[volkl48]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that statistic includes every Forest Service road on the books.

[jeffbee]

Yes, clearly. In what way is a forest road not a road?

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7775746,-122.9327754,2401a,3...

[refurb]

I think when people think “road” they think something maintained and well used.

A forestry or old logging road that hasn’t been used in 50 years doesn’t come to mind.

[aembleton]

Looks in remarkably good condition for something that hasn't been used for 50 years. You can even see tyre marks: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7941501,-122.9358659,3a,75y,...

[jeffbee]

I can't really know what people think is or isn't a road but these are objectively roads and I think you are understating the extent to which resource extraction activities use these roads today, and the degree to which any road, no matter how much or little used, alters the ecosystem through which it passes.

[refurb]

A road (dirt trail) that hasn't been in use for 100 years is not impacting the ecosystem to any extent at all.

[freddie_mercury]

Do you have any support for your repeated claims that the roads under discussion haven't been used for 100 years?

Virtually no forest service roads are older than 50 years old, as most were constructed after WW2 to assist in logging.

[aspaceman]

The point is that humans have touched it. There’s a perception there’s large segments of the American West and Midwest that haven’t been touched. Which is what they’re describing. Almost every place, at one point or another was close to the road. When we’ve only had cars for the last 100 or so, that’s quite a statement.

You’re splitting hairs.

[refurb]

People really believe there are parts of the west and mid-west that haven't been "touched" (we're changing the discussion here)?

The entire country has been surveyed, so of course it's been touched (as defined by some human presence at some point in time).