They’re coming for our forests again

We are all unfortunately aware of Trump’s promise to “drill, baby, drill,” his constant reference to climate change as a “scam” and any policies to address the climate/ecological crises as the “green new scam”.

As painful as it is to hear the world’s most powerful person talk like this - the actions behind these catch-phrases are far more devastating.

The administration has removed tax credits for renewable projects, made it more difficult to build renewables on public land, and is attempting to cancel permits for renewable projects already under construction.

This is coupled with the administration’s support for mining and the fossil fuel industry.

They have opened up public land for new coal mines, approved new mining leases, backed coal mining with public funds and exempted mines and FF projects from environmental rules.

They have also rolled back environmental regulations on clean water, air quality, chemicals, and vehicle emissions.

More repeals are likely to come with the administration’s attack of the endangerment finding which underpins the nation’s climate policy.

National forests - and the wildlife and delicate ecosystems that they protect - are now in the firing line of the administration as they plan to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule.

We need this Rule to stay

The Roadless Area Conservation Rule was introduced in 2001 to prevent the further break up of unfragmented national forests. As indicated by the name, the Rule prevents new road construction (which could be used for logging and/or private dwelling construction) across nearly 60 million acres of national forests.

The government summarised the reasons for the Rule when proscribing it:

“[R]oadless areas provide clean drinking water and function as biological strongholds for populations of threatened and endangered species. They provide large, relatively undisturbed landscapes that are important to biological diversity and the long-term survival of many at risk species. Inventoried roadless areas provide opportunities for dispersed outdoor recreation, opportunities that diminish as open space and natural settings are developed elsewhere. They also serve as bulwarks against the spread of non-native invasive plant species…”

Let’s dig into some of these benefits of the rule more closely.

Clean Water

Without delving too deep into the ecological processes at play, forests play several important roles in providing clean drinking water such as forest floor vegetation breaking down pollutants in the water and preventing soil erosion by regulating heavy rainfall.

When roads break up the landscape, rainwater runs off its natural pathway and away from vegetation that filters the water. It also picks up more pollutants and sediment by running on the roads leading to significant water quality degradation.

Water that is protected by forests - “forest watershed” - supplies clean drinking water to 60 million Americans, three quarters of which comes from national forests protected by the Roadless Area Conservation Rule.

Up to 90% of New York City’s drinking water is from watersheds, three quarters of which is covered by forest.

As we enter the era of “water bankruptcy“ we can’t afford big business ruining natural, clean and reliable water sources.

Climate

Forests are one nature’s great carbon sinks as trees and vegetation capture carbon from the atmosphere and sequester the carbon into biomass, deadwood and soil.

Old growth forests are particularly important for climate mitigation efforts as they store far more carbon per hectare than younger forests, and can accumulate carbon for centuries if not disturbed (i.e. logged).

Alaska’s Tongass Forest, which is protected by the Roadless Area Conservation Rule, is the biggest forest carbon sink in the US (also the biggest temperate rainforest in the world) and contains old growth trees that are more than four times older than the USA.

The Tongass represents roughly 9% of all national forests in the US but holds about 20% of all the carbon sequestered in national forests, underscoring its importance to climate mitigation in North America.

Logging the Tongass would be the equivalent to building and running new coal power fire stations.

Wildlife

The Tongass, like all the forests protected by the Roadless Area Conservation Rule, are arguably most important for protecting endangered native wildlife.

While areas under the protection of the Rule account for 2% of the total land in the lower 48, they provide 57% of the habitat for vulnerable wildlife species which include iconic American species like bears, rattlesnakes, woodpeckers and salmon.

Breaking up unfragmented forest would be disastrous for many of these iconic species, with grizzly bears being the prime example:

“Logging, mining, roads, and other kinds of human development can separate once connected and interbreeding populations from each other, leading to less genetic diversity in their mating pool. Grizzlies are particularly vulnerable because their populations grow slowly,” Gabrielle Berthel (National Resources Defense Council).

In addition, the proximity to roads and the opening up of land that may be used for hunting obviously increases the likelihood of grizzly bear conflict with humans.

In some national parks - where grizzly bears are supposedly protected - up to 100% of all bear mortalities occurred within close proximity to roads or high use trails.

With many scientists arguing we are currently enduring the sixth mass extinction event due to increased carbon emissions, it is more vital than ever that we help - not hinder - precious wildlife in their fight for survival.

So, why is this Rule under attack?

Why then is the Roadless Area Conservation Rule under attack? It is difficult to find any scientific, economic or logical reasoning.

Certainly, the public are not in favour of removing the Rule.

Recent polling found that 77% of the respondents think that conserving national forests is more important than opening up forests for timber production or mining.

The administration puts forward two arguments for rescinding the Rule - I think we all know which one is actually pushing them to remove the Rule.

FIrst, they argue that rescinding the rule will allow more flexible management of wildfires as they will be in the hands of local management.

But, the Rule already allows exceptions for managing wildfires. 2 million acres of the forest covered by the Rule have already been treated to prevent wildfires.

Most wildfires in the US are caused by human ignition, therefore constructing new roads for human access in forests may increase the likelihood of wildfire ignition.

The second reason for rescinding the Rule gleaned from the Secretary of Agriculture’s press release on the Rule is to enable “timber harvest” and “responsible timber production”.

The statement also attacks the Rule for hurting “jobs and economic development across rural America.”

Yes, in isolation, opening up forests for logging can produce economic benefits and jobs.

But that is rudimentary economic analysis which ignores the bigger picture.

As mentioned above, New York City alone has saved billions of dollars by not having to construct filtration plants for their forest watershed-sourced drinking water.

The pristine natural environment supported by the Rule is also extremely important for the tourism and recreation economy.

Nearly half of the US Forestry Service’s 392,000 jobs (2023) were in recreation and visitation, jobs that would be put at risk if forests are carved up for logging and mining.

There is also little likelihood that any new roads can be built and maintained responsibly by the Forest Service, who are already unable to maintain the current road system due to dwindling resources.

“It would seem strange for the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) to invest in new infrastructure when so much already needs to be repaired, unless the government was planning to privatize roadless areas,” Matt Sedlar, the Centre for Economic Policy Research.

There is little public support, or any scientific or economic logic behind the administration’s move to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. We all know why they are doing it.

The National Resources Defense Council and a broad coalition of partners are leading the fight to protect the Roadless Area Conservation Rule – and you can add your voice.

Submit a public comment before the deadline on September 21st HERE.

Public lands belong to all of us. Let’s protect them.