The Roadless Rule, Recommended Wilderness, And Budget Reconciliation

Or, what in the name of Heavenly Father does Mike Lee think he’s doing? And how we stop him for good.

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources this morning voted to advance an amendment to the Wildfire Prevention Act that would eliminate the 2001 Roadless Rule—which protects 45 million acres of National Forest from logging—and prevent it from being restored in the future. While that’s going on, a USDA order is reportedly inbound striking protections from 5 million acres of recommended Wilderness. With Republicans working on a budget reconciliation package they hope to pass this summer, what’s all this add up to?

What’s Going On With The Roadless Rule?

The Trump administration first announced its plan to eliminate the Roadless Rule last June. It plans to do that through agency rule making at USDA, not legislation, and that process has now dragged on for a solid year while they work through the barely-hanging-on-by-a-thread National Environmental Policy Act process. A source tells me the Environmental Impact Statement, which is mandated by NEPA, should come in, “the next month or so.” From there, expect USDA to rapidly announce its Record of Decision, in which its almost certain the rule will be struck.

It’s important to understand what the Roadless Rule is, why it was implemented, and what it protects to fully continue this discussion. So let’s move through that as fast as possible.

Logging in this country began transitioning away from “wild” lumber and towards tree farms in the 1940s. Logging on public lands peaked in the 1980s. To be legally permitted on public lands, logging projects must be profitable, and taxpayers must fund the roads necessary to access the timber. If an area of public land had not been logged by 2001, it’s because it wasn’t economically viable to build roads in it.

At 265,000 miles, the network of dirt roads operated by USFS is the largest in the world. The Roadless Rule sought to save the Forest Service money, and allow it to concentrate its limited budget on road building and maintenance in cost effective areas. It was not intended to achieve environmental protections, even though that has been its net impact.

It’s also important to note that the Roadless Rule does not prevent road construction or industrial operation in areas it applies to. It simply prevents taxpayer dollars from being used to build roads for the purpose of logging. Roadless areas contain about 9,000 miles of road, along with hydroelectric power plants, utility corridors, and other grid infrastructure.

What’s Recommended Wilderness And Why Does The Administration Hate It?

The New York Times reports (gift link) that an order inbound from the Agriculture Secretary will eliminate protections from areas of “recommended Wilderness” nationwide.

The Wilderness Society clarifies that there’s 5.18 million acres of National Forest that could be impacted by that order, and has mapped out all of them. You can find that map at this link.

The organization has also compiled total recommended Wilderness acreage by state:

Alabama 544

Alaska 1,384,332

Arizona 267,487

Arkansas 1,051

California 279,507

Colorado 209,894

Florida 6,538

Georgia 7,831

Idaho 1,356,877

Missouri 1,882

Montana 1,212,700

New Mexico 91,986

North Carolina 49,776

Oklahoma 1,283

Pennsylvania 12,381

South Carolina 1,909

South Dakota 42,607

Tennessee 752

Utah 83,562

Virginia 28,490

Washington 76,120

Wyoming 61,627

The explanation there is that the Wilderness Act of 1964 allows Congress to permanently protect, “undeveloped federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation.”

Within Congressionally-designated Wilderness, no commercial activity, powered equipment, or vehicles of any kind (even bicycles) are allowed. It’s the highest level of protection that can be applied to federally-managed public land.

The rub there is the “retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation.” Once roads are built, vehicular access becomes established, or commercial activity takes place, that area becomes ineligible for Wilderness status.

Areas of Recommended Wilderness are ones which USFS has determined might make good Wilderness areas in the future. The Wilderness Society explains:

Federal wilderness status is the highest level of public lands protection, and it can only be conferred by Congress. “Recommended wilderness” means that a place has been assessed by Forest Service staff as exceptionally intact, untouched by development and critical to wildlife and the broader ecosystem—in short, worthy of legislative protection. This recommendation is based on years of feedback from the public, state and local governments, including local elected officials, as well as best available science. In the meantime, it is managed by the agency in a way that retains that wilderness character. The Forest Service is known to be conservative when it comes to recommending new areas for wilderness and stewarding these lands to maintain their wildland values.

The point of this memo is to ruin the untouched nature of these areas so that they become ineligible for Wilderness protection in the future.

