Read the comments.

Dear Forest Service, In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. And I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide. Sincerely, Laura Hanks

In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. And I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide. Our national parks and forests are part of what makes this country special na dso majestic. Once they are gone they are gone. Future generations deserve to have them.

In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. Further, I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. Increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. Central Oregon has suffered the loss of natural areas, structures, homes, and lives due to wildfires and increasing the chance for fires is irresponsible. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide.

In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. And I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide. This is a misguided attempt to rescind protections that protect much of central oregons ecosystems and has wider impacts on the folks who reside here. Please take comments on this seriously and reconsider this.

In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. This is important to me because here in Central Oregon, it’s a way of life. Being connected and having wild places available is what makes it special. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. And I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide.

Dear Administration. I cannot believe I’m having to speak up around protecting something that has been natural to me and my children, since we were born - from the exploitation of my own government. I’m aghast and saddened, but hopeful this can be stopped before moving forward. In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. And I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide.

Hello, I live in Central Oregon. In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. And I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide.

Please reconsider this errant and misguided choice. In Central Oregon alone, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. And I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide. We must preserve our wild places for the health and well being of all living things, including you and I, and future generations of humans.

No one wants this and those who adhere to this administration's crap agendas will be held responsible. Figure it out. In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. And I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide.

In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. And I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide. I plead with the agency to rescind this rule. Oregon and the US doesn't need more wildfires. Every year they are closer to our home, in a rural town of 35k people. It destroys habitat for wildlife and our mule deer population is already desperately struggling. This is a poor outcome for our ecosystem and hunting outlook. The roadless rule MUST be rescinded to protect our wilderness areas!

I have lived in the Pacific Northwest for half a century. In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. And I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide.

In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. And I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increase risk of wildfire and roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. The USDA already manages 380,000 miles of roads, and it struggles to manage those effectively. It is clear that we don't need more roads, we need to protect our wild spaces. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide.

I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. These areas are essential for wildfire mitigation, wildlife, and recreation. I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. These are treasured natural spaces for future generations to enjoy. In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide.

I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. Climate change and wildfire are NOT reasons for opening up roadless areas. The science says the opposite! I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide.

I am strongly opposed to abandoning the roadless area rule that has protected our wilderness areas for decades. As a US citizen who wants my children to grow up in our beautiful country, let's protect our legacy and abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate, alter, or weaken the Roadless Rule, which would reduce protections across nearly 45 million acres of public lands managed by the US Forest Service nationwide. I urge the agency to take the No Action alternative and maintain full Roadless Rule protections for America's wild forests. In Central Oregon, nearly 200,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas in the Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest, and Crooked River National Grassland have protected wildlife habitat, boosted local economies, and ensured clean drinking water for nearly 25 years. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is impractical. In Central Oregon, opening roadless areas to logging will not yield a meaningful economic return. Instead, increasing roads will damage recreation areas, scenic views, and wildlife habitat, and eliminate the core reasons people choose to live, work, and recreate in Central Oregon. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is dangerous. More roads also mean more fires: research shows wildfires are four times more likely to ignite near roads. More roads will also degrade drinking watersheds. In Central Oregon, the Bend Municipal Watershed begins in the headwaters of Bridge Creek and Tumalo Creek in the Deschutes National Forest. Losing Roadless protections will threaten water quality for fish species and the drinking water supply for more than 100,000 people in Bend, and tens of millions of people across the country. Rescinding the Roadless Rule makes our forests less resilient. Roads spread invasive species, disrupt wildlife corridors, and erode forest resilience in the face of rapidly shifting wildfire regimes. Let’s abandon this misguided effort to repeal the Roadless Rule and instead strengthen protections for America’s roadless forests for all the clean water, climate resilience, recreation, and habitat for biodiversity they provide.