Oppose the 2001 Roadless Rule Rescission proposal

Roadless Inventoried Areas in the Coronado National Forest

Please oppose the 2001 roadless rescission proposal. The science behind the proposal is flawed and this really is just another step to destroying our environment, local communities, clean water, etc all for fossil fuels and big industry profits. Please comment before the comment period ends September 19th using the link below.

https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FS-2025-0001/document?withinCommentPeriod=true&fbclid=IwY2xjawMiwitleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETF2cEp5T1dGMXZPdFdSdUVPAR4-p1TYfn-Xi1prywXhbP1VGIV7sgOPXut6FS1tJA9-oUHBINMFMwf_RKsUlA_aem_cODZZS2nqICUIgnCmbVoRQ

Below is a sample comment specifically tailored towards AZ. It is always good to personalize the comment if you can.

Subject: Comment Opposing the Proposed Rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing to strongly oppose the proposed rescission or weakening of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule(Roadless Rule), particularly as it applies to roadless areas in Arizona’s national forests. These areas are among the last remaining intact ecosystems in our state and play a vital role in safeguarding biodiversity, water quality, climate resilience, and cultural heritage.

Arizona’s approximately 1.2 million acres of roadless national forest lands—including parts of the Apache-Sitgreaves, Coconino, Kaibab, Prescott, and Tonto National Forests—represent some of the most ecologically sensitive and scenic landscapes in the Southwest. These lands support critical habitat for imperiled species such as the Mexican spotted owl, Gila trout, and jaguar, as well as providing essential ecosystem services like water filtration for millions downstream.

The original 2001 rule was based on the most extensive public comment process in Forest Service history, receiving over 1.6 million comments—with more than 95% in favor of protecting roadless areas. There is no new compelling scientific, legal, or democratic rationale for undoing this policy. Instead, a rescission would undermine public trust and jeopardize decades of bipartisan conservation progress.

Road-building in these fragile areas would increase the risk of:

* Wildfire ignition and spread, especially in Arizona’s arid forests already suffering from drought and climate stress;

* Habitat fragmentation, leading to the decline of native wildlife populations;

* Cultural resource damage, including impacts on sacred Indigenous sites and traditional uses;

* Loss of recreational opportunities that depend on solitude and natural integrity.

The Roadless Rule does not prohibit fire prevention, forest restoration, or community safety projects—it only restricts unnecessary road construction and industrial development in the most ecologically valuable areas. Arizona communities value these lands not for extractive development but for clean water, wildlife, and quiet recreation.

I urge the Forest Service to retain the full protections of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule and reject any proposal that would erode the ecological and cultural legacy of Arizona’s national forests.

Thank you for considering my comment.

Sincerely,�[Your Full Name]�[Optional: Title / Affiliation / Tribe / Organization, if applicable] More information:
Repealing 'Roadless Rule,' Trump rolls back protections for 58M acres of forests & wildlands

Push Back on Trump's EPA Wrecking Ball

Push back on the EPA's plan to reverse the endangerment finding that allows them to regulate CO2 emissions

The Trump EPA has issued a proposal to revoke the endangerment finding. The proposal relies on misinterpretations of the law and recent cases, fringe science, and tortured cost analysis to justify a conclusion that the EPA cannot and should not regulate greenhouse gases.

Learn more and take action here: https://earthjustice.org/experts/hana-vizcarra/a-legal-analysis-of-the-trump-epas-plan-to-revoke-the-endangerment-finding

Note that this action requires making public comments to the EPA, not just signing a petition. While this action requires more time and effort than the actions below, the impact of this policy change would be far greater than any of the actions below.

Oppose the EPA's plan to weaken power plant carbon pollution standards

On June 11, 2025, Donald Trump and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin announced their proposal to repeal standards that cut climate pollution from power plants–a major source of the carbon pollution that exacerbates climate change. With their Polluters First Agenda, Trump and Zeldin are attempting to undermine the scientific basis for any climate pollution standards and replace scientists with partisans who will carry water for the big polluters. These actions would increase dangerous pollution that makes people sicker and raises the likelihood of extreme weather events such as wildfires, flooding, tornadoes, and more.

