
Trump to Strip Protections from Millions of Acres of National Forests
A decades-old rule protecting tens of millions of acres of pristine national forest land, including 9 million acres in Alaska's Tongass National Forest, would be rescinded under plans announced Monday by the Trump administration.
Speaking at a meeting of Western governors in New Mexico, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said the administration would begin the process of rolling back protections for nearly 59 million roadless acres of the National Forest System.
If the rollback survives court challenges, it will open up vast swaths of largely untouched land to logging and roadbuilding. By the Agriculture Department's estimate, this would include about 30 percent of the land in the National Forest System, encompassing 92 percent of Tongass, one of the last remaining intact temperate rainforests in the world. In a news release, the department, which houses the U.S. Forest Service, criticized the roadless rule as 'outdated,' saying it 'goes against the mandate of the USDA Forest Service to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the nation's forests and grasslands.'
Environmental groups condemned the decision and vowed to take the administration to court.
'The roadless rule has protected 58 million acres of our wildest national forest lands from clear-cutting for more than a generation,' said Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife and oceans for the environmental firm Earthjustice. 'The Trump administration now wants to throw these forest protections overboard so the timber industry can make huge money from unrestrained logging.'
The Roadless Area Conservation Rule dates to the late 1990s, when President Bill Clinton instructed the Forest Service to come up with ways to preserve increasingly scarce roadless areas in the national forests. Conservationists considered these lands essential for species whose habitats were being lost to encroaching development and large-scale timber harvests.
The protections, which took effect in 2001, have been the subject of court battles and sparring between Democrats and Republicans ever since.
The logging industry welcomed the decision.
'Our forests are extremely overgrown, overly dense, unhealthy, dead, dying and burning,' said Scott Dane, executive director for the American Loggers Council, a timber industry group with members in 46 states.
He said federal forests on average have about 300 trunks per acre, while the optimal density should be about 75 trunks. Dane said President Donald Trump's policies have been misconstrued as opening up national forests to unrestricted logging, while in fact the industry practices sustainable forestry management subject to extensive requirements.
'To allow access into these forests, like we used to do prior to 2001 and for 100 years prior to that, will enable the forest managers to practice sustainable forest management,' he said.
Monday's announcement follows Trump's March 1 executive order instructing the Agriculture Department and the Interior Department to boost timber production, with an aim of reducing wildfire risk and reliance on foreign imports.
Because of its vast wilderness, environmental fragility and ancient trees, Alaska's Tongass National Forest became the face of the issue. Democrats and environmentalists argued for keeping the roadless rule in place, saying it would protect critical habitat and prevent the carbon dioxide trapped in the forest's trees from escaping into the atmosphere. Alaska's governor and congressional delegation have countered that the rule hurts the timber industry and the state's economy.
After court battles kept the rules in place, Trump stripped it out in 2020, during his first term, making it legal for logging companies to build roads and cut down trees in the Tongass. President Joe Biden restored the protections, restricting development on roughly 9.3 million acres throughout the forest.
Trump officials have gone further this time, targeting not just the rule's application in Alaska but its protections nationwide. In her comments Monday, Rollins framed the decision as an effort to reduce the threat of wildfires by encouraging more local management of the nation's forests.
'This misguided rule prohibits the Forest Service from thinning and cutting trees to prevent wildfires,' Rollins said. 'And when fires start, the rule limits our firefighters' access to quickly put them out.'
The Forest Service manages nearly 200 million acres of land, and its emphasis on preventing wildfires from growing out of control has become more central to its mission as the blazes have become more frequent and intense because of climate change. Yet critics of the administration's approach have said Trump officials have worsened the danger by firing several thousand Forest Service employees this year.
Advocates for the roadless rule said ending it would do little to reduce the threat of wildfires, noting that the regulation already contains an exception for removing dangerous fuels that the Forest Service has used for years.
Chris Wood, chief executive of the conservation group Trout Unlimited, said the administration's decision 'feels a little bit like a solution in search of a problem.'
