USFS Roadless Rule Draft EIS Released
Public Comment Period Open Now Through September 21
On Aug 18, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke L. Rollins announced that the U.S. Forest Service released the Roadless Rule Draft EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) and has filed a proposed rule to rescind in its entirety the national 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. If successful, this move will strip protections from millions of acres of California backcountry and roughly 44 million acres nationwide. And while CAMTB and coalition members knew this was coming, it is no less disappointing.
For California mountain bikers and trail stewards, this is not an abstract policy fight. Roadless areas are where we find many of our most important backcountry experiences. Protecting these landscapes has long meant protecting the bike-legal, wilderness-adjacent experiences that define our riding culture. If you need a refresher on the vital recreation resources contained within these boundaries, please read our Roadless Rule Update from April 20th.
Here is where we currently stand with the new draft, and what we ask you to do next.
What the Roadless Rule Draft EIS Actually Does (vs. The Claims)
What the USDA says it is doing and what the new draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) actually accomplishes are two very different things.
The agency’s press release leans heavily on mitigating wildfire risk, increasing local control, and following executive orders to expand timber and energy development. However, after our initial review, the draft EIS reads mainly like a procedural document. It lays out alternatives for weakening or eliminating the rule and looks at the consequences. It does not make a compelling, public-interest case for why the rule should disappear. It was never meant to.
Essentially, this draft EIS is just the paperwork required to carry out a policy rollback that leaders are already pushing from the top down.
The Wildfire and Local Control Contradictions
The wildfire justification does a lot of heavy lifting in the public conversation. Yet, it isn’t the true focus of the Draft EIS.
The current Roadless Rule already allows active forest management and fuels reduction to protect communities. For riders and other backcountry users, the key question is simple: if wildfire is the real concern, why eliminate a landscape-wide conservation rule? Why not just use the tools already available under the current framework?
Furthermore, the administration claims that ending the rule will “restore authority” to local forest managers. In theory, that sounds appealing. On the ground, it falls apart. The Forest Service currently operates under severe staffing and capacity constraints. Outside reports consistently raise concerns about vacancies, massive maintenance backlogs, and the agency’s ability to keep up with recreational demands.
Shifting more responsibility to under-resourced local units is a glaring contradiction. Local control only works when managers actually have the staff, time, and funding to make good decisions.
The Roadless Experience
Roadless areas matter because they preserve the settings for many of the trails we love most. Iconic routes like Cannell Plunge, Pauley Creek, Second Divide, and Condor Peak depend on intact backcountry landscapes. They aren’t just scenic; they belong to a larger, connected system that still feels wild enough to be special.
Most riders don’t distinguish between “roadless areas” and “backcountry.” Even so, much of our weekend recreation happens in places that rely directly on Roadless Rule protections. That is exactly why this rule matters. It protects places you experience every weekend, even if you don’t know the legal term for them.
A Better Path Forward
CAMTB absolutely supports streamlining reviews for trail maintenance and restoration within roadless areas. At the same time, any new trail construction or major actions beyond basic repair should still undergo robust local, tribal, and environmental review before moving forward.
We need a practical, balanced approach. We can improve trail sustainability and address on-the-ground needs without inviting broad road building or industrial-scale impacts. In fact, the Forest Service’s existing road maintenance backlog is a strong argument against the Roadless Rule Rescission.
We remain open to working with Forest Service partners to balance recreation, forest resilience, and ecosystem health. The tools already exist. We just need a careful, place-based approach with local input. None of this requires throwing out the rule entirely.
Next Steps: Get Ready to Speak Up on the Roadless Rule Draft EIS
Because the Draft EIS just dropped, we are still evaluating the full scope of what it means. Over the coming days, CAMTB and the broader public lands community will dive deeper into the analysis and alternatives.
Next week, we will follow up to share a more detailed analysis. We will provide talking points for you to consider when crafting your own response. We will also share an easy-to-use tool so you can submit your comments directly to Regulations.gov ahead of the September 20th deadline.
In the meantime, read the Draft EIS and go ride your favorite trails with fresh eyes. Then, prepare your comments telling the USDA exactly why intact, roadless backcountry landscapes matter to the California cycling and trails community. But don’t stop there: ask your local trail organization to spread the word and push your riding partners to comment as well. We need to demand an extended comment period and make it clear that the public deserves the strong protections we’ve relied on—not a rushed rollback of a widely supported rule.