Please sign on to oppose this repeal of these standards

https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/oppose-the-epas-plan-to-weaken-power-plant-carbon-pollution-standards-partner/?source=SCGC

Submit a public comment to stop the repeal of lifesaving Mercury and Air Toxics Standards  

The Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) have achieved a 90% reduction in mercury pollution from power plants and cleaned up dangerous soot at the same time. Now the Trump administration wants to rollback the 2024 provisions that strengthened these standards.

We must stop the Trump administration’s Polluters First Agenda. Use the button below to sign the petition

https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/submit-a-public-comment-to-stop-the-repeal-of-lifesaving-mercury-and-air-toxics-standards-partner/?source=SCGC

Defend Our National Monuments

A recent opinion from the Department of Justice says that they think President Trump can abolish areas protected as national monuments by previous presidents. This finding is disturbing on many levels, but it also indicates that we are likely to see some of our national monuments eliminated or shrunk. We know for sure that they are looking at the Baaj Nwaavjo I'tah Kukveni - Ancestral Footprints of the Grand Canyon National Monument, adjacent to Grand Canyon National Park and the Ironwood Forest National Monument, northwest of Tucson. 

Please sign the petition opposing any reduction in size or removal of protections for the Baaj Nwaavjo monument.

https://act.sierraclub.org/actions/Arizona?actionId=AR0521102&id=701Po00000yg9u2IAA&data=696f42e9785e9478e7ff871c629d98d7017c871f797a78dff43d5ffcfeccee5977af3ad4be2bd6e16b29c9f5c4371337

2025 Environmental Report Card for AZ Legislature & Governor

Check out the 2025 Environmental Report Card! See How Your Legislators Did This Session The Sierra Club, joined by Chispa Arizona and Arizona Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) Advocates, released the 2025 Environmental Report Card for the Arizona Legislature and Governor. “Not only did we not see any real progress on water issues, but we saw harmful utility bills signed into law, allowing old coal plants to continue operating after the utilities have bonded for their debt, continuing to pollute our air and water and fuel climate change,” said Sandy Bahr, director for Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon Chapter. “The Legislature and Governor also gave utilities liability relief for fires sparked by their infrastructure. The attacks on voting, especially early voting, continued, but those bills were vetoed and the referrals did not get to the ballot – at least not this time.” See the full news release here and the report card in English here. La Tarjeta de Evaluación del Medio Ambiente de 2025 está disponible en español Some of the bad bills at the AZ legislature.

Phew! Some of what finally got done this Legislative session

Arizona House of Representatives

Here is the last Legislative Update from Sandy Bahr of the Grand Canyon Chapter of the Sierra Club. As Sandy mentioned, she will be sending out fewer legislative reports since the session is in recess. We may still have some petitions from the city or Calls to Action from other environmental groups. So keep checking.

Thanks for all your good advocacy this last session! 

Learning about the issues helps us be better advocates. Check out Dan's presentation on A Story of Water in the Desert.

