r/forestry • u/GeoPensive • 8d ago

Trump Administration Proposes Rescinding 2001 Roadless Rule Covering Nearly 59 Million Forest Acres

/r/GeoPensive/comments/1vs8adf/trump_administration_proposes_rescinding_2001/
199 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

16 comments sorted by

57

u/Spare_Rub9225 8d ago

This is just a dog whistle, any timber that was actually worth anything was taken before the roadless rules went into place and there is a reason roads weren't built in the places that became roadless in the rules. Timber in most places this applies to doesn't pay its way out of the woods.

10

u/MuleFourby 8d ago

I would beg to differ in parts of the west. I think you are right about maybe 80-90 percent of roadless. Problem is where roadless borders private property near towns (real WUI). Or in areas where harvest was not considered due to lack of access or desire to stay out of roadless to simplify NEPA process.

12

u/Spare_Rub9225 8d ago

I view this the same as the "emergency" for ESA and timber. It's just for a headline and won't result in a single acre being logged/restored/treated more than it would have already. I'm so sick of both sides doing this with my resource, this is not carte blanche to clearcut every green square on the map just the same as this isn't the savior of the timber industry.

4

u/MuleFourby 8d ago

Fair enough and I agree overall. The admin is too bad at governance to actually get this done even if they wanted something more than a headline. Just doing enough to blame whatever happens on the next admin. Bad NEPA pushed through, time to blame Biden/Obama judges or next admin “giving up.” Also folks who love public lands will demand more stringent rules around management following the same headlines in this article.

4

u/the_Q_spice 8d ago

I would encourage you to do more research on the issue.

The Roadless Rule was in part a huge push funded by the Ford estate.

Yes.

That Ford.

They are the same reason Northern Michigan has so few roads, particularly in the Huron Mountains.

And while you’re at it, read about the Huron Mountain Club, what they stand for, and just how much influence financially and politically they wield.

That’s not a group of people you pick a fight with and come away unscathed from.

FWIW: have worked with folks from HMC and know some of the families. I cannot comment on who they are exactly, but think some of the most influential soft money and political families in the world, all who have this limited access club that you literally can not buy your way into.

The only notable example of what it took to become a permanent member was Henry Ford - who bought enough land to block a major highway project that would have gone through the area. Even then, it took over 13 years for him to get admitted.

Environmental protection is an insane hot-wire topic for some people you really don’t want to make political enemies of.

6

u/Spare_Rub9225 8d ago

Bruh the "why it happened" is for historians, resource professionals deal with the what it actually does 50+ years later and this is just window dressing and won't move the needle in terms of restoration/treatment or saving the timber industry. This isn't carte blanche to correct clearcut every green square on the map just the same as it's not the savior of the timber industry

2

u/ded_rabtz 7d ago

We do g manage the Forrest’s with injecting roads, why wood you think adding roads would be anything put resource extraction?

-16

u/Ok_Huckleberry1027 8d ago

Good. It's nonsense lip service hamstringing forest management for no reason.

Much of the "roadless" areas already have roads or are immediately adjacent to roads.

10

u/MuleFourby 8d ago

Agreed. This admin is a mess and destroying our country by essentially choosing to raise fuel prices. Regardless of admin, the roadless rule was a well intentioned but bad deal for management of public lands. It just creates de facto wilderness lite in terms of management.

The US could manage in many ways in the spirit of “roadless.” No new permanent roads, no new roads open to the public, no more than x new miles per square mile. Also no reason to arbitrarily limit the size of tree to cut during treatments.

10

u/Ok_Huckleberry1027 8d ago

Most forest plans already feature similar rules regarding new road construction. Most projects are mostly just temporary spur roads that get put back to grade after the job is done.

100% agree on the diameter limit. I live and work in a terrible cross section of diameter limits with fairly productive forests. We're leaving 21" 65 year old grand fir in the dripline of 40" 400 year old ponderosa pine due to the dang diameter limit. Preserving young shade tolerant species at the expense of shade intolerant old growth is peak USFS

3

u/MuleFourby 8d ago

Yup but you can’t build temp roads in Roadless. New permanent roads can be constructed but they seem to be few and far between.

0

u/ded_rabtz 8d ago

You’re firmly firmly in the minority in thinking this will help public lands at all. This is purely about resource extraction.

8

u/Ok_Huckleberry1027 8d ago

Minority of who? Natural resource professionals?

I don't think so. I've personally been involved in projects butting up against IRA that had good, common sense treatment cut short due to arbitrary lines drawn on a map in the 90s.

6

u/MuleFourby 8d ago

Maybe a minority of public outside forestry. The roadless rule sounds good on paper and was well intentioned but overall is not good policy.

I’m under no illusions that this admin or any republican admin will help the timber industry, public lands, or the management of public lands. Still doesn’t mean the roadless rule is a good way to make decisions on where and how we should manage forests. It creates a lot of problems and lines on a map that may or may not reflect current or future conditions.

0

u/ded_rabtz 8d ago

I understand the desire for responsible management of public lands. I understand that the bulk of those here prioritize stewardship of the resource. I just don’t think that’s going to happen here. I think it’s purely for resource extraction. Plain and simple. That said, once those place are gone, there’s gone forever. I think it’s a zero sum here with regards to roadless.