In the submitted comments, the attorneys general highlight that the Forest Service’s proposed rule would replace the existing “closed unless designated open” system with a nationwide “open unless closed” presumption.
Source: N.M. Department of Justice
Albuquerque, NM – Today, Attorney General Raúl Torrez led a coalition of attorneys general in submitting formal comments opposing the U.S. Forest Service’s intent to revise the Travel Management Rule. The proposed revisions would dismantle essential safeguards that have long protected the nation’s forests, wildlife, water, and recreation economy, and would destabilize the clear, consistent framework that currently governs motorized vehicle access across nearly 200 million acres of National Forest System lands.
“New Mexicans hunt, hike, fish, and camp in our National Forests because they’re some of the best places in the country to do it,” said Attorney General Raúl Torrez. “The Forest Service’s proposed changes put that at risk—more erosion, damaged trails, and degraded waterways don’t just hurt wildlife, they hurt the families who depend on these lands for recreation and the rural communities that depend on those visitors. We’re pushing back to keep our forests safe, accessible, and open for the people who actually use them.”
In the submitted comments, the attorneys general highlight that the Forest Service’s proposed rule would replace the existing “closed unless designated open” system with a nationwide “open unless closed” presumption. This proposal would eliminate requirements that minimize environmental harm before allowing motorized travel, weaken public involvement, and pressure local managers to open more roads and trails without adequate environmental review. The coalition argues this sweeping change threatens to undermine decades of successful management designed to balance motorized access with ecological protection and multiple uses.
The States warn that the proposed revisions would cause widespread environmental harm. By encouraging increased and potentially unmanaged motorized access, the proposal would likely fragment wildlife habitat, degrade water quality, accelerate erosion, and foster the spread of invasive species. The additional human activity and expanded access into remote forest landscapes also pose increased wildfire risks, especially at a time when wildfires have become more frequent and severe across the western United States.
The attorneys general emphasize that wildlife, including numerous threatened and endangered species, could face significant and irreversible harms. The noise, disturbance, collisions, and habitat fragmentation associated with expanded motor vehicle use threaten species such as salmon, lynx, elk, wolves, Mexican spotted owls, and bull trout—many of which rely on quiet, undisturbed areas within National Forests for breeding, feeding, and migration. Under the Endangered Species Act, federal agencies must ensure their actions do not jeopardize listed species or harm critical habitat, and the States stress that the Forest Service cannot lawfully proceed without consultation with federal wildlife agencies.
Water quality is another major concern raised by the attorneys general. National Forests protect vital municipal water sources for cities and communities throughout the country. Increased road traffic and construction would raise sedimentation and pollution in watersheds that supply drinking water, posing risks both to human health and to aquatic ecosystems. In many states, drinking water and waterways are closely tied to forested headwaters that would be put at risk under the proposed framework.
The coalition also warns that the proposal threatens the emerging outdoor recreation economy, which contributes nearly $700 billion to the nation’s GDP. In New Mexico, the outdoor recreation economy contributes $3.6 billion to our state’s GDP. Many forest users depend on areas free from motorized disturbance. Increasing motorized access in previously protected areas would degrade these experiences and could push non-motorized users away entirely. This displacement would have substantial economic consequences, particularly for rural communities whose livelihoods depend on non-motorized recreation and tourism.
The attorneys general also raise concerns about impacts to cultural, religious, and historic resources. Many National Forests contain sacred Tribal sites, archaeological resources, traditional gathering areas, and historic landscapes. Expanded motorized access without careful review threatens to irreparably harm these irreplaceable places. States emphasize that federal law requires that such impacts be thoroughly evaluated and avoided.
The Travel Management Rule proposal was released just days after the Forest Service proposed rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule—an action that would increase road construction in some of the most ecologically sensitive landscapes. Together, the two proposals would dramatically expand motorized access and roadbuilding in forests, compounding potential harm and creating management chaos. Yet, the Forest Service has not analyzed these proposals together despite their interrelated impacts.
The States further criticize the Forest Service for allowing only a 30-day public comment period on a proposal with such sweeping national implications. Meaningful public involvement is central to NEPA and to effective management of public lands, and the coalition urges the agency to extend opportunities for public input throughout the process.
The coalition also reinforces that any changes to the Travel Management Rule must comply with the legal requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), National Forest Management Act (NFMA), Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act (MUSYA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Wilderness Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).
Attorney General Torrez led the multistate coalition and was joined by California, Colorado, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, and Wisconsin.
You must be logged in to post a comment.