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.
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
Beth Drohan
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
Moira Goldfarb
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
Lisa Kocsis
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests.
Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use.
The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Keep Our National Roadless Areas Wild!
Sincerely,
Leslie Mork-Geist
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
To Whom It May Concern,
I FULLY CONCUR with ALL of the following:
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
Tracy Ralph
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
Richard Loeb
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001-223869).
For 25 years, this policy has protected some of the most ecologically important and undeveloped areas of our national forests from road building and industrial development. These roadless areas safeguard clean water, trout fisheries, wildlife habitat, and quiet recreation across the country.
Opening nearly 45 million acres of national forest land to new road construction, commercial logging, and mineral extraction would fragment habitat, accelerate biodiversity loss, and impose high costs on American taxpayers through added road construction and maintenance. The U.S. National Forest System already contains nearly 400,000 miles of roads, most of them fragmenting sensitive wildlife habitat and all of them expensive to maintain. Our nation should be closing and revegetating unneeded backcountry roads, not adding more.
Although this proposal does not directly affect the Adirondack Park, the Park is one of the largest intact temperate forest landscapes in the United States, a six-million-acre mosaic of public and private lands that supports rare wildlife, globally significant wetlands, and extensive backcountry recreation. Its ecological integrity is connected to the health of nearby national forests such as the Green Mountain, Finger Lakes, White Mountain, and Allegheny National Forests. These forests contribute to a broader regional network of wildlife habitat and climate-resilient landscapes that support migratory species and ecological processes extending into the Adirondacks. Weakening protections in these forests would undermine that regional connectivity.
Commercial logging, mining, and livestock grazing belong on private lands, not on public lands where they reduce biological diversity, degrade quiet recreation opportunities, and cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. Public lands should be managed for long-term ecological health, clean water, wildlife, and sustainable recreation, not expanded industrial use. The 2001 Roadless Rule remains one of the most effective tools for protecting intact forest landscapes. Weakening it would undermine decades of conservation progress and jeopardize the ecological integrity of national forests across the country.
I urge you to maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule and reject this proposal.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
Donna Welch
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 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 1,196 submissions in its group.