Current weather

  • Clear sky
  • 68°
    Clear sky

Gibbons: There's no need for more roads in old forests

Posted: Monday, October 29, 2001

   Anyone who promoted building more roads in our national forests should first be required to travel on the thousands and thousands of roads that already fragment our forests before requesting another one. We seem to have plenty of roads and do not need any more right now.




more Gibbons columns

The primary reason I can think of for a road being essential is if someone is going to remove something from the forest, such as big trees or minerals or oil and gas. If someone were going to do that in a national forest, would they be planning to share the monetary returns equally with all of the rest of us who have ownership in the forest? The answer is too easy.

   Human highways unquestionably have had and continue to have major environmental impacts on plants, animals and habitats throughout the country. Roads can alter the direction and rate of flow of natural waters, affecting the way wetlands and woodlands function. Roads dissect the landscape so that normal movement patterns of the numerous native species, both large and small, that move overland are disrupted. No night or day passes without vehicles killing countless animals on roads that pass through forests, prairies, wetlands and deserts. Adding more roads in the forests will exacerbate the problem.

   Some of the environmental consequences of roads also damage natural habitats and wildlife in a subtle and indirect manner. Roads that carry people into remote and pristine regions often lead to commercial development, mining, logging, and exploration for oil. None of these activities are intended to have a negative impact on natural systems, but without special attention, all can. And again I ask, if someone tells us that an activity that disrupts the forest is in the best interest of the country, will we all get to share in the income? Still an easy answer.

   The U.S. Forest Service currently is responsible for nearly 200 million acres of the country's land and water. They are charged with making the best use of forests, grasslands and wetlands for the American people. Included among the service's responsibilities are providing opportunities for the timber industry and recreation for the general public. Carrying out conservation goals and maintaining the natural biodiversity of various regions is also part of the USFS's obligation. Balancing these three objectives is not easy, but all can be accomplished without building new roads into forests for purposes of exploitation.

   Before he left office, President Clinton proposed a plan that would further define the USFS's role as guardians of our natural ecosystems. He said, ''Specifically, I direct the Forest Service to develop, and propose for public comment, regulations to provide appropriate long-term protection for most or all of these currently 'roadless' areas, and to determine whether such protection is warranted for any smaller 'roadless' areas not yet inventoried.'' The roadless areas he referred to were 40 million acres in the National Forest System.

   The USFS prepared a draft environmental impact statement, which some people liked and others did not. Much of the debate centered on whether commercial activities should be restricted or not. Sentiments were strong on both sides, and both sides had extremists. Although a majority of U.S. citizens responded in favor of the plan, the debate rages on today. Nonetheless, the Roadless Area Conservation Rule is now in effect, protecting thousands of square miles of national forests. Some politicians seem bent on having it revoked.

   If you want to express concerns about political moves that are afoot to change the roadless initiative, or even if you want to take the other side and support the construction of new roads in old forests, you can send a letter to Forest Service, USDA, Attention: Roadless Interim Directives, P.O. Box 221150, Salt Lake City, UT 84122. Or email

   As would be expected, the issue of whether we should have a moratorium on building roads into wilderness areas remains an unresolved political issue and will continue to be so as long as profits can be made by a few in the depths of a forest. And will those profits be shared equitably among the rest of us? Another easy answer.

    If you have an environmental question or comment, email




  • 1 Press Place Athens Ga, 30601
  • Switchboard: 706-549-0123
  • Circulation and Delivery: 706-208-2300
  • Newsroom Tip: 706-208-2211
  • Obituary Clerk: 706-208-2355
  • Accounts Receivable: 706-549-0123
  • View the Staff Directory
  • or Send feedback