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.
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
JJ So
California
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Waldo
Florida
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Rachel Robertson
Ohio
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Lacey Sessions
Utah
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Caroline Urdanivia, NJ
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Chloe Nelson
MT
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Lorena Cañas
your state
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Diana Candelaria
Texas
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Abbie Allen
your state
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Sarah Maciel
New York
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Lopez
Massachusetts
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Angela Walker
Hawaii
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Michael K Willey
Valparaiso, IN
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Shannon Skalski
Pennsylvania
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
David Panofsky
New York
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Ryan Barrett
Indiana
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Amanda Kavajian
Queens, NY
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Kalen Linssen
New York
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Ashley Go
Massachusetts
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize our national forests. The Roadless Rule has protected irreplaceable roadless values while permitting fire suppression, fuels mitigation work, trail maintenance, and other forest management activities for the past 25 years. It is a fiscally responsible, environmentally sound, multiple-use management tool.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Sonya Richins
CEO Reinfree.org
UTAH
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 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 2,367 submissions in its group.