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.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
If it is true wilderness then it should be declared such. Otherwise the roadless rule needlessly prevents management when our forests need it now due to warming conditions and extremely high fuel loading from fire prevention.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
As a forest landowner, certified tree farmer, and public promoter of healthy forests, I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
The roadless rule was ill advised from day one. It is not grounded in sound, scientific forest management practices. I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health. I am an active user of the Nantahala National Forest.
The decline in the Ruffed Grouse population since 2001 rule is very sad. Please help these great birds - as well as other birds and wildlife - by supporting public lands access, active forest management and rescinding the Roadless Rule. Thank you.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
Specific area removals for specific reasons would have been a better way to approach this, but in lieu of that then the blanket rescinding is necessary.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
I support the Forest Service’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule unnecessarily restricts access and limits the ability of Forest Service professionals to actively manage forests facing severe wildfire, insects, disease and declining forest health.
Healthy forests require active management, and effective management requires access. Forest Service professionals should have greater flexibility to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forest conditions and respond to wildfire before more forests, watersheds and wildlife habitat are lost.
The Roadless Rule limits that flexibility by imposing nationwide restrictions on forests with very different conditions and management needs. Decisions about access and forest management should be made through forest planning and site specific analysis, where local professionals can apply science and their knowledge of the land.
After 25 years, we have seen severe wildfire and forest mortality affect millions of acres of roadless forests across the West. Continuing to restrict management will not keep these forests healthy and standing.
I urge the Forest Service to rescind the Roadless Rule and give its professionals the flexibility they need to actively manage our national forests for the future.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 449 submissions in its group.