Terry Zink has spent his entire life in the woods.
A 57-year-old, third-generation hound from Marion, Montana—a town tucked away in the Flathead National Forest—Zink hunts mountain lions and bears while running a small archery business.
He also voted for Trump, but after the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) implemented deep cuts to the federal agencies that manage America’s public lands in 2025, Zink is openly second-guessing his vote.
“You won’t meet anyone more conservative than me, and I didn’t vote for it,” Zink told Politico (1). “You can’t lay off our firefighters. You can’t lay off our trail crews. You have to have selective logging, water restoration and healthy forests.”
In Montana, the impact is already being felt. Hunters are heading to overlapping trails, ranchers are looking at freezes on funding for drought resilience and wildfire mitigation, and outfitters and guides — who brought in an estimated $314 million to Montana in 2024 — are facing staff cuts that have hurt their businesses.
And this isn’t just happening in Montana.
Versions of this scenario are playing out in the West, with real consequences for rural jobs, small businesses, and the cost of hunting and fishing on public lands.
Since the beginning of 2024, the federal workforce managing America’s public lands has shrunk by about 20%, falling from 79,070 employees to 63,141 by September 2025, according to the Center for American Progress (2).
The cuts hit these specific agencies the hardest (3):
-
US Forest Service: About 3,400 jobs cut
-
National Park Service: About 1,000 jobs cut
-
Land Administration Office: About 800 jobs cut
About 97% of Bureau of Land Management employees work outside of DC, often in remote small towns where federal agencies are among the largest employers (4). When lifeguard stations close or seasonal crews disappear, the economic fallout can spill over to local gas stations, restaurants and diners, as well as hotels and motels.
According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, outdoor recreation generated $1.2 trillion in economic output in 2023, accounted for 2.3% of US GDP, and supported five million jobs (5). States like Montana, Alaska, Vermont and Hawaii rely on outdoor recreation at twice the national average. In Montana alone, the sector pumped $3.4 billion into the state economy in 2023 (6).
Meanwhile, all of this economic impact depends on public lands being accessible, properly staffed, and well maintained.
Read more: The average net worth of Americans is a surprising $620,654. But it means almost nothing. Here’s the number that matters (and how to make it skyrocket)
Cuts to agencies that maintain public lands may sound like an environmental issue, but cuts can also impact the economy as well as your wallet. Here’s how:
Research from Headwaters Economics shows that rural counties with significant federal land have historically experienced stronger job growth than other states. In fact, western counties with 30% or more federally protected land experienced a 345% increase in jobs over 40 years, compared to only an 83% increase in counties with no federal public lands (7).
The 2025 job cuts are sure to affect those percentages, and stalling job growth in counties with significant federal land could have a negative economic effect on local communities.
Providers cannot conduct tours without permits, farmers need grazing approvals, and guides depend on well-maintained trails and open access.
With less staff at the federal agencies that manage America’s public lands, permits are piling up. A supplier in Colorado told reporters in May 2025 that his permits for the year were already behind schedule, leaving the entire season and his revenue in limbo (8).
This kind of delay could lead to trip cancellations and decreased business for outfitters and guides, meaning tourists who come to town for said trips may not be spending money and contributing to the local economy. In 2024, visitors to national parks spent $29 billion in nearby communities, generating $56.3 billion in total economic output, according to the National Park Service (9).
According to the Center for American Progress, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) tried to insert language into Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” that would have made millions of acres of public land eligible for sale. A bipartisan backlash killed this initiative, but Lee vowed to keep pushing (10). In fact, Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum has repeatedly called public lands “America’s balance sheet,” framing them as assets waiting to be sold (11).
Today, Americans can hunt, fish, hike, and camp on public land for free, or close to it, but access comes at a real dollar value. On private lands, hunting leases typically cost between $10 and $50 per acre, but these costs can vary. A basic lease of 200 acres can cost anywhere from $2,000 to $10,000 per year. In top hunting states such as Texas, Kansas, and Illinois, prices can rise to $25-$60 per acre (12).
For now, Americans still have access to public lands for these activities, but if states inherit land they can’t afford to manage, selling the land becomes the easiest option. In fact, the state of Nevada retained only 3,000 acres of the original 2.1 million it received from the federal government (13). And when states sell public lands, free access to them can quickly disappear.
As for Zink, he’s still in the woods, hunting and running his business. But like many, he’s watching closely and wondering how long the land that supports his livelihood will remain public, affordable and accessible.
We only rely on verified sources and credible third-party reports. For details, see editorial ethics and guidelines.
Politics (1); Center for American Progress (2); Mountaineers.org (3); Inside Climate News (4); Bureau of Economic Analysis (5); Bureau of Business and Economic Research (6); Headwaters Economics (7); NPR News (8); National Park Service (9); Axios (10); PBS News (11); Land application (12); National Wildlife Federation (13)
This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. Offered without warranty of any kind.
