Much of the land in question is National Forrest land. I also believe that in places the roadless areas cross state boundaries. Who better to manage federal land than the federal government? It makes little sense to me to have part of a wilderness area opened to logging and other resource extraction uses, while a part across the state line is managed differently. The trout and game animals are not concerned with state boundaries. I think those who do not seek immediate financial gain from its management can better handle resource management.

I believe you will see that in states with pro development governors, states like Alaska Idaho, and Montana the roadless ban will be lifted. In states like Oregon and hopefully Washington the ban will stay in place. That tells me that the management decisions are in fact based upon political ideology rather than sound resource management considerations.

That to me is the epitome of managing a resource for political gain.