I strongly oppose the rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. By ending this rule, it poses multiple threats to our forests and public health via increased wildfires, threatens local economies, jeopardizes clean drinking water for millions of Americans, endangers natural habitats and ecosystem biodiversity, and violates the public land agreement with American taxpayers.
Data shows that roads act as an ignition source for wildfires and they are the most common places for wildfires to start. The US Forest Service's own data shows that roads are highly correlated with wildfires, with the majority of wildfires being started as a result of human activity within 50 meters of a roadway. Additionally, researchers found that there is a four times greater risk of fires starting near roads compared with roadless forests (Aplet et al., 2026). The administration's claim that the Roadless Rule prevents the US Forest Service from decreasing wildfire damage is simply false; repealing this rule will result in more fires (Aplet et al., 2026), further straining already at capacity wildfire fighting resources. This also places habitats and communities in increased danger, and home and business owners assume an increased risk for property damage, which has further economic implications. Regarding public health, wildfire smoke contributes to poor air quality for millions of Americans. Wildfire smoke composition is harmful to breathe, exacerbating chronic respiratory conditions and promoting the development of reactive airway conditions, like asthma (The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology, 2026). The administration's continued cuts to healthcare spending creates a situation where we should be focusing on reducing chronic illness, not promoting it. The economic implications of long-term chronic conditions are well established, and air quality is a major factor in chronic disease prevention.
Local economies will suffer under this rule change, with the US Forest Service’s own economists stating that revoking the Roadless Rule would result in a loss of up to $9 million annually in visitor spending to nearby communities that benefit from remote public land tourism. Additionally, the agency is already behind in existing road maintenance (US Forest Service, 2026); adding more dirt roads for the primary purpose of industry accessing forests, not for the benefit of American taxpayers, will further contribute to the road maintenance spending backlog resulting in an even bigger bill for taxpayers who are ultimately footing the bill for private industry to access our public lands (US Forest Service, 2026).
Drinking water quality will suffer under this rule change for approximately 25 million Americans (Olden et al., 2026; US Forest Service, 2026). Increased soil erosion, sediment run off, and pollution will jeopardize remote watersheds that provide drinking water for millions of Americans (US Forest Service, 2026). At a time when we are facing more droughts and competition with industry for fresh water, this is a disastrous situation that will result in water shortages for millions of people.
Additionally, the biological assessment provided by the US Forest Service highlights the negative impact on biodiversity and 327 threatened and endangered species. Seventy-one designated critical habitats are at risk with revoking this rule (US Forest Service, 2026). Biodiversity is the cornerstone of a healthy ecosystem.
These lands are pristine and untouched American wilderness. Who are we that we would destroy our own world-renowned, iconic wilderness. This is our heritage. Americans take great pride in our protected, wild, public lands and I reject any actions by the federal government that would damage them, such as revoking the Roadless Rule. As an American taxpayer I fundamentally oppose this action that would result in unnecessary increased spending of our tax dollars, poorer air and water quality, destruction of old growth habitats and wildlife populations, and what represents an egregious misuse of our public lands with nothing in return, while industry makes billions in profits at our expense. I oppose.
Aplet, G.H., Hartger, P. & Dietz, M.S. Three-decade record of contiguous-U.S. national forest wildfires indicates increased density of ignitions near roads. Fire Ecology 22, 8 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-026-00450-2
Olden JD, Postel SL, Dombeck MP, Kesting H, Freeman P, et al. (2026) Assessing the value of the U.S. Roadless Rule for people and nature. PLOS Water 5(7): e0000538. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pwat.0000538
The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology. (2026, July 16). Wildfire Smoke, Asthma and the Immune System. https://www.aaaai.org/tools-for-the-public/conditions-library/asthma/wildfire
US Forest Service. (2026, August). 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule Rescission. Draft Environmental Impact Statement. US Department of Agriculture.