We are at it again — fighting to protect our public lands. This time, it’s 60 million acres of national forests spread across 37 states, and we have a narrow window to fight back. Katie Johnson from The Conservation Alliance is back with an update on the Roadless Rule — and more importantly, exactly what you can do before September 21st. I’m your host, Missy Rentz, and this is The Parks Podcast.
A note from Missy: The roadless rule made headlines again. Katie Johnson — who joined us in Episode 37 to explain the roadless rule — is back with an update. We are about 10 days into a 30-day public comment period. The comment period is open through September 21st. This impacts all of us — not just the West.
Episode Guest
Katie Johnson, Campaigns and Engagement Manager
The Conservation Alliance
Key Facts
- The Roadless Rule: Put in place in 2001. Has protected 60 million acres of national forest lands across the lower 48 and Alaska from industrial development (logging, road building, reconstruction, mining) for 25 years.
- Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs): The lands protected by the rule. They exist in 37 states — not just the West. Maps available state by state on the USDA Forest Service website.
- The DEIS: US Forest Service released a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) proposing a full repeal of the Roadless Rule. Three alternatives:
- Alternative 1: No action (rule stays the same)
- Alternative 2: Full repeal (rule repealed in its entirety)
- Alternative 3: Modified rule — but this would shrink protected footprint from 60 million to roughly 13 million acres, strip designations near roads and in the wildland urban interface (WUI) in the Tongass and elsewhere, and create an ongoing process for local officials to propose further boundary changes. Not a good alternative.
- If repealed: ~45 million of the 60 million acres would be opened to road construction/reconstruction, logging, mining, and industrial development.
- Comment period: Open now through September 21st. Comments submitted to regulations.gov (publicly viewable). Goal: 1 million comments.
Roadless Rule Opposition Arguments (and the rebuttals)
- Argument: The national rule is inflexible and acts as a mandate; should be managed locally, forest by forest or unit by unit.
- Rebuttal: Exclusions and exceptions already exist (e.g., fire management access). Forest ecosystems don’t stop at state borders — unit-by-unit management creates complications for forests that span state lines. Local management would still require staffing, funding, resources, and public input — all of which are already being cut. Additionally, there is already a massive maintenance backlog on existing roads — adding more roads without funding is fiscally unsound.
Who Gets Impacted (the “not just a West Coast thing” breakdown)
- Local and gateway communities — businesses, tourism, lodging, restaurants, recreation guiding, gear shops adjacent to national forest lands
- Tribal communities — subsistence needs (old growth, fishing, hunting), significant cultural implications
- Backcountry recreators and thru-hikers — the Appalachian Trail, Continental Divide Trail, Pacific Crest Trail all have sections in inventoried roadless areas. 25,000 miles of trail at risk. 750 miles of whitewater access potentially impacted.
- Wildlife — roads act as barriers to migration and breeding; wildlife corridors severed
- Waterways — road sediment and runoff; pollution impacts clean water
- Everyone, even non-recreators — businesses that rely on clean water (including breweries!), outdoor gear and apparel companies relying on healthy ecosystems, all impacted
Show Notes & Links
- The Conservation Alliance public comment form
- regulations.gov — where all public comments are submitted and viewed
- USDA Forest Service roadless area maps by state: https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/planning/roadless/state-maps
- Related episode: E37 — Katie Johnson’s first Roadless Rule episode
- Five Calls app for representative calls
Transcript
The Roadless Rule — An Update on the Public Comment Period
The Parks Podcast, Episode 82 | Katie Johnson, Campaigns and Engagement Manager, The Conservation Alliance
What’s Happening Right Now
Missy Rentz: Today’s episode, I’m joined by Katie Johnson. Katie is the Campaigns and Engagement Manager for The Conservation Alliance, and she is back on the podcast to talk about the Roadless Rule. Katie, welcome back.
Katie Johnson: Thanks for having me. It’s good to be here.
Missy: So last September, you joined me — I think it was our first episode together — where you were talking about the Roadless Rule and you did this amazing job of explaining what it was, why it was important, that it had just bubbled to the surface. It’s Episode 37 if people want to go back and listen. But last week, the Roadless Rule made headlines again. This is a broad question, but can you please explain what in the world is going on?
Katie: Yes, we are back at it about a year later — which is kinda crazy that it’s been almost a whole year since that episode. So just as a reminder of what we talked about: inventoried roadless areas, or IRAs as they are often referred to, make up some of the most iconic and intact landscapes in the US — from North Carolina to Montana to California, everywhere in between.
Katie: These lands support local communities, they support tribal sovereignty, and a $1.3 trillion outdoor economy. So these landscapes are critical for our industry and really folks from all walks of life across the country. The Roadless Rule was put in place in 2001 and has safeguarded all of these areas for 25 years — protecting 60 million acres of national forest lands across the lower 48 and Alaska, mainly from industrial development such as logging, road building, reconstruction, and mining.
