The following transcript was generated using automated transcription software for the accessibility and convenience of our audience. While we strive for accuracy, the automated process may introduce errors, omissions, or misinterpretations. This transcript is intended as a helpful companion to the original audio and should not be considered a verbatim record. For the most accurate representation, please refer to the audio recording.
Michael Dunne: I'm Michael Dunne. As anyone who's hiked in our local national forests knows, they're thick with evergreens and plants of all shapes and sizes. Stepping just a few feet off trail can seem like entering a kind of Jurassic world of plant life. In forests that were massively logged during the past two centuries or more, restoration has depended in large part on making it harder for logging companies to gain access. Thus was born what's known as the roadless rule. Today on the show, you'll hear from an environmental organization, Defenders of Wildlife, on how the Trump administration is trying to remove that rule and gain major new access for logging. Then, at the end of the show, our reporter tells us about a national conference held locally to help the threatened population of gray whales off the coast.
Dunne: Sometimes the simpler a policy is, the more effective it can be. For years now, limiting road building in our national forests has helped reduce logging of those forests. But the Trump administration wants to remove this policy and open up our forests to more logging. You'll now hear from an environmental group urging the public to help stop this action. Colin Reynolds is senior advisor for the Northwest Field Conservation Program at Defenders of Wildlife. Colin, it's great to talk to you again. Thanks so much for coming on.
Colin Reynolds: Thanks so much for having me, Michael.
Dunne: Yeah, let's start with this. Tell folks what the Roadless Area Conservation Rule is.
Reynolds: Absolutely, and I'm happy to talk about this important issue today. The roadless rule is one of our country's most important conservation policies. It was established back in 2001. It put a nationwide prohibition on timber harvesting, road construction and road reconstruction in what are called inventoried roadless areas on national forest land. These are basically high-quality areas: undisturbed soil, water and air, sources of public drinking water, and great habitat for a lot of imperiled species. They're located throughout the country, around 45 million acres of national forest land nationwide, with 2 million acres in Oregon itself.
Dunne: Okay, and I guess the assumption is that with fewer roads, it's simply not as easy to harvest the forest. Is that basically it?
Reynolds: In a sense. Roadless areas are important to wildlife and habitat because without roads and logging, wildlife can thrive undisturbed by clear-cuts, bulldozers and so on. These inventoried roadless areas, or IRAs, not to be confused with retirement accounts, do have some exceptions to the protections. The Forest Service can go in to help with wildfire risk reduction. People can still recreate in those areas, motorized and non-motorized. There is some timber harvest that occurs. So activities and management can still happen there. It's just that these areas were recognized by the government as being so important for wildlife and habitat that they set them aside, with some exceptions to allow access when needed for safety purposes.
Dunne: Okay, and in the 25 years since it was established, give us a thumbnail of what the impact has been.
Reynolds: That's one of the benefits of something being in place for about 25 years: you get an idea of its importance and what it's done. In terms of drinking water, it protects a lot of our national drinking water, even within the Portland metro area. The impact has been really positive for wildlife and for water quality here in Oregon. Nearly 2 million acres of forest land in the state is designated as roadless, and because certain activities aren't occurring in those areas, there's less erosion getting into waterways and fewer landslides. It really protects our water. Within 100 miles of Portland, there are more than 380,000 acres of inventoried roadless areas that help stream quality, protecting drinking water for more than 900,000 Oregonians statewide. So that alone has been impactful. We also know that building roads for timber harvesting leads to more fires, so over the past 25 years there's been less fire in certain areas, less habitat fragmentation, and overall it's been a net benefit. One more thing, Michael: one of the reasons the roadless rule was implemented in 2001 was the realization that the cost of maintaining these roads was so great. At the time, there was about $8 billion in deferred maintenance. That cost hasn't really been minimized over the years for maintaining roads that either were never built or have since been retired.
Dunne: Okay, so tell our audience what the Trump administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture are trying to do with this rule.
Reynolds: Great question. Just to bring everyone up to speed: a couple of weeks ago, in late August, the Trump administration published a proposed rule to fully rescind the roadless rule nationwide. The public has until Sept. 21, coming up quickly, to say they want the rule to stay on the books. Oregon is kind of an interesting test case, a preview of what may happen elsewhere. Right now, the Trump administration is also revising the Blue Mountains Forest Plan, which covers three forest plans in northeastern Oregon and southeastern Washington: the Malheur, Umatilla and Walla Walla. That plan, also open for comment, proposes to repeal the roadless rule and would triple logging in these forests, opening the door to logging some of the region's oldest and largest trees. So to bring it back to your question: the Trump administration wants to eliminate the roadless rule nationally, but we're already seeing what that could look like on the ground in the Blue Mountains, which means a lot more logging, more road building, and impacts we believe the public doesn't want. That's why we're asking people to submit comments opposing the rule by Sept. 21.
Dunne: So what has the Trump administration said as its reason for trying to remove the roadless rule?
Reynolds: I think there have been a couple of things the administration has said, mainly that the rule prevents the ability to manage forests to reduce wildfire risk. But we recognize the importance of this issue and don't believe eliminating the roadless rule will reduce wildfire risk to communities. The science shows that wildfires have a greater chance of starting along roads because of human activity like campfires and smoking, and recent studies show the highest density of wildfire ignitions occurs within a 50-meter zone around roads. Combined with the fact that the roadless rule has always allowed for road construction when needed to protect human safety in cases of imminent danger, such as wildfire, we don't think the wildfire argument is very compelling. One more example: the administration says it wants to return management to local land managers. That sounds good in principle, but the agency's own proposed rule emphasizes local control while also saying the repeal fulfills President Trump's executive order on timber production. It's hard to reconcile those two things: give control back to local managers, whose staff has been cut significantly, including the research center in Portland and the Pacific Northwest regional headquarters for the U.S. Forest Service, which just closed last week, while also saying those local managers should increase timber production. Those two examples alone are something a lot of us disagree with.
