I strongly oppose the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule and urge the USDA to retain it in its entirety.
The Rule protects some of our nation’s last remaining large, undeveloped public forests from the permanent consequences of road construction and commercial development. Once roads are built and intensive development begins, the roadless character and many of the ecological, recreational, wildlife, watershed, and other public values of these areas cannot simply be restored.
The Department’s stated goals of reducing regulatory burden and increasing local flexibility do not justify eliminating national protections. National Forest lands belong to the American public as a whole, and their management should not be determined solely by short-term or local economic pressures.
Rescission would create greater opportunities for commercial logging, road building, mining, and other development in areas protected precisely because of their undeveloped character. Any economic benefits would be temporary and concentrated, while the loss of intact forests, wildlife habitat, clean watersheds, recreation, and other public values could be permanent.
The Roadless Rule has protected these lands for more than two decades. That is not a regulatory failure; it is evidence of the Rule’s value. I urge the USDA to withdraw the proposal and preserve the Rule’s national protections rather than shifting responsibility for them to individual forest-level decisions.
Sincerely,
David E. Brown, Ph.D.
Missoula, MT 59801