Economic development interests continue to support repeal of wilderness protections

RAPID CITY – The United States Forest Service has received more than a million comments on its proposal to rescind the Roadless Rule. The Center for Western Priorities noted that more than ninety-nine percent of the comments oppose the repeal.

The Roadless Rule was very popular when it was created in 2001 to protect nearly 59 million acres of undeveloped national forest land from logging, road construction, and mineral leasing. There are two separate rules for Idaho and Colorado that would remain in place, but the rollback would focus on expanding logging, boosting rural economic opportunities, and cutting regulations. If it were rescinded, it would end federal protections on road construction, reconstruction, mining, and timber harvesting in Inventoried Roadles Areas (IRAS) across the National Forest System Lands, including within the Black Hills National Forest (BHNF).

The South Dakota Chapter of the Backcountry Hunters and Anglers oppose the rescission, saying on their social media that the 2001 Roadless Rule has kept some of South Dakota’s wildest backcountry intact for over 20 years, including the Black Elk Wilderness, Norbeck Wildlife Preserve, and roadless tracts across the BHNF. Many comments opposing the rescission said these areas provide secure habitat for elk and deer, clean water for trout streams, and a wide range of recreational opportunities. Many people commenting mentioned the sense of solitude they experience when visiting the Black Hills.

In a public statement, Drew Caputo, Vice President of Litigation for Lands, Wildlife and Oceans at Earthjustice said that Earthjustice has successfully defended the Roadless Rule in court for decades. “The Roadless Rule has protected priceless forests across America for a quarter century. These national forests belong to all Americans, not to the timber industry, which wants them sold to the highest bidder. “Nothing will stop us from taking up that fight again.”

Trump promised to open these protected areas and said he will fast track the repeal saying it’s a critical step toward restoring decision-making to local land managers. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Brooke L. Rollins made the announcement in June saying the rule is outdated, contradicts the will of Congress, and goes against the agencies mandate to sustain the “health, diversity, and productivity of the nation’s forests and grasslands.”

The rescission would open the BHNF to new roadbuilding, mining, logging, and exploration threatening critical backcountry habitat, increasing wildfire risk, and impacting water quality and resources for municipalities, agriculture, recreation, and wildlife. It would also eliminated federal oversight and regulations, allowing those decisions to made locally, as well as eliminate public involvement requirements.

Rapid City-based NDN Collective submitted a comment letter explaining Indigenous nations hold individual and collective sovereign rights based on nation-to-nation treaties with the United States according to Article VI of the Constitution. Lead Organizer for the organizations Protect the Hesapa Campaign Taylor Gunhammer (Oglala Lakota), said the biodiversity is of critical importance, not only to Indigenous nations, but all living organisms. “The interconnectivity of individual species extends to habitats, to biomes, to weather regions and to the entire planet.”

Gunhammer said the most egregious harms of the repeal would be the contamination of water sources which communities and miliary personnel depend on. He noted that according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), mining is responsible for a staggering fifty percent of all toxic waste in the United States. “It also has contributed to the contamination of half of the nation’s lakes and forty percent of its river and stream. The in situ leach uranium mining in particular constitutes the intentional contamination, forever, of an underground aquifer in every case where it is permitted to happen.

The fast-tracking of the Roadless Rule coincides with Trump’s Executive Order 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation, to eliminate unnecessary and complex barriers that hinder American businesses and innovation. USDA says this approach allows land managers to make informed decisions that best protect people, communities, and resources based on their unique local conditions.

Conservation groups have repeatedly accused the Trump administration of circumventing environmental laws pointing to the same efforts during the first Trump administration. In June, Earthjustice sent a letter to the Forest Service notifying the agency that it had violated the Endangered Species Act by failing to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service prior to putting the new Roadless Rule into effect.

“America’s forests are not a piggy bank for timber companies,” said Andrew Wetzler, senior vice president at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) said in a press release. “They are our natural savings account for clean water, recreation, wildlife, and climate stability.”

