The National Wildlife Refuge System is the world’s largest system of lands and waters dedicated to the conservation of wildlife. That system is much more than a collection of boundaries drawn on the map. To fulfil its mission, the Refuge System must actively maintain and restore habitats, inventory and monitor the species that use them, and accommodate compatible public uses. Each of those programs requires the time and labor of a highly skilled workforce. It is the dedicated staff of the Refuge System that truly makes it a system.
Unfortunately, the Refuge System workforce has dwindled over the years. Due to stagnant funding, the number of full-time staff at the start of 2025 was roughly 30% less than it was in 2010. Since taking office, the Trump administration has made aggressive moves to push out hundreds more Refuge System employees while also putting a freeze on hiring. With many positions vacant, critical refuge needs are going unmet. What has long been a chronic problem is now a full-blown crisis.
The public got a glimpse of the situation this past April, when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service released a summary of its effort to categorize refuges based on staffing levels. The four categories are 1) refuges that have “full required resources;” 2) refuges that can only partially achieve their management goals due to “limited resources;” 3) refuges that have “insufficient resources” to achieve their management goals; and 4) refuges that are “shuttered.”
The summary revealed that none of the 573 refuges in the Refuge System have all the resources they need, and 57% have insufficient resources. “Capacity right now is at a tipping point,” an agency official noted, “[putting] both the economic and the conservation vitality of the National Wildlife Refuge System at risk.”
A nationwide problem headed in the wrong direction
Defenders of Wildlife recently obtained the spreadsheet used by FWS to categorize the refuges. This spreadsheet identifies the status of every refuge, including any changes that occurred between the initial assessment in March and a second in July of this year. Unsurprisingly, there was a negative trend—16 refuges were downgraded from limited to insufficient while none moved in the opposite direction. As of July, the share of refuges unable to achieve their goals had ticked up to 59%, and there were still no refuges that were fully staffed.
Nationwide, 9% of refuges are classified as shuttered. Some of these had already limited public access for years because of safety concerns or to protect wildlife such as nesting seabirds. But at least one historically open refuge—Guadalupe-Nipomo Dunes on the central California coast—was shuttered as of March. And Louisianna’s Bayou Cocodrie and St. Catherine Creek were moved from insufficient to shuttered in the July update. While these refuges may not have locked their gates, it appears they no longer have any on-the-ground management.
Insufficiently staffed refuges are found in every region of the System, ranging from 19% of refuges in the southwest to all of Alaska’s 16 refuges. The most biodiverse refuges, and some of those most important to threatened and endangered species, have been particularly hard hit by the loss of staff. Defenders of Wildlife conducted an analysis to rank refuges based on their biodiversity values, with an emphasis on federally listed and other at-risk species. Eight of the top 10 refuges in our rankings and 68% of the top 50 were categorized as insufficiently staffed.
Local perspectives and impacts
The spreadsheet includes notes from refuge staff that offer a window into the real consequences of staffing cuts. Hakalau Forest in Hawaii is the top-ranked refuge according to our biodiversity analysis, thanks in large part to imperiled songbirds like the iconic 'I'iwi. The notes reveal that Hakalau Forest recently lost two key leadership positions, as well as the refuge’s only maintenance person. Another Hawaiian refuge, Kilauea Point, has “lost ability to maintain habitat critical to this refuge.”
Buenos Aires refuge in Arizona was created to support a reintroduction program for the endangered masked bobwhite quail. Its managers note that they “do not have sufficient funding to minimally operate the refuge and fulfill the quail care and recovery expectations.” The notes for Nevada’s Ash Meadows, renowned for its endemic species including the critically endangered Devils Hole pupfish, state simply that the refuge has “insufficient staff for the work.”
To compensate for vacant positions, the remaining staff have taken on unfamiliar roles and worked countless hours of unpaid overtime. There has been an understandable reluctance among managers to acknowledge the ways in which their admirable efforts have been unable to overcome the loss of resources, leaving refuge needs unmet. Many of the notes put on a brave face while also indicating how dire the situation has become. The managers at the Sacramento refuge in California say they are “getting by but staff are strained.” At Moapa Valley they are “getting by but with staff of one.” And at Kern they are “getting by with interns for now.”
A time for Congressional action
The state of Refuge System staffing will get worse before it gets better. A widely expected Department of Interior reorganization and reduction in force order is looming. In his budget proposal for 2026, President Trump requested a drastic 22% reduction in appropriations for the Refuge System.
There has at least been pushback in Congress, where appropriations committees in the House and Senate each approved funding levels that are similar to the amount the Refuge System received in fiscal year 2025. The Senate appropriations bill also expressed concern about the deterioration of Refuge System staffing and would require monthly reports with staffing levels and other data “to convince the Committee that operations have not been and will not be deleteriously affected in an effort to make the Refuge System operate more efficiently.”
Holding the line is necessary but just the start of what Congress needs to do. To put the Refuge System back on track, there must be a plan to give it the resources it needs to restore the essential functions that have been lost.
Author
