Rethink logging in protected federal forests

Published 1:30 am Tuesday, September 16, 2025

Rescinding the Roadless Area Conservation Rule could have economic benefits but also environmental drawbacks. In considering a proposal to remove the 2001 rule, federal officials must take a long-term view of the impact rather than focusing on short-term gains.

The rule was established in 2001 by the U.S. Forest Service, prohibiting road construction and timber harvesting in designated areas. It was developed during the Clinton administration and finalized after more than 600 public meetings.

The goal of the rule is to protect wildlife habitat, maintain water quality and preserve natural landscapes in broad swaths of federal forests. More than 2 million acres throughout Washington are protected by the rule. Nationally, approximately 30 percent of National Forest System lands — 58.5 million acres — are affected.

“It’s been an effective policy for protecting values that you find in roadless areas such as clean, cold water and wildlife habitat,” Dave Werntz of Conservation Northwest told The (Spokane) Spokesman-Review. “It’s not a place that people are clamoring to see developed. It’s hard to see the logic behind this proposal.”

The Trump administration is considering a proposal to rescind the rule, allowing for roads and development in remote areas. U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins said the move would bring the country “one step closer to common sense management of our national forest lands.”

Nick Smith of the American Forest Resource Council, which supports removal of the rule, told the Spokesman-Review: “It would be removing one layer on top of a very complex sort of web of environmental laws and regulations. We don’t think rescinding the roadless rule will result in the kind of unrestrained logging that environmental groups are claiming.”

Whether logging would be limited or unrestrained, any increase should be approached with caution. Once wilderness areas are graded, habitats are damaged and streams are defiled, they cannot be recovered — at least not for decades or perhaps centuries. The quick economic gains provided by an increase in logging would be more than offset by long-term degradation. Adding to that are the increasingly obvious dangers of climate change, which is partly the result of overzealous development and industrialization.

As Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., said: “Mounting climate impacts have increased the need to protect America’s last remaining wild forestlands, which reduce wildland fire risk and store huge amounts of carbon. Roadless areas provide Washingtonians with unmatched outdoor recreation opportunities, clean drinking water for our communities, and habitat for numerous endangered species.”

In June, Cantwell introduced the Roadless Area Conservation Act of 2025, an effort to codify the roadless rule. The issue points out the problems inherent with decades of congressional inaction; allowing bureaucrats to make significant decisions leaves open the possibility of policy changes from one administration to the next.

Now, there is an administration focused on unfettered development, at the expense of decades of thoughtful environmental protections. That policy pendulum lends uncertainty to rural communities.

Congress should provide some assurances for those communities. It also should work to limit climate change rather than exacerbating it, while acting in the best interests of endangered species, including salmon.

Most important, Congress and the administration should focus on long-term impacts rather than short-term profits.