Wide-open motorized use threatens America's national forests

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins and Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden

View of George Washington National Forest

For 20 years, the Forest Service has designated certain areas on our national forests where motorized vehicles are allowed for recreation. The decisions, guided by the “Travel Management Rule,” are based on maintaining clean water, wildlife habitat, and sensitive cultural areas while also allowing for the enjoyment of these public lands in a manner that reduces user conflict and protects public safety.

Now the administration plans to flip the travel rule on its head, paving the way for widespread harm and hazard. A new proposed rule would allow motor-vehicle use on ALL roads, trails and other areas EXCEPT those designated as off-limits. Such decisions would fall to the local field offices, where budgets are being gutted, depriving them of the staffing, funding, expertise, monitoring, and enforcement capacity needed to properly manage our public lands.

Take action today to oppose the new Travel Management Rule! The Forest Service’s deadline ends at midnight, Wednesday, September 23.

Compounding the threat, the Forest Service simultaneously plans to repeal the “Roadless Area Conservation Rule,” which for 25 years has protected 45 million acres of the most remote, intact places on our national forests from unnecessary roadbuilding, commercial logging, mining and other development. The Roadless Rule establishes a national floor for protecting specific wild areas, while the Travel Management Rule establishes a national framework for deciding where motorized access occurs.

The double-whammy impact of repealing roadless-area protection AND opening most roads to motorized travel would allow incremental and separate decisions about roadbuilding and motorized-access to erode the undeveloped character of America’s wildest public lands one national forest at a time.

Sign this Virginia Wilderness Committee petition, and we'll send all your names to the agency for the docket. Each person will be counted individually toward the total number of comments officially received by the agency.

Thank you!

Ellen Stuart-Haentjens, Executive Director

To: Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins and Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden
From: [Your Name]

Dear Secretary Rollins and Deputy Secretary Vaden:

I am writing to convey my opposition to the U.S. Forest Service’s proposed revisions to the 2005 Travel Management Rule (TMR). The current TMR provides an important framework for managing motorized vehicle use on our national forests while protecting natural resources, supporting diverse recreational uses, and ensuring meaningful public participation. The proposed revisions would shift that framework toward increased motorized access while reducing several of the safeguards and public processes that currently guide travel-management decisions.

Below are reasons I urge you to reconsider the proposed changes:

- Avoid an “open unless explicitly closed” system. The current system generally limits motorized use to routes and areas specifically designated for that purpose. Reversing this approach could substantially increase the number of routes available for motorized use and place a greater obligation on the Forest Service to identify, evaluate, maintain, sign, and enforce those routes.

- Consider the Forest Service’s existing staff and funding constraints. The agency already faces significant staffing, funding, and road-maintenance challenges – adding the burden of annual trail reviews proposed in this revised framework will further strain resources. Expanding the agency’s responsibility for monitoring and managing motorized routes raises questions about whether adequate resources are available to carry out these responsibilities.

- Protect trails and reduce erosion. Increased motorized use would place additional pressure on trails, particularly on steep terrain. In Virginia’s George Washington and Jefferson National Forests, volunteers already maintain an extensive network of trails. Increased vehicle use could add to this burden and contribute to erosion and impacts on streams.

- Protect natural resources. The existing rule helps minimize damage to soil, water, vegetation, wildlife, and other resources from motorized use. Eliminating these national minimization criteria will make it more difficult for land managers to address resource impacts consistently.

- Maintain meaningful public participation. The proposal would limit environmental review and associated public participation to “substantive” changes, without clearly defining that term. This could make it more difficult for the public to participate in decisions affecting trail access, permitted uses, and motorized routes on our public lands.

- Preserve safe and compatible recreation. National forests serve a wide range of users, including hikers, mountain bikers, horseback riders, hunters, anglers, campers, and motorized recreationists. The current TMR sufficiently balances these uses and addresses conflicts and safety concerns.

- Consider the cumulative effects of changing safeguards. The proposal assumes that other laws, regulations, and land-management authorities will continue to provide adequate environmental protection. However, many of those policies have been weakened this year—or removed altogether.

The Travel Management Rule does more than determine where vehicles can travel. It balances motorized access with public safety, natural resource protection, conflicts among user groups, and the Forest Service’s ability to manage its transportation system.

I ask the U.S. Department of Agriculture to reconsider the proposed revisions to the 2005 Travel Management Rule and maintain clear resource-protection standards, meaningful public participation, and a manageable framework for motorized access on our National Forest System lands.

Thank you for considering my comments.