I'm writing as a frequent visitor to the public lands of Central Oregon, and I strongly oppose the USDA's proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule. I urge you to choose the No Action alternative and keep full Roadless Rule protections for the nearly 45 million acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas nationwide.
Central Oregon has close to 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland. For nearly 25 years these areas have protected wildlife habitat, supported local economies, and kept drinking water clean. I care about three things in particular.
Mountain biking and backcountry recreation. Mountain bikes aren't allowed in designated Wilderness, so roadless areas are some of the only places left where riders can find a remote, backcountry experience. New logging roads, clearcuts, and truck traffic would break up trail corridors, close routes during operations, and replace a backcountry ride with a ride through an industrial zone. Once a road goes in, that experience doesn't come back.
Clean water and snow. Roads are one of the biggest sources of sediment in forest streams. The Bend Municipal Watershed starts in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest, and it supplies drinking water to more than 100,000 people. It also supports fish populations downstream. The snowpack in these high-elevation forests is our water supply and the base of our winter recreation. Road building and logging remove the canopy and disturb soils, which changes how snow builds up and melts and puts more sediment and pollutants into the water. Protecting roadless areas is the cheapest way to keep that water clean. Paying to treat it later costs far more.
The economic cost. Opening Central Oregon's roadless areas to logging won't produce a meaningful economic return. These areas are often remote and steep, so roads are expensive to build and to maintain, and the timber value is low. The real economic engine here is outdoor recreation and the quality of life that draws people and businesses to the region. Riders, skiers, hikers, anglers, and hunters support local shops, guides, restaurants, and lodging year-round. Damaging the landscapes that bring people here would trade a lasting, renewable economy for a short-term, marginal timber harvest.
Rescinding the Rule would also make our forests less resilient. Research shows wildfires are about four times more likely to ignite near roads. Roads also spread invasive species, break up wildlife corridors, and weaken forests that are already dealing with rapidly changing fire regimes.
Please abandon the effort to repeal the Roadless Rule. Instead, strengthen protections for America's roadless forests and the clean water, recreation, climate resilience, and wildlife habitat they provide.
Chris Niggel
Bend, OR