hold on there's just too much going on in Congress lmao...
Eliminates national forest roadless rule, mandates new roads.
Rep. Hageman (R-WY) and 4 co-sponsors.
Introduced in the House, referred to committees.
This bill would eliminate a 2001 federal rule protecting certain roadless areas within national forests and prevent similar rules in the future. It also requires the Forest Service to build new permanent and temporary roads for activities like forest restoration and wildfire risk reduction. The primary sponsor, Representative Hageman from Wyoming, sits on the Committee on Natural Resources, which received this bill. Being in committee means it must be debated and voted on there before potentially moving to a full House vote.
Introduced Feb 25, 2026
This bill was introduced in the House of Representatives on February 25, 2026. It has been referred to the House Committees on Agriculture and Natural Resources. For the bill to advance, it must be approved by these committees before it can be considered for a vote by the full House of Representatives. If passed by the House, it would then move to the Senate for consideration.
If this bill becomes law, you might see new roads built in national forest areas that were previously protected from road construction. This could change how you access and experience these lands. The bill aims to facilitate forest restoration and reduce wildfire risks, particularly near communities, by requiring the construction of these roads. However, any new road construction would still need to follow existing environmental laws, such as the National Environmental Policy Act.
Supporters Say
Supporters would argue this bill improves forest health, wildfire prevention, and access for resource management.
Critics Say
Critics would argue it damages wilderness character, increases environmental impact, and reduces protected wild spaces.
Those in favor often highlight the need for better access to manage forests effectively, reduce hazardous fuels, and respond to wildfires, especially near developed areas. Opponents typically raise concerns about habitat destruction, increased erosion, water quality degradation, and the loss of pristine wild areas that provide unique recreational and ecological value.