Read the comments.

I write to you in strong opposition to USDA's proposal to eliminate, weaken, or alter the 2001 Roadless Rule. Rescinding this rule risks intact forests critical to tackling the climate crisis and providing clean air and water to millions of people. I urge the agency to take Alternative 1, the “No Action” alternative, and leave current roadless protections in place. The Roadless Rule conserves wild areas for their ecological, recreational, and cultural value by protecting more than 58 million acres of our national forests from harmful logging and roadbuilding. The Rule is tremendously popular. Over the last three decades, millions of people from across the country have weighed in to support it. The Roadless Rule was created under the most extensive public comment process in the history of US federal rulemaking, and with 95% of commenters supporting protections. Last year, when the administration first announced this attempted rollback, over 600,000 people made their voices heard, and over 99% were in OPPOSITION to this administration's attempted rollbacks! The agency's proposal is also costly to American taxpayers. It's extremely expensive to build new logging roads in remote backcountry areas, plus the long-term maintenance for these rarely, if ever, used roads. The economics don't make sense. Meanwhile, these public lands support a multi-billion-dollar outdoor recreation industry that would be severely impacted by logging and development. This bedrock environmental protection preserves some of the most intact and resilient wildlands that provide clean drinking water for 1 in 10 Oregonians, and millions of Americans nationwide. These public lands also provide wildlife habitat, boundless recreation, and protect sacred sites and traditional foods for Indigenous communities. We must uphold the Roadless Rule to protect these public lands now and for future generations. Building roads and clearcutting forests leave permanent damage to the landscape and ecosystem. Research also shows that wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads, so more roads means more wildfires. Oregonians cannot afford more wildfires-- our communities are suffering too much already. Fighting fires in remote areas is also dangerous, expensive, and takes resources from protecting homes and communities. In addition to increased wildfire risk, roads also increase the spread of invasive species which further jeopardize our forests and all they provide for humans and wildlife alike. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has been a cornerstone of sound forest management, balancing ecological, economic, and cultural values. Weakening or repealing it would be a grave mistake. I urge USDA to take No Action on the Roadless Rule to keep current protections in place. Thank you for your consideration,

Dear Secretary Brooke Rollins, I write to you in strong opposition to USDA's proposal to eliminate, weaken, or alter the 2001 Roadless Rule. Rescinding this rule risks intact forests critical to tackling the climate crisis and providing clean air and water to millions of people. I urge the agency to take Alternative 1, the “No Action” alternative, and leave current roadless protections in place. The Roadless Rule conserves wild areas for their ecological, recreational, and cultural value by protecting more than 58 million acres of our national forests from harmful logging and roadbuilding. The Rule is tremendously popular. Over the last three decades, millions of people from across the country have weighed in to support it. The Roadless Rule was created under the most extensive public comment process in the history of US federal rulemaking, and with 95% of commenters supporting protections. Last year, when the administration first announced this attempted rollback, over 600,000 people made their voices heard, and over 99% were in OPPOSITION to this administration's attempted rollbacks! These trees are protectors of our air, water, and climate. To permit their exploitation by ending the roadless rule opens all the citizens of the US and the world to dangers that we can't even imagine. Mankind has brought us to the place we are now at and mankind is the only species that can save us from causing our own destruction. Leave the Roadless Rule intact, please. The agency's proposal is also costly to American taxpayers. It's extremely expensive to build new logging roads in remote backcountry areas, plus the long-term maintenance for these rarely, if ever, used roads. The economics don't make sense. Meanwhile, these public lands support a multi-billion-dollar outdoor recreation industry that would be severely impacted by logging and development. This bedrock environmental protection preserves some of the most intact and resilient wildlands that provide clean drinking water for 1 in 10 Oregonians, and millions of Americans nationwide. These public lands also provide wildlife habitat, boundless recreation, and protect sacred sites and traditional foods for Indigenous communities. We must uphold the Roadless Rule to protect these public lands now and for future generations. Building roads and clearcutting forests leave permanent damage to the landscape and ecosystem. Research also shows that wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads, so more roads means more wildfires. Oregonians cannot afford more wildfires-- our communities are suffering too much already. Fighting fires in remote areas is also dangerous, expensive, and takes resources from protecting homes and communities. In addition to increased wildfire risk, roads also increase the spread of invasive species which further jeopardize our forests and all they provide for humans and wildlife alike. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has been a cornerstone of sound forest management, balancing ecological, economic, and cultural values. Weakening or repealing it would be a grave mistake. I urge USDA to take No Action on the Roadless Rule to keep current protections in place. Thank you for your consideration,

