Ripping Apart Montana Roadless Areas

[Flynarrow]

In Montana and I suspect other States, Roadless areas provide enough big game security on public lands that allow us to have long hunting seasons, fewer limited entry, and a chance for mature animals. More roads dissect this security, ultimately meaning shorter hunting seasons, fewer mature animals and more limited entry hunting opportunities. And more animals PUSHED TO PRIVATE lands.

So why are Daines, Sheehy, Zinky and Downing....and Gianforte....silent on this insane proposal? These lands are generally steep with high road building costs exceeding timber values.....that is why they are still roadless. Roading these areas are not going to bring economic prosperity, but rather ripping at the soul of what makes Montana special.

Scream, write letters, call your congressmen and Governor. Comment and Get others involved....time is short
(Sept 19) at www.regulations.gov Docket # FS-2025-0001.

 

[Flynarrow]

 

[sapperJ24]

So why are Daines, Sheehy, Zinky and Downing....and Gianforte....silent on this insane proposal? These lands are generally steep with high road building costs exceeding timber values.....that is why they are still roadless. Roading these areas are not going to bring economic prosperity, but rather ripping at the soul of what makes Montana special.

Scream, write letters, call your congressmen and Governor. Comment and Get others involved....time is short
(Sept 19) at www.regulations.gov Docket # FS-2025-0001.

Just want to clarify one thing. The elected officials you mentioned haven't been silent.

Governor Greg Gianforte (MT): “Under this outdated rule, nearly 58% of forest service land in Montana was restricted from road development and unable to be properly managed for fire risk. Thank you, Secretary Rollins and President Trump, for restoring common sense to active forest management

Senator Steve Daines (MT): “Huge win for Montana, forest management, and wildfire mitigation. Thanks to the Trump administration and USDA for being committed to Montana-First priorities

Representative Ryan Zinke (MT): “The rescission of the outdated Roadless Rule is a victory for Montana, public lands, and forest management everywhere. As I've long maintained, one of the biggest obstacles to proper forest management and wildfire prevention has been unnecessary and overbearing regulations like this one. If you can't build a road, you can't fight fires, you can't cut trees, and you can't properly take care of our national heritage held in our public lands. I applaud the President and Secretary Rollins for their initiative to allow real and needed work to be done on our national forest land.”

Representative Troy Downing (MT): “Long overdue! The USDA's move to rescind the Roadless Rule is a critical step toward responsible forest management that will help reduce wildfire risk, protect watersheds, and support rural economies.”

https://www.usda.gov/about-usda/news/press-releases/2025/06/24/what-they-are-saying-strong-support-secretary-rollins-rescission-roadless-rule-eliminating

Lastly Gianforte's comment on 58% is misleading. I'm assuming he is also including congressionally designated wilderness. Of the 16.9m acres of forest service in Montana, 6.4m are inventoried roadless, however 3.8m are considered "Inventoried Roadless Areas allocated to a prescription that allows road construction and reconstruction."

Inventoried Roadless Area Acreage by State

 

[Flynarrow]

Just want to clarify one thing. The elected officials you mentioned haven't been silent.

Governor Greg Gianforte (MT): “Under this outdated rule, nearly 58% of forest service land in Montana was restricted from road development and unable to be properly managed for fire risk. Thank you, Secretary Rollins and President Trump, for restoring common sense to active forest management

Senator Steve Daines (MT): “Huge win for Montana, forest management, and wildfire mitigation. Thanks to the Trump administration and USDA for being committed to Montana-First priorities

Representative Ryan Zinke (MT): “The rescission of the outdated Roadless Rule is a victory for Montana, public lands, and forest management everywhere. As I've long maintained, one of the biggest obstacles to proper forest management and wildfire prevention has been unnecessary and overbearing regulations like this one. If you can't build a road, you can't fight fires, you can't cut trees, and you can't properly take care of our national heritage held in our public lands. I applaud the President and Secretary Rollins for their initiative to allow real and needed work to be done on our national forest land.”

Representative Troy Downing (MT): “Long overdue! The USDA's move to rescind the Roadless Rule is a critical step toward responsible forest management that will help reduce wildfire risk, protect watersheds, and support rural economies.”

https://www.usda.gov/about-usda/news/press-releases/2025/06/24/what-they-are-saying-strong-support-secretary-rollins-rescission-roadless-rule-eliminating

Lastly Gianforte's comment on 58% is misleading. I'm assuming he is also including congressionally designated wilderness. Of the 16.9m acres of forest service in Montana, 6.4m are inventoried roadless, however 3.8m are considered "Inventoried Roadless Areas allocated to a prescription that allows road construction and reconstruction."

Inventoried Roadless Area Acreage by State

Good points.....do sportsmen want their representation advocating to punch out Roadless? Who are they representing?

 

[Treeshark]

Who are they representing?

Approximately 20% of Montana residents are hunters- they represent the other 80% as well.

 

[El Jason]

Approximately 20% of Montana residents are hunters- they represent the other 80% as well.

Is that you, Yogi Berra?

 

[Treeshark]

You can observe a lot by watching

 

[Flynarrow]

Approximately 20% of Montana residents are hunters- they represent the other 80% as well.

According to recent polls, the vast majority of Montanans support keeping Roadless areas roadless.

 

[Treeshark]

I bet polls would also show that the majority of residents support increased local economic opportunities, improved fire suppression capabilities and improved access to hunting and fishing opportunities. Polls on things like this are so easily manipulated by wording, they’re useless.

Do you think Gianforte, Daines, Zinke etc forgot to consider polling before releasing their statements of support?

I suspect this is an issue with low voter fidelity. IE: who cares? (This is the risk of treating everything as a crisis).

 

[El Jason]

 

[Treeshark]

What are your thoughts on this issue? Always appreciate other perspectives, that’s the point of a forum.

 

[SAJ-99]

improved fire suppression capabilities

You certainly create a war, soothing picture of how all this plays out. None of this is about fire suppression. That is cover. It’s almost a joke. No one is building a road in the Bob to harvest timber. Think O&G, metals, rare earths. If we have a war with China, we have some serious holes to fill. This is a test to figure out who is going to sue the US Govt when the equipment rolls in during peace time. My guess is the only real pushback might be from the tribes.

 

[Treeshark]

None of this is about fire suppression.

I personally agree- but that was one of the supposed benefits being touted by Gianforte, Daines etc.

My point was polling data is not useful in things like this, as it can be easily manipulated by wording.

Example from your post: “Do you support reduced reliance on China for mineral resources in case of war?”

 

[TOGIE]

i think gianforte, daines, and zinke mostly just stood up, took off their knee pads, and wiped off their mouths before releasing their statements of support.

 

[SAJ-99]

My point was polling data is not useful in things like this, as it can be easily manipulated by wording.

Example from your post: “Do you support reduced reliance on China for mineral resources in case of war?”

Those are different questions, but both can be true. Cognitive dissonance is everywhere these days.

And Daines and Gianforte are morons if they believe what they say. They just know that fire is an easier thing to justify than trying to explain what a rare earth metal is. Particularly when Montana doesn’t have any.

 

[Forkyfinder]

I can really get behind managing forest areas for fire before it gets out of shape for a lot of reasons.

But why does the forest service.... need MORE area to manage for fire - considering there isnt enough active management on what they can already use?

 

[Treeshark]

One good thing is that all these new roads will allow people to go rake up the woods like they do in Scandinavia.

 

[Forkyfinder]

One good thing is that all these new roads will allow people to go rake up the woods like they do in Scandinavia.

...?

 

[Treeshark]

...?

Gotta rake em.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Maybe new roads will alleviate the backlog of road maintenance throughout the USFS.