I oppose the proposal to fully or partially rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I live in Salem, Oregon. Public lands have a great impact on my life and personal well being. I am a nature photographer, Oregon forests volunteer, citizen scientist, and avid hiker. The lands highlighted in this proposal protect my community from nearby wildfires, as well as decrease wildfire smoke and bad air. They also provide our local watershed with clean water, create large amounts of jobs and revenue through recreation and help protect the whole planet from rising temperatures by acting as a carbon storage.
I care about all wildlands in my state, specifically areas where I hike or would impact my community if this rule were changed. The Opal Creek area and Bull Of The Woods area impacted my community in 2020 during the Beachie Creek fire. This area is extremely fragile and still recovering after that devastating wildfire. Allowing more roads into this area would further endanger not only these forests but all life nearby. “Over 90% of all wildfires from all causes occurred within 1/2 mile of a road.” This is according to the Pacific Biodiversity Institute’s 2007 study by P. H. Morrison. According to the study, less roads directly correlate to less wildfires in forest land. The two most common causes of wildfires are the burning of materials or arson. They comprise about 40% of forest fires while lightning occurrences rank 3rd at 15%. According to a DEQ study published in the Central Oregon Daily news paper, the city of Salem has seen an increase from an average of 0 unhealthy air days to 4.9 unhealthy air days in the past 12 years. As far as fire extinguishing goes, recent aerial technology allows us to detect early hot spots to stop fires in remote areas before they become wildfires. And the current infrastructure is more than adequate to provide transportation to extinguish fires. Additional roads in roadless areas are a danger to the area and surrounding communities and increase fire risk in backcountry forests. The Roadless Rule helps protect areas that are fire resilient and less prone to wildfire ignitions. Studies show that fires are 4x more likely to start near a road than in a roadless forest, and logging can increase fire hazard.
As my city's drinking water comes from watersheds around Detroit Lake, I am particularly concerned about an increase in roads north of the reservoir in Opal Creek and Bull Run. Rescinding the roadless rule will allow increased logging and roads that threaten clean drinking water sources. The Roadless Rule helps safeguard watersheds that provide drinking water to over 2.2 million Oregonians.
In addition to protecting communities throughout Oregon, the roadless rule protects sensitive habitats and species such as in the dune lands south of Florence Oregon, important cultural areas such as foraging areas in the Drift Creek Wilderness and around Mt Hebo, livelihoods and income in the recreation sectors of our state such as back country skiing and hiking in the Hood and Jefferson Wilderness areas and breathtaking views of wild land that bring in tourism from all over the world in and around Hells Canyon and the Wallowa Mountains.
A personal story about me. A member of my family worked in Forestry and taught my siblings and myself to love the outdoors. As a result, we hike and explore the wildlands of our state and others nearby. I forage mushrooms in the Drift Creek Wilderness and they frequently hike in the Mt Hood Wilderness. The wildlands are a part of every Oregonian’s life and should be protected to continue our unique way of life. We passed the Roadless Rule with unanimous support and do not wish to see it ended. For the reasons listed above, fully or partially rescinding the Roadless Rule under Alternatives 2 and 3 of the draft EIS would be a huge mistake. I urge you to listen to the people and oppose the proposal to rescind or alter the Roadless Rule and support alternative 1, the No Action alternative.