YouTube : https://youtu.be/NssC1fzs4jk

Sandy wrote: It's over! Finally, the 2025 Legislative Session has come to close as the House and Senate finally agreed on a budget that the Governor could sign. They adjourned sine die at 1:20 PM today (June 27, 2025). The budget agreement only happened after the House insisted on passing two budgets that the Governor would veto, and she did. In doing so, she set a new veto record of 169 vetoes -- so far. She could still veto a few more bills. As far as the budget goes, the version that was signed is okay on environmental protection. It still does not include adequate funding for important programs, but there are no major poison pills and there is $9 million for the Water Quality Fee Fund for helping to address impaired waters and also to implement new water quality standards in permits. There are also two new employees funded for implementing the aquifer water quality standards. There is $1 million for the Arizona State Parks Heritage Fund -- it should get $10 million, but last year got nothing. The Water Quality Assurance Revolving Fund, our state Superfund program, got $15 million, and there is $2 million for clean up of the Iron King Mine smelter near Humboldt. The Department of Water Resources got six additional employees for the assured water supply program and other groundwater issues. There was an attempt to refer some additional measures to the ballot over the last couple of days, but as the Republican majority in the House was missing four of its members, they did not have the votes to refer them. Look for a bunch next year, however, including measures to impede voting and make ballot measures more difficult. As noted last week,SCR1004 tax prohibition; vehicle mileage; monitoring  (Hoffman: Chaplik, Keshel) passed and will be on the 2026 ballot. It would prohibit the state and local government from taking important actions to reduce vehicle miles traveled. Travel reduction is a component of our state implementation plans to improve air quality. It also prohibits any kind of fee based on vehicle miles traveled. Fees such as these have been proposed as an alternative to gas taxes to pay for roads. SB1611 physical availability exemption credit; groundwater (Shope: Petersen) passed in the House 35-20-5 on Monday and was transmitted to the Governor. She will sign it as her staff was engaged in the negotiations. This bill is also known as the ag to urban bill because it promotes development on agricultural lands, was significantly improved and could result in some groundwater savings. We hope that is the case, but we remain concerned about the bill promoting more urban sprawl rather than encouraging more sustainable development and that it significantly increases the replenishment obligation of the Central Arizona Groundwater Replenishment District (CAGRD). The CAGRD was designed to utilize excess Central Arizona Project (CAP) water, but there is no excess CAP water any longer, so what will be used for replenishment? It also reduces the replenishment reserve requirement from 100 years to 20 years for the CAGRD. Karen Peters, the nominee for the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality director, had her confirmation hearing on Monday, but the full Senate failed to act on this nomination. We have heard that they believe she can continue to serve as was re-nominated February. We shall see what the Senate does on that. The Senate failed to confirm three appointees to the Arizona Game and Fish Commission Appointment Recommendation Board as well, so they will not be able to serve beyond August. In the good news category, a whole slew of bad bills that remained -- one on wind energy siting, one on sewage sludge application, and several bad voting bills -- did not advance. Next Friday is the July 4th holiday, so we will not be sending out an update. Look for one later in July with the report card on the legislature. We will stop sending updates weekly until the 2026 session starts, but will send periodic updates or actions you can take on this list. Bills passed and signed this session will become law on September 26, 2025.

To see the bills we tracked this session, please go here.

Oppose Project Blue - the Water Thirsty, Energy Hog Data Center

But Project Blue is a LARGE data center!

Project Blue is a secretive development proposed by a venture capital firm to build the largest data center complex in the state near the Pima County Fairgrounds to be occupied by an as yet unnamed customer.

There have been a number of promises made to Pima County and the City of Tucson that were convincing enough that the Pima County Board of Supervisors narrowly approved the project this week (though the swing vote, Supervisor Matt Heinz, has now changed his mind after the promise that the data center wouldn't increase electricity costs was broken by TEP on the same day the Supervisors voted. It would increase Tucson electric bills by 14%!) The project still needs City of Tucson Mayor and Council approval for the water component of the project, so it can still be stopped.

The developer promises no environmental impact because they are going to fund an expansion of reclaimed water service to the area of the project, but that ignores the fact that reclaimed water is being considered as a potential future potable water source if water supplies continue to dwindle and a portion of the reclaimed water is currently being used for riparian environment restoration along the Santa Cruz River. Adding a huge water user to Tucson Water's service area is bound to impact future water security. The other promises from the developers to fund projects that will increase the water supply in Tucson are assuming that it's possible to create water by spending enough money. You can't drink cash!

Reach out to your City Councilmember and demand that they vote against extending water service to this ill-conceived project. A theoretical gain in economic prosperity is not worth the risk of future water shortages.

SIGN THIS PETITION:

https://www.change.org/p/tell-tucson-city-council-to-stop-project-blue-ai-center-in-tucson?signed=true

Tucson Clean and Beautiful suggests these actions: 

Discover the rapid rise of U.S. data centers, with over $1 trillion invested, and see how this growth affects our environment and communities. Learn the stories behind the impact, explore ways you can get involved, and make your voice heard! We encourage everyone to do their research, stay engaged, and advocate for responsible tech development. 🤖🏜️

1. Identify Your Ward Councilmember: Find out who represents your neighborhood. Addressing your concerns directly to them can be especially impactful.

2. Attend Public Meetings: Keep an eye on scheduled public hearings, city council meetings, or planning hearings related to the project. Presenting your concerns in person or submitting written comments can make a difference.

3. Write Letters or Emails: Compose clear, respectful messages outlining your opposition or concerns about the development. Highlight how it might affect your community, environment, or local resources.

4. Engage with Planning & Development Services: Contact the City of Tucson department for information on review processes, comment periods, and upcoming hearings.

5. Coordinate with Others: Consider organizing or joining local groups or coalitions. Collective voices often carry more weight and demonstrate broad community interest.