Dear Secretary Brooke Rollins, I write to you in strong opposition to USDA's proposal to eliminate, weaken, or alter the 2001 Roadless Rule. Rescinding this rule risks intact forests critical to tackling the climate crisis and providing clean air and water to millions of people. I urge the agency to take Alternative 1, the “No Action” alternative, and leave current roadless protections in place. The Roadless Rule conserves wild areas for their ecological, recreational, and cultural value by protecting more than 58 million acres of our national forests from harmful logging and roadbuilding. The Rule is tremendously popular. Over the last three decades, millions of people from across the country have weighed in to support it. The Roadless Rule was created under the most extensive public comment process in the history of US federal rulemaking, and with 95% of commenters supporting protections. Last year, when the administration first announced this attempted rollback, over 600,000 people made their voices heard, and over 99% were in OPPOSITION to this administration's attempted rollbacks! The agency's proposal is also costly to American taxpayers. It's extremely expensive to build new logging roads in remote backcountry areas, plus the long-term maintenance for these rarely, if ever, used roads. The economics don't make sense. Meanwhile, these public lands support a multi-billion-dollar outdoor recreation industry that would be severely impacted by logging and development. This bedrock environmental protection preserves some of the most intact and resilient wildlands that provide clean drinking water for 1 in 10 Oregonians, and millions of Americans nationwide. These public lands also provide wildlife habitat, boundless recreation, and protect sacred sites and traditional foods for Indigenous communities. We must uphold the Roadless Rule to protect these public lands now and for future generations. Building roads and clearcutting forests leave permanent damage to the landscape and ecosystem. Research also shows that wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads, so more roads means more wildfires. Oregonians cannot afford more wildfires-- our communities are suffering too much already. Fighting fires in remote areas is also dangerous, expensive, and takes resources from protecting homes and communities. In addition to increased wildfire risk, roads also increase the spread of invasive species which further jeopardize our forests and all they provide for humans and wildlife alike. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has been a cornerstone of sound forest management, balancing ecological, economic, and cultural values. Weakening or repealing it would be a grave mistake. I urge USDA to take No Action on the Roadless Rule to keep current protections in place. Thank you for making a prudent decision.

Dear Secretary Brooke Rollins, I write to you in strong opposition to USDA's proposal to eliminate, weaken, or alter the 2001 Roadless Rule. Rescinding this rule risks intact forests critical to tackling the climate crisis and providing clean air and water to millions of people. I urge the agency to take Alternative 1, the “No Action” alternative, and leave current roadless protections in place. The Roadless Rule conserves wild areas for their ecological, recreational, and cultural value by protecting more than 58 million acres of our national forests from harmful logging and roadbuilding. The Rule is tremendously popular. Over the last three decades, millions of people from across the country have weighed in to support it. The Roadless Rule was created under the most extensive public comment process in the history of US federal rulemaking, and with 95% of commenters supporting protections. Last year, when the administration first announced this attempted rollback, over 600,000 people made their voices heard, and over 99% were in OPPOSITION to this administration's attempted rollbacks! The agency's proposal is also costly to American taxpayers. It's extremely expensive to build new logging roads in remote backcountry areas, plus the long-term maintenance for these rarely, if ever, used roads. The economics don't make sense. Meanwhile, these public lands support a multi-billion-dollar outdoor recreation industry that would be severely impacted by logging and development. This bedrock environmental protection preserves some of the most intact and resilient wildlands that provide clean drinking water for 1 in 10 Oregonians, and millions of Americans nationwide. These public lands also provide wildlife habitat, boundless recreation, and protect sacred sites and traditional foods for Indigenous communities. We must uphold the Roadless Rule to protect these public lands now and for future generations. Building roads and clearcutting forests leave permanent damage to the landscape and ecosystem. Research also shows that wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads, so more roads means more wildfires. Oregonians cannot afford more wildfires-- our communities are suffering too much already. Fighting fires in remote areas is also dangerous, expensive, and takes resources from protecting homes and communities. In addition to increased wildfire risk, roads also increase the spread of invasive species which further jeopardize our forests and all they provide for humans and wildlife alike. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has been a cornerstone of sound forest management, balancing ecological, economic, and cultural values. Weakening or repealing it would be a grave mistake. I urge USDA to take No Action on the Roadless Rule to keep current protections in place. Thank you for your consideration, Powered by NGP VAN

