Read the comments.

Re: Rescission of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule, Docket FS-2025-0001 The Heavenly Father owns everything. He spoke and said let there be light. He spoke and said let's make Mankind in my image in my likeness Male and Female he created them. He blessed them and said it is very good. We aren't Slave's to this system. The water is for all of Mankind it's not for selfish egoestic greedy politicians for capital gain. Jesus Christ is coming soon repent thy kingdom is near. Money isn't what makes the World go around. Money is fake it has no value it's a promissory note that ties you to a debt, it's an I owe you to the government that has been deciveing Mankind for over 2000 years. Cardinal and hummingbirds and all of the Heavenly Father's wing animals are to soar high not be in a cage. Ozark -St. Francis National Forests has historically been owned and managed by the U.S. Forest Service but Governor Sarah Sanders has decided to designate Blanchard Springs State Park! Why you ask? Governor Sarah Sanders is doing a slight of the hand's she states that it's getting a updated face lift but what is really happening behind the sence! FROM WHITE COUNTY TO HOT SPRINGS the earthly systems are executing a coordinated push to lock our land into a global debt script. The STATE is asserting control over natural aquifers from from Blanchard Springs Caverns up north to the thermal water tables of Hot springs to lock down cooling loops for out of state tech corporations! The Apartment of Truth: Overcoming the Script In Genesis 1:31 The Heavenly Father spoke and declared that Creation is very good. In Palsm 1:48 The word records that we were all there in the beginning clapping and rejoicing as he spoke the universe into a unalterable decree. Isaiah 28.8 warns that forums of men are covered in filth,with vomit on the tables no place clean. The political parties both Republicans and Democrats are the same failing system. The Lamb Jesus Christ is the only one who can save you. Follow him stand in the Stillness and you will completely override this failing lower government. I am writing in opposition to the rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule, and specifically about these inventoried roadless areas: - East Fork (13,037 acres), Ozark-St. Francis NF, Arkansas - Penhook (6,566 acres), Ozark-St. Francis NF, Arkansas - Little Blakely (3,342 acres), Ouachita NF, Arkansas - Clifty Canyon (1,963 acres), Ozark-St. Francis NF, Arkansas - Pedestal Rocks (21,957 acres), Ozark-St. Francis NF, Arkansas - Bear Mountain (1,910 acres), Ouachita NF, Arkansas - Richland Creek (571 acres), Ozark-St. Francis NF, Arkansas - Hurricane Creek (2,279 acres), Ozark-St. Francis NF, Arkansas - Gee Creek (7,957 acres), Ozark-St. Francis NF, Arkansas - Dismal Creek (9,160 acres), Ozark-St. Francis NF, Arkansas I ask that the agency disclose and analyze the site-specific environmental consequences of the proposed rescission for each of these areas, including the effects of the road construction and timber harvest it would newly allow. I raise the following issues for the record and ask that the agency respond to each of them: Issue 1: Twenty-four million people's drinking water is asserted away Clean water matters to me, and my own tap may trace back to this country. I do not accept assurances in place of analysis. Approximately 24 million people use water originating within the potentially affected roadless areas, through more than 7,000 municipal intakes, and less than 12 percent of these watersheds are currently impaired. The DEIS says forest plans address sources of public drinking water without identifying one enforceable provision. I ask that the agency identify, forest by forest, which plan provisions are equivalent to 36 CFR 294.12 and 294.13 for municipal watersheds. I request that the agency respond in the record to each of the issues raised in this comment, and that it analyze in the DEIS an alternative that retains the 2001 rule's protections for the areas named above. Where this proposal rests on factual conclusions that differ from the agency's own prior findings quoted here, I ask that the agency acknowledge the change in position and provide a reasoned explanation for it on the record. Sincerely, [The Watchman on the Wall] [Bald Knob, Arkansas]

The Roