by George Wuerthner, ecologist, Livingston/Gardiner
In 2001, the Forest Service passed the Roadless Rule Conservation Act. The Trump administration is seeking to rescind the Act. During a brief public comment period, 99% of the respondents opposed the idea.
The Roadless Rule affected 58.5 million acres of Forest Service roadless lands and put them off-limits to new road construction, logging, and road reconstruction. As the Forest Service recognized in its original review, these roadless lands “have the greatest likelihood of altering and fragmenting landscapes, resulting in immediate, long-term loss of roadless area values and characteristics.”
Abolishing protection from logging and roading provided by the Roadless Rules has major economic consequences, both in direct costs and in avoided costs.
For instance, a practical rationale for the rule is the Forest Service’s acknowledgment that the roughly 370,000 miles of existing Forest Service road network could not be maintained. There is already an $ 11 billion backlog in road maintenance, and creating even more roads would exacerbate this situation.
For instance, nearly 85 percent of the wildfires that start on National Forest land are human-caused. We spend 2.5 billion fighting these fires, and new logging and roading will only increase firefighting costs. A new study found that from 1992 to 2024, wildfires were 4 times more likely to ignite within 50 meters of a road than in a forest without motorized roads. Thus, preserving roadless lands will reduce the likelihood of wildfire.
There are other ecological and economic reasons for preserving the Roadless Rule. Some of the highest quality water is found in roadless areas. Many western cities obtain their drinking water from Forest Service roadless areas and require less treatment than water from other sources.
That same high-quality water supports important fisheries, from salmon to trout, that anglers seek, and provides important food for other wildlife, from bald eagles to river otters. Approximately 70 percent of all roadless areas support native trout and salmon, with 92% of all species at some risk. This includes the “Blue Ribbon” trout streams found in Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, and Colorado, all of which flow from roadless areas. In SE Alaska, nearly all salmon production occurs in Forest Service roadless lands.
Roadless lands are critical for sustaining populations of elk and deer, important to hunters, and essential as prey for predators like mountain lions and wolves. For example, in Idaho, 98% of elk use roadless lands at some point.
Roadless lands are also a major repository of carbon. Carbon emissions are driving climate warming. Just their carbon storage value alone exceeds any economic return from logging.
The idea promoted by the Trump administration that logging our roadless lands can decrease wildfires ignores studies showing that intact forest ecosystems are less likely to burn and burn at lower severity than “managed” forests.
Finally, intact roadless lands are essential for preserving biodiversity, which is the foundation for ecosystem function and stability. Estimates suggest that 57% of vulnerable U.S. wildlife species have suitable habitat in roadless areas.
When all these opportunity costs, as well as actual economic and ecological costs, are considered, any rational person would keep the existing 2001 Roadless Rule Conservation Act intact. Let’s hope a few rational people are working in the current administration.
Leave a Reply