Read the comments.

Dear Deputy Secretary Vaden, I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g., stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Our natural resources were saved for a reason, today these needs are multiplied in their importance. We should be adding more land into conservation rather than allowing usage of the resources. It is a travesty to consider using the resources let alone for profit. This should NOT happen. Thank you.

Dear Deputy Secretary Vaden, Protect our lands, do what's right we only have one earth. It is our duty individually to take care of the land we have been given and protect it for our future generations. Keep the roadless rule in effect! Make your ancestors proud. I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g., stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Thank you.

Dear Deputy Secretary Vaden, The roadless rule was put in place to protect wild spaces. Once they are gone it will be impossible to return the land. I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g., stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Thank you.

Dear Deputy Secretary Vaden, We the people love our protected wild national forest lands. I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g., stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Thank you.

Dear Deputy Secretary Vaden, I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Our forests and roadless areas are important to Virginia. We need to maintain these areas as they provide critical resources for clean air and water for all of Virginia. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g., stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: We do not need more destruction of our public lands and national forests. The Lord only made this one earth. We have to stop taking away the sacredness of this land!!! This needs to be stopped!! I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: We do not need more roads in our forests for management. We do need more forest rangers. I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: We MUST not allow protected areas of wilderness to be opened to logging and commercial use. These areas are protected for a REASON: They serve as watersheds, wildlife habitats, and help to balance our ecosystem. Doing away with these protections is unacceptable, and honestly, unthinkable. I am ashamed to even have to point this out. I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: We need ALL of the roadless areas we can keep! Do not change the roadless areas conservation rule! It is important for generations to come and for our health and the health of many species of wildlife. I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: We need to protect our forests and wildlife areas for future generations. Our wildlife and forests are already disappearing at an alarming rate to to stupidity,climate change and greed. This will open it up yo even more. Trees effect our climate and we need them to survive. I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: What do you think about the research showing the majority of wildfires are started by humans ..near roads? Opening up the deep backwoods to more roads feels quite risky. Do you have an opposition to forest management near human communities rather than in the deep backcountry where most people do not go? DO you think that opening up the deep backwoods to the general public is counter intuitive? If not could you please explain why opening roads into our last remaining untouched wilderness would be beneficial for the land and the wildlife and us? Why couldnt we focus on more forest management near human communities? Ive read the research studies and I do not understand the benefits of rescinding the roadless rule. You will have a lot more humans being stupid in the forests if more roads are paved... where currently few humans access those areas. I would be very interested in hearing your rationale? I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: I want to keep the Roadless Rule because building more roads opens up the places where we have the richest biodiversity to non-native invasives that crowd out native plants. The Forest Service does not have adequate resources to eradicate these invasives once they get started. Some of them prevent new trees from growing. This rescission could permanently alter our forests in ways that are irreversible. I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Keep Hone Quarry sacred and quaint. Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Keep our public lands pristine and untouched. No roads. No construction. No mining. Hands Off our parks and forests. Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Keep the Roadless Rule intact, dang it! Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: I value clean drinking water for human consumption. I value clean drinking water for healthy fish habitat and because I am a fisher-woman. I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Keep the Roadless Rule in place. As a former researcher of invasive species, I am well aware of the dangers that creating new roads and developments in wilderness areas will create as wildfires become more likely and invasive species have access to previously undisturbed native habitats. Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Keep the roadless rule to ensure clean drinking water, protect wildlife habitat, risk of forest fires, strengthens local economies, prevent invasive species, and no more roads are needed. I enjoy hiking, and more roads would eliminate wild areas. Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: Opening up wilderness to roads inevitably leads to human development, loss of wildlife habitat, and degradation of water and air quality. We need to preserve our wild spaces. I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Thank you.

Dear Secretary Rollins: I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Please preserve our natural land and prevent new roads or logging to explain. Thank you.