The U.S. Department of Agriculture has pulled Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest off the chopping block and agreed to take a second look at the planned closure of nearby Bartlett Experimental Forest, defusing a fight that had united New Hampshire’s bipartisan congressional delegation against a Trump administration consolidation plan. Governor Kelly Ayotte announced the reversal Monday after what she described as a productive conversation with USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins, calling the two White Mountain research sites essential to the state’s economy and environment, according to New Hampshire Public Radio.
For the 70-year-old field station tucked into the southwestern flank of the White Mountain National Forest, Monday’s announcement ends weeks of uncertainty. Hubbard Brook was established in 1955 and has become one of the most-cited long-term ecological research sites in North America, with continuous data sets on water chemistry, soil, forest health, and climate that scientists rely on to understand how northern forests respond to acid rain, drought, and warming temperatures. None of that record would be possible without the technicians, plots, and instruments that the Forest Service was suddenly proposing to walk away from.
Why Hubbard Brook Was Suddenly in Doubt
The crisis began in March, when the Forest Service announced a sweeping nationwide reorganization. The agency said it would relocate its headquarters from Washington, D.C. to Salt Lake City, Utah, consolidate regional offices, and shut down more than 50 of its 77 research and development sites. Bartlett Experimental Forest, a roughly 100-year-old facility about an hour’s drive from Hubbard Brook, was placed on the closure list immediately. Hubbard Brook itself was not formally closed, but the agency’s own website listed every research and development site as “under evaluation,” which meant the gear could be unplugged at any moment.
Forest scientists and the White Mountains communities that host them treated the ambiguity as a death sentence. Hubbard Brook is not just a fence around some trees. It is a watershed-scale laboratory whose value lies in continuity, with stream gauges and weather records that stretch back to the Eisenhower administration. Break the chain even for a single field season, and decades of comparative data lose context. That is the case Hubbard Brook’s executive director, Anthea Lavallee, and her counterparts at Bartlett had been making for weeks.
A Rare Bipartisan Win Under a Republican USDA
Lavallee credited a coordinated push by Ayotte, a Republican, and Democratic Senators Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan with persuading the USDA to back down. “I think everyone agreed that supporting this science that’s a vital resource to forest policy makers and practitioners is a good idea for all kinds of reasons,” Lavallee told NHPR. She emphasized that the coalition pressuring the agency stretched across timber, recreation, and academic interests, an unusual alignment in a state where forest policy normally divides loggers from conservationists.
Shaheen’s office said it received more than 30 letters in support of keeping the experimental forests open. That paper trail, combined with direct outreach to Secretary Rollins, gave the delegation a clear case to make: Hubbard Brook and Bartlett are not duplicative bureaucratic outposts but core federal investments that the timber industry, university researchers, and state agencies all use to do their jobs.
“New Hampshire’s forests are an essential part of our economy, our environment, and our way of life,” Ayotte said in a statement. “I had a productive conversation with Secretary Rollins and Senator Shaheen, and I appreciate USDA’s commitment to keeping these important research forests operating.”
Bartlett Is Reprieved, Not Saved
While Hubbard Brook is now formally off the closure list, the future of Bartlett Experimental Forest is less settled. The USDA committed only to reevaluate the decision to shutter Bartlett’s facilities, not to reverse it. Bartlett, established in 1931, has its own long-term datasets on forest growth, harvesting impacts, and wildlife. It is also the home base for researchers who range across the White Mountain National Forest, including those who work on the roadless rule rollback and federal forest management debates that have intensified in recent years.
“We’re still very concerned about Bartlett, but we’re hopeful that these other incredibly important sites all across the country will also stay safe,” Lavallee said. The Forest Service has not released an updated list of sites slated for closure, and watchdogs both inside and outside the agency expect the broader consolidation push to continue.
What the Science Actually Produces
Hubbard Brook’s research portfolio is the strongest argument for the federal investment. The site is best known for documenting the link between fossil fuel emissions and acid rain, work that helped drive the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments. More recently, researchers there have tracked the slow recovery of streams as sulfur emissions have declined, the troubling reappearance of mercury and lead in forest soils, and the way warmer winters are reshaping the snowpack that feeds New Hampshire rivers.
Those findings feed directly into how the state thinks about water quality, timber yield, and climate resilience. The legislature has been wrestling with related questions all session, including its decision to bar carbon sequestration projects on state and county lands and a separate effort to study the impact of neonicotinoid-treated seeds on wildlife. The empirical foundation under each of those debates traces back, in part, to the kind of long-running field work Hubbard Brook does.
A Political Lesson for the Delegation
Politically, the Hubbard Brook outcome will be claimed as a win by everyone involved. Ayotte gets to demonstrate she can move a Republican USDA on a state priority. Shaheen and Hassan, both Democrats, get a tangible result during a session when their party has limited leverage at the federal level. The Trump administration gets to argue that its consolidation plan is being executed with input from local stakeholders rather than imposed from above.
It also resets expectations for how future Forest Service decisions in New England will land. Bartlett’s fate is the next test. So is the broader question of how many of the agency’s research sites across the country can survive the reorganization with the kind of focused, bipartisan push that Hubbard Brook just received. New Hampshire has now shown one template for keeping a federal facility open: line up the governor, both senators, the host university community, the timber industry, and the recreation economy behind the same letter.
For the technicians who will go back to checking stream gauges, weighing snowpack, and recalibrating instruments this week, the message is more immediate. The lights stay on, and the record keeps running.
Frequently Asked Questions
Will Hubbard Brook close as part of the Forest Service reorganization?
No. USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins confirmed on May 11, 2026 that Hubbard Brook is not on any proposed closure list and will continue to operate. The decision followed a coordinated push by Governor Kelly Ayotte and Senators Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan.
What about Bartlett Experimental Forest?
Bartlett’s status is still unresolved. The USDA committed only to reevaluate its earlier decision to close Bartlett facilities rather than to reverse the closure outright. Advocates remain cautiously optimistic but say the fight is not over.
Why is Hubbard Brook so important to researchers?
Hubbard Brook has produced one of the longest continuous ecological data sets in North America, including the foundational research that connected fossil fuel emissions to acid rain. Its watershed-scale measurements of water chemistry, soil, snowpack, and forest health are used by federal agencies, state regulators, universities, and the timber industry.
How big was the Forest Service reorganization plan?
The agency announced in March 2026 that it would move its national headquarters from Washington, D.C. to Salt Lake City, Utah, consolidate regional offices, and shutter more than 50 of its 77 research and development sites across the country. Bartlett was on the initial closure list. Hubbard Brook was officially under evaluation.
Who led the effort to keep Hubbard Brook open?
It was a bipartisan effort. Republican Governor Kelly Ayotte and Democratic Senators Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan all pressed USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins. Senator Shaheen’s office said more than 30 letters from constituents and stakeholders were submitted in support of keeping the experimental forests open.