Dunne: I'm going to ask you to look into a bit of a crystal ball. We've had 25 years of the roadless rule. If it goes away, what might we see in those same forests 25 years from now?
Reynolds: Great question. I think we'd see a lot of the negative impacts we were trying to prevent from the start: more habitat fragmentation from road building and timber harvesting in areas that are challenging to harvest, or maybe not economical, on slopes or in remote areas. We'd have to build roads to get in there, which causes habitat fragmentation, increased runoff, reduced water quality and more human-caused fires. It's so challenging to put the genie back in the bottle once it's out, in terms of reconnecting habitat. This is something we really call on the public to weigh in on: submit comments opposing this proposed rescission and keep the rule in place, because we think it benefits not just people who recreate and drink water in the area and enjoy our natural areas, but also the wildlife and habitat itself.
Dunne: Okay, what specifically can members of the public do, and where can they do it?
Reynolds: By Sept. 21, the public can go to regulations.gov, to the proposed roadless area conservation rule, and submit comments opposing this proposed rescission. If you need help finding where to go, there are a number of resources out there, but one I'd point to specifically is defenders.org/roadless-rule. You can go there to learn more, and we'd really appreciate the public opposing this proposed rescission.
Dunne: We'll put that link on our web post. Colin, my last question for you: in addition to this, what other legislation or policy changes is the Trump administration proposing that relate to this?
Reynolds: This proposed rescission fits into a larger pattern nationwide. It isn't happening in isolation. Along with this rule, the administration also rescinded the Bureau of Land Management's Public Lands Rule. There have been regulatory rollbacks under the Endangered Species Act, and within Oregon there's also the Blue Mountains Forest Plan revision in northeastern Oregon, along with two other major land management processes underway: the Northwest Forest Plan amendment from the U.S. Forest Service and the Western Oregon Plan Revision from the Bureau of Land Management. These are compounding attacks against our nation's wildlife and habitat, and I think most of us wouldn't want those to happen. So many of us love our nation's wildlife, find common ground in going into the wilderness, recreating, looking out for wildlife and experiencing the outdoors. This is something I think we can all rally around to oppose this proposed rescission.
Dunne: He's Colin Reynolds, senior advisor for the Northwest Field Conservation Program at Defenders of Wildlife. Colin, it's always great to talk to you. Thanks so much for coming on and talking to our audience.
Reynolds: Thanks so much for having me.
Dunne: As we finish out the show today, we're going to bring in one of our reporters to update us on a recent symposium held at the coast to figure out how to help the threatened population of gray whales. KLCC's Weekend Edition host and reporter Brianna Bowman. Brianna, it's great to talk to you. Thanks so much for coming on.
Brianna Bowman: Yeah, nice to talk to you, Michael.
Dunne: Yeah, I really enjoyed the feature piece you did about this symposium on the coast. Talk about what scientists from all over the world were discussing regarding gray whales.
Bowman: This was a unique, landmark symposium called the Range-Wide Gray Whale Symposium, and it brought together scientists from throughout the gray whale's range, hence the name. We had scientists from Mexico up through Alaska, and even a scientist from Russia, though virtually, who gave a presentation about the western Pacific North population of gray whales. It was organized by the Marine Mammal Commission to discuss the current status and health of the gray whale population, because, as I'm sure many listeners know, there's been a lot of concern this year about strandings up and down the West Coast, many of them apparently related to poor nutrition. A lot of these whales were malnourished, not all of them, but many, and there's a lot of concern about the gray whale population. They were a conservation success after being brought back from the brink of extinction in the early 1900s and delisted from the Endangered Species Act in 1994. They really came back, but within the last few years, one of the scientists said, since 2020 there's been roughly a 32% decrease in their population. So there's a lot of concern. We got some of the best and brightest minds in one room to share information with each other and see what more we can learn and where people can prioritize their research.
Dunne: Okay, for folks who don't know, you have a background in this. You know a lot about fisheries and ocean sciences, and a lot of your education is in that area. Was there a moment, or something you heard at this symposium, given your level of knowledge and education, that surprised you?
Bowman: I don't know if 'shocked' is the word. I think what really sank in for me at this symposium was the connection between what we're observing with gray whales here on the West Coast and what's happening farther north. In Oregon, we have a strong connection with gray whales, I have my gray whale license plate, many of us do, they're an iconic species, and I was struck by really grasping that connection. I worked as a fishery scientist in Alaska, that's where I got my master's degree, and I have many friends still very much involved in the fisheries industry and management. It really hit home, seeing the effects of a changing climate in the Bering Sea and the Arctic show up as consequences in a species we love and connect with so much here on the Oregon coast. It's a very tangible way to observe the effects of climate change in our backyard.
Dunne: Were there solutions discussed for improving the overall health of the gray whale population, or is that something for next time, now that we understand the problem?
Bowman: A main goal was really just to bring these scientists into one room to share their knowledge with each other.
Dunne: She's Brianna Bowman, our Weekend Edition host and reporter. Brianna, thank you so much for your feature, and thanks for coming on the program.
Bowman: Yeah, thank you, Michael.
Dunne: That's the show for today. All episodes of Oregon on the Record are available as a podcast at klcc.org. Monday on the show, you'll hear from a Corvallis nonprofit trying to bolster food security in Linn and Benton counties by improving connections between farmers and the public. I'm Michael Dunne, host of Oregon on the Record. Thanks for listening.