Katie: Last week we saw the US Forest Service release their Draft Environmental Impact Statement, or the DEIS, which proposes a full repeal of the Roadless Rule. Last fall we submitted comments during the notice of intent comment period. This is now the DEIS comment period that we’re entering.
Katie: In the Draft Environmental Impact Statement there are three alternatives listed for how this is going to potentially move forward. Alternative One is the no action alternative — the rule would stay the same as it is now. Alternative Two would be a full repeal — the rule would be repealed in its entirety. And Alternative Three would be a modified Roadless Rule, which is interesting, but after looking a little bit into and analyzing this DEIS, we found that it would shrink the protected footprint of the Roadless Rule to only about roughly 13 million acres, and would strip some of the designation from areas near roads and in the wildland urban interface, or WUI, in the Tongass and elsewhere, while creating an ongoing process for local officials to propose further boundary changes.
Katie: So the modification is interesting and not really something that we’re seeing as a good alternative after reading a little bit further into it. All in all, if finalized and the rule were repealed, it would open about 45 million of that 60 million acres of national forest lands to construction or reconstruction of roads, logging, mining, and other industrial developments. It also is going to threaten backcountry outdoor recreation access. It’s going to impact gateway communities that surround these national forest areas, fish and wildlife habitat, and our overarching outdoor economy. The public comment period for the DEIS is now open and it’s open through September 21st, and making a lot of noise around how folks feel about this is a really great opportunity for our industry to show up and advocate for these lands.
Why Alternative Three Isn’t a Real Alternative
Missy: Yeah, and I just want to say — you talked about Alternative Three and you talked about it being 13 million acres, but that’s still 38 million they would take. So I mean, it’s like a band-aid or something. Like, it’s just not a good option. It’s still going to be really damaging to our outdoor economy and our outdoor recreation and our food and water.
Katie: Correct.
Why Has the Roadless Rule Been Disputed?
Missy: So it seems like this issue has been challenged — and even though it’s come up a lot more during this administration, since it was started 25 years ago, it’s been kind of disputed. Why? Like, what are the concerns? Why do some people think we need roads everywhere?
Katie: Yeah, so it’s a great question. At the highest level, we’re seeing the rationale that there are concerns that a national rule is inflexible and doesn’t allow for local management and acts more as a mandate — and so can be very limiting in that way. The Roadless Rule keeps large swaths of ecosystems protected, and they create such an ecosystem value that having a check and balance is really important for the protection of those landscapes.
Katie: We’re seeing arguments that this should be managed a little bit more at the local level, forest by forest or unit by unit. This would in turn really leave a lot of openings for more access or more development to take place potentially. And if that is the case, that would require staffing, that would require funding, that would require resources, it would require public input, and there’s a lot of other pieces to that that we’re not sure would be in place.
Katie: It’s important to note that there are exclusions and exceptions to the rule as it exists now. If fire management access needs to be obtained or utilized, that already exists. There are other things in there that allow for a little bit more flexibility, and it’s not quite as inflexible as maybe it’s being made to seem.
Katie: Something important to note is that these forest ecosystems don’t stop at state borders or on state lines. They’re ecosystems that span across different states or different regions and incorporate so many different ecosystem values amongst themselves and different values across all of these different states. And so when you take that down to forest by forest or unit by unit, that can create some interesting complications for forests that might be across state lines or would fall in different management sectors.
The Road Maintenance Backlog — and Roads as Wildlife Barriers
Missy: Two things that I have recently read and would love if you have any thoughts on. The first — you brought up funding, and I read an article recently that there’s this desire to have these roads, but there’s not funding to maintain a lot of the existing ones. So we’re asking to put something in place that causes a greater financial drain that doesn’t exist.
Katie: You absolutely nailed it. Yeah. There is already an existing backlog of maintenance on the places that we already have designated for roads and other areas, and those resources are already being hurt by cuts from staffing and resources and funding and all of those pieces. And we could certainly see issues that arise in similar fashion with a repeal of the rule.
Katie: And again, that local management still would require staffing and funding and resources and public input. When you’re creating management plans for areas like national forests, that is meant to require public input and community input for the folks that it’s going to directly impact and for the users of those areas. So yes, that is a big concern and something that is important to note.
Missy: Yeah. The other one that was new to me since we last talked was — there’s certainly all that comes with the construction of roads, the road sediment, and how damaging that is from a pollutant standpoint. But also I read that a road is like a barrier for animals. So it becomes a migration challenge, it becomes a breeding challenge, and we’re cutting off spaces for our wildlife.
Katie: Yeah, it’s a greater point across the board. Wildlife is one of the many user groups, if you will, that benefit from this intact landscape — whether that’s waterways or wildlife or recreation. There’s all sorts of different uses and reasons for these landscapes to be intact and untouched. There are impacts across the board on who would be impacted and how that would negatively impact different groups, whether that is our wildlife or us as humans, or the waterways that are running through these regions.