ubject: Docket: FS-2025-0001 - Keep the Roadless Rule intact Dear Secretary Brooke Rollins, I write to you in strong opposition to USDA's proposal to eliminate, weaken, or alter the 2001 Roadless Rule. Rescinding this rule risks intact forests critical to tackling the climate crisis and providing clean air and water to millions of people. I urge the agency to take Alternative 1, the “No Action” alternative, and leave current roadless protections in place. The Roadless Rule conserves wild areas for their ecological, recreational, and cultural value by protecting more than 58 million acres of our national forests from harmful logging and roadbuilding. The Rule is tremendously popular. Over the last three decades, millions of people from across the country have weighed in to support it. The Roadless Rule was created under the most extensive public comment process in the history of US federal rulemaking, and with 95% of commenters supporting protections. Last year, when the administration first announced this attempted rollback, over 600,000 people made their voices heard, and over 99% were in OPPOSITION to this administration's attempted rollbacks! The agency's proposal is also costly to American taxpayers. It's extremely expensive to build new logging roads in remote backcountry areas, plus the long-term maintenance for these rarely, if ever, used roads. The economics don't make sense. Meanwhile, these public lands support a multi-billion-dollar outdoor recreation industry that would be severely impacted by logging and development. This bedrock environmental protection preserves some of the most intact and resilient wildlands that provide clean drinking water for 1 in 10 Oregonians, and millions of Americans nationwide. These public lands also provide wildlife habitat, boundless recreation, and protect sacred sites and traditional foods for Indigenous communities. We must uphold the Roadless Rule to protect these public lands now and for future generations. Building roads and clearcutting forests leave permanent damage to the landscape and ecosystem. Research also shows that wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads, so more roads means more wildfires. Oregonians cannot afford more wildfires-- our communities are suffering too much already. Fighting fires in remote areas is also dangerous, expensive, and takes resources from protecting homes and communities. In addition to increased wildfire risk, roads also increase the spread of invasive species which further jeopardize our forests and all they provide for humans and wildlife alike. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has been a cornerstone of sound forest management, balancing ecological, economic, and cultural values. Weakening or repealing it would be a grave mistake. I urge USDA to take No Action on the Roadless Rule to keep current protections in place.

Subject: Docket: FS-2025-0001 - Keep the Roadless Rule intact Dear Secretary Brooke Rollins, I write to you in strong opposition to USDA's proposal to eliminate, weaken, or alter the 2001 Roadless Rule. Rescinding this rule risks intact forests critical to tackling the climate crisis and providing clean air and water to millions of people. I urge the agency to take Alternative 1, the “No Action” alternative, and leave current roadless protections in place. The Roadless Rule conserves wild areas for their ecological, recreational, and cultural value by protecting more than 58 million acres of our national forests from harmful logging and roadbuilding. The Rule is tremendously popular. Over the last three decades, millions of people from across the country have weighed in to support it. The Roadless Rule was created under the most extensive public comment process in the history of US federal rulemaking, and with 95% of commenters supporting protections. Last year, when the administration first announced this attempted rollback, over 600,000 people made their voices heard, and over 99% were in OPPOSITION to this administration's attempted rollbacks! The agency's proposal is also costly to American taxpayers. It's extremely expensive to build new logging roads in remote backcountry areas, plus the long-term maintenance for these rarely, if ever, used roads. The economics don't make sense. Meanwhile, these public lands support a multi-billion-dollar outdoor recreation industry that would be severely impacted by logging and development. This bedrock environmental protection preserves some of the most intact and resilient wildlands that provide clean drinking water for 1 in 10 Oregonians, and millions of Americans nationwide. These public lands also provide wildlife habitat, boundless recreation, and protect sacred sites and traditional foods for Indigenous communities. We must uphold the Roadless Rule to protect these public lands now and for future generations. Building roads and clearcutting forests leave permanent damage to the landscape and ecosystem. Research also shows that wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads, so more roads means more wildfires. Oregonians cannot afford more wildfires-- our communities are suffering too much already. Fighting fires in remote areas is also dangerous, expensive, and takes resources from protecting homes and communities. In addition to increased wildfire risk, roads also increase the spread of invasive species which further jeopardize our forests and all they provide for humans and wildlife alike. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has been a cornerstone of sound forest management, balancing ecological, economic, and cultural values. Weakening or repealing it would be a grave mistake. I urge USDA to take No Action on the Roadless Rule to keep current protections in place. Thank you for your consideration, MT

