MountainTrue collects public comment on Roadless Rule repeal

MountainTrue held its third round of roadless rule public comment sessions at Cowee School on July 23, drawing 30 people from around Macon County to voice their dissent with the United States Government's most recent effort to abolish the roadless rule. The conservation nonprofit's resilient forests director, Josh Kelly, gave a presentation to attendees about the history, significance, support and benefits of the roadless rule — as well as the hazards of congress' most recent effort to get rid of it. Talk of such a repeal began in June 2025, when U.S. Department of Agriculture secretary Brooke Rollins declared the Trump administration was repealing the rule to "get rid of overcomplicated, burdensome barriers that hamper American business and innovation." The USDA said the goal of the repeal was to improve fire management and open up national forests for resource extraction. Following the declaration, MountainTrue worked alongside other conservation agencies to organize public comment and resistance to the repeal up through the present. These likewise include opposition to amendments designed to repeal or nullify the roadless rule both in the 2025 "Big Beautiful Bill" and the 2025 Wildfire Prevention Act by making it easier to sell Forest Service land. The 2025 budget amendment was successfully removed and the 2025 wildfire bill remained in committee as of July 24. Public comment MountainTrue is in the process of collecting public comments about the proposed repeal, with the nonprofit's southwestern district hosting public comment events in Asheville, Haywood and now at Cowee School. He said though the government is required to hear public comments, it has been relucted to hold public comment periods about the proposed changes, so MountainTrue is doing it instead. Kelly said the government is, theoretically, unable to pursue "arbitrary" rule changes, meaning any member of the public can challenge its arguments and present specific, fact-based counterarguments in favor of the rule. "Luckily we live in a country that has laws that require public participation from government," Kelly said. "it could be anybody, it could be a five-year-old, it could be a 105-year-old." During the public period when Roadless Rule was proposed, 1.5 million members of the public came forward to participate, driving 95% support for the Roadless Rule. Kelly said in the time since the repeal has been in the public conversation, 600,000 people have come forward, showing 99% favorability for keeping the rule in place. Kelly said the most powerful arguments will be specific and data-based, saying, "You can say 'I like roadless areas because they're beautiful,' that's true … but it's going to be much more powerful if you say, for example … the Cheoah Bald roadless area is very important to you because it protects water in the Nantahala River, because of the cultural sites for Native American people, because of unique wildlife species, etc." The event's 30 attendees were invited to give public comments, to write their arguments on a set of postcards to be collected and sent to public officials and representatives, or to leave letters and audio comments with MountainTrue to transcribe and distribute to these public officials. Of those attending, most chose to fill out a postcard rather than speak, but Scaly Mountain resident Constance Neely agreed to share her comments. "I am a hiker, but I am also a soil conservationist," she said. "And what I cannot tolerate is seeing sediment in our streams, and that is coming from the roads. If you put more roads into our forests, you are going to both make it much more vulnerable — our watersheds and our water quality to sedimentation — but you're also going to break up the habitats for our wildlife. So absolutely, we need the roadless rule." Following the meeting, Kelly said the best thing concerned citizens could do would be to sign up to the MountainTrue newsletter, which occasionally sends out notice of other meetings, legislation and calls to action. You may also also contact Senators Ted Budd and Thom Tillis or House representative Chuck Edwards. Roadless Rule The Roadless Rule was established in 2001 with 95% support from public commenters discussing the proposed legislation, according to Kelly. He noted the difference between national parks and national forests. The parks fall under the Department of Interior and are used for conservation and recreation, while the forests were established primarily for timber production. Resource extraction was the historical prerogative of America's national forests, with the 1960s through the early 1990s being a period of "aggressive" road construction, Kelly said. "Because they were, in my opinion, overbuilt," he said, "But even back then, at the peak of U.S. Forest Service timber production, the U.S. Forest Service was losing $2 billion annually on the timber sale program, and at the same time there were a lot of crises with salmon runs going extinct, animals becoming endangered. A lot of changing priorities nationally." As Americans grew more conservation-minded and began to value wildlands for recreation like fishing and hunting, Kelly said the Forest Service began to inventory all the nation's roadless areas. They defined a roadless area in the Eastern U.S. as an area without a permanent road larger than 2,000 acres, and in the west as larger than 5,000 acres. Kelly shared data on these roadless areas taken from the Southern Environmental Law Center. "These are the last, wildest, best places we have in the country. 