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.
Subject: Public Comment Supporting the “No Action” Alternative – Opposing the Rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule
To: USDA Forest Service Planning Team
Re: Notice of Intent to Rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (90 FR 42179)
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team,
As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences.
Subject: Public Comment Supporting the “No Action” Alternative – Opposing the Rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule
To: USDA Forest Service Planning Team
Re: Notice of Intent to Rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (90 FR 42179)
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team,
As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences.
Subject: Public Comment Supporting the “No Action” Alternative – Opposing the Rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule
To: USDA Forest Service Planning Team
Re: Notice of Intent to Rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (90 FR 42179)
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team,
As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences.
Opposes rescissionA1 strongSubstance 4/24Owed an answerAug 27, 2026FS-2025-0001-274397
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Small family — One letter sent by 3 to 9 people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.This comment stands for all 4 submissions in its group.
Subject: Public Comment Supporting the “No Action” Alternative – Opposing the Rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule
To: USDA Forest Service Planning Team
Re: Notice of Intent to Rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (90 FR 42179)
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team,
As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences.
Small family — One letter sent by 3 to 9 people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 4 submissions in its group.
Small family — One letter sent by 3 to 9 people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 4 submissions in its group.
Small family — One letter sent by 3 to 9 people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 4 submissions in its group.
Small family — One letter sent by 3 to 9 people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.This comment stands for all 4 submissions in its group.