Trump admin plans to revoke protection for 58.5 million acres of national forest


This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

Decision

The Trump administration is rescinding the so-called roadless rule, which protects around 30% of national forests from construction, mining and logging.

Criticism

Critics argue that the move will harm ecosystems and drinking water for millions of Americans and is essentially a giveaway to the timber industry.

Proponents

Proponents of the move argue it will lead to more innovation and remove restrictive regulations on American businesses.


Full story

The United States Department of Agriculture announced a plan on Monday, June 23, to revoke a decades-old rule that protects more than 58 million acres of national forests from road construction, mining, drilling and logging. The USDA, which oversees the U.S. Forest Service, plans to rescind the 2001 roadless rule, originally created to preserve wilderness across roughly 30% of the country’s national forests.

What Is the roadless rule?

Lawmakers enacted the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule during the final days of the Clinton administration. Lawmakers designed the rule to limit development in designated roadless areas across national forests. These areas span more than 40 states and territories and are home to critical wildlife habitats and vital sources of drinking water for millions of Americans.

QR code for SAN app download

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

Studies have shown that constructing roads can lead to harmful consequences, including disruption to habitats and ecosystems, as well as worsening erosion and polluting drinking water. The National Forest Service’s 2001 impact report on the policy found that national forests are a major source of drinking water for Americans and areas marked as roadless protect water sources for millions of people who rely on them. 

However, USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins argued the rule is “outdated” and “overly restrictive.”

The Trump administration’s reasoning

Rollins noted that nearly 60% of the forests in Utah restrict road construction and argues the move puts the area at risk of fire because of officials’ inability to “properly manage” the forest. She also pointed to Montana, which she estimated has 58% of forest protected by the roadless rule and Alaska’s Tongass National Forest, where Rollins said 92% of forest is affected by the rule. The USDA secretary claims the rule hurts job growth and economic development. 

“Once again, President Trump is removing absurd obstacles to common-sense management of our natural resources by rescinding the overly restrictive roadless rule. This move opens a new era of consistency and sustainability for our nation’s forests. It is abundantly clear that properly managing our forests preserves them from devastating fires and allows future generations of Americans to enjoy and reap the benefits of this great land,” Rollins said in a statement.

In line with other actions

Rollins said the decision aligns with President Donald Trump’s executive order, “Unleashing Prosperity and Deregulation,” and supports efforts to expand mining, logging, and drilling on public lands. The president’s efforts also include a proposal in the Senate version of the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” that would lead to the sale of millions of acres of public land. Trump has argued these actions will eliminate costly regulations to American business and innovation, boost domestic timber supplies and result in greater energy independence. 

The Trump administration claims of the 58.5 million acres covered by the roadless rule, 28 million are in places where the risk of wildfires is high. They contend revoking the rule will lead to better management of land at risk of fire through fewer restrictions on clearing out high-risk areas. 

According to the USDA’s website, more than 40 states and territories have areas protected by the roadless rule.

Logging industry celebrates decision

The logging industry celebrated the plan. 

“Our forests are extremely overgrown, overly dense, unhealthy, dead, dying and burning,” Scott Dane, executive director for the American Loggers Council, told The Washington Post.

Dane said on average, national forests have roughly 300 trunks per acre, but noted the ideal density should be around 75 trunks. Dane countered that critics are mischaracterizing Trump’s policies as opening federal forests to unchecked logging. He emphasized that the logging industry follows sustainable practices and still faces strict regulatory requirements.

“To allow access into these forests, like we used to prior to 2001 and for 100 years prior to that, will enable the forest managers to practice sustainable forest management,” Dane said.

Backlash from environmental groups

Environmental advocates criticized the USDA’s move. 

“Secretary Rollins is taking a blowtorch to a landmark rule that shields almost 60 million acres of national forests from the serious impacts roads can have not only on wildlife and their habitats but also on the nation’s drinking water sources,” Vera Smith, the director of the national forests and public lands program at the nonprofit Defenders of Wildlife, said in a statement. 

Conservation campaigns director at the nonprofit Wilderness Society, Josh Hicks, called the rule “remarkably successful at protecting the nation’s forests from mining, logging and roadbuilding for nearly 25 years.”

“Any attempt to revoke it is an attack on the air and water we breathe and drink, abundant recreational opportunities which millions of people enjoy each year, havens for wildlife and critical buffers for communities threatened by increasingly severe wildfire seasons,” Hicks said.

Pushback on wildfire claims

Critics of the USDA’s decision also disagree that revoking the rule will decrease wildfire risk.

