Recently the state of Utah submitted a petition to the U.S. Forest Service asking for so-called “needed changes” to the existing national Roadless Rule established in 2001.
When the rule was first proposed, it not only underwent much scrutiny among biological, zoological and ecological experts but also, and more important, it was open to many weeks of public comment, resulting in an overwhelming number of people favoring the rule — easily over 90 percent.
The state claims the rule prohibits adequate wildfire suppression and/or prevention, but agency maps show that, since 2013, only a little more than 10 percent of burned acres occurred inside designated roadless areas. The state’s desire to change the rule in the name of wildfire suppression is nothing more than a thinly disguised attempt to make it easier to develop new roads, cut more timber and allow more commercial extraction activities on our public forest lands than are currently permitted.
But if these activities don’t continue to be tightly regulated, unnecessary wildlife displacement, habitat alteration and watershed degradation will likely occur. The benefits of the existing rule are great for the general public, in that these roadless forest lands keep ecosystems intact, as well as ensuring a wealth of recreation opportunities.
James W. Thompson, Salt Lake City