While the memo itself has not yet been published, it does not seem like it will apply to Wilderness Study Areas since those are managed by BLM.

What’s Mike Lee Doing?

Mike Lee’s purpose in life is to pave paradise and build a parking lot. He did some sort of deal with the devil in which he was promised the ability to regrow his hair should he achieve that.

But, destroying nature is not popular, so Baldilocks often finds himself frustrated. Last summer, for example, the plan he cooked up with Steve Daines (R-“Skullduggery”) to sell off 3.3 million acres of Bureau of Land Management and USFS land, while authorizing the future sale of hundreds of millions of acres more, as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act failed after immense public outcry.

Despite the fact that the Roadless Rule was never intended to provide Wilderness-style protections, it’s got a sexy name, and following that sell off attempt, it’s attracted the most interest from the general public. So there’s much outcry over Republican attempts to eliminate it, and that’s apparently got Mike Lee sweating that it might not go through, and if it does not the devil might not restore his luscious locks.

So, Lee used his position as the chair of the The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources to introduce an amendment to John Barrasso’s (R-Wyoming) Wildfire Prevention Act that would permanently eliminate the Roadless Rule and prevent it from being reestablished in the future.

The bill will now go before the full Senate, where it’s extremely unlikely that Lee’s amendment will survive the Filibuster.

The 60 Vote Threshold

Republicans are preparing another budget reconciliation package that they hope to pass this summer. As a reminder, that process allows them to pass a bill on a simple majority, but it can only contain matters directly related to the federal budget.

A source tells me that Lee’s amendment stands, “zero chance,” of being included in any reconciliation measure since has nothing to do with budgets.

Separately, Senators Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden (both Democrats from Oregon) introduced the Public Lands Integrity Act last month, which aims to prevent any future land selloffs from being included in budget reconciliation.

It also stands zero chance of passing.

Your Takeaways

I’m going to keep this simple and bullet pointed:

• Striking protections from areas of public land does not necessarily mean those areas are going to be destroyed.

• As we just saw with the failed ANWR lease sale, in which oil companies walked away from an amount of untapped oil approaching $1 trillion in value, the administration is doing a very good job at saying it wants to destroy public lands, but doing a very bad job at creating the economic conditions that enable the destruction of public lands.

• The Roadless Rule was never intended to provide Wilderness-style protections. We can no longer rely on norms and agency rule making, we must protect the things that matter to Americans with actual laws.

• Taking such sweeping action to attempt and eliminate areas of recommended Wilderness nationwide all at once indicates that the administration is scared of the Wilderness Act.

• The Wilderness Act is the correct way to permanently protect unspoiled areas of public land.

• Mike Lee’s bad behavior, and the bipartisan public outcry it has led to have created once-in-a-generation political conditions in which a sweeping application of Wilderness protections across areas threatened by this administration will absolutely win over a broad coalition of voters, and might actually stand a chance of becoming law.

Hey Sam Forstag, you just bought yourself the challenge of convincing Montanans that you’re more than just an AOC and Bernie endorsement. Can you really win over voters outside Missoula?

Hey Seth Bodnar, everyone’s worried you’re going to split the vote, and hand the Senate back to Republicans. Can you really attract conservative voters?

Hey Alani Bankhead, Wilderness areas would be a great place to stage a pedophile hunt.

Writing a bill that would apply Wilderness protections to all 45 million acres formerly protected by the Roadless Rule (excepting those already developed), all 5.18 million acres of recommended Wilderness, and while we’re at it, all 11.1 million acres of Wilderness Study Areas in one fell swoop would be one hell of a way to win an election. And passing that with a veto-proof majority would be one heck of a way for lawmakers to distance themselves from Trump in future elections. It’s also just the right thing to do for America’s future.

Top photo: USFS

A journalist with more than two decades of experience working around the world, Wes Siler is here to cut through the outrage and disinformation to bring you the factual, insightful, actionable reporting you need to understand what’s going on. Upgrading to a paid subscription supports this reporting, and buys personal access to Wes, who will help you save money on gear, plan outdoor adventures, and prepare for real life, and who promises he’s less salty in real life than he sometimes comes across as on the Internet.