The White Mountain National Forest — “land of many uses” — in the fall. Photo by Cate Bligh on Unsplash
The proposed end of ‘Roadless Rule’ is concerning, but ongoing dismantlement of U.S. Forest Service is a bigger threat
Forest management is in the national spotlight after the U.S. Forest Service announced plans last week to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The Northern Forest Center, a proponent of forest management, shared our concern about this change when it was first suggested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture last fall. We noted how changes could actually increase the risk of fire and spread of invasive species across Northeastern forests.
While we remain concerned about the recission, we perceive this administration’s systematic dismantling of the U.S. Forest Service to be an even bigger threat to the long-term health of federal forest lands. Mass layoffs, shuttered research stations, and a reorganization of the agency are stripping away huge amounts of institutional and scientific knowledge — and basic forest management capacity — at a time when stresses and demands on our federal forests are only increasing.
We heard these concerns in field visits with regional foresters just last week. The loss of capacity and institutional knowledge is impacting the White Mountain National Forest and also the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Umbagog National Wildlife Refuge, which has an obligation to harvest wood but does not have a forester on staff.
The Forest Service is accepting comments on the proposed recission of the Roadless Rule through Sept. 21, 2026.
The Northern Forest Center’s comment submitted September 2025 to Brad Kinder at the U.S. Forest Service’s Ecosystem Management Coordination:
Dear Mr. Kinder:
On behalf of the Northern Forest Center, I am writing to oppose rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule.
Here in the Northeast, fire is not a significant concern on the landscape, and roads already serve areas with merchantable timber. New roads actually increase the likelihood of fire (which follows human activity) and also the continued introduction and spread of invasive and destructive pests and pathogens.
We are proponents of forest management and the use of public lands to service multiple public benefits, including timber production, recreation, wildlife habitat and the protection of ecologically and culturally significant places. While the idea of increasing timber production from national forests is not one we oppose, it is important that the USFS maintain the trust of the American people that it will do so in a responsible manner. Laws like the Roadless Rule and NEPA are part of maintaining that trust and ensuring that our public lands are managed well.
Also crucial to maintaining our public lands and trust in their management are well-resourced and staffed federal land management agencies. Before recent federal cuts, the U.S. Forest Service was already struggling to manage existing assets such as roads, culverts, and stream crossing with existing funding and personnel. With recent cuts, those challenges are exacerbated, calling into question how the agency could staff and appropriately oversee any expansion of roads on National Forest lands.
Thank you for considering our perspective.
Sincerely,
Joseph Short, Vice President
