Protecting Our Wild Places: Why We Should Care About the Roadless Rule

People across the country, from different backgrounds and political views, agree on one thing: our public lands are precious and need protection.

The Recent Threat

This was clear when millions of acres of public lands were almost sold off in a recent budget proposal. The public spoke up, and the sale was stopped. But the threat to these lands is not over.

Right now, the current administration is trying to give away millions of acres of our wildest national forests to private companies. This would also take away the original Indigenous people's access to their traditional lands. And guess who pays for this? We do.

The Roadless Area Conservation Rule

This plan involves getting rid of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. You might not know the name, but you know the results. For over 20 years, this rule has kept nearly 60 million acres of national forests safe from roads, logging, and mining. This includes places like the Chiricahua Mountains and the Blue Range in Arizona.

Wildfires and the Roadless Rule

Some people say getting rid of this rule will help with wildfires, but that's not true. Studies show that wildfires are more likely to start near roads and developments. So, building more roads could actually make the problem worse.

The Real Reason

So, why get rid of the Roadless Rule? It seems the real reason is to allow more logging, mining, and drilling on public lands. This could make climate change even worse. Big, old trees absorb a lot of carbon pollution and are more resistant to wildfires. Cutting them down is not a good idea.

Economic Impact

Getting rid of the Roadless Rule is also a bad idea for the economy. Building and maintaining roads is expensive. The Forest Service already has a huge network of roads to take care of. Plus, most people don't want to see the Roadless Rule go away. In a recent comment period, 99% of the comments were against getting rid of the rule.