San Francisco Chronicle Op-Ed: Keep Roadless Lands Free of Industry Inroads

According to the Heritage Forest Campaign, more than 2 million Americans, including 187,695 Californians, wrote the federal government in support of the current Roadless Rule. For them, voicing an opinion to protect our national forests probably seems futile and destined to fall on deaf ears. The Bush administration's record-breaking rollbacks of environmental regulations (laying its corporate-interest cards on the table) compound many Americans' growing sentiment of betrayal.

For many, feeling betrayed comes not only from seeing our natural heritage squandered by the administration's dismantling of environmental laws, but also from the complete discount of public participation in the democratic process. Throughout the country, concerned citizens trying to protect public land from wanton logging and oil and gas development experience deep frustration as they see popular forest-protection laws such as the Sierra Nevada Framework, the Northwest Forest Plan and now the landmark Roadless Rule put on the chopping block. In addition, people who have written to the Forest Service or the bureau of Land Management protesting the logging of ancient forests increasingly find their comments ignored, even if they are in the overwhelming majority.

There is a bright side to the Bush administration's serving up national-forest land as if it were a double shot at the Last Chance Saloon, in that environmentalists, hunters, anglers, outdoor recreationists, local officials, businesses, Republicans and Democrats are finding common ground in their opposition to the gutting of the Roadless Rule. This show of solidarity is because whether one values wilderness, recreation, public health or a sustainable economy, the 58.5 million acres of wild forest affected by the rule contain more than 350 watersheds, preserve habitat for over 220 endangered plant and animal species, and provide innumerable recreational opportunities and jobs, all of which benefit the greatest amount of people and their interests.

These benefits are especially important for California, where national forests supply two thirds of our drinking water and provide habitat for commercial fishing, and where many popular wilderness areas like the Tahoe National Forest are protected from industrial activities solely by the Roadless Rule.

Contrary to the governors of Oregon, Washington and New Mexico, all of whom expressed dismay at the Forest Service proposal and their intent to keep roadless areas in their state protected, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has taken no position on the fate of 4 million acres of roadless areas, equaling 4 percent of the state's land (according to U.S. Forest Service numbers). His silence is disheartening, given the large number of Californians who want roadless areas protected.

We simply do not need new roads in National Forests. As Taxpayers for Common Sense points out, there are already more than 383,000 logging roads, enough to circle the earth 15 times, and a $10 billion road-maintenance backlog. Building new roads is a flagrant waste of tax money.

Once again, it is imperative for all Americans to let the Bush administration know that our national forests, our wilderness, our public health and our natural legacy will not be sacrificed for the benefit of the timber and oil and gas industries. We all need to raise our voices, put pen to paper and write the Forest Service. Write to say you oppose the proposal (36 CFR Part 294.12) to weaken the Roadless Area Conservation Rule and to keep the current rule intact.

Express your views
You can send comments on eliminating the Roadless Area Conservation Rule
before Sept. 14:

By Mail:
Content Analysis Team
Attn: Roadless State Petitions
USDA Forest Service
P.O. Box 221090
Salt Lake City, UT 84122
Fax: (801) 517-1014

E-mail:
statepetitionroadless@fs.fed.us

Pamela Wellner is a senior campaigner for Greenpeace in San Francisco
(www.greenpeaceusa.org) and a board member of the Rainforest Action
Network.