Arizona groups fight rushed rollback of forest protections

For people in Tucson who rely on Southern Arizona’s forests for clean water, wildlife habitat, recreation and relief from the desert heat, a proposed federal policy change could affect more than distant public lands. National and local conservation groups are urging the Trump administration to slow its effort to repeal the Roadless Rule, a Clinton-era protection covering undeveloped national forest lands. In Arizona, the policy applies to more than 1.2 million acres. Advocates warn that removing those safeguards could allow new roads, commercial logging and mining in places that have remained largely untouched.

The dispute centers on the amount of time the public has to respond. The federal government has opened a 32 day comment period on the proposed repeal, a schedule conservationists say is far too short for a decision that could shape public lands for decades. The comment period is set to close at midnight on September 21. Environmental organizations are asking residents to submit formal comments to the U.S. Forest Service and to press the agency to provide more time for people to understand the proposal and weigh in.

The Roadless Rule protects about 45 million acres of undeveloped national forest lands nationwide. Tim Preso, managing attorney for the biodiversity program at Earthjustice, said those areas matter to people who visit them and depend on the benefits they provide, including clean water, wildlife and outdoor recreation. He described the proposal as an attempt to remove protections from lands that could remain vulnerable for 25 years. Preso also argued that the current comment period is only a small portion of the time historically provided when the rule itself was established.

For Tucson and Southern Arizona, the issue is especially significant because the region’s forests are surrounded by a landscape already facing extreme heat and drought. Louise Misztal, executive director of the Tucson based Sky Island Alliance, said local residents should view the proposal as part of a wider effort to dismantle longstanding public land protections without adequate input from people in Arizona. The Sky Island Alliance is among the groups encouraging residents to take part, particularly those who visit or care about the region’s forested mountain ranges and the ecological connections they provide.

Misztal also pointed to wildfire risk as a major concern. New roads can make remote areas more accessible for development, but they can also bring vehicles and human activity into places where fires could start. She said fires have been found to be four times more likely to begin near roads than in areas without roads. For Tucson residents, that warning has added urgency because wildfires have occurred close to home in recent years. Conservationists say road construction could increase risks in forests already stressed by drought and hotter conditions.

The proposed repeal would not immediately build roads, begin logging or authorize mining on every protected parcel. Instead, it would remove the broad, national safeguard that currently limits those activities in inventoried roadless areas. Conservation groups say that change could make individual forests more vulnerable to development decisions in the future. They are concerned not only about direct damage to trees and habitat, but also about the effects of roads on wildlife movement, water resources, recreation and the spread or ignition of fire.

The public participation process has drawn criticism beyond the length of the comment period. The Forest Service has scheduled hearings, but the meetings are either virtual or being held in Alaska. That arrangement means people in Arizona and most other parts of the country do not have an in person forum in their own communities. Misztal said the lack of localized hearings contributes to the concern that the administration is moving to dismantle the public land system without hearing from the residents who use and value those lands.

The Forest Service had not provided a comment about the proposed rollback at the time of the report. In the meantime, conservation groups are directing residents to the Roadless Rule page, where they can find a link to submit comments directly to the agency. A formal response gives Tucson area residents a way to describe how forest lands affect their recreation, water, wildlife and fire concerns, even if they cannot attend one of the scheduled hearings.

The fight is part of a broader national debate over how undeveloped public forests should be managed and who should have a voice in decisions affecting them. Supporters of the existing rule say its protections preserve places that provide lasting public benefits and prevent irreversible development. Those opposing the rollback effort are focused first on the process, saying the government should allow more time and create meaningful opportunities for communities outside Alaska to participate. For Southern Arizona, the immediate question is whether residents will have enough time and access to influence what happens to protected forest lands before the September 21 deadline.