Could Ending the Roadless Rule Help Montana’s Wildfire Problem?

Each summer in western Montana, I get tired of looking for the mountains and wondering if they are still there. They are. The issue is they are masked from view due to yet another layer of wildfire smoke.

This is one of several reasons I am keeping an eye out as the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) moves forward with its plan to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule, which will have a HUGE effect on Montana’s national forests.

What exactly does the Roadless Rule do?

The Roadless Rule prohibits the building of new roads into designated “roadless” areas in our nation’s forests. In addition, it limits the amount of old road repair allowed in these areas, as well as the type of logging that can occur. This does not mean all activities like hunting, fishing, backpacking, etc., cannot take place.

A hiker with a large backpack on a rocky peak at golden hour

Approximately 59% of Montana’s Forest Service lands fall under the scope of the Roadless Rule. Supporters of the rule feel it has preserved much of Montana’s untouched backcountry. As a hunter myself, I agree. There is something about loading your pack and venturing into a remote wilderness area that is free of clowns on dirt bikes or people road hunting each drainage.

Personally, I do not want “forest management” to be code for handing over large amounts of public land to corporate interests.

Wildfires and access – my torn position:

According to the USDA, approximately 41% of inventoried roadless areas are located in areas with either a high or very high level of wildfire hazard potential. Unfortunately, fewer than five percent of those inventoried areas have been treated with hazardous fuels treatments since 2014.

Mario Tama, Getty Images

As I look back at western Montana’s increasing length and intensity of fire seasons combined with continued poor air quality due to smoke, I start to get a little frustrated. I am also frustrated with lost access. Over the last 40 years, I have hunted many of the same locations. However, each year I seem to lose use of another old familiar route because it now has a gate or a closure sign. To be clear, seasonal closures have little to do with the Roadless Rule and represent my larger frustration with how we manage our public lands. Specifically, it often appears that some roads remain open during early spring only to later close upon arrival of hunting season. My dad always joked that maybe the “flower sniffers” were allowed to drive up there, but the hunting families like us are not.

Which side am I on?

If the Roadless Rule is rescinded, it would not automatically allow for logging or new road development on every forest. Any new projects would still require additional planning and environmental analysis prior to approval.

Road closed barrier on a dirt path surrounded by trees

So I guess you can say, I am split. I support protecting Montana’s backcountry, but I also want healthy forests, improved wildfire management practices, and reasonable public access to those forests. Fortunately, this has not yet happened.

Public comments – now is your chance!

The USDA is currently taking public comment on the proposal until September 21st.

Where do you stand? Should we keep the Roadless Rule intact or should forest managers be provided greater flexibility? Hunters, hikers, anglers, landowners, and yes, even the flower sniffers all deserve a voice.