I'm a lifelong North Dakota resident with an appreciation for places that aren't intersected by roads, and a taxpayer who doesn't think the Service needs to spend money on more roads and maintenance beyond what we already have. I urge the U.S. Forest Service to select the No Action Alternative and retain the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I value the roadless areas within the Dakota Prairie Grasslands, including the Little Missouri National Grassland. Rescinding the Rule is unnecessary and costly:
- It is not required for oil and gas development. Modern horizontal directional drilling allows resources to be accessed from existing road networks and centralized well pads without new roads into roadless areas.
- It is not required for wildfire mitigation. The current Rule already permits fuels reduction and habitat restoration. Research also shows wildfire ignitions occur roughly four times more often near roads than in roadless forest.
- It adds cost, not value. The Forest Service already manages about 370,000 miles of road nationally, with $10.8 billion in deferred maintenance. New roads mean new long-term liabilities for taxpayers.
Less than 40,000 acres of the Dakota Prairie Grasslands remain managed as Suitable for Wilderness, down from roughly 500,000 acres eligible in the early 1970s. These lands support cattle grazing, hunting, fishing, and recreation that generations of North Dakotans depend on. I ask the Forest Service to protect what remains and reject this proposal.