As a backcountry fly fisher who fishes and recreates in areas including the Deschutes National Forest, Three Sisters Wilderness, and Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule.
For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes.
Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country.
USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone.
Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain.
Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country.
The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility.
America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported.
I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place.
Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.