The Public Record · Docket FS-2025-0001

Read the comments.

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.

1 unique comments1 submissions
Position
  • Opposes rescission 100.0%
Answerability
  • A1 strong 0
  • A2 moderate 0
  • A3 weak 0
  • A0 none 1
Substance /24
Median 6middle half 6–6 · 1 scored
Topics raised
Count
Position
Answerability
Substance /24
Order
1 unique comment naming Gallatin National Forest signed from MT · showing 1–1Clear all filters
  1. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 6/24Sep 17, 2026FS-2025-0001-443086
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
    Dear Secretary Rollins, I strongly oppose revising the U.S. Forest Service Travel Management Rule so that motorized access is open unless designated closed instead of closed unless open. The justification for the rule change on the summary at Regulations.gov is that the proposed rule change provides responsible officials with flexibility to better guide management. Forest Service officials already have lots of flexibility in managing local issues under the Roadless Rule. This is especially important now because water is increasingly scarce, wildfires more destructive, climate change is ongoing, and pressure on public land is increasing. The Roadless Rule has worked well for the last 20 years and enabled citizens to work out reasonable compromises on motorized access. There is no reason to think that rescinding the rule will improve this situation. Ive lived in Montana for over fifty years, and I hike, camp, and hunt in Custer Gallatin National Forest. I used to fly fish, but I dont do that anymore because of a bad right shoulder. In the 1990's I hunted on private land more often than not. It was easy to talk to ranchers and get permission to hunt on their land. Those days are gone. There is now much less hunting access on private land. Even though hunting pressure is much greater than it used to be in Custer Gallatin National Forest, thats where I usually hunt. I walk in and if Im successful, drag out. I want places I can do that without competing with ATVs and motorcycles. One time, a number of years ago, before the Roadless Rule, I stalked a buck for an hour or so and was finally getting close enough for a good shot (I hunt with an open sight). Just then a couple of ATVs came over a grassy hill and away went my buck. I didnt like that. When I hunt, I want to be out there by myself without unexpected OHVs. Ive never had any problems with people riding ATVs or motorcycles, and as far as I know theyve never had any problems with me. But Im aware that one difficulty with motorized users. A noticeable number dont respect the rules. Two summers ago I saw two motorcycles on near Hyalite Lake on a day when that timeshare trail was not open to motorcycles. Ive seen tread makes deep in mud on the Sky Rim Trail in Yellowstone along the border with Gallatin-Custer . More roads means more abuse. For years my wife and I and my daughter and I have hiked in national forests. When we do that, we like to be alone with the sounds of nature around us and not be interrupted by motors. Fewer places will be like that if the Roadless Rule is rescinded. Please adopt the No Action alternative for the Final Rule. Respectfully, Jim Allard Bozeman, MT 59715
    Full analysis of this comment →

Keep learning. Keep speaking up.The Roadless Rule depends on public engagement. Share what you've learned.

© 2026 roadless.org - Defending America's Last Wild Forests

Privacy Policy|Questions or concerns? noroads@roadless.org|Follow us: @defendroadless