Dear Secretary Brooke Rollins, I write to you in strong opposition to USDA's proposal to eliminate, weaken, or alter the 2001 Roadless Rule. Rescinding this rule risks intact forests critical to tackling the climate crisis and providing clean air and water to millions of people. I urge the agency to take Alternative 1, the “No Action” alternative, and leave current roadless protections in place. The Roadless Rule conserves wild areas for their ecological, recreational, and cultural value by protecting more than 58 million acres of our national forests from harmful logging and roadbuilding. The Rule is tremendously popular. Over the last three decades, millions of people from across the country have weighed in to support it. The Roadless Rule was created under the most extensive public comment process in the history of US federal rulemaking, and with 95% of commenters supporting protections. Last year, when the administration first announced this attempted rollback, over 600,000 people made their voices heard, and over 99% were in OPPOSITION to this administration's attempted rollbacks! The agency's proposal is also costly to American taxpayers. It's extremely expensive to build new logging roads in remote backcountry areas, plus the long-term maintenance for these rarely, if ever, used roads. The economics don't make sense. Meanwhile, these public lands support a multi-billion-dollar outdoor recreation industry that would be severely impacted by logging and development. This bedrock environmental protection preserves some of the most intact and resilient wildlands that provide clean drinking water for 1 in 10 Oregonians, and millions of Americans nationwide. These public lands also provide wildlife habitat, boundless recreation, and protect sacred sites and traditional foods for Indigenous communities. We must uphold the Roadless Rule to protect these public lands now and for future generations. Building roads and clearcutting forests leave permanent damage to the landscape and ecosystem. Research also shows that wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads, so more roads means more wildfires. Oregonians cannot afford more wildfires-- our communities are suffering too much already. Fighting fires in remote areas is also dangerous, expensive, and takes resources from protecting homes and communities. In addition to increased wildfire risk, roads also increase the spread of invasive species which further jeopardize our forests and all they provide for humans and wildlife alike. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has been a cornerstone of sound forest management, balancing ecological, economic, and cultural values. Weakening or repealing it would be a grave mistake. I urge USDA to take No Action on the Roadless Rule to keep current protections in place. Thank you for your consideration, Jennifer Will

Dear Secretary Brooke Rollins, I write to you in strong opposition to USDA's proposal to eliminate, weaken, or alter the 2001 Roadless Rule. Rescinding this rule risks intact forests critical to tackling the climate crisis and providing clean air and water to millions of people. I urge the agency to take Alternative 1, the “No Action” alternative, and leave current roadless protections in place. The Roadless Rule conserves wild areas for their ecological, recreational, and cultural value by protecting more than 58 million acres of our national forests from harmful logging and roadbuilding. The Rule is tremendously popular. Over the last three decades, millions of people from across the country have weighed in to support it. The Roadless Rule was created under the most extensive public comment process in the history of US federal rulemaking, and with 95% of commenters supporting protections. Last year, when the administration first announced this attempted rollback, over 600,000 people made their voices heard, and over 99% were in OPPOSITION to this administration's attempted rollbacks! The agency's proposal is also costly to American taxpayers. It's extremely expensive to build new logging roads in remote backcountry areas, plus the long-term maintenance for these rarely, if ever, used roads. The economics don't make sense. Meanwhile, these public lands support a multi-billion-dollar outdoor recreation industry that would be severely impacted by logging and development. This bedrock environmental protection preserves some of the most intact and resilient wildlands that provide clean drinking water for 1 in 10 Oregonians, and millions of Americans nationwide. These public lands also provide wildlife habitat, boundless recreation, and protect sacred sites and traditional foods for Indigenous communities. We must uphold the Roadless Rule to protect these public lands now and for future generations. Building roads and clearcutting forests leave permanent damage to the landscape and ecosystem. Research also shows that wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads, so more roads means more wildfires. Oregonians cannot afford more wildfires-- our communities are suffering too much already. Fighting fires in remote areas is also dangerous, expensive, and takes resources from protecting homes and communities. In addition to increased wildfire risk, roads also increase the spread of invasive species which further jeopardize our forests and all they provide for humans and wildlife alike. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has been a cornerstone of sound forest management, balancing ecological, economic, and cultural values. Weakening or repealing it would be a grave mistake. I urge USDA to take No Action on the Roadless Rule to keep current protections in place. Thank you for your consideration, Kaleigh Lucas Portland, OR 97211