'There are provisions within the roadless rule that allow for wildfire fighting,' Wood said. 'My hope is once they go through a rulemaking process, and they see how wildly unpopular and unnecessary this is, common sense will prevail.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Yomiuri Shimbun
35 minutes ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
GOP Tax Bill Draws Flack on Energy Provisions from Some Onetime Allies
The massive tax and immigration bill advancing through Congress could raise energy prices in much of the United States and make it harder for American companies to compete globally on AI and manufacturing as a result of deep cuts to federal support for wind and solar power, batteries and other renewable technologies, a wide range of experts warned on Sunday. Notably, some conservative voices, including the chief policy officer of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, fossil fuel advocate Alex Epstein and onetime Trump ally Elon Musk, have vented their frustration about the bill's potential impact on energy prices and American business. 'A massive strategic error is being made right now to damage solar/battery that will leave America extremely vulnerable in the future,' Musk wrote on X on Sunday. In addition to phasing out tax credits for wind and solar power by 2027, the Senate version of the bill would add a new tax on wind and solar projects built after 2027 that use equipment made in China, which has rankled conservatives who worry it will raise energy prices. The bill also requires the federal government to sell more oil and gas leases and approve more coal production. Ultimately, power companies may still build many of the same renewable energy projects they were already planning, experts say. Wind and solar are still the fastest-to-build power sources available, while there's a years-long backlog for new natural gas turbines and nuclear plants face major delays. But the cost of building renewable projects will spike as subsidies vanish and cautious lenders demand higher interest rates to finance construction. 'We will still build renewables,' said Doug Lewin, president of the energy consultancy Stoic Energy and author of the Texas Energy and Power newsletter. 'But we're going to build less of them, and what we build will be more expensive.' Those who have cheered the end of subsidies for renewable power argue they have skewed the market toward less reliable sources of energy that ebb and flow with the weather. 'Ending these federal giveaways will lead to a more market-driven allocation of capital, favoring energy sources that are more economically efficient and better suited to meeting growing demand,' Thomas Pyle, president of the Institute for Energy Research, said in an email Sunday. The bill 'positions the U.S. more effectively to respond to surging electricity demand,' he added. 'The prior trajectory toward 'net zero' emissions would have constrained capacity expansion and posed reliability risks.' After a debate and consideration of amendments, senators expect to vote on the bill sometime on Monday. GOP leaders are still scrambling for votes with their razor-thin majority, but if they succeed, the measure will go back to the House for final approval in hopes of meeting President Donald Trump's self-imposed Independence Day deadline. The House passed a version of Trump's agenda in May, with similar cuts to energy spending. Energy costs expected to rise Congress is taking up the sweeping legislation as American energy demand is spiking as new data centers and factories devour more electricity – something many in the fossil-fuel industry acknowledge. 'Demand for affordable, reliable energy is increasing across all aspects of the economy, and the growth in AI will require around-the-clock power driven largely by natural gas,' American Petroleum Institute President Mike Sommers wrote in a statement Sunday. 'This bill seizes the opportunity to secure our energy future by unlocking investment, opening lease sales and expanding access to oil and natural gas.' But power companies won't be able to meet that demand quickly with gas alone, experts say. Amid a global shortage of natural-gas turbines, the wait for new gas-burning power plants is up to seven years, according to S&P Global. New nuclear plants could take even longer. Companies are extending the lives of old coal plants, but they aren't investing in new ones because they're too expensive. Solar panels, wind turbines and batteries can be built more quickly and already make up more than 90 percent of the new electricity added to American power grids each year. That means power companies will keep building them even without subsidies – they'll just shift the cost onto their customers, experts say. 'We've got this surging energy demand. Our ability to deploy more stuff that's not wind, solar and storage is supply-chain limited. And what Congress wants to do is make it significantly more expensive to build out the stuff we can build,' said Robbie Orvis, senior director for modeling and analysis at the clean-energy think tank Energy Innovation. 'And that means it will make electricity rates more expensive.' Power companies won't just pass on the cost of their lost tax credits, experts say. They'll also pass on the cost of a new tax on wind and solar equipment built in China, taking effect in 2027, that Senate Republicans included in their version. That tax is paired with funding cuts for American wind and solar manufacturing, making it less likely that power companies could switch from Chinese to U.S. suppliers. 'Electricity demand is set to see enormous growth & this tax will increase prices,' Neil Bradley, chief policy officer of the traditionally GOP-friendly U.S. Chamber of Congress, posted on X on Saturday. 'It should be removed.' Another risk that industry watchers see: The whipsaw policy changes from former president Joe Biden to Trump have spooked investors, meaning they'll charge higher interest rates when they lend money to energy projects to make up for the risk they're taking, which also raises the price of energy. 'That uncertainty has to be priced into future financial deals for these projects,' Orvis said. Still, while energy price hikes are expected, they will vary from state to state, according to economic models from policy think tanks including Energy Innovation and the Rhodium Group. Growth of data centers and manufacturing will slow Rising energy prices and delays in building new power plants will slow the growth of factories and data centers in the United States, experts say. 