08/19/2026
We must get engaged!
Many of you are probably aware that the US Department of Agriculture this week posted in the Federal Register 36 CFR Part 294, Special Roadless Area Conservation (Roadless Rule Recission), and is opening a comment period.
You can easily Google the document. It does not throw regulation to the wind. In fact, if the proposal is codified, it will generally not change existing land management plans but will come into play in future plans, notwithstanding that existing plans can be amended. The overriding intent is to put management of these areas into the hands of the Forest Service regional supervisors. This can work both ways, less restriction or more restriction. It would eliminate the argument that “our hands are tied by the roadless rule”.
Now the wilderness folks don’t want the rule rescinded because the status quo has pretty much shut out motorized recreation in roadless designated areas. They don’t want any risk of change.
They will comment heavily on all the alleged impact expanded motorized use could have on their private recreational areas within public lands.
As a motorized recreationalist, it is easy to sit back and think “it can’t get worse and probably will get better so why comment”. Wrong. It could get worse and, at the very least, will invite litigation when/if forest supervisors try to balance multiple use of the forest. We must get engaged!
One thing that caught my eye when reading the document was that it stated that the proposed rule could have a negative economic impact on recreation. I don’t see that. While there is the potential for alleged conflict between motorized and non-motorized users, that statement overlooks that motorized recreation is the fastest-growing segment in the US. More access should have a more positive economic impact.
I can’t stress enough that all motorized recreationalists need to comment on the positive benefits of the proposed roadless rule rescission. The key points from my perspective are: positive economic impact, decision-making at a local level instead of at a national level “one size fits all”, balanced multiple use of public land. Better fire and insect management due to better access almost goes without saying. Back to the regional decision-making, the Clearwater National Forest supervisors on two recent forest plans supported snowmobile access in RWA’s yet were overridden at the DC level. The proposed rule change would be a step to stop that interference.
Comment link: https://www.regulations.gov/ Docket number FS 2025-0001. We need to support this rule proposal so we can work with the regional Forest Supervisors outside of DC oversight.