In my youth, I have seen the destruction from clearcut forests, fires, and homes destroyed by massive mud slides because the timber companies were allowed to clearcut our beloved redwood forests. DO NOT allow this to happen again!!! I write to you in strong opposition to USDA's proposal to eliminate, weaken, or alter the 2001 Roadless Rule. Rescinding this rule risks intact forests critical to tackling the climate crisis and providing clean air and water to millions of people. I urge the agency to take Alternative 1, the “No Action” alternative, and leave current roadless protections in place. The Roadless Rule conserves wild areas for their ecological, recreational, and cultural value by protecting more than 58 million acres of our national forests from harmful logging and roadbuilding. The Rule is tremendously popular. Over the last three decades, millions of people from across the country have weighed in to support it. The Roadless Rule was created under the most extensive public comment process in the history of US federal rulemaking, and with 95% of commenters supporting protections. Last year, when the administration first announced this attempted rollback, over 600,000 people made their voices heard, and over 99% were in OPPOSITION to this administration's attempted rollbacks! The agency's proposal is also costly to American taxpayers. It's extremely expensive to build new logging roads in remote backcountry areas, plus the long-term maintenance for these rarely, if ever, used roads. The economics don't make sense. Meanwhile, these public lands support a multi-billion-dollar outdoor recreation industry that would be severely impacted by logging and development. This bedrock environmental protection preserves some of the most intact and resilient wildlands that provide clean drinking water for 1 in 10 Oregonians, and millions of Americans nationwide. These public lands also provide wildlife habitat, boundless recreation, and protect sacred sites and traditional foods for Indigenous communities. We must uphold the Roadless Rule to protect these public lands now and for future generations. Building roads and clearcutting forests leave permanent damage to the landscape and ecosystem. Research also shows that wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads, so more roads mean more wildfires. Oregonians cannot afford more wildfires-- our communities are suffering too much already. Fighting fires in remote areas is also dangerous, expensive, and takes resources from protecting homes and communities. In addition to increased wildfire risk, roads also increase the spread of invasive species which further jeopardize our forests and all they provide for humans and wildlife alike. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has been a cornerstone of sound forest management, balancing ecological, economic, and cultural values. Weakening or repealing it would be a grave mistake. I urge USDA to take No Action on the Roadless Rule to keep current protections in place. Thank you for your consideration,