Who Gets Impacted — And Why This Isn’t Just a West Coast Issue
Missy: So let’s dive into that a little bit because I think this is a massive issue, but it’s kind of got a cute name with the Roadless Rule. And as a marketer, I appreciate that, but I’ve heard a lot of people say it confuses them. Let’s break this down in more detail. Who’s going to be impacted by this and how?
Katie: Yeah, it’s such a good question. Last year we saw the intention to sell off a mass amount of public lands in the budget reconciliation process, and that was pretty easy to understand — we could say, “This many million acres are potentially going to be impacted by the chance to be sold off. Here’s how you can act.” This one’s a little bit more nuanced. But it’s essentially the same overarching argument in that these large swaths of land can’t be disposed of in large sweeping quantities, especially without public input.
Katie: The first group that’s going to be impacted are those local and gateway communities. There are businesses and tourism opportunities and recreation guiding opportunities and gear shops and other folks and retailers located in these gateway communities outside of these national forest lands that are adjacent to or within these roadless areas. All those businesses are going to be impacted if the outdoor recreation access changes or the flow of visitation changes within those areas. Right now it’s a sustainable method for the economy to be bolstered by the access without harming the ecosystems that exist in these places — and that healthy balance could be upended very quickly if development moves forward.
Katie: The other groups that we’re seeing would have quite a bit of impact are tribal communities. A lot of their subsistence needs are not going to be met if we see the Roadless Rule repealed. They rely on old growth trees and access for fishing and hunting and other things, and there are significant cultural implications that would be eliminated without these forests and these areas of intact ecosystems in place. That’s devastating for our tribal communities across the country.
Katie: It’s also going to impact our backcountry recreators — thru-hikers and backpackers. The Appalachian Trail has sections of it that are in inventoried roadless areas, as well as the Continental Divide Trail and the Pacific Crest Trail. So for our Triple Crowners out there, this impacts the thru-hiking access. And there’s a lot of other thru-hiking on smaller trails that are also impacted too. There are 750 miles of whitewater access that could be impacted and 25,000 miles of trail at risk.
Katie: Lastly, it’s important to note that even if you’re not an athlete that plays outside or a recreator at heart, these are still going to impact folks across the country no matter what. At TCA, we work with outdoor businesses and nature-dependent businesses, and a lot of those folks rely on healthy ecosystems for their products — whether that is apparel or gear that you’re using in the outdoors or the beer that you’re drinking. You need clean water to drink beer. And so this impacts multiple industries across the board. This isn’t just an outdoor conversation or a conversation for recreators specifically, but it’s for all folks across all walks of life.
Missy: Yeah. And I just want to point out that you’ve mentioned several, but when you brought up the Appalachian Trail — I think so much that has been brought up is the West, and this is all of us. If you’re in the East or you’re in parts of the country where you feel like it hasn’t touched you yet, this is touching you. And so it’s really important that we raise our voices, let our representatives know that it’s not okay, and submit the public comment.
How to Act — The Comment Period Is Open Now
Katie: Yes. As you mentioned, this impacts folks across 37 states — which is a lot of states. So this is not just consistent with the West or the Mountain West. The public comment period is open now through September 21st, and the Conservation Alliance has an individual grassroots link where you can submit a public comment asking to retain the Roadless Rule. We actually have the form pre-filled out for you, so you don’t have to change anything. But if you want to change where you’re located or how you use these areas or what they mean to you, you have the ability to make that messaging unique for yourself.
Katie: Those will be submitted to regulations.gov, which is where all of these comments are collected — and they are actually viewable to the public. We’re hoping to have a million comments. There is a website that we can share that highlights all of the roadless areas listed state by state — that’s on the USDA Forest Service website. So if you don’t know if you have roadless areas in your state, which you probably do, you can find where they are, see the map of those designations, and that can help you determine how you talk about these in your comment.
Katie: And we also offer an option where you can submit a similar message to your representatives as well. So you can say, “I’ve already submitted this to the regulations.gov portal, but also I’m messaging you as a constituent to say this is not okay and here’s why.” It’s kind of a twofold approach that you can engage with in both ways.
Missy: That’s great. That makes it so easy. We will put links in the show notes, on the Parks Podcast website, and we’ll make sure it’s listed in the link in bio and in the comments on any of our social posts — just so that everybody is aware. We have until September 21st. Let’s just get it done, and let’s let Washington know that this is not okay.
Katie: We appreciate your support, and we’re looking forward to hitting a million comments on this.
Missy: Perfect. Well, thank you for all of your work. Thank you for coming on — it feels like weekly right now — to keep us up to date with what’s going on. I think it is so important, and you do such an amazing job, Katie, at breaking it down for us so that we all understand what’s happening. So thank you very much for that. And as always, thank you for coming on The Parks Podcast.
Katie: Always grateful to be here. We’re grateful for all the work that you’re doing, and I look forward to whatever topic we talk about next.
Missy: Wonderful. That’s it for this episode. Until next time — we’ll see you in the parks.
Music for The Parks Podcast is performed and produced by Porter Hardy. Follow us @TheParksPodcast or visit TheParksPodcast.com.