The USFS Wants to Rescind the Roadless Rule, Speak Up Now

On August 18, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke L. Rollinsannounced the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) has filed a proposed ruleto rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The announcement claims the rescission is due to the fact that the rule “exacerbates rising wildfire risk.”

The Wildfire Excuse

Using wildfire as reason to rescind the Roadless Rule is more likely a thinly veiled excuse to allow logging and mineral extraction in these areas. Multiple studies have proven that wildfires are both more likely to start near roads and are also able to be managed just as effectively in roadless areas.

In this2020 study conducted by the USDA, researchers determined that over two decades of monitoring forest areas with and without roads, there is no correlation of roads in maintaining forest health. “Agency management records show that a lack of roads has not stopped fire prevention measures; fuel management activities in roadless areas have actually been more numerous on a per-square-kilometer basis than elsewhere in the National Forest System,” the study states.

According to this January 2026 studypublished inFire Ecology, the lower wildfire-ignition density across USFS regions was in designated wilderness areas, closely followed by roadless areas. Comparatively, the highest wildfire-ignition density was in lands within 50 meters of a road where fires are four times more likely to start. “Our results suggest that building roads into roadless areas is likely to result in more fires,” the study concludes.

And inthis letter addressed to Secretary Rollins and Chief Schultzfrom 30 of the country's top forest science researchers, they refute the recent claims of the USDA that rescinding the rule will aid in fire mitigation. “A careful examination of the available research appears to strongly suggest two key relevant points: 1) building more roads in currently unroaded areas is likely to result in more human-caused wildfire starts on national forest lands, and 2) that current roadless rule limitations are not hindering hazardous fuel reduction projects,” the letter states.

New Roads?

Currently, the USFS manages roughly 370,000 miles of roads and is approximately $10.8 billion in the hole for deferred maintenance. If you’ll remember not long ago, DOGE ripped through funding dollars and the federal workforce with an electric chainsaw. The USFS is understaffed and underfunded. New roads—both permanent and temporary—take money to build and maintain.

Yet, the drafted EIS fails to include any accountability for the cost of road maintenance or building in the proposed draft. It does, however, offer that “budget, conservation objectives, and physical resource limits are expected to constrain new permanent road construction.”

The EIS also states that "any near-term permanent road additions would be anticipated to occur on lands where current land management plans allow them (but where the 2001 Roadless Rule currently prohibits them)—totaling about 18.2 million acres, or 45.5 percent of the potentially affected environment. Temporary roads, if proposed, are more likely to occur on lands within 0.5 miles of existing roads—totaling about 11.3 million acres, or 28.3 percent of the potentially affected environment.”

That means up to 74% or 29.5 million acres of current roadless areas could potentially have permanent or temporary roads through them.

Wildlife, Habitat, and Hunting Heritage

Multiple resources have been published recently on what roadless areas provide. Check out thisinteractive map and report from onXthat shows where roadless areas could be impacted near you. Looking to better understand the impacts of the Roadless Rule on hunters, anglers, wildlife, and habitat?Check out this report compiled by Trout Unlimited.
The Roadless Rule may not be perfect as it’s currently written, but that’s no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Getting rid of the rule entirely will cause far more problems than it is currently creating. Revision is very different from rescission. Taking away those protections without a backup leaves too many critical forest areas vulnerable for development.
The Roadless Rule protects over 44 million acres of forest in 37 states. These lands support native fish, big game, game birds, and other non-game species as well. They offer some of the best hunting and fishing opportunities. Not to mention, maintaining unfragmented roadless areas is one of the most effective and cost-efficient forms of conservation.

How Many Ways Can You Rescind a Rule?

If you’ve been keeping up with the news on the Roadless Rule, you know this isn’t the first attempt at getting rid of it recently.

Last August,the USDA opened a public comment periodto gain input while creating an environmental impact statement (EIS) for rescinding the rule. Over 625,000 comments were submitted, and about 99% opposed it. But that didn’t stop the USDA from drafting the new proposed EIS (which is what the public comment period open now is regarding).

Additionally, this year in January, Rep. Harriet Hageman proposed billH.R.7695to rescind the rule, which did not progress past the House. And in June, Mike Lee’s last-minute amendment to the Wildfire Prevention Act of 2025 to nullify the roadless rule ultimately failed. These are two examples of attempting to expedite the process of rescinding the rule, but their defeats are a good indication that the American people do not actually want the Roadless Rule rescinded.

Importantly, if Congress passed a bill to rescind the rule, there would be no judicial review. Whereas rescinding the rule through the USDA is likely to result in years of litigation.

Following the public comment period, the comments will have to be reviewed, responded to, and a final EIS will be published. How the next few years unfold is uncertain, but it’s likely that a recession would take years to actually be implemented.

Drop a Comment

Thepublic comment periodjust opened today, August 20, and is only open until September 21. If you’re starting to feel like Sisyphus making your voice heard on issues regarding our public lands, you’re not alone.

Writing public comments might seem like screaming into a void at times, but they are actually useful in more ways than you may realize. First of all, public comments build an administrative record for any potential future litigation, and if you (or an organization) want to legally challenge the outcome, you must be engaged in the process (i.e., leave a comment). If the public doesn’t weigh in on this issue, then elected officials whodorepresent the will of the public have nothing to base their claims on.

Additionally, the government has to reply to all public comments, so there is value in providing a unique perspective that they have to individually respond to. The more comments there are, the more it showshowandhow muchpeople care about an issue. It’s also important to consider that future administrations might take your comments into consideration and have different priorities. Your comments won’t just disappear.

Finally, this is your last opportunity to comment on the Roadless Rule. Sostay strong, keep pushing that metaphorical rock, andleave a comment now.

Shop