Subject: Docket: FS-2025-0001 - Keep the Roadless Rule intact Dear Secretary Brooke Rollins, I write to you in strong OPPOSITION to USDA's proposal to eliminate, weaken, or alter the 2001 Roadless Rule. Rescinding this rule risks intact forests critical to tackling the climate crisis and providing clean air and water to millions of people. I urge the agency to take Alternative 1, the “No Action” alternative, and leave current roadless protections in place. The Roadless Rule conserves wild areas for their ecological, recreational, and cultural value by protecting more than 58 million acres of our national forests from harmful logging and roadbuilding. The Rule is tremendously popular. Over the last three decades, millions of people from across the country have weighed in to support it. The Roadless Rule was created under the most extensive public comment process in the history of US federal rulemaking, and with 95% of commenters supporting protections. Last year, when the administration first announced this attempted rollback, over 600,000 people made their voices heard, and over 99% were in OPPOSITION to this administration's attempted rollbacks! The agency's proposal is also costly to American taxpayers. It's extremely expensive to build new logging roads in remote backcountry areas, plus the long-term maintenance for these rarely, if ever, used roads. The economics don't make sense. Meanwhile, these public lands support a multi-billion-dollar outdoor recreation industry that would be severely impacted by logging and development. This bedrock environmental protection preserves some of the most intact and resilient wildlands that provide clean drinking water for 1 in 10 Oregonians, and millions of Americans nationwide. These public lands also provide wildlife habitat, boundless recreation, and protect sacred sites and traditional foods for Indigenous communities. We must uphold the Roadless Rule to protect these public lands now and for future generations. Building roads and clearcutting forests leave permanent damage to the landscape and ecosystem. Research also shows that wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads, so more roads means more wildfires. Oregonians cannot afford more wildfires-- our communities are suffering too much already. Fighting fires in remote areas is also dangerous, expensive, and takes resources from protecting homes and communities. In addition to increased wildfire risk, roads also increase the spread of invasive species which further jeopardize our forests and all they provide for humans and wildlife alike. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has been a cornerstone of sound forest management, balancing ecological, economic, and cultural values. Weakening or repealing it would be a grave mistake. I strongly urge USDA to take NO Action on the Roadless Rule to keep current protections in place. Thank you for your consideration.

Dear Secretary Brooke Rollins, I write to you in strong opposition to USDA's proposal to eliminate, weaken, or alter the 2001 Roadless Rule. Rescinding this rule risks intact forests critical to tackling the climate crisis and providing clean air and water to millions of people. I urge the agency to take Alternative 1, the “No Action” alternative, and leave current roadless protections in place. The Roadless Rule conserves wild areas for their ecological, recreational, and cultural value by protecting more than 58 million acres of our national forests from harmful logging and roadbuilding. The Rule is tremendously popular. Over the last three decades, millions of people from across the country have weighed in to support it. The Roadless Rule was created under the most extensive public comment process in the history of US federal rulemaking, and with 95% of commenters supporting protections. Last year, when the administration first announced this attempted rollback, over 600,000 people made their voices heard, and over 99% were in OPPOSITION to this administration's attempted rollbacks! The agency's proposal is also costly to American taxpayers. It's extremely expensive to build new logging roads in remote backcountry areas, plus the long-term maintenance for these rarely, if ever, used roads. The economics don't make sense. Meanwhile, these public lands support a multi-billion-dollar outdoor recreation industry that would be severely impacted by logging and development. This bedrock environmental protection preserves some of the most intact and resilient wildlands that provide clean drinking water for 1 in 10 Oregonians, and millions of Americans nationwide. These public lands also provide wildlife habitat, boundless recreation, and protect sacred sites and traditional foods for Indigenous communities. We must uphold the Roadless Rule to protect these public lands now and for future generations. Building roads and clearcutting forests leave permanent damage to the landscape and ecosystem. Research also shows that wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads, so more roads means more wildfires. Oregonians cannot afford more wildfires-- our communities are suffering too much already. Fighting fires in remote areas is also dangerous, expensive, and takes resources from protecting homes and communities. In addition to increased wildfire risk, roads also increase the spread of invasive species which further jeopardize our forests and all they provide for humans and wildlife alike. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has been a cornerstone of sound forest management, balancing ecological, economic, and cultural values. Weakening or repealing it would be a grave mistake. I urge USDA to take No Action on the Roadless Rule to keep current protections in place. Thank you for your consideration, Cheryl Fergeson West Haven, UT 84401

