“cons of using taxpayer money to fund roads far outweigh the pros”
“cause millions of dollars in damage”
What it names
Roadless areas
Ponderosa Pine
The comment
I am writing this comment after 2 years in Alaska. In the summer’s I’ve spent here I have witnessed the suffocating effects of wildfires. Wildfires are a natural part of life, and even healthy for our forests. However, effects on communities can be devastating and it is imperative to prevent increase in wildfires beyond what is necessary for normal growth and development. In Alaska, both the Chugach and Tongass National forests would be affected by this policy change.
A 2026 study shows that wildfire ignition density within 50 meters of road is four times higher (Aplet et al. 2026). If new roads are allowed to be built, this could ultimately increase overall wildfire ignition density leading to greater fire risk of the entire area. In contrast, wildfires are important for long-term health of our forests. Development of forest roads prior to the roadless rule in 2001, lead to aggressive fire suppression of low-intensity fires fire that longleaf pine, ponderosa pine, and similar systems evolved with (USDA Forest Service 2001).
As outlined above, rescinding the roadless rule actually increases risk of wildfire. In addition, it may lead to unnecessary suppression of some needed wildfire. Wildfires can wreak havoc on communities and cause millions of dollars in damage. The cons of using taxpayer money to fund roads far outweigh the pros. Do not rescind the roadless rule.