71% of them are in the western continental United States, 25% are in Alaska. Just 2% are eastern national forests," Kelly said. "The majority of those are in the Southern Appalachians … there are very few of these areas, basically none of them outside of federal ownership." This lead to the creation of the 2001 roadless rule, established to "provide lasting protection for inventoried roadless areas in the national forest system" by preventing permanent road construction, though unofficial "temporary" roads can still be built. Kelly said there is a variety of benefits of keeping these areas clear of road construction, the first being pollution. He said the largest pollutant in public waterways is sediment, the majority of which comes from roads. Construction, timber harvest and other sources of sediment can be mitigated with the best practices recommended by experts, but the number one source comes from water runoff from permanent roads. Roadless areas are also often mountainous, upstream of local municipal water resources, Kelly said. He pointed out municipalities downstream of Mt. Mitchell, Mackey Mountain and South Mills River could be affected by the rule's repeal. Following pollution, roadless areas help to the preservation of old growth, which Kelly described as "seed trees" which can keep the forest alive with new growth — keeping sustainable timber as a resource for generations through sustainable logging practices. He also noted of the loggers he had spoken to, around half are opposed to the repeal of the roadless rule because they are not interested in building new roads to go deeper into national forests. They would prefer to take convenient, accessible new growth from areas alongside existing roadways where it can be more cheaply harvested and transported. Native species like endangered or threatened bats, flying squirrels, salamanders and the Southern Appalachian Brook Trout — the only trout species native to Western North Carolina — all benefit from the indirect ecological protections afforded by the roadless rule. Tourists and residents benefit from increased access to older, wilder nature free from excessive logging or development, Kelly said. "In North Carolina, you're talking about Snowbird Creek, you're talking about Middle Prong in Haywood County," Kelly said. "I remember the first time I went to Middle Prong I met this guy back there and he said, 'son, if you catch 50 fish back there, you're having a bad day,' and that's the truth. These places are phenomenal in their productivity for cold water fisheries." He said fly fishing in North Carolina is responsible for $44,000,000 in economic activity and the N.C. Waildlife resource commission estimated trout fishing in North Carolina created $1.38 billion in economic impact, which would likely be damaged without the roadless rule. Kelly said many anglers are only interested in catching native brook trout. Outdoor Alliance placed the economic impact of recreational tourism just from climbers, mountain bikers and paddlers at $83.3 million from 4.6 million visitors each year, and $31.7 million each year from residents of Western North Carolina. It also says 95% of residents "chose to live in Western North Carolina for its unparalleled access to outdoor recreation." Associate attorney Abigail Hunt of the Southern Environmental Law Center said, "Roadless areas are the backbones of local economies across Western North Carolina. Visitors come from all over the world to see these spectacularly wild forests, and they support local businesses and communities in the process. Getting rid of the Roadless Rule would not only put our incredible landscapes at risk, it would also be a devastating blow to local economies that depend on roadless areas for tourism and tax dollars." Mici Canales, marketing director for Visit Smokies, said the group does not have access to data isolating the economic impact of roadless area tourism, but said outdoor recreation from visitors generates "approximately $831.7 million in economic output and supports more than 8,300 full-time jobs across Cherokee, Clay, Graham, Haywood, Jackson, Macon and Swain counties." Canales shared a statement from Visit Smokies reading, "Outdoor recreation is not simply an amenity in the westernmost counties of North Carolina. It is part of our economic foundation. Our forests, rivers, waterfalls, trails and scenic landscapes bring visitors who support local outfitters, guides, lodging properties, restaurants, retailers and other small businesses throughout the region. … As the federal process moves forward, we believe the economic value of clean water, scenic character, public access and the backcountry experiences that distinguish our region should be fully considered, alongside the Forest Service's multiple-use responsibilities and meaningful local input." In most recent attempt to repeal the roadless rule, Rollins and the USDA argued the repeal will allow for better fire protection as firefighters are better able to get trucks into forested areas to fight any wildfires that break out. However, Kelly pointed out, according to the national parks service, 85% of wildfires are caused by human activity. He said most of these fires are started within a half mile of a road, and more roads in and through currently roadless areas could create more opportunities for human activity to start more wildfires. In addition, because roadless areas are not close to human property, wildfires in such areas tend not to be as threatening to people. The Forest Service also has the ability to move equipment into roadless areas via temporary roads to perform wildfire maintenance or prescribed burns. "Currently, 50% of Nantahala-Pisgah National Forests, under the 1994 forest plan, is open for timber production, that's half a million acres," Kelly said. "This [repealing the Roadless Rule] would add another 130,000 acres that would become available … that's more or less what's at stake. What's at stake is the loss of these last wild places, the last vestiges of wild places in the east, locally. That's what's in our backyard, it's up to us to protect if we want. We're looking at a situation where our grandkids may not have the same opportunities, or even our children, to do that." In response to questions from attendees about these policy changes being driven by special interests, Kelly noted again that half of the loggers he'd spoken to were opposed to the repeal, and while there will always be those within the timber, mining and natural gas industries interested in accessing public lands for profit, he believes many are not interested in the significant investments in infrastructure required to enable that access. Kelly said a problem in the future could be the federal government working to legalize the sale of large tracts of national forests and public land using a ballooning deficit as an excuse to privatize the public resource.

MountainTrue collects public comment on Roadless Rule repeal

Contact Us