Subject: Docket: FS-2025-0001 - Keep the Roadless Rule intact Dear Secretary Brooke Rollins, I write to you in strong opposition to USDA's proposal to eliminate, weaken, or alter the 2001 Roadless Rule. Rescinding this rule risks intact forests critical to tackling the climate crisis and providing clean air and water to millions of people. I urge the agency to take Alternative 1, the “No Action” alternative, and leave current roadless protections in place. The Roadless Rule conserves wild areas for their ecological, recreational, and cultural value by protecting more than 58 million acres of our national forests from harmful logging and roadbuilding. The Rule is tremendously popular. Over the last three decades, millions of people from across the country have weighed in to support it. The Roadless Rule was created under the most extensive public comment process in the history of US federal rulemaking, and with 95% of commenters supporting protections. Last year, when the administration first announced this attempted rollback, over 600,000 people made their voices heard, and over 99% were in OPPOSITION to this administration's attempted rollbacks! The agency's proposal is also costly to American taxpayers. It's extremely expensive to build new logging roads in remote backcountry areas, plus the long-term maintenance for these rarely, if ever, used roads. The economics don't make sense. Meanwhile, these public lands support a multi-billion-dollar outdoor recreation industry that would be severely impacted by logging and development. This bedrock environmental protection preserves some of the most intact and resilient wildlands that provide clean drinking water for 1 in 10 Oregonians, and millions of Americans nationwide. These public lands also provide wildlife habitat, boundless recreation, and protect sacred sites and traditional foods for Indigenous communities. We must uphold the Roadless Rule to protect these public lands now and for future generations. Building roads and clearcutting forests leave permanent damage to the landscape and ecosystem. Research also shows that wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads, so more roads means more wildfires. Oregonians cannot afford more wildfires-- our communities are suffering too much already. Fighting fires in remote areas is also dangerous, expensive, and takes resources from protecting homes and communities. In addition to increased wildfire risk, roads also increase the spread of invasive species which further jeopardize our forests and all they provide for humans and wildlife alike. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has been a cornerstone of sound forest management, balancing ecological, economic, and cultural values. Weakening or repealing it would be a grave mistake. I urge USDA to take No Action on the Roadless Rule to keep current protections in place. Thank you for your consideration, Julie Fiene Yeager, MD

Subject: Docket: FS-2025-0001 - Keep the Roadless Rule intact Dear Secretary Brooke Rollins, I write to you in strong opposition to USDA's proposal to eliminate, weaken, or alter the 2001 Roadless Rule. Rescinding this rule risks intact forests critical to tackling the climate crisis and providing clean air and water to millions of people. I urge the agency to take Alternative 1, the “No Action” alternative, and leave current roadless protections in place. The Roadless Rule conserves wild areas for their ecological, recreational, and cultural value by protecting more than 58 million acres of our national forests from harmful logging and roadbuilding. The Rule is tremendously popular. Over the last three decades, millions of people from across the country have weighed in to support it. The Roadless Rule was created under the most extensive public comment process in the history of US federal rulemaking, and with 95% of commenters supporting protections. Last year, when the administration first announced this attempted rollback, over 600,000 people made their voices heard, and over 99% were in OPPOSITION to this administration's attempted rollbacks! The agency's proposal is also costly to American taxpayers. It's extremely expensive to build new logging roads in remote backcountry areas, plus the long-term maintenance for these rarely, if ever, used roads. The economics don't make sense. Meanwhile, these public lands support a multi-billion-dollar outdoor recreation industry that would be severely impacted by logging and development. This bedrock environmental protection preserves some of the most intact and resilient wildlands that provide clean drinking water for 1 in 10 Oregonians, and millions of Americans nationwide. These public lands also provide wildlife habitat, boundless recreation, and protect sacred sites and traditional foods for Indigenous communities. We must uphold the Roadless Rule to protect these public lands now and for future generations. Building roads and clearcutting forests leave permanent damage to the landscape and ecosystem. Research also shows that wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads, so more roads means more wildfires. Oregonians cannot afford more wildfires-- our communities are suffering too much already. Fighting fires in remote areas is also dangerous, expensive, and takes resources from protecting homes and communities. In addition to increased wildfire risk, roads also increase the spread of invasive species which further jeopardize our forests and all they provide for humans and wildlife alike. For more than two decades, the Roadless Rule has been a cornerstone of sound forest management, balancing ecological, economic, and cultural values. Weakening or repealing it would be a grave mistake. I urge USDA to take No Action on the Roadless Rule to keep current protections in place. Thank you for your consideration, Adrian Peter Bergeron

I write to you in strong opposition to USDA's proposal to eliminate, weaken, or alter the 2001 Roadless Rule.