The Sierra Club called the rescission comment period, which opened on August 29, 2025, and closed on September 19, 2025, “abnormally short,” only 21 days. Comment periods, which are designed to receive public comment, are usually from 30 to 90 days. This comment period not only prevented the full, prior and informed consent of Tribes but severely limited public participation. When the Roadles Rule was developed more than twenty years ago, the Forest Service gathered more than 1.5 million comments from hundreds of hearings they held across the country over nearly two years of public engagement. Still, Alex Craven, Sierra Club’s Forest Campaign Manager noted that thousands of Americans managed to make their voices heard in less than a month.

The Roadless Rule was a response to a transportation policy announcement by the Forest Service in 1998, which was followed by a moratorium on road building. Earthjustice intervened after the Wyoming Timber Industry Association challenged the moratorium. The State of Idaho also challenged the protections. Both lawsuits were dismissed.

Since then, Earthjustice diligently defended the nations wildest undeveloped national forest lands from logging, coal, gas, oil and mineral development. They provide a timeline on their website of the ongoing challenges. “The American people have been clear, and they have been consistent when it comes to our public lands,” said Craven, “and if the Trump administration axes the Roadless Rule, it will be in direct opposition to what the people have demanded for more than two decades.

Business interests have widely criticized the rule saying that it has a negative economic impact, hampers job creation and rural economic development.

Some ranching sectors continue to argue that the Roadless Rule has hampered their ability to effectively manage cattle on federal allotments due to restrictions on road construction.

The National Mining Association in a letter they submitted in the comments section said that it strongly supports the rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule, which they say adopted an overly restricting “one-size-fits-all” approach that failed to give appropriate weight to the local considerations. NMA says many of its members conduct mining operations on National Forest System lands and are severely impacted by Forest Service decisions related to the protection of roadless areas. Essentially, they commented that the rule impedes their access to natural resources.

The U.S. imports a significant amount of its lumber supply according to the National Association of Homebuilders (NAHB) who said that opening federal forests to logging will increase domestic timber production to meet demand that demand.

The Forest Landowners Association (FLA) argued the repeal would enable better stewardship of federal lands.

USDA has said, as have many proponents of the repeal, that there is high risk of wildfire in these areas and contends the rescission will allow for better management at the local level with more flexibility to take swift action to reduce wildfire risk and help protect communities and infrastructure.

The Wilderness Society has said that this is a myth. Studies show that the presence of roads increases the likelihood of wildfires starting near them. USDA says that building more roads will help timber sales and wildfire mitigation, but agency records show that ninety percent of human caused wildfires happen within a half mile of a road. Rather than road building, the Wilderness society focus should be on reducing wildfire risks by building better forest management practices to protect communities, biodiversity, and wildlife.

New research led by the University of Utah, the University of California, and the U.S. Forest Service published last month found privately managed forests typically had higher fire severity and those risks extended to areas near but not owned by private industry, threatening the wilderness, small landowners, and urban areas.

David Wilms pushed back on that, as have many. He is associate vice president for public lands at the National Wildlife Federation (NWF). He agreed that the Roadless Rule could use some improvements but said outright cancellation “goes against the best available science.”

Gunhammer called the repeal reckless. “Not only does this impact Indigenous cultural traditions but deeply harms outdoors-based tourism and recreation opportunities across the United States.”

Western Watersheds, along with more than 150 conservation organizations submitted a letter in early August urging Congress and USDA to go above and beyond preserving the Roadless Rule and make protections permanent.

Now that public comment has concluded, USDA is expected to release both a final rule and an environmental impact statement no earlier than late 2026.

Before reaching a final decision, the USDA is required to carefully review and take into account the substantial public input received throughout the comment process. The agency is expected to evaluate the comments, concerns, and suggestions submitted by individuals, organizations, and stakeholders across the country, ensuring their decision reflects a comprehensive consideration of the public’s perspectives.

(Contact Marnie Cook at cook8715m@gmail.com)

The post Economic development interests continue to support repeal of wilderness protections first appeared on Native Sun News Today.

Visit Original Source