Other than a quick rape of available timber in some places, not much. Only when there is a big fire that gets on national news (especially if its a blue state) will trump then tell them to build as many roads neccessary to contain it.

Wilderness areas and NPs shouldn't have roads. No old or even old-ish growth should be logged. The west has been fucked enough.
>>2841195
Fuck off

>>2841196
The ending of the roadless rule has no impact on designated wilderness areas (the green on the map) or national parks, since wilderness is already roadless and its a forest service rule not a national park one. you should probably know what you are talking about before telling people to fuck off.

>>2841185
93% of summer Elk range in Montana is roadless habitat. More roads will bring more fires, more invasive/noxious weeds, less viable grazing habitat for wildlife and livestock...the economic benefit of any lumber harvest do not meet the amount of degradation that would occur should it get repealed. But this is what you voted for...censorship and habitat destruction