'If they can't find the power here, they will go somewhere else to find the power,' said John Hensley, senior vice president for markets and policy analysis for the American Clean Power Association, an industry group representing wind and solar interests. 'You're already starting to see them look at places like Canada, Iceland or the Nordic countries that have surplus electricity available.' Meanwhile, tech companies urged lawmakers to focus on the implications for artificial intelligence. Lawmakers should 'deploy an all-of-the-above energy strategy that ensures sufficient generation capacity from a diverse supply of energy sources, including nuclear, geothermal, and solar to support the development of AI,' Janae Washington, a spokesperson for the Information Technology Industry Council, wrote in an email on Sunday. 'We urge the Senate to prioritize a reliable and resilient energy mix that advances AI innovation and growth and reject provisions that will harm the U.S.'s ability to compete in the global race for AI and energy dominance,' Washington wrote. The bill would also end direct subsidies for making solar panels, wind turbines, batteries and electric cars in the United States. Spooked manufacturers are already canceling planned factories, and the swift end of promised tax credits could doom the brief boom in U.S. manufacturing, which is mostly built on EVs and green energy projects. Some experts worry that will cede key industries to Chinese firms at the expense of the United States. 'We're undermining the entire infrastructure to onshore those industries, and we're going to make it a lot more expensive for other industries like AI and data centers to move here and to onshore here by making their energy costs go through the roof,' Orvis said. Meanwhile, North America's Building Trades Unions estimates the bill will eliminate up to 1.75 million construction jobs. 'If enacted, this stands to be the biggest job-killing bill in the history of this country,' the group warned Saturday. 'Simply put, it is the equivalent of terminating more than 1,000 Keystone XL pipeline projects.' The push to 'electrify everything' will dwindle Under the Biden administration, green energy advocates imagined a nationwide push to reshape the energy system and 'electrify everything,' switching cars from gas engines to electric motors, homes from gas furnaces to heat pumps, and so on. That push was always going to be an expensive challenge – and a top target for Republicans. 'Even before this legislative shift, the feasibility of fully electrifying transportation, heating, and industrial processes was already in question due to the physical and economic realities of the grid,' wrote Pyle, of the Institute for Energy Research, in his email. In the long run, the United States is still moving toward replacing some fossil fuel energy sources with electricity – but much more slowly than it seemed a year ago, experts say. 'Based on this legislation and everything else the administration has done so far, there will definitely be a slowdown in the rate of electrification,' Orvis said. That will have consequences for climate change and air quality, but it may also put the country at a competitive disadvantage in the emerging clean energy industry. 'The rest of the world is going to continue to electrify, and they'll get all the parts and components from China,' said Lewin. 'China is going to be able to wield significant political power in the world because of their lock on the supply chain for electricity.'


Yomiuri Shimbun
an hour ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
U.S. Strikes on Iran's Nuclear Sites Set up 'Cat-and-Mouse' Hunt for Missing Uranium
VIENNA, June 29 (Reuters) – The U.S. and Israeli bombing of Iranian nuclear sites creates a conundrum for U.N. inspectors in Iran: how can you tell if enriched uranium stocks, some of them near weapons grade, were buried beneath the rubble or had been secretly hidden away? Following last weekend's attacks on three of Iran's top nuclear sites – at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan – President Donald Trump said the facilities had been 'obliterated' by U.S. munitions, including bunker-busting bombs. But the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitors Tehran's nuclear program, has said it's unclear exactly what damage was sustained at Fordow, a plant buried deep inside a mountain that produced the bulk of Iran's most highly enriched uranium. IAEA chief Rafael Grossi said on Monday it was highly likely the sensitive centrifuges used to enrich uranium inside Fordow were badly damaged. It's far less clear whether Iran's 9 tonnes of enriched uranium – more than 400 kg of it enriched to close to weapons grade – were destroyed. Western governments are scrambling to determine what's become of it. Reuters spoke to more than a dozen current and former officials involved in efforts to contain Iran's nuclear program who said the bombing may have provided the perfect cover for Iran to make its uranium stockpiles disappear and any IAEA investigation would likely be lengthy and arduous. Olli Heinonen, previously the IAEA's top inspector from 2005 to 2010, said the search will probably involve complicated recovery of materials from damaged buildings as well as forensics and environmental sampling, which take a long time. 'There could be materials which are inaccessible, distributed under the rubble or lost during the bombing,' said Heinonen, who dealt extensively with Iran while at the IAEA and now works at the Stimson Center think-tank in Washington. Iran's more than 400 kg of uranium enriched to up to 60% purity – a short step from the roughly 90% of weapons grade – are enough, if enriched further, for nine nuclear weapons, according to an IAEA yardstick. Even a fraction of that left unaccounted for would be a grave concern for Western powers that believe Iran is at least keeping the option of nuclear weapons open. There are indications Iran may have moved some of its enriched uranium before it could be struck. IAEA chief Grossi said Iran informed him on June 13, the day of Israel's first attacks, that it was taking measures to protect its nuclear equipment and materials. While it did not elaborate, he said that suggests it was moved. A Western diplomat involved in the dossier, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the issue, said most of the enriched uranium at Fordow would appear to have been moved days in advance of the attacks, 'almost as if they knew it was coming'. Some experts have said a line of vehicles including trucks visible on satellite imagery outside Fordow before it was hit suggests enriched uranium there was moved elsewhere, though U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Thursday said he was unaware of any intelligence suggesting Iran had moved it. Trump has also dismissed such concerns. In an interview due to air on Sunday with Fox News Channel's 'Sunday Morning Futures', he insisted the Iranians 'didn't move anything.' 