The Public Record · Docket FS-2025-0001

Read the comments.

Every public comment on the proposed rescission of the Roadless Rule, sorted by what it talks about. Pick a topic, then narrow by position, by how hard the comment is for the agency to set aside, or by how substantive it is. Each comment is shown in full, as filed. How comments are classified and scored is explained in the Comment Analysis.

1 unique comments22 submissions

Position

Opposes rescission 100.0%

Answerability

A1 strong 0
A2 moderate 0
A3 weak 0
A0 none 1

Substance /24

Median 5middle half 5–5 · 1 scored

Topics raised

22 submissions in this letter's group · showing 1–20Clear all filters

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 28, 2026FS-2025-0001-502556
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-477501
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 23, 2026FS-2025-0001-474691
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 23, 2026FS-2025-0001-475211
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 22, 2026FS-2025-0001-467642
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 21, 2026FS-2025-0001-448951
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 16, 2026FS-2025-0001-427618
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-378831
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 7, 2026FS-2025-0001-318143
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 4, 2026FS-2025-0001-312975
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 1, 2026FS-2025-0001-298814
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 27, 2026FS-2025-0001-277705
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 26, 2026FS-2025-0001-272817
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-264523
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-264964
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 22, 2026FS-2025-0001-245922
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 21, 2026FS-2025-0001-226889
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the yno action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 21, 2026FS-2025-0001-227223
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 20, 2026FS-2025-0001-223997
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.This comment stands for all 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 20001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule sites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 20, 2026FS-2025-0001-224375
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 22 submissions in its group.
As a hunter, angler, and public land owner, I urge the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to reject the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of the most important fish and wildlife habitat in the National Forest System while allowing many of the management activities needed to maintain healthy forests. The rule does not prohibit hunting, fishing, grazing, recreation, habitat restoration, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, mining, or access to valid existing rights. Instead, it provides a common-sense framework for limiting new road construction in some of the nation's most intact backcountry landscapes. Rescinding the rule will harm durable access, game migration, and opportunities for future hunters and anglers across the country. USFS currently manages approximately 370,000 miles of roads and faces a deferred maintenance backlog of roughly $10.8 billion, with ~55% of that backlog tied to roads alone. Meanwhile, the proposed rule cites an annual National Forest System sawtimber harvest of just $5.2 to $11.4 million per year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6 million per year in revenue to the timber industry if the rule were to be rescinded. This proposed action is not fiscally responsible. Building additional roads into currently roadless areas would create new long-term maintenance obligations while diverting resources from the existing infrastructure the agency already struggles to maintain. Roadless areas provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife, conserve clean water, and support the hunting and fishing opportunities that define America's outdoor heritage. These landscapes help maintain secure habitat for elk, mule deer, native trout, and countless other species that depend on large, unfragmented landscapes. They also protect headwater streams and watersheds that supply clean drinking water to communities across the country. The Roadless Rule was developed through one of the largest public participation efforts in federal land management history, generating approximately 1.6 million public comments, 99% of which were in support of the rule. Any decision to weaken or eliminate these protections should be supported by clear evidence that doing so would improve land management outcomes without sacrificing wildlife habitat, watershed health, recreational opportunities, or fiscal responsibility. America's roadless areas remain some of our most valuable public lands. The Forest Service should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, conserving intact habitat, and ensuring future generations inherit the same hunting, fishing, and backcountry opportunities we enjoy today. While I remain open to common sense, locally informed improvements to the Roadless Rule, Alternative 2 and 3 would remove protections from millions of acres and go far beyond the targeted reforms both I and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers have supported. I respectfully urge the Forest Service to adopt the no action alternative and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place. Don't bulldoze the backcountry. Defend the Roadless Rule.
Full analysis of this comment →

Sharing & methodology

These results are meant to be shared.

Please cite us. This analysis is the intellectual property of Roadless.org and Nicholas Holshouser. You are welcome to reproduce it — every reproduction must include this citation:

Roadless.org and Nicholas Holshouser, “2001 Roadless Rule Revision — Substantive Analysis,” https://roadless.org.

How it works. A large language model (an open-weight Qwen3.8 model) reads each substantive comment and copies, word for word, the passages that carry its analytical gap, evidence, request, alternative and connection to the place; it returns no scores. Code grades those passages 0–3 on eight dimensions — evidence, legal grounding, engagement with the environmental analysis, analytical gaps, alternatives, specific requests, position, and local knowledge — with legal grounding taken from a citation scan, not the model. For the strongest tenth on each side, the copied passages are checked against the comment and shown as exhibits. A comment counts as “substantive” when it clears a floor filter — it must show at least one substantive signal (a named entity, a specific citation, a stated analytical deficiency, or first-person testimony), which screens out one-line and purely conclusory submissions before any model scoring.

The full method. Every step, why it is done that way, its known limits and a glossary: Methodologies →

The data. The full canonical dataset — every comment on Docket FS-2025-0001 — is available from Regulations.gov's bulk download, the canonical source: https://www.regulations.gov/bulkdownload. Download the CSV directly (Regulations.gov keeps this link working until October 18, 2026): https://bulk-downloads.regulations.gov/mv4-z8fw-q5jx.csv.

Roadless.org — analysis of the public comment docket.
Media inquiries welcome — nicholas@wanderingnature.com.