I oppose rescinding the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Having lived near US National Forest Service (USFS) lands for over 4 decades in Idaho and Wyoming (Bridger-Teton and Caribou-Targhee NF), I know how important roadless lands are for wildlife, clean water, recreation, scenery and human safety. As a pilot employed to conduct aerial wildlife surveys and research, I have seen the stark contrast of roadless lands, which benefit many kinds of mammals, and the much less valuable roaded and logged lands, which wildlife avoid.
The claim that USFS needs more roads and more logging to mitigate wildfire risks and handle diseases is ludicrous for the following reasons:
1. Wildfires are most often started by humans, in the vicinity of roads. The proliferation of recreational vehicles and large pickup trucks means more vehicles and people in remote areas, where cell phone do not work. More fires should be expected with more roads on USFS lands. And more lives lost because of the scarcity of local law enforcement. Obviously, the agencies lack the resources to deal with this.
2. Local USFS planners and managers are not able to keep up with their current work loads, let alone a flood of new projects brought by eliminating the federal ban on logging and road-building within roughly 45 million acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas. This would be disastrous. USFS staff can retire to avoid the ugly situation, but those of us who live near, recreate or work in those previously roadless areas will bear the costs of dealing with poorly supervised projects, and the risks they pose.
3. Logged areas slowly recover in this region, and can result in dense monocultures of lodgepole pine, or shrubs and grass. These are also risky for wildfire. How much of a budget will USFS have to keep maintaining these areas to reduce future fire risks? What kind of schedule is needed to keep the lands in the ‘desired future conditions’? Do not gaslight the public by saying more roads save money and make us safer. The environmental analysis must closely examine these issues affecting the future with the best available science.
4. The environmental qualities of roadless areas are numerous, particularly as ever larger amounts of land in the US are degraded by a variety of factors. Qualities include secure habitat for rare and threatened species, migration zones, nesting habitat for forest-dependent birds, clean and undisturbed streams and wetlands, plant and forest successional stage diversity. Humans find solitude, natural sounds, and remarkable beauty of many kinds as they recreate in these areas, gaining physical health and peace of mind. These are ever more precious in the 21st century.
5. Time and again, we have seen ‘managed areas’ of forests burn, threatening homes and entire towns. USFS needs to disclose the scale of this phenomenon. The claim that more logging, thinning, and roads protect people needs to be scrutinized with the best available science.
6. USFS cannot maintain the current vast system of back-county roads. How will the addition of many more roads increase the burden, the problems, and the national debt?
Please do not rescind the Roadless Rule. Drop it now to avoid wasting more money, or proceed to select the No Action Alternative.