US roads quadruple wildfire risk in protected forests, study finds

Neueste Nachrichten

US roads quadruple wildfire risk in protected forests, study finds

Black and white photo of a forest with trees in the foreground and houses in the background, showing the effects of Canadian wildfires.
Alex Duffy
Alex Duffy
2 Min.

US roads quadruple wildfire risk in protected forests, study finds

A new study has revealed a stark link between roads and wildfire risk in US forests. Research published in Fire Ecology shows that, between 1992 and 2024, wildfires were four times more likely to start within 50 metres of a road than in areas without vehicle access. The findings come as the Trump administration moves to roll back a long-standing rule restricting road construction and logging in protected national forests.

The 2001 Roadless Rule currently protects around 45 million acres of national forests and grasslands. These areas provide critical habitat for up to 57% of vulnerable wildlife species and supply clean drinking water to as many as 60 million Americans. The rule also limits roadbuilding, which the original 2001 environmental impact statement warned could raise the risk of human-caused fires.

Proponents of repealing the rule argue it would give land managers more flexibility to thin forests and fight wildfires. Federal wildfires already burn, on average, five times more land than fires elsewhere in the US. Between 2017 and 2021, about 8 million acres burned annually—nearly double the rate from three decades earlier. Critics, however, see the move as a favour to the timber industry rather than a fire-prevention measure. The Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission, in its recent review of wildfire policy, did not recommend rescinding the Roadless Rule. Roads, while useful for firefighter access, also introduce more ignition sources, from discarded cigarettes to vehicle sparks.

The proposed repeal would open millions of acres to potential road construction and logging. Supporters claim it will improve fire management, while opponents warn it could increase fire risks and harm protected ecosystems. The decision now rests with the administration, which has framed the change as essential for modern forest management.