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.
Watershes, streams, rivers wetlands and aquiters and everything inbetween MUST be protected. For the health of the people, domesticated animals, wild animals and the environment at large. These are delicate balances that will be totally screwed up if this so-called conservation rule goes forward.
I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is.
The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms.
Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern.
The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts.
I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms.
Sincerely,
Sincerely,
L. L. Wilkinson
Taos, NM 87571
Watershes, streams, rivers wetlands and aquiters and everything inbetween MUST be protected. For the health of the people, domesticated animals, wild animals and the environment at large. These are delicate balances that will be totally screwed up if this so-called conservation rule goes forward.
I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is.
The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms.
Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern.
The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts.
I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms.
Sincerely,
Sincerely,
L. L. Wilkinson
Taos, NM 87571
Watershes, streams, rivers wetlands and aquiters and everything inbetween MUST be protected. For the health of the people, domesticated animals, wild animals and the environment at large. These are delicate balances that will be totally screwed up if this so-called conservation rule goes forward.
I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is.
The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms.
Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern.
The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts.
I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms.
Sincerely,
Sincerely,
L. L. Wilkinson
Taos, NM 87571
Watershes, streams, rivers wetlands and aquiters and everything inbetween MUST be protected. For the health of the people, domesticated animals, wild animals and the environment at large. These are delicate balances that will be totally screwed up if this so-called conservation rule goes forward.
I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is.
The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms.
Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern.
The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts.
I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms.
Sincerely,
Sincerely,
L. L. Wilkinson
Taos, NM 87571
Watershes, streams, rivers wetlands and aquiters and everything inbetween MUST be protected. For the health of the people, domesticated animals, wild animals and the environment at large. These are delicate balances that will be totally screwed up if this so-called conservation rule goes forward.
I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is.
The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms.
Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern.
The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts.
I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms.
Sincerely,
Sincerely,
L. L. Wilkinson
Taos, NM 87571
Watershes, streams, rivers wetlands and aquiters and everything inbetween MUST be protected. For the health of the people, domesticated animals, wild animals and the environment at large. These are delicate balances that will be totally screwed up if this so-called conservation rule goes forward.
I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is.
The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms.
Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern.
The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts.
I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms.
Sincerely,
Sincerely,
L. L. Wilkinson
Taos, NM 87571
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.This comment stands for all 10 submissions in its group.
Watershes, streams, rivers wetlands and aquiters and everything inbetween MUST be protected. For the health of the people, domesticated animals, wild animals and the environment at large. These are delicate balances that will be totally screwed up if this so-called conservation rule goes forward.
I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is.
The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms.
Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern.
The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts.
I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms.
Sincerely,
Sincerely,
L. L. Wilkinson
Taos, NM 87571
Watershes, streams, rivers wetlands and aquiters and everything inbetween MUST be protected. For the health of the people, domesticated animals, wild animals and the environment at large. These are delicate balances that will be totally screwed up if this so-called conservation rule goes forward.
I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is.
The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms.
Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern.
The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts.
I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms.
Sincerely,
Sincerely,
L. L. Wilkinson
Taos, NM 87571
Watershes, streams, rivers wetlands and aquiters and everything inbetween MUST be protected. For the health of the people, domesticated animals, wild animals and the environment at large. These are delicate balances that will be totally screwed up if this so-called conservation rule goes forward.
I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is.
The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms.
Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern.
The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts.
I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms.
Sincerely,
Sincerely,
L. L. Wilkinson
Taos, NM 87571
Watershes, streams, rivers wetlands and aquiters and everything inbetween MUST be protected. For the health of the people, domesticated animals, wild animals and the environment at large. These are delicate balances that will be totally screwed up if this so-called conservation rule goes forward.
I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is.
The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms.
Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern.
The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts.
I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms.
Sincerely,
Sincerely,
L. L. Wilkinson
Taos, NM 87571
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 10 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 10 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 10 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 10 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 10 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 10 submissions in its group.
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.This comment stands for all 10 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 10 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 10 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 10 submissions in its group.