《无路区域保护条例》（俗称 “无路条例”）已实施 25 年，该条例明令禁止在近 4500 万英亩国有林区修建道路、采伐木材。
不过，特朗普政府本周宣布，将推进方案，废除这份 2001 年出台的规定。该规定原本禁止在国有林区修路、伐木以及开展其他开发建设。美方表示，这种 “一刀切管控” 让林地管理人员束手束脚，也阻碍了全美国有林区降低野火风险的相关工作。
美国农业部长布鲁克・罗林斯在声明中称：“我国森林再也经不起十年的不作为。各地林木过度生长、虫害与病害频发，这些本可预防的问题，正在把健康林地变成一触即燃的易燃区。长久以来，过时的管控条例限制了数千万英亩林地开展养护治理，而这类治理本可以改善森林健康，降低野火对周边社区的威胁。”
哥伦比亚大学萨宾气候变化法律中心执行主任迈克尔・伯格表示：“无路条例禁止在约 4500 万英亩联邦土地上伐木、新建道路，其中包括阿拉斯加通加斯国家森林大片区域。倘若按提案废除该条例，相关禁令将不复存在。在这些特殊区域修路、开展商业采伐，对全体美国民众而言是一大损失，也是本届政府对全球气候的又一次重创。”
主管美国林务局的美国农业部，于周二在《联邦公报》公示新规草案以及配套的环境影响报告书初稿。
美国林务局局长汤姆・舒茨表示：“主动管护森林不是可选项，而是必要举措。在已划定的无路林区中，超四成区域（大多位于美国西部）存在高或极高野火隐患，而 2014 年至今，仅有 5％ 的区域完成了易燃可燃物清理作业。”
官方称，废除条例后，更多决策权将下放给 “最熟悉土地情况” 的地方林业管理人员，允许他们结合当地实际制定管护方案。但此次法规调整本身，并不代表直接批准修路或伐木项目。 反对方：政策调整或将引发严重环境问题
多家环保组织迅速批评该提案，担忧此举会破坏森林、野生动物栖息地与水资源。
塞拉俱乐部森林项目负责人亚历克斯・克雷文称：“《无路区域保护条例》是现存大片原始国有林区免遭工业化开发的唯一屏障。这些森林是野生动物关键栖息地，为数百万民众提供洁净空气与水源，还留存着美国境内大片原生古森林。”
反对废除条例的人士还指出无路林区的多元价值，称其深刻影响地方社区与经济发展。
全美野生动物联合会公共土地政策高级经理戴维・德雷尔说道：“无路林区拥有国内保存最完整的野生动物栖息地，保障稳定洁净的供水，同时承载着原住民心中极具文化意义的场地。这片土地也支撑着狩猎、垂钓等户外产业，拉动地方经济。” 最新研究建议强化相关法规
多名生态学者与森林管理专家发布政策分析，评估废除无路条例带来的区域及大范围影响。这份发表于《生物保护》期刊的分析报告认为，废除条例的理由并不成立，此举会破坏森林生态功能、加剧野火风险，整体经济效益极差。
论文作者写道：“拟废除《无路区域保护条例》，将危及美国不可再生的完整原生林区。这些林区是全球原生森林网络的重要一环，维系着区域乃至地球整体生态健康。”
研究团队不主张放宽管控，反而建议出台《无路区域保护法案》，将部门规章升级为联邦正式法律，进一步强化保护力度。 支持方：主张下放管理权，交由地方自主决策
支持政策调整的一方认为，当年美国农业部无权出台无路条例，该规定阻碍了乡村地区推进基建和能源项目。
服务阿拉斯加东南部 1300 余名用户的非营利电力机构内航道电力合作社表示，无路条例让他们难以开发低成本替代能源。
代理该合作社的太平洋法律基金会提出，条例相关限制阻碍部分社区推行节能利民项目，而这类项目本可以兼顾环保需求。
太平洋法律基金会资深律师卢克・韦克称：“无路条例制约了内航道电力合作社开发水电、地热项目，而这类项目原本可以降低合作社对高价柴油发电的依赖。合作社用户目前承担着全美名列前茅的高昂电费，他们理应可以推进合规能源项目，降低用电成本，减少柴油发电使用。”
多个受政策影响的美国西部共和党州长也表态支持废除条例，主张林地管理决策权应交由更贴近当地的州政府和地方政府。
拟定新规不适用于科罗拉多州、爱达荷州的国有林区，两州已出台本地化无路管控条例。支持者认为，两州的治理模式，可以作为全国改革的参考范本。
犹他州州长斯宾塞・考克斯表示：“犹他民众热爱森林，爱护森林意味着用心管护。25 年来，无路条例这套联邦一刀切政策束缚了地方林地管理人员。废除条例后，我们可以灵活制定适配每一片林区、每一处社区的管护方案。通过主动管护林地，我们能为后代守护珍贵自然风貌。”
怀俄明州州长马克・戈登同样看好此次调整，认为改革有利于落实地方决策：“这项举措代表着推行本地化长效规划，把管理权交到最熟悉这片土地的人手中。” 后续流程安排
新规正式落地前，公众可针对条例草案与环境评估报告提交意见。意见征集周期为 30 天，截止时间为 9 月 21 日午夜。
伯格提到：“最终条例正式公布后，大概率会引发诉讼；原告也可能提前起诉，质疑流程问题，例如本次意见征询周期过短。”
Trump admin moves to allow logging and construction in national forests
For 25 years， the Roadless Area Conservation Rule， commonly called the “Roadless Rule”， established broad prohibitions on road construction and timber harvesting on nearly 45 million acres of National Forest System lands．
However， the Trump administrationannouncedthis week that it is moving ahead with plans to rescind the 2001 rule that blocked road construction， logging and other development on national forest lands， saying the “one－size－fits－all restriction” has frustrated land managers and served as a barrier to reducing wildfire risk across the nation’s national forests．
“Our forests can’t afford another decade of inaction． Across the country， we’ve watched preventable conditions – overgrown stands， insect outbreaks and disease – turn healthy landscapes into tinderboxes，” said Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins in a statement． “For too long， outdated restrictions have kept tens of millions of forested acres off－limits to the very treatments that improve forest health and reduce wildfire risk to our communities．”
“The Roadless Rule prohibits timber harvesting and new road construction on some 45 million acres of federal lands， including in vast areas of the Tongass National Forest in Alaska． If the rule is repealed as proposed， those prohibitions will go away． Subjecting these special places to new roads and commercial forestry would be a loss for the American people， and another blow by this administration to the global climate，” said Michael Burger， Executive Director at Columbia’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law．
The USDA， which oversees the U．S． Forest Service， filed the proposed rule and corresponding draft environmental impact statement in the Federal Register on Tuesday．
“Active forest management is not an option． It’s essential，” said Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz in a statement． “More than 40％ of inventoried roadless areas， primarily in the West， have high or very high wildfire hazard potential． And only 5％ of those areas have received hazardous fuels reduction treatments since 2014．”
Officials said the repeal would shift more decision－making to local forest managers “who know the land best” and could consider local conditions when making management decisions． The change itself would not authorize road construction or logging projects．
Opponents warn of significant environmental impacts
Environmental groups quickly criticized the proposal， citing concerns about the potential impacts on forests， wildlife and water resources．
