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. You will destroy the ecosystem.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Shanon
Montana
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,
Secylia R.
Iowa
P.S. Don't be the the villian in your childhood movies. You can change the world for better not worse.
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.
Save our beautiful country from all consuming greed.
Sincerely,
Tara Voettiner
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. athis is vital to ecosystems, wildlife and many people.
thank you
Sincerely,
Rose Wilde
Wa
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.
Thank you,
Samantha
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
Rhode Island
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable northern Wisconsin 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,
Stephen Morales
Wisconsin
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,
Jenifer R Gold DVM Diplomate ACVIM ACVECC both large animal
MT
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable public land and wildlife habitat 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,
Robin Rank
Illinois
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,
Deborah Rademacher
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 and leave our public lands alone. That is how they need to be
Sincerely,
Casey Malmquist
Montana
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule. Once these lands are up for developement they will never be the same.
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,
Mr. George Scherman
Montana
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
This reprehensible, egregious situation demands to be halted immediately!!!!
Rolling back the Roadless Rule will open irreplaceable Montana landscapes up to large-scale logging, road construction, and other development that will industrialize this 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,
Sandy Walker
Montana
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I am strongly opposed to 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 and devastate 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,
Ms. Kim M Destiche
Montana
Dear Secretary Rollins,
Please leave our protected hands alone. Please !!
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,
Lauri M Cary
Montana born and raised
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. This is NOT what our wild lands need!
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. Think of future generations of children who deserve to know there are large forests where humans don't go and are kept wild for animals and plants. We must stop taking and taking. Please be smart and let the 2001 Roadless Rule stand for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Julia Wharton
Washington State
Dear Secretary Rollins,
Public Lands are meant to be for us, the public, not the corporations.
Save the best of the last lands we have. No new roads!
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,
Rankin Renwick
Oregon
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.
Where I live the Roadless Rule protects critical wildlife habitat for rare carnivores like wolverine, protects wildlife corridors for threatened species like grizzly bears, protects water and habitat for Bull Trout, and the water we drink. Rescinding the Roadless Rule would have catastrophic affects on this landscape and destroy one of the last remaining wild places where wildlife outnumber the humans and there is a commitment to coexist with our wild neighbors.
Do not rescind the Roadless Rule, once it is gone there will be irreversible damage.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Kirsten Frazer
Montana
Dear Secretary Rollins,
I strongly oppose the Proposed Rule rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule.
As a life-long resident of Montana, I have enjoyed recreating in Montana's wild places for nearly 60 years. Opening these areas to roads and vehicles would increase the number of human-caused fires. It would ruin this most precious resource for future generations. I believe it is best to let wild places be wild places, safe from "management" by human-kind. This will be especially important for future generations.
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.
Rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule would be irresponsible and would go against the desires of the majority of the public. Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
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.
We deserve to have areas with no roads and to access those areas the old fashioned way, walking. We deserve to have roadless areas that provide a sanctuary from the daily grind of life. Until you experience the total silence of modern life snd songs of the forests, you wont understand.
Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule.
Sincerely,
Shana Williams
Montana
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 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 236 submissions in its group.