Oregon Congresswoman Andrea Salinas is leading a congressional effort urging the Trump administration to retain federal protections covering approximately 44 million acres of national forest land as the U.S. Department of Agriculture considers eliminating a conservation policy that has governed those areas for 25 years.
Salinas joined Congresswoman Yassamin Ansari and Sens. Maria Cantwell and Reuben Gallego in organizing a letter signed by 164 members of Congress opposing the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The lawmakers are asking Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins and the U.S. Forest Service to withdraw the proposal and continue administering the existing policy.
The Roadless Rule restricts most road construction, road reconstruction and certain timber activities within designated inventoried roadless areas of the National Forest System. Approximately 44 million acres across 37 states currently fall under the protections, encompassing undeveloped forests, municipal watersheds, wildlife habitat and recreational lands.
The congressional letter also challenges the amount of time provided for public participation in the current rulemaking process. Lawmakers are requesting that the 30-day comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and proposed rule be extended to 120 days. They are also seeking public meetings in communities substantially affected by roadless designations and additional consultation with Tribal governments.
Before the Roadless Rule was adopted in 2001, the Forest Service received approximately 1.6 million public comments and conducted more than 600 meetings nationwide. According to the congressional letter, about 95 percent of those comments supported the policy.
A 21-day comment period conducted in 2025 concerning the federal government’s intention to rescind the rule generated more than 600,000 responses. The lawmakers reported that more than 99 percent opposed eliminating the protections.
“When the Roadless Rule was originally developed, the aforementioned 600 public meetings ensured that affected communities, Tribes, local governments, industry, recreation interests, and conservation organizations had the opportunity to engage directly with the agency,” the lawmakers wrote. “The proposal to repeal the Rule warrants the same level of public engagement.”
The lands governed by the rule are connected to several areas of federal forest policy, including wildfire management, timber activity, drinking-water protection, wildlife habitat and recreation.
According to information cited in the congressional letter, roadless protections extend into 354 municipal watersheds. The lawmakers also cited Forest Service data indicating that watersheds within roadless areas are more likely to be classified as properly functioning than watersheds outside the designated lands.
Hundreds of species listed or proposed for protection under the Endangered Species Act use habitat within roadless areas, including grizzly bears and lynx. The letter identifies Alaska’s Tongass National Forest, New Mexico’s Gila National Forest and Virginia’s George Washington National Forest among the federal landscapes affected by the policy.
Wildfire management is another component of the dispute. Arguments favoring greater access to federal forests have included concerns that roadless restrictions can interfere with active forest management and wildfire prevention. The lawmakers opposing repeal maintain that the existing policy permits wildfire suppression, prevention work and hazardous-fuels reduction.
Nearly 2 million acres within designated roadless areas have undergone fuel treatments in recent years, according to the letter. The lawmakers also cited research finding comparable wildfire risk inside and outside roadless areas while contending that additional roads can introduce human ignition sources through vehicles, campfires and recreational activity.
Federal costs are included in the congressional argument. The Forest Service faces a road maintenance backlog approaching $6 billion, and lawmakers opposing repeal contend that constructing additional roads in remote national forests could create further long-term maintenance expenses.
Recreational use of the affected lands is extensive. Roadless areas contain more than 25,000 miles of trails, approximately 8,500 climbing routes, 1,000 miles of whitewater and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking trails, according to figures presented in the letter. Hunting and fishing are also permitted across many of the designated areas. The lawmakers placed those activities within a national outdoor recreation economy valued at approximately $1.3 trillion.
Oregon has millions of acres within the National Forest System, making federal forest policy particularly consequential for communities where public lands intersect with timber production, wildfire management, recreation, watersheds and rural economies.
The 164 lawmakers are asking federal officials to retain the existing Roadless Rule while addressing management needs within its current framework.
“After 25 years of successful implementation, the conclusion is clear: the Roadless Rule is effective, widely supported, and essential to responsible forest management,” the lawmakers wrote.
The Forest Service has not completed the rulemaking process. The proposal remains under federal review as the administration considers whether protections established in 2001 will remain in place or be rescinded across millions of acres of national forest land.