“The Roadless Area Conservation Rule is the only thing preventing much of our wildest remaining national forests from industrial development，” said Alex Craven， Sierra Club Forest Campaign manager， in a statement． “These forests offer critical habitat for wildlife； provide clean， fresh air and water for millions； and contain vast swaths of the last remaining old－growth forests in the country．”
Opponents of the repeal also highlight the broader role these forests play， saying the roadless areas are an important part of local communities and economies．
“Roadless forests provide some of the nation’s most intact habitat， help maintain clean and reliable water supplies， and include places of deep cultural importance to Indigenous communities，” said David Dreher， senior manager for public lands policy at the National Wildlife Federation． “These landscapes also sustain hunting， fishing， and other outdoor recreation that contributes to local economies．”
New analysis recommends strengthening the regulations
A new policyanalysisby ecologists and forest management experts examined the potential local and large－scale impacts of repealing the Roadless Rule． The analysis， published in the journal Biological Conservation， concluded that the justifications for rescinding the Roadless Rule are ＂will degrade these forest ecosystem functions， increase fire risk， and is grossly uneconomic．”
“The proposed rescission of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule endangers irreplaceable intact forest landscapes in the US． These areas are part of a global network of intact forests vital to regional and planetary health，” the authors wrote．
Rather than weakening the rule， the authors recommended strengthening it by passing the Roadless Area Conservation Act， which would turn the agency regulations into federal law．
Supporters argue for local control
Supporters of the decision say that the USDA lacked legal authority to impose the Roadless Rule and that the rule has made it more difficult for rural communities to pursue infrastructure and energy projects．
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative （IPEC）， a nonprofit， consumer－owned electric utility serving over 1，300 members in rural Southeast Alaska， says the rule has made it more difficult to pursue lower－cost energy alternatives．
The Pacific Legal Foundation， which represents IPEC， has argued that the rule’s restrictions limit the ability for certain communities to pursue cost－saving energy initiatives which would also help the environment．
“The Roadless Rule has restricted IPEC’s ability to pursue promising hydroelectric and geothermal projects that could reduce its dependence on high－cost diesel fuel for electricity，” Pacific Legal Foundation Senior Attorney Luke Wake said in a statement．
“IPEC’s members currently face some of the highest utility rates in the nation， and they should be free to pursue responsible energy projects that could make electricity more affordable and reduce their reliance on expensive diesel generation，” Wake added．
Republican governors in several Western states affected by the proposed change have also voiced support for the repeal， arguing that land－management decisions should be made by states and local governments that are closer to the impacted communities and forests．
The proposed rule would not apply to national forests in Colorado and Idaho， where separate state－specific roadless regulations are in place． Supporters point to those states as potential models for how the land can be effectively managed outside of a national framework．
“Utahns love our forests， and loving these places means taking care of them，” Utah Gov． Spencer J． Cox said in a statement． “For 25 years， the Roadless Rule has tied the hands of local land managers with a one－size－fits－all federal policy． Rescinding it restores the flexibility to make thoughtful decisions based on the needs of each forest and each community． We can protect the landscapes we treasure by actively managing them for the next generation．”
Wyoming Gov． Mark Gordon also praised the proposed change， saying it would promote local decision－making．
“This step reflects a commitment to locally－driven， durable planning and empowering those who know these lands the best，” Gordon said in a statement．
What happens next？
The public will have an opportunity tocommenton the proposed rule and draft environmental statement before it becomes final． The 30－day comment period ends at midnight on Sept． 21．
“Litigation will most likely follow upon publication of a final rule － though it is possible lawsuits may come sooner to challenge procedural aspects of the process， such as the extraordinarily short comment period，＂ said Burger．