'It's very dangerous to do. It is very heavy – very, very heavy. It's a very hard thing to do,' Trump said. 'Plus we didn't give much notice because they didn't know we were coming until just, you know, then.' The White House did not respond to a request for comment. The State Department referred Reuters to Trump's public remarks. A second Western diplomat said it would be a major challenge to verify the condition of the uranium stockpile, citing a long list of past disputes between the IAEA and Tehran, including Iran's failure to credibly explain uranium traces found at undeclared sites. 'It'll be a game of cat and mouse.' Iran says it has fulfilled all its obligations towards the watchdog. PICTURE BLURRED Before Israel launched its 12-day military campaign aimed at destroying Iran's nuclear and missile capabilities, the IAEA had regular access to Iran's enrichment sites and monitored what was inside them around the clock as part of the 191-nation Non-Proliferation Treaty aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, to which Iran is a party. Now, rubble and ash blur the picture. What's more, Iran has threatened to stop working with the IAEA. Furious at the non-proliferation regime's failure to protect it from strikes many countries see as unlawful, Iran's parliament voted on Wednesday to suspend cooperation. Tehran says a resolution this month passed by the IAEA's 35-nation Board of Governors declaring Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations paved the way for Israel's attacks, which began the next day, by providing an element of diplomatic cover. The IAEA denies that. Iran has repeatedly denied that it has an active program to develop a nuclear bomb. And U.S. intelligence – dismissed by Trump before the airstrikes – had said there was no evidence Tehran was taking steps toward developing one. However, experts say there is no reason for enriching uranium to 60% for a civilian nuclear program, which can run on less than 5% enrichment. As a party to the NPT, Iran must account for its stock of enriched uranium. The IAEA then has to verify Iran's account by means including inspections, but its powers are limited – it inspects Iran's declared nuclear facilities but cannot carry out snap inspections at undeclared locations. Iran has an unknown number of extra centrifuges stored at locations the U.N. nuclear watchdog is unaware of, the IAEA has said, with which it might be able to set up a new or secret enrichment site. That makes hunting down the material that can be enriched further, particularly that closest to bomb grade, all the more important. 'Iran's stockpile of 60% enriched uranium may not have been part of the 'mission' but it is a significant part of the proliferation risk – particularly if centrifuges are unaccounted for,' Kelsey Davenport of the Washington-based Arms Control Association said on X on Friday. The IAEA can and does receive intelligence from member states, which include the United States and Israel, but says it takes nothing at face value and independently verifies tip-offs. Having pummelled the sites housing the uranium, Israel and the U.S. are seen as the countries most likely to accuse Iran of hiding it or restarting enrichment, officials say. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office did not respond to a request for comment for this story. CHASING SHADOWS U.N. inspectors' futile hunt for large caches of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, which preceded the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, showed the enormous difficulty of verifying foreign powers' assertions about hidden stockpiles of material when there is little tangible information to go on. As in Iraq, inspectors could end up chasing shadows. 'If the Iranians come clean with the 400 kg of HEU (highly enriched uranium) then the problem is manageable, but if they don't then nobody will ever be sure what happened to it,' a third Western diplomat said. The IAEA, which answers to 180 member states, has said it cannot guarantee Iran's nuclear development is entirely peaceful, but has no credible indications of a coordinated weapons program. The U.S. this week backed the IAEA's verification and monitoring work and urged Tehran to ensure its inspectors in the country are safe. It is a long journey from there to accounting for every gram of enriched uranium, the IAEA's standard. The above-ground plant at Natanz, the smaller of the two facilities enriching uranium up to 60 percent, was flattened in the strikes, the IAEA said, suggesting a small portion of Iran's enriched uranium stockpile may have been destroyed. Fordow, Iran's most deeply buried enrichment plant, which was producing the bulk of 60%-enriched uranium, was first seriously hit last weekend when the United States dropped its biggest conventional bombs on it. The damage to its underground halls is unclear. An underground area in Isfahan where much of Iran's most highly enriched uranium was stored was also bombed, causing damage to the tunnel entrances leading to it. The agency has not been able to carry out inspections since Israel's bombing campaign began, leaving the outside world with more questions than answers. Grossi said on Wednesday the conditions at the bombed sites would make it difficult for IAEA inspectors to work there – suggesting it could take time. 'There is rubble, there could be unexploded ordnance,' he said. Heinonen, the former chief IAEA inspector, said it was vital the agency be transparent in real time about what its inspectors have been able to verify independently, including any uncertainties, and what remained unknown. 'Member states can then make their own risk assessments,' he said.


