Today the federal government announced it has rescinded protections on a whopping 59 million acres of National Forest land. These protections did many things, some great, some frustrating, but the biggest single thing they did was prevent this land from being logged and developed.
Now before anyone thinks this is going to become a political diatribe, let me make clear that this isn’t a this side vs. that side thing. I literally do not care who the president is as regards this change in protection of National Forest.
The protections fall under what has been called the “Roadless Rule,” which was the shorthand for the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. To be clear, this is a rule that was passed by the Bush administration, which should give pause to anyone who wants to make this a left vs. right battle.
What’s especially chilling in this is the Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, who we should be looking to protect land held in trust on behalf of the American people, has spoken of a new “era of abundance.”
Rescinding this rule will affect one of the last remaining old-growth forests on U.S. land, in Alaska.
Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, speaking to a gathering of the Western Governors’ Association, said, “President Trump is removing absurd obstacles to commonsense management of our natural resources by rescinding the overly restrictive roadless rule. This move opens a new era of consistency and sustainability for our nation’s forests It is abundantly clear that properly managing our forests preserves them from devastating fires and allows future generations of American to enjoy and reap the benefits of this great land.”
I have so many problems with this statement, I scarcely know where to begin, but I’ll begin with a factual point: The great majority of wildfires start near roads. City planners speak of the WUI; that is, W U I, the wildland/urban interface. This is where most wildfires begin, and is why they can burn their way into inhabited neighborhoods.
If we begin logging these lands, we can count on seeing the same effects that have taken place as Amazon Rainforest has been cut down: an increase in the release of greenhouse gases, a decrease in biodiversity, water pollution, displacement of species as well as a decreased ability of plantlife to absorb carbon dioxide, further compounding global warming.
Also, the word “reap” means to gather or harvest, as in a crop. It’s a not very veiled reference to logging. And his charge that this will improve sustainability defies logic. An old growth forest doesn’t need help with sustainability. They did fine for thousands of years before the invention of the chainsaw.
Alaska representative Nick Begich said, “Alaska’s forests are one of our state’s greatest natural assets and the ‘Roadless Rule’ has long stifled responsible forest management, blocked access to critical resources and halted economic opportunity.”
Allow me to translate for anyone whose view of the world isn’t bent on the rape of the land: the Roadless Rule has prevented logging and mining and we could have made lots of money if we could clearcut and mine forests that help to preserve the ecosystem for our planet’s survival.
You’ll pardon me if I think we should be worried that once these lands are logged they won’t be sold off for development.
I don’t know that we, the cycling community, have a play here, but this would be an occasion for all of us to write our representatives in the Senate and Congress and encourage them to do what they can to prevent clearcutting these forests. And in my mind, that means requesting that they be held for recreation, rather than resource extraction.
Yes, road building in these forests could mean riding bikes there, but I think we will do ourselves a favor in terms of building a coalition with the Sierra Club and the Audubon Society if we can demonstrate an alignment with them, that some lands need to be preserved. Even if that means they remain bike-free.