The Forest Service cannot allow the roadless rule to be rescinded. It’s time for FS leadership to step up and protect our public lands from those who want to exploit it for their own personal gain. The roadless rule is more important than ever for both humans and wildlife, as our natural resources dwindle and climate change impacts the globe. Counter to what the current administration claims, we don’t need to “maximize the development and production of the natural resources located on both Federal and State lands…”. Our public lands deserve protection.
Though the administration states the RR had been the “subject of extensive litigation”, it had, and has, strong bipartisan support. Years of work and analysis were put into passing the roadless rule; in fact, this effort had some of the greatest public participation in history. As you know, there were over 600 public meetings across 36 states, over 1.6 million public comments made, overwhelmingly in its favor.
The rule offers consistent land management across states to avoid incremental loss of the “ecological characteristics and social values” of roadless areas. It provides lasting protection for roadless areas to preserve wildlife habitat, protect water quality, and provide recreational opportunities, among other benefits.
The RR moved policy away from developing the FS road system to managing it in an environmentally and financially responsible way, reasons that still resonate today. It directs funds into roads that best provide access for current and anticipated management objectives as well as public uses of FS land. It emphasizes reconstruction and maintenance of needed roads, instead of putting funds into new roads that may not be adequately maintained.
The current administration doesn’t offer much of an argument for rescinding the roadless rule. They say it’s to reduce regulatory burden and bring decisions down to the forest level. Decisions have always been made at the forest level with national guidance and over site. This is an appropriate strategy as public land is held as a national asset for all Americans and does not belong to any one state. Americans In Illinois have just as much of a stake in what happens to public land in Utah as those that live in Utah.
Regulations are only a burden for those that feel the rules stand in the way of their desired outcome. Many that oppose this rule are looking to increase oil, gas, mining, and timber production, justifying it by declaring a national energy emergency. This action will cause undue harm by by failing to stop roads that have “the greatest likelihood of altering and fragmenting landscapes, resulting in immediate, long-term loss of roadless area values and characteristics” as outlined in 66 FR 3244 - 3245.
There is also the claim it’s for wildfire mitigation, removing a one size fits all policy, yet the blanket policy of full suppression is currently an accepted strategy. This strategy goes against findings that full suppression of past wildfires lead to the build up of fuels which increases wildfire severity. The FS also found that a majority of fires are started along FS roads and result in more acres burned, making the addition of more roads counterintuitive if the goal is to increase wildfire mitigation. In 2025 hazardous fuel removal (mechanical and prescribed fire) fell to about half the number of acres treated in 2023 and 2024. Mitigation efforts should begin with reducing fuels in the many areas that do not fall under the roadless rule, rather than adding roads which increase the likelihood of wildfire.