Yomiuri Shimbun
2 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
CIA Chief Told Lawmakers Iran Nuclear Program Set Back Years with Strikes on Metal Conversion Site
WASHINGTON (AP) — CIA Director John Ratcliffe told skeptical U.S. lawmakers that American military strikes destroyed Iran's lone metal conversion facility and in the process delivered a monumental setback to Tehran's nuclear program that would take years to overcome, a U.S. official said Sunday. The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive intelligence, said Ratcliffe laid out the importance of the strikes on the metal conversion facility during a classified hearing for U.S. lawmakers last week. Details about the private briefings surfaced as President Donald Trump and his administration keep pushing back on questions from Democratic lawmakers and others about how far Iran was set back by the strikes before last Tuesday's ceasefire with Israel took hold. 'It was obliterating like nobody's ever seen before,' Trump said in an interview on Fox News Channel's 'Sunday Morning Futures.' 'And that meant the end to their nuclear ambitions, at least for a period of time.' Ratcliffe also told lawmakers that the intelligence community assessed the vast majority of Iran's amassed enriched uranium likely remains buried under the rubble at Isfahan and Fordo, two of the three key nuclear facilities targeted by U.S. strikes. But even if the uranium remains intact, the loss of its metal conversion facility effectively has taken away Tehran's ability to build a bomb for years to come, the official said. Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said Sunday on CBS' 'Face the Nation' that the three Iranian sites with 'capabilities in terms of treatment, conversion and enrichment of uranium have been destroyed to an important degree.' But, he added, 'some is still standing' and that because capabilities remain, 'if they so wish, they will be able to start doing this again.' He said assessing the full damage comes down to Iran allowing in inspectors. 'Frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared, and there is nothing there,' Grossi said. Trump has insisted from just hours after three key targets were struck by U.S. bunker-buster bombs and Tomahawk missiles that Iran's nuclear program was 'obliterated.' His defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, has said they were 'destroyed.' A preliminary report issued by the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency, meanwhile, said the strikes did significant damage to the Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan sites, but did not totally destroy the facilities. As a result of Israeli and U.S. strikes, Grossi says that 'it is clear that there has been severe damage, but it's not total damage.' Israel claims it has set back Iran's nuclear program by 'many years.' The metal conversion facility that Ratcliffe said was destroyed was located at the Isfahan nuclear facility. The process of transforming enriched uranium gas into dense metal, or metallization, is a key step in building the explosive core of a bomb. Secretary of State Marco Rubio in comments at the NATO summit last week also suggested that it was likely the U.S. strikes had destroyed the metal conversion facility. 'You can't do a nuclear weapon without a conversion facility,' Rubio said. 'We can't even find where it is, where it used to be on the map. You can't even find where it used to be because the whole thing is just blackened out. It's gone. It's wiped out.' The CIA director also stressed to lawmakers during the congressional briefing that Iran's air defense was shattered during the 12-day assault. As a result, any attempt by Iran to rebuild its nuclear program could now easily be thwarted by Israeli strikes that Iran currently has little wherewithal to defend against, the official said. Ratcliffe's briefing to lawmakers on the U.S. findings appeared to mesh with some of Israeli officials' battle damage assessments. Israeli officials have determined that Iran's ability to enrich uranium to a weapons-grade level was neutralized for a prolonged period, according to a senior Israeli military official who was not authorized to talk publicly about the matter. Tehran's nuclear program also was significantly damaged by the strikes killing key scientists, damage to Iran's missile production industry and the battering of Iran's aerial defense system, according to the Israeli's assessment. Grossi, and some Democrats, note that Iran still has the know-how. 'You cannot undo the knowledge that you have or the capacities that you have,' Grossi said, emphasizing the need to come to a diplomatic deal on the country's nuclear program.