Art Morrison, a spokesman for the Forest Service in Albuquerque, said the U.S. Department of Agriculture's office of general counsel has not yet received a copy of Parker's lawsuit. He couldn't comment further.

According to the lawsuit, Parker became the subject of hostile treatment by his supervisors after complaining about what he called a "systemic problem" when it came to proper pesticide use across several forests in New Mexico and Arizona.

Parker had accused some managers of not preparing environmental risk assessments and failing to get approval from agency officials who had the authority to make decisions about pesticides.

He was concerned that not following agency policies or laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act -- which serves as the basis for federal management of public lands -- could have consequences for public safety and the environment.

"Responsible management officials knew and were aware that Mr. Parker considered the manner in which pesticide coordination was being carried out by others to be ethically, legally and environmentally unsound," the lawsuit reads.

While forest officials have remained mum on Parker's case, they have maintained that all projects involving pesticides and herbicides undergo a process to ensure the public is involved and that requirements spelled out by federal law are met.

In addition to seeking a jury trial, Parker's lawsuit asks the court to reverse a decision reached in June by the federal government's Merit Systems Protection Board upholding his firing.

The lawsuit claims the board's decision was "an abuse of discretion, contrary to law and unsupported by substantial evidence."

The board's decision details the bitter relationship between Parker and his immediate supervisor, Leonard Lucero, as well as the back-and-forth exchanges between the two that eventually resulted in Parker being suspended three times in eight months for allegedly failing to follow his supervisor's instructions and for not properly formatting progress reports.

Parker maintains that he developed a pesticide training program as requested despite not having any funding for the work and that he provided information on his progress as requested by his supervisor.

He said the suspensions and his eventual firing over what he called "minor formatting issues" amounted to reprisal for him speaking out about potential problems.

MSPB administrative judge Laura Albornoz acknowledged in her ruling that regional forest officials had discussed news reports about Parker's allegations of pesticide misuse that were published around the same time as the agency's disciplinary actions. She said his whistleblowing was a contributing factor in the agency's personnel action.

But she also found that the agency would have taken the same action despite Parker's disclosures because he and his supervisor had been disagreeing about how to proceed with training since late 2004 -- before Parker went public with the allegations.

Parker said he had complained to forest officials about his concerns long before going public with the information in 2005.

Prior to the Southwest region beginning to use pesticides in 2003, Parker said his supervisor had never complained about his performance. He also noted that his record as a 39-year veteran was clean.

"The adverse actions occurred only as the pesticide program grew and were directly related to me as the messenger of bad news," Parker said.