6. Contact Pima County Officials: Community members in Tucson can reach out to Pima County officials to express their concerns and oppose the construction of the new data center.

7. Stay Informed on Utility Regulations: If power consumption or utility impacts concern you, reaching out to the Arizona Corporation Commission can provide additional avenues for advocacy. Visit at www.azcc.gov

Remember, active and informed participation helps shape outcomes that reflect your community’s needs! And don’t forget to utilize your platform!

Last Legislative Update of this Session? And some final actions...

There are a few actions at the end of this post (for those of you who haven't already acted on them), but generally this is an update on the Arizona Legislature from Sandy Bahr of the Sierra Club wrapping things up as the session comes to a close. (Dan and I added a few sentences elaborating on and clarifying SB 1611*.) 

Please, look out for a Call to Action on Project Blue, the proposed data center on the south side that would use a lot of water and energy. 

Sandy writes, "I am sorry I did not get you all an update last week. I was out of office enjoying a No Kings Day protest with my sister, plus there was not much to report until very late Friday night. I will catch you up now, however." So last week, the Arizona House passed a budget that had no support from the Governor or most Senate Republicans, so it was basically a nonstarter. This week, and late into the night on Thursday night, the Arizona Senate passed a bipartisan budget that has the Governor's support. The House was then supposed to begin action on that budget, but instead, they adjourned and left until Monday. The Senate then adjourned sine die, meaning they are not planning to come back at all this session. Read more about that here. So where does that leave us? It is unclear. The House could come back Monday and just pass the Senate budget and then adjourn. It seems unlikely, however. They could try to convince the Senate to reconsider its adjournment action and come back and work on further amending the budget. The House could stall and not pass a budget before the end of the fiscal year, which would then result in a partial shutdown of the state government. Sigh. What a mess. As far as the budget goes, the version upon which the Senate and Governor agreed is not bad, overall, on environmental protection. It still does not include adequate funding for important programs, but there are no major poison pills and there is $9 million for the Water Quality Fee Fund for helping to address impaired waters and also to implement new water quality standards in permits. There is also $1 million for the Arizona State Parks Heritage Fund -- it should get $10 million, but last year got nothing. The Water Quality Assurance Revolving Fund, our state Superfund program, got $15 million, and there is $2 million for clean up of the Iron King Mine smelter near Humboldt. This budget passed with bipartisan support but the self-proclaimed "Freedom Caucus" Republicans are super ticked off, which is why we find ourselves with no state budget and the clock ticking. One positive thing the Senate did yesterday was to vote down HCR2013 early ballots; deadlines; foreign money, which would have referred a measure to the ballot that imposed stricter early voting deadlines and required Maricopa and Pima voters to confirm their addresses every election cycle. It was defeated 11-18-1. There are still a number of other bad voting measures that they could refer however, if the Senate comes back. SB1611 physical availability exemption credit; groundwater (Shope: Petersen), also known as the ag to urban bill because it promotes development on agricultural lands, was significantly improved and could result in some groundwater savings. For example, the revised bill sets limits on how much water a development can withdraw based on a groundwater threshold and it limits the use of water-thirsty landscaping and decorative features like lakes and waterfalls. We remain concerned about the bill promoting more urban sprawl rather than encouraging more sustainable development and that it significantly increases the replenishment obligation of the Central Arizona Groundwater Replenishment District (CAGRD). The CAGRD was designed to utilize excess Central Arizona Project (CAP) water, but there is no excess CAP water any longer, so what will be used for replenishment? It also reduces the replenishment reserve requirement for the CAGRD. Additionally, there appear to be some potential loopholes in the 36 page long bill. It will likely be heard in the House next week.* On the bad news front, the House put a referendum on the ballot for 2026 for a proposed constitutional amendment. SCR1004 was substituted for HCR2035 tax prohibition; vehicle mileage; monitoring and passed with only Republican votes. If passed by voters, it would prohibit the state and local government from taking important actions to reduce vehicle miles traveled. Travel reduction is a component of our state implementation plans to improve air quality and removing those provisions would mean seeking approval and replacing those reductions with some other measure, thus shifting more of the burden for reducing pollution to other entities. It also prohibits any kind of fee based on vehicle miles traveled. Fees such as these have been proposed as an alternative to gas taxes to pay for roads. Finally, a constitutional amendment would also take away flexibility from the legislature itself for future measures to fund roads. Watch for this on your ballot in 2026. There are still a few other bills outstanding that we are concerned about, including a harmful wind energy bill, water bills, and several referrals. Reach out to your representatives about these bills, if you haven't already.  Find out who your Representative is, first find your district by using this app:  https://irc-az.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/lookup/index.html?appid=424810a4667049388ef6df4f0c73098b Use that district to find your Rep and their contact info. here:  https://www.azleg.gov/MemberRoster/ SB1150 NOW: wind farms; construction; policies; procedures  (Gowan) includes numerous new mandates for wind energy generation facilities that will erect significant roadblocks to siting wind projects. The mandates include requiring financial surety and prohibitions on the construction of wind projects within six miles of a property zoned residential, yet you can plop down a large gas plant – something that emits harmful pollutants – right next to a residential neighborhood. Thoughtful siting criteria are fine, but this bill is not about that. It is about stopping wind farms. It still awaits a final passage vote in the Senate. SB1520 Now: Rural Water (Dunn) establishes an extremely weak system for groundwater "management" in a limited number of areas in rural Arizona. It is not what is needed to stabilize aquifers to limit land subsidence, earth fissures, and the continued decline of water levels, which are drying up wells in some areas. Discussions have broken down on this bill, so the outlook is grim for rural water,  but legislators still may send it up for a veto.  There are quite a few referrals that could still move forward, but we have heard they plan to wait until next session for most of them. Here are two of them that could advance. HCR2025 constitutional amendments; sixty percent vote (Kolodin: Kupper, Marshall) refers a proposed constitutional amendment to the ballot that would require sixty percent approval for any future constitutional amendment, thus raising the bar significantly for future amendments. Why should only 40% of voters be allowed to tell 60% of the state what they can and can’t do? This bill passed out of the House and could be brought to the Senate Floor at any time. HCR2057 initiatives; referendums; signature requirement; counties (Keshel) refers a proposed constitutional amendment to the ballot that requires a proportionate number of signatures from each county for a statewide initiatives, constitutional amendments, and referenda. It passed in the House as well and could come to the floor of the Senate at any time as well.

