Every public comment on the proposed rescission of the Roadless Rule, sorted by what it talks about. Pick a topic, then narrow by position, by how hard the comment is for the agency to set aside, or by how substantive it is. Each comment is shown in full, as filed. How comments are classified and scored is explained in the Comment Analysis.
We are dependent on the planet we live on. Humans continue to push it to the brink of habitability. We need to protect what still exists.
The Forest Service should keep the Roadless Rule intact exactly as it is, utilizing Alternative 1 in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned about the proposal to rescind the Roadless Rule.
Roadless areas provide important benefits to communities across the country, including clean drinking water, wildlife habitat, opportunities for outdoor recreation, and protection from the impacts of development. These lands are also an important part of the character and identity of many communities and provide places for people to hike, hunt, fish, camp, ski and otherwise enjoy the outdoors.
I am particularly concerned that rescinding the Roadless Rule could increase development, reduce recreation opportunities, affect wildlife habitat, increase wildfire risk, or harm local economies that depend on outdoor recreation.
The Roadless Rule has provided consistent, nationwide protections for these special places for decades. The Forest Service should not weaken those protections or open currently protected roadless lands to new development. I urge the Forest Service to pursue Alternative 1 and retain the existing Roadless Rule protections.
Sincerely,
Lindsey Rugg
607 W Summit Pl Chandler, AZ 85225-7798
AtlasShrugged17@gmail.com
The Forest Service should keep the Roadless Rule intact exactly as it is, utilizing Alternative 1 in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned about the proposal to rescind the Roadless Rule. It is so important to be vigilant in protecting these areas for future generations, and a rule change like this make no sense.
Roadless areas provide important benefits to communities across the country, including clean drinking water, wildlife habitat, opportunities for outdoor recreation, and protection from the impacts of development. These lands are also an important part of the character and identity of many communities and provide places for people to hike, hunt, fish, camp, ski and otherwise enjoy the outdoors.
I am particularly concerned that rescinding the Roadless Rule could increase development, reduce recreation opportunities, affect wildlife habitat, increase wildfire risk, or harm local economies that depend on outdoor recreation.
The Roadless Rule has provided consistent, nationwide protections for these special places for decades. The Forest Service should not weaken those protections or open currently protected roadless lands to new development. I urge the Forest Service to pursue Alternative 1 and retain the existing Roadless Rule protections.
Sincerely,
Mark Sauer
1315 Northcliff Trce Roswell, GA 30076-3277
mcsauer@yahoo.com
Small family — One letter sent by 3 to 9 people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.This comment stands for all 3 submissions in its group.
The Forest Service should keep the Roadless Rule intact exactly as it is, utilizing Alternative 1 in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned about the proposal to rescind the Roadless Rule.
Roadless areas provide important benefits to communities across the country, including clean drinking water, wildlife habitat, opportunities for outdoor recreation, and protection from the impacts of development. These lands are also an important part of the character and identity of many communities and provide places for people to hike, hunt, fish, camp, ski and otherwise enjoy the outdoors.
I am particularly concerned that rescinding the Roadless Rule could increase development, reduce recreation opportunities, affect wildlife habitat, increase wildfire risk, or harm local economies that depend on outdoor recreation. These areas need to remain undeveloped for the health of the ecosystem, humans, and the planet.
The Roadless Rule has provided consistent, nationwide protections for these special places for decades. The Forest Service should not weaken those protections or open currently protected roadless lands to new development. I urge the Forest Service to pursue Alternative 1 and retain the existing Roadless Rule protections.
Sincerely,
Steven Crock
4 Forrester Dr Manchester, MO 63011-4008
sncrock59@gmail.com
Small family — One letter sent by 3 to 9 people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 3 submissions in its group.
Small family — One letter sent by 3 to 9 people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 3 submissions in its group.
Small family — One letter sent by 3 to 9 people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.This comment stands for all 3 submissions in its group.