“It’s ridiculous for Secretary Rollins to spin this as a move that will reduce wildfire risk or improve recreation,” Rachael Hamby, a policy director with the Center for Western Priorities, said in a statement. “Commercial logging exacerbates climate change, increasing the intensity of wildfires. This is nothing more than a massive giveaway to timber companies at the expense of every American and forests that belong to all of us.”

Drew McConville, a senior fellow with the Center for American Progress, accused the Trump administration of being “dead set on liquidating our public lands as quickly as possible.”

“Under the guise of wildfire prevention, this action would shamelessly offer up some of our most treasured national forests for drilling, mining, and timber,” McConville said. “It should be clear by now to President Trump that American people do not want their forests and parks sold out to the highest bidder.”

Chris Wood, one of the people who helped develop the roadless rule when he worked at the Forest Service, said the rule is “one of the most significant and popular conservation achievements in the history of the United States.”

Gifford Pinchot, the first chief of the Forest Service, once described it as “the application of common sense to common problems for the common good.”

“Let’s hope common sense prevails and the administration reconsiders its proposal,” Wood told The Los Angeles Times.

Emma Stoltzfus (Video Editor) and Devin Pavlou (Digital Producer) contributed to this report.

Why this story matters

The plan to revoke the 2001 Roadless Rule by the U.S. Department of Agriculture could reshape how over 58 million acres of national forest are managed, affecting environmental protections, wildfire management, economic interests, and the use of public lands.

Environmental protection

The potential removal of the Roadless Rule raises concerns from environmental groups about the impact on wildlife habitats, drinking water sources, and ecological preservation.

Economic and industry interests

Advocates for the forestry and logging industries argue that rescinding the rule will promote job growth, economic development, and sustainable resource management.

Wildfire management

The debate over whether removing restrictions on forest management will reduce the risk of wildfires highlights differing perspectives between government officials, industry representatives, and environmental advocates.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 36 media outlets

History lesson

The Roadless Rule faced ongoing political contention since 2001, with attempts to weaken or overturn it occurring under several administrations. Past efforts to allow more development in national forests have triggered legal battles, state-level carve-outs, and public comment periods demonstrating strong support for conservation, reflecting an enduring national debate over public land stewardship.

Oppo research

Opponents, including environmental advocacy organizations and Democratic lawmakers, are preparing to challenge the rollback in court. They describe the move as environmentally destructive, motivated by industry, and harmful to public interests. Statements pledged continued protest, litigation, and public campaigns to restore or strengthen protections for national forests.

Policy impact

Rescinding the rule is likely to have direct impacts on timber harvesting, road building, and economic activity in rural and forest-dependent communities. It could also alter public access, recreational uses, and the regulatory landscape for development projects, with implications for wildlife, water quality, fire management, and local economies.

Bias comparison

  • Media outlets on the left frame the Trump administration’s plan to rescind the Roadless Rule as an environmental attack, using charged terms like "strip protections," "attack," and "massive giveaway" to highlight threats to wildlife, air, and water, emphasizing harm and public loss.
  • Media outlets in the center balance both right and left views, spotlighting local economic benefits, wildfire risk reduction, and sustainability while de-emphasizing emotional rhetoric.
  • Media outlets on the right celebrate deregulation and economic opportunity with positive phrasing such as "rolls back rule" and "applauds," portraying the rule as an unnecessary "block" on resource use.

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

36 total sources

Key points from the Left

  • The Trump administration plans to rescind the roadless rule, which has been in place since 2001, according to Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins.
  • The roadless rule has frustrated Republican lawmakers, particularly in Western states where logging has declined.
  • Rollins stated that rescinding the rule would allow for 'responsible timber production' to help reduce wildfire risks.
  • Environmental groups argue that revoking the rule would harm vital natural resources, air, water, and wildlife, criticizing the move as an attack on protections.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

  • On Monday, Brooke Rollins, head of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, revealed that the Trump administration intends to roll back the 2001 roadless rule, which impacts nearly 59 million acres across the country.
  • The roadless rule, adopted in the last days of the Clinton administration, restricted road construction and logging to protect national forest lands.
  • Rollins stated that the rule restricted building roads and sustainable timber harvesting, and that removing it will foster greater uniformity, environmental stewardship, and effective management of local forests.
  • The USDA stated the rule covers 30% of national forest lands and includes 28 million acres at high wildfire risk, while critics call rescinding the rule an attack on air, water, wildlife, and recreation.
  • The decision marks a shift from the Biden administration, drawing praise from some lawmakers and industry leaders, but environmental groups promise legal challenges and warn of greater wildfire risk and ecological harm.

Report an issue with this summary

Powered by Ground News™