How does AZ place on Best States for Environmental Protection?

With over half of Americans greatly worried about contamination of our waterways and soil, the non-profit organization SmileHub today released new reports on the Best Charities for Environmental Protection and the Best States for Environmental Protection in 2025.

The U.S. produces over 292 million tons of waste per year, or over 4.9 pounds per person per day, according to the latest data from the Environmental Protection Agency. Additionally, over 50% of Americans worry a great deal about pollution of water sources and the contamination of soil and water by toxic waste. Pollution and waste are issues across the U.S., but some states work harder than others to limit their impact.

To highlight states that understand nature’s importance and the ones that need to improve, SmileHub compared the 50 states across 25 key metrics. The data set ranges from the number of environmental charities per capita to industrial toxins per square mile of land area to climate change vulnerability.

Best States		Worst States
1. California		41. Tennessee
2. Washington		42. Iowa
3. New York		43. Kansas
4. Vermont		44. Wyoming
5. Maryland		45. Kentucky
6. Hawaii		46. North Dakota
7. Massachusetts		47. Alabama
8. New Jersey		48. Mississippi
9. Oregon		49. West Virginia
10. Virginia		50. Louisiana

*Arizona landed 23rd

Key Stats

• California has the highest number of environmental protection charities per capita – 9.9 times higher than in Oklahoma, which has the lowest number.
• New York has the highest share of workers that use green transportation – 3 times higher than in Mississippi, which has the lowest share.
• South Dakota has the highest share of renewable energy consumption – 18.3 times higher than Delaware, which has the lowest share.
• Hawaii is one of the states with the highest soil quality – 27 times higher than New Mexico, which has the lowest soil quality.

JANA'S NOTE: Despite having an abundance of sun, we didn't even place on highest share of renewable energy consumption! What is keeping us from that? 

The majority at our state legislature pushes through bad bills that prohibit the advancement of clean energy in favor of fossil fuels.  They have also sponsored several bills that prohibit water conservation and even allowed landowners to dump toxins in dry washes on their property. 

To view the full report and your state’s rank, please visit: 
https://smilehub.org/blog/best-states-for-environmental-protection/123