Read the comments.

I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. Opening these areas to development will pollute drinking-water sources for millions of people with sediment from road construction and logging. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires.

As a lifelong forest user, I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. In Oregon we treasure and protect our natural resources such as clean water for communities, plant and wildlife protections, and clean air. We aim to prevent human caused fires rather than increase the incidence by building roads. Statistics show us that fires are caused within half mile of roads. All the proven information cannot be ignored or denied. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.

As a stakeholder, I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.

I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after twenty-five years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.

I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. Opening these areas to development will pollute drinking-water sources for millions of people with sediment from road construction and logging. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires.

Biological diversity - both floral and faunal – knows no geopolitical, ideological, nor ecological/economic bounds. Species transcend whatever artificial bounds we attempt to place upon them. Certainly, the intrinsic ecological value of a biologically diverse forest far exceeds its economic value. It makes only common sense, therefore, to protect and preserve America’s forests and their constituent wildlife that contribute so very much to existence of life on Earth, including human lives, from destructive logging for the economic enrichment of industrial corporations and their billionaire executives at the expense of ecological sustainability. We strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. We urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.

I STRONGLY oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. It would also harm - not help - our wildlife and outdoor communities. I have been a public school librarian in the state of Montana for 13 years. Libraries offer a safe space for people to go when they don't have anywhere else. Libraries are safe havens for children and people who need a space that is different than the rest of the school or city. Some children and some people need quiet spaces, to get away from the chaos of American life. Libraries offer that, and our untouched national forests offer that. There needs to be quiet, untouched spaces for people and wildlife to go when the world around them is busy and bustling and overflowing with stimulation. Our national forests have plenty of roads and logging areas already, we absolutely do NOT need MORE roads or more of our pristine spaces taken over by infrastructure. This decision would have a direct negative impact on me and the small Montana community I call home. I am fortunate enough to live in the backyard of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, and the thought of the roadless rule being changed is terrifying. It would destroy the GYE and the enormous number of wildlife who depend on it, as well as the communities who care for these lands. PLEASE DO NOT TOUCH ANY MORE OF OUR PROTECTED PUBLIC LANDS. Leave the Roadless Rule intact!!!!! Furthermore... The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.

I absolutely love national forests and am horrified by the proposal to repeal the Roadless Rule. I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than 25 years. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science and this action would majorly harm our national forests, which are irreplaceable and something that should be preserved for future generations. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule, and it should absolutely not be overturned. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for many animal species, that breaking up habitats harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I strongly urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all. Thank you for your consideration and for doing the right thing by preserving national forests for future generations. Sonja Ecklund

I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER

I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER

I’m a Montana resident. I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. Please do not repeal this rule, for the sake of our health and futures.

I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.

I write to urge US Forest Service to keep the Roadless Rule intact exactly as is, utilizing Alternative 1 in the current DEIS. I am a resident of SE Ohio adjacent to the Wayne NF and have been studying and researching forest, climate, and biodiversity issues for thirty years. I have visited many national parks and National Forests and am distressed by their abuse by one administration after another. I am especially concerned about the current proposal, which threatens biodiversity and our remaining intact roadless areas under the pretense of "reducing fire risk" and tailoring "management" to local conditions. This is a ruse to support logging and burning at the expense of unmanaged intact forests, the most resilient type of forests and the most threatened by management. While USDA is using wildfire prevention as an excuse, the reality is that this change is a clear and dangerous boon to the logging industry. Pristine forests, clean water, and important wildlife habitat are all imperiled by this plan. Unfragmented forests are essential for many increasingly threatened and endangered species of animals, plants, and fungi as well as serving climate and biodiversity needs of our rapidly deteriorating biomes. I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than 25 years The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm rather than protect our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today when U.S.F.S. first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as essential buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and with wildlands disappearing at an increasingly rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase, not decrease, wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.

I stand against the rescission of the Roadless Rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.

Good afternoon, I am writing to oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than 25 years. I submitted comments in support of the Roadless Rule during its creation in the late '90s. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was then. The U.S. Forest Service first enacted the Roadless Area Conservation Rule in 2001 with broad bipartisan support. That support still exists today. The rescinding of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule would harm, not help, our national forests. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. I live in Asheville, NC and am an avid whitewater kayaker (member of American Whitewater). National Forests here in Western North Carolina account of substantial portion of our region's revenue, largely because of tourism and outdoor recreation. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans (including our homes here in Asheville, NC) and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Additionally, the US Forest Service's own data has demonstrated that expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. There are over 300 million ignition sources living in the United States, that us, people. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.