Rescinding the Roadless Rule is an attack on America’s future

In a disastrous step backwards for America’s forests, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins has announced that the U.S. Department of Agriculture is rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule – a longstanding federal policy that has been instrumental in protecting nearly 60 million acres of America’s wild forests from the incursion of roads, logging and industrial development.

Implemented as a result of one of the most extensive public comment processes in federal rulemaking history, this rule, usually referred to simply as “The Roadless Rule,” has served as a crucial bulwark against the destruction of some of the last intact forest ecosystems in the United States. For nearly a quarter of a century, the rule has been instrumental in preserving critical wildlife habitat, protecting drinking water sources for millions of Americans, and locking away huge amounts of carbon at a time when climate change has made these vast natural carbon sinks more vital than ever.

Forests without roads: Why it matters

The rollback of the Roadless Rule would be disastrous not just for trees, but the ecological integrity of vast swathes of the American landscape.

Roadless areas of forestland are not simply “unused” or “unproductive” landscapes waiting to be put to better use. They are among the most ecologically important places on the planet. By keeping them free of new roads, we preserve biodiversity, prevent the spread of invasive species and maintain the natural cycles that forests depend on.

As well as enabling easier access for logging and mining companies, roads themselves are one of the leading vectors of ecological fragmentation, slicing up wildlife habitats and disrupting the movement and reproduction of species. Even so-called “temporary” roads can leave permanent scars, causing erosion, sedimentation of waterways and an open door for further human exploitation.

Forests – and old-growth forests in particular – play a critical role in providing the clean water essential for healthy fish and wildlife populations and local communities, providing natural water filtration and nutrient cycling, maintaining healthy soils, and reducing the threat of flooding in downstream communities. Soil erosion caused by logging and other human activities leads to increased quantities of nutrients, sediment and other pollutants making their way into rivers and streams, which can be devastating for fish and other aquatic species.

Undeveloped forests – and again, old-growth forests especially – are also critical buffers against climate change, absorbing CO2 and storing it long-term in trees and soils. Alaska’s Tongass National Forest alone stores hundreds of millions of tons of carbon – 8% of the total carbon stored in all U.S. forests. A 2016 analysis of U.S. Forest Service proposals to log more than 300,000 acres of the forest estimated that this would be equivalent to putting an additional 4 million vehicles on the nation’s roads and keeping them there for a century.

Public lands, public interest

Once a road is built and a forest is logged, the ecological damage is done. The trees themselves may eventually regrow, but ecosystems are much slower to recover – and some may never return to their original state.

The Roadless Rule has – and has always had – broad support among the American public. The rule was born as a result of more than 1.6 million public comments – the vast majority of them in support of it – and surveys show that that support has not gone away. Research by Pew Charitable Trusts in 2019 found 75% of Americans remained in favor of it.

The battle over the Roadless Rule pits short-term economic interests against the broader public interest in maintaining intact natural landscapes and the complex webs of life they support, both for their own sake and for the services they provide. The cost of losing these landscapes, after all, is borne by everyone – including future generations, who have no say in current discussions.

In an era when ecosystem collapse and climate change are no longer hypothetical threats, but crises unfolding before our eyes, the direction of travel should be toward stronger protections for our forests, not rescinding the ones we already have. Weakening the safeguards that protect the nation’s last remaining natural landscapes is not just an attack on ancient trees and unspoiled wilderness – it’s an attack on America’s future.