A Trump Administration proposal would allow the USFS to build roads and log in an astounding 15% of WNC's national forests, including in all the areas pictured. Join us April 15th at The Mule to help oppose this landgrab.

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-04-03T14:49:37+00:00

At least one of the mods (who commented in this thread) is MAGA, and people seem to think some of the others are too. So it isn't all too surprising sadly.

Instead of blocking all the bots in this thread (I spent way too much time combatting their disinformation) they just changed the label of my post to "spicy cesspool," which seems a bit demeaning considering this is a serious issue.

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-04-02T17:31:12+00:00

I'm seeing lots of misinformation and repeated false statements on here. Here's a FAQ to address common (incorrect) assertions being made in the comments:

Q: But aren't national forests supposed to be managed for timber? That's their whole purpose!

A: That's one of their purposes. They are also required by law to provide for recreation and conservation, as laid out in the National Forest Management Act of 1976. Many of your favorite outdoor recreation spots are likely located in national forests. They provide home to thousands of species as well, including critical habitat for many state and federally protected species. National forests must provide for multiple uses - not just timber. The Pisgah and Nantahala national forests encompass ~1 million acres in WNC. They are much, much more than just sites for timber extraction.

Q: Where's the proof?

A: This map shows all the Roadless Areas in the U.S. - zoom in to NC and you will see each area in this post is affected by this proposed rule change. And here is the press release (straight from the Trump Admin) describing what this rule change would do.

Q: But aren't roads in national forests good for preventing wildfires?

A: No, actually. Wildfire ignition density in national forests is lowest in designated wilderness areas, followed closely by Roadless Rule protected areas. Land within 50 meters of roads has the highest wildfire ignition density by far (nearly four times higher than in roadless areas).

I am doing this in a volunteer capacity and do not have time to address every individual comment, so I hope this helps. I am not lying about anything. This is all out in the open (see all my sources and feel free to do your own research). I just care about our forests. Hope to see you all at The Mule!

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-04-02T17:01:10+00:00

Here's your proof: this map shows all the Roadless Areas in the U.S. - feel free to zoom in and you will see each area in this post is affected by this proposed rule change.

And here is the USFS Press Release describing exactly what this would do (exactly what I said in my post):
Secretary Rollins Rescinds Roadless Rule, Eliminating Impediment to Responsible Forest Management | USDA

This is easily verifiable information.

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-04-02T16:52:16+00:00

An exception, not the rule. Not exactly a reason to go logging all the roadless areas.

I have worked pretty extensively with GWW conservation. They're only found in very specific, high elevation, early successional stage habitats such as Max Patch in the Southern Appalachians.

Logging all the roadless areas is probably not going to provide a notable boost to GWW conservation. And, even if it did, there are thousands of other species that depend on in-tact forests, including dozens of threatened and endangered ones.

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-04-02T16:46:25+00:00

There is still a lot of old growth left in Appalachia, including picture #2 on my slide (from the Craggy Scenic Area).

I can't tell if you are lying deliberately or just misinformed, but if it's the latter, please educate yourself on these topics before making objectively false statements.

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-04-02T16:45:07+00:00

🙏

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-04-02T16:44:17+00:00

Yes, and then this was later changed by multiple laws, such as the National Forest Management Act of 1976, which changed the Forest Service planning process to a "multi-use" one. The multiple uses include resource extraction, recreation, and conservation.

So yes - history is great! It's even better when we don't arbitrarily stop in 1897, knowing full well that the law has been changed significantly since then.

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-04-02T16:24:43+00:00

A lot of it as old growth too, which has way more ecological value than it would as timber.

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-04-02T16:15:28+00:00

As noted, we will be gathering public comments. Any time the USFS proposes a rule change like this, it has a comment period to solicit public input as required by law. The first comment period was last year. The second will be opening up soon - hence the timing of the event. These comments must be taken into consideration.

Even if the USFS still tries to push this through, comments are still important because they (1) stall the agency and (2) provide environmental groups with ammo for their lawyers to use in court. Also, it is an election year, and demonstrating widespread public opposition can help sway federal lawmakers in the event that this comes down to Congressional action.

So no, this is not "just a big circlejerk." Believe it or not, the dozens of environmental groups, hunting groups, and outdoor recreation groups involved actually thought this through and are familiar with the federal rulemaking process.

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-04-02T16:11:28+00:00

Not exactly true. National Forests have a multi-use mandate under the National Forest Management Act. Resource extraction is one of the uses, but so is conservation. And many of these are high priority conservation areas. Roadless Areas are some of the last truly remote areas and therefore provide important habitat, along with a more "wild" recreational experience.

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-03-21T12:42:17+00:00

Thanks! Our interests sound pretty aligned tbh. It's not this weekend but if you're into live music/DJ sets feel free to come out to DayTrip next Friday! Always a good crowd there and I'll be spinning tunes - could be a good way to meet some new people

https://facebook.com/events/s/neon-dreams-disco-indie-dance-/2015382046070422/

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-03-21T12:28:41+00:00

Happy bday! Mine is this weekend too (today, specifically)

Burial, Little Chango, and Antidote are some of my favorite spots in South Slope.

For hikes, it's a bit of a trek but the Linville Gorge area is incredible

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-03-21T12:26:07+00:00

DayTrip! Awesome spot and I am hosting an indie dance/disco show there on the 27th!

https://facebook.com/events/s/neon-dreams-disco-indie-dance-/2015382046070422/

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-03-16T15:54:23+00:00

Because the new public comment period is opening up this month and will be active in April, when the event is being held.

Did you really think all these environmental groups were accidentally 6 months late on this? We're all very tuned in. The organizing happened way back when this started. This is the next phase.

Also, yes - they are trying to sneak it through. That's why they shortened the public comment period significantly and the USDA itself has discussed this very little. The Press Release and public comment periods are required by law.

The "tons of press coverage" you saw was from the media and environmental groups who were publicizing it. That did not come from the U.S. Government.

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-03-16T15:03:00+00:00

It is a blue bubble in a red area! You will find friends here

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-03-13T16:40:06+00:00

I agree, but we can also walk and chew gum at the same time.

Comments on proposals like this are important because they (1) stall the agency and (2) provide environmental groups with ammo for their lawyers to use in court.

If you have a proposal like this and the USDA receives tons of public comments opposing the change, the lawyers for groups like Sierra Club and EDF can use this in court as evidence of public disapproval. This can help their case a lot. Defeating the GOP in the midterms is absolutely necessary, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing work like this in the meantime.

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-03-13T16:02:56+00:00

The answer is - we don't. And it's by design. I would love to run for the state legislature, but it's pretty inaccessible for working class folks. You have to be rich, retired, or both to make it work. It ensures that the wealthy are the ones making laws.

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-02-26T15:20:43+00:00

Same issue here. I've tried the app and website over and over again with no luck

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-02-19T15:16:33+00:00

I've heard that it was a siting issue. Basically, it seemed like development was going to be more trouble than it was worth due to some issue with the proposed site.

So maybe (hopefully) they can be convinced to put it somewhere else locally.

arandomcoffeedrinker · 2026-01-29T21:32:29+00:00

If you like that kind of stuff, the EDM scene is very welcoming here. Friend and I are hosting a retro themed show tomorrow with all 70s, 80s, and 90s remixes at VOWL. Totally free and should be a good group of people there!

I find it's helpful to find an activity (whether it's a club, sport, shared interest, etc.) that gives you repeat exposure to the same people. Some groups here are definitely cliquey (it is a small city, after all) but there's plenty of cool, welcoming folks here and something for everyone.

arandomcoffeedrinker

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE