OPINION

Destroying Roadless Protections Causes Waste and Bureaucracy

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Since 2001, the “Roadless Rule” has been in place to conserve some of our most wild, backcountry, and remote public forestland across thirty-nine states. As its name suggests, it prevents road building in deep forests so that we may conserve recreation, hunting, and wildlife uses for all of us to enjoy now and into the future. But today, some federal government bureaucrats want to repeal the rule, claiming it would make preventing wildfires easier. If this were true, it would be commendable as fire wreaks destruction upon communities across the country. 

But it is widely recognized that building more roads in forests actuallycauses fire. The simple truth is that more development equals more fire. As conservatives, we have a long history of caring for the environment, as well as finding the most effective and cost-efficient governmental solutions toward that end. Repealing the Roadless Rule is not effective for any of the stated reasons Washington is claiming. It will cause more waste and bureaucracy.

On August 29th, the Forest Service announced a brief, 21-day comment period to weigh in on their proposal of opening up 45 million acres of our best national forests to development. This shortened timeline, announced the day before a holiday weekend, is a joke. Those of us following closely enough to even know what’s going on have mere days to express our thoughtful pleas on something so monumental. One of our key rights guaranteed under the First Amendment of the Constitution is the ability to petition for a redress of grievances. Opening a public comment period like this, a requirement by law, stifles that discussion.

Not only do conservatives want to protect the environment, we also want to avoid wasteful spending and bureaucracy. According to a 2020 study by Taxpayers for Common Sense, “over the past four decades the Forest Service had spent nearly $2 billion preparing and administering timber sales in Alaska's Tongass National Forest—the largest U.S. National Forest and one of the areas protected under the Roadless Rule—while collecting just $227 million in receipts, for a net loss of roughly $1.73 billion in constant 2019 dollars.”

These exorbitant losses cannot be justified. Anyone with business sense can see that the situation in the Tongass is a losing proposition. And that’s just one of the many forests that would be affected. Repealing the Roadless Rule would require significant bureaucratic time and expense to update the management plans for every national forest across the country. This would create compounding and cascading layers of inefficiency and government waste.

The cost of containing wildfires would also soar. Federal agencies already spend billions each year on wildfire suppression, mitigation, and recovery. We cannot do anything to make this burden worse. We, the taxpayers, ultimately pay for it. The best prevention of wildfire is to leave the Roadless Rule intact and limit human access in these pristine areas to just those backcountry uses we already enjoy. Building more roads, cutting trees down, and industrial development will all cause more fire.

Conservatives support safety and fiscal responsibility. Former Republican Governor of Idaho James Risch (now a US Senator), for instance, spearheaded a special process for conserving Roadless forest regions of his state. This has exempted national forests in Idaho from the disastrous repeal now being sought by Washington.

But this isn’t just about lands across the west. Repealing the Roadless Rule would affect hundreds of thousands of acres in Virginia, my home. The George Washington and Jefferson National Forests are living monuments to two of Virginia's great native sons. Unlike the marble and limestone monuments that honor them in DC, these national forests sustain plant and wildlife and will continue to do so for centuries into the future—unless they are cut down.

Getting rid of the Roadless Rule makes us less safe, costs us money, and is an inefficient use of government resources. Those who value our national forests that we all own and enjoy, as I do, should let their voices be heard. Keep the Roadless Rule in place.

Craig Shirley is Chairman of Citizens for the Republic and a bestselling author.