Read the comments.

I oppose full rescission. I hike, camp, and shoot on National Forest System lands, and the DEIS does not analyze how road construction forecloses those uses. Roads are not neutral. Each corridor redraws concentrations of vehicle traffic and dispersed camping, and under 36 CFR 261.10(d) and 261.58(m) every campsite, structure, and occupied area imposes a 150-yard no-discharge buffer, plus a prohibition on firing across or on a road. One spur, especially as it pertains to extraction industries, removes far more shooting-capable ground than its physical footprint and often severs long, unobstructed lanes with competent backstops that my, and many other Americans long range marksmanship and hunting hobbies, require (something a 25-100yd urban enclosed range cannot substitute). For example, the Croatan National Forest (just three hours away from me) banned target shooting after expanded road access, followed by commercial and private development, constricted shooting areas and interrupted countless potential safe shooting lanes, until eventually any terrain that could’ve been used as an assured backstop fell outside of areas where it was legal to shoot, with the final decision coming after a stray round managed to travel .8 miles through the forest itself and into a private residence. Rescission spreads that pattern across another 44.7 million acres. The DEIS reduces recreation harm to a single $6.1 million annual figure and never disaggregates dispersed shooting, despite the EXPLORE Act directive to identify target shooting opportunities. Please analyze acreage and terrain types remaining available for lawful dispersed shooting under each alternative. The same area fragmentation degrades hiking, camping, and general living. Roads bring noise, dust, exhaust, and sediment into the air as well as headwaters serving tens of millions of Americans. Additionally, headlights and operational lighting are brought that much deeper into places whose recreational and natural value is partially derived from substantial natural darkness and quiet. Aside from people, new roads fragment habitat for bear, elk, and native trout; roughly 25% of federally listed animal species have habitat in roadless areas. Lastly, the wildfire rationale is unsupported. About 90% of wildfires are human-caused, and human ignitions are roughly four times likelier near roads than in roadless country. USDA concedes 11.3 million roadless acres already sit near existing roads and remain untreated. Access is not a constraint; workforce capacity and a $6.9 billion road maintenance backlog are. I urge selection of the no-action alternative.