

• Outreach programs connecting parks to urban areas and underserved communities are particularly vulnerable to budget cuts, potentially depriving children of school trips that often serve as their first exposure to nature.

• Cuts to these programs raise concerns about fairness and inclusivity, as they disproportionately affect those who rely on such initiatives to access national parks.

5. Impact on Park Staff and Institutional Knowledge

• Budget constraints lead to burnout and attrition among park staff, with fewer personnel struggling to manage the same or increased workloads, especially during high visitor seasons.

• Loss of experienced staff results in a significant decline in institutional knowledge, which includes deep understanding of park ecosystems, history, and emergency management, making it difficult to replace their expertise.

• The emotional toll on staff, described as "moral injury," stems from witnessing the degradation of parks they are dedicated to protecting, leaving them feeling powerless and deeply wounded.

6. Broader Implications for National Parks and Society

• Cuts to funding and resources send a subtle message that preservation and shared spaces are not urgent priorities, potentially undermining the cultural compass tied to the idea of national parks as sacred ground.

• The decline in park quality and accessibility could weaken the connection families, veterans, and children have with these spaces, eroding their role as symbols of democracy and shared values.

• The document suggests that these changes could have long-term consequences for the legacy of national parks and the collective sense of wonder and responsibility they inspire.

Protecting our Environment

Major Cuts to the NWS and NOAA
Listen to this podcast for a complete analysis.

National Weather and NOAA Podcast Summary by Richard Olsenius

Discussion on proposed budget cuts to NOAA and FEMA, their impacts on weather forecasting, disaster response, and public safety.

Highlights

1. Texas Floods and Communication Challenges

• Catastrophic flash floods in Texas over the 4th of July weekend resulted in over 100 lives lost, including 27 at Camp Mystic, highlighting the importance of effective weather forecasting and communication systems.

• The National Weather Service (NWS) issued flood watches days in advance and flash flood warnings and emergency alerts during the event, with accurate predictions of river rise (14.3 feet in under three hours).

• Despite accurate forecasts, the "last mile problem" in communication was evident, as Kerr County officials and residents were not adequately informed or prepared, with warnings appearing on social media too late.

• Factors like cell service availability, alert fatigue, and confusion between flood watches and warnings contributed to the communication gap, emphasizing the need for clearer and more actionable messaging.

2. Proposed Budget Cuts to NOAA and Their Implications

• The Trump administration’s FY 2026 budget proposal includes a 27% reduction in NOAA funding, amounting to $4.5 billion, with the complete elimination of the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OHA), which coordinates climate research.

• Cuts would impact hundreds of federal and university research positions, regional climate data programs, and critical labs like the National Severe Storms Laboratory, Mauna Loa Laboratory, and hurricane forecasting facilities.

• The reduction in funding for NOAA satellites, such as Landsat, essential for flood monitoring and damage assessment, could degrade weather forecasting capabilities and lead to a plateau or regression in forecast accuracy.

• Critics argue these cuts represent an ideological agenda targeting climate-focused research, with potential long-term impacts on the ability to predict and respond to extreme weather events.

3. Privatization of Weather Forecasting and Disaster Response

• Proposed changes align with efforts to privatize weather forecasting, with plans to commercialize NOAA’s operations and shift disaster response responsibilities to individual states.

• Critics, including former NOAA administrator Rick Spinner, warn that privatization could lead to Americans paying for weather information currently provided for free, raising concerns about equitable access.

• Commerce Secretary Howard Linick and other key figures have ties to private firms with interests in weather derivatives and satellite imagery, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest.

• The administration’s plan to phase out FEMA by December 2025 would reduce federal disaster recovery funding and shift responsibilities to states, bypassing FEMA’s established grant processes.

4. Human and Institutional Costs of Budget Cuts

• Approximately 800 NOAA employees have already left since February, with another 2,000 positions potentially at risk if the budget passes, leading to staffing shortages in half of National Weather Service offices.

• Reduced staffing has already impacted 24-hour coverage and upper air balloon soundings, which are vital for forecast accuracy, further degrading the ability to predict extreme weather.

• Experts warn that dismantling research infrastructure would take years or decades to recover, likening it to "blowing up a dam and trying to rebuild it by gluing pieces back together."

5. Climate Change and Public Perception Challenges

• NOAA’s Climate Extreme Index shows a 58% increase in extreme weather events since the 1980s, underscoring the growing frequency and intensity of such events due to climate change.

• Experts like Michael Oppenheimer and Marshall Sheppard highlight the dangers of "normalcy bias," where individuals base decisions on past experiences, leading to dangerous overconfidence in the face of escalating threats.

• The Texas floods exemplify how outdated perceptions of risk can lead to tragic outcomes, as individuals underestimate the severity of new extreme weather events.

6. Political Actions and Their Impact on Weather Forecasting

• Texas Senator Ted Cruz inserted language into a Republican spending bill that eliminated $150 million for weather forecasting improvements and $50 million in NOAA grants for climate-related research, drawing criticism for the timing during the Texas floods.

• Environmental groups argue such actions exacerbate the deadly impact of disasters, while the administration defends the cuts as efforts to reduce bureaucratic bloat and politically driven programs.

• The broader implications of these actions include potential erosion of institutional knowledge and reduced capacity to adapt to the escalating threats posed by climate change.