Read the comments.

We are citizens of the United States. Like, most, people, We have a, high, regard, and, appreciation, for, wild, beauty of our forests, rivers, and, mountains. We want to preserve them, at, all, costs, for, all, life, including the wildlife that depends on them! Our family is, adamantly, OPPOSED to rescinding the "Roadless Rule"! Numerous studies, including opinions of the "Forest Service", confirm that will NOT accomplish any of the objectives that are promised for it! It will NOT help prevent, forest, fire, but, result in, additional, human, caused, forest, fire; it will degrade our, precious, water, both, in quantity, and, quality; it is predicted to result in, fewer, outdoor, recreationists, NOT more; and, will result in a, tremendous, loss to the quantity, and, quality, of, wildlife, habitat! There is, simply, NO, reasonable, rationale for it! Not only will the, roadless, areas and their wild, denizens be harmed, many of our, roadless, areas surround, or, are adjacent to, federal, Wilderness, areas, and, act as a buffer to their protection, and, will also therefore, be degraded, and, harmed. To degrade the, roadless, areas would be to degrade the qualities of the Wilderness!

I am a citizen of the United States [or Utah or Wyoming] and have lived here most of my long life. Like most people of Utah, I have a high regard for wild beauty of our forests, rivers, and mountains. I want to preserve them at all costs for all life, including the wildlife that depends on them. I am adamantly opposed to rescinding the Roadless Rule. Numerous studies, including opinions of the Forest Service confirm that will not accomplish any of the objectives that are promised for it. It will not help prevent forest fire but result in additional human caused forest fire; it will degrade our precious water, both in quantity and quality; it is predicted to result in fewer outdoor recreationists, not more; and will result in a tremendous loss to the quantity and quality of wildlife habitat. There is simply no reasonable rationale for it. Not only will the roadless areas and their wild denizens be harmed, many of our roadless areas surround or are adjacent to federal wilderness areas and act as a buffer to their protection and will also therefore be degraded and harmed. To degrade the roadless areas would be to degrade the qualities of the wilderness.

I am a citizen of the United States [or Utah or Wyoming] and have lived here most of my long life. Like most people of Utah, I have a high regard for wild beauty of our forests, rivers, and mountains. I want to preserve them at all costs for all life, including the wildlife that depends on them. I am adamantly opposed to rescinding the Roadless Rule. Numerous studies, including opinions of the Forest Service confirm that will not accomplish any of the objectives that are promised for it. It will not help prevent forest fire but result in additional human caused forest fire; it will degrade our precious water, both in quantity and quality; it is predicted to result in fewer outdoor recreationists, not more; and will result in a tremendous loss to the quantity and quality of wildlife habitat. There is simply no reasonable rationale for it. Not only will the roadless areas and their wild denizens be harmed, many of our roadless areas surround or are adjacent to federal wilderness areas and act as a buffer to their protection and will also therefore be degraded and harmed. To degrade the roadless areas would be to degrade the qualities of the wilderness. Sincerely, Kirk Robinson, PhD Executive Director Western Wildlife Conservancy Salt Lake City, UT 84105