Roadless Rule Rescinded

Lolz on the rationale. As I understand it the current rule already allows for vegetation management and access for fire suppression.

Moreover, more roads + more people and their junk = more fire risk.
 
I am surprised by the lack of opposition, or at least quietness, to this by certain contingents that have funded numerous studies showing how critical roadless areas are for elk.
 
Omitting politics:

The scale for thinning, logging vs closed off? Pro's/Con's for wildlife?

Maybe better than a blanket - across the board, regardless the setting, we place it in the hands of the District Rangers?
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
119,809
Messages
2,239,004
Members
39,014
Latest member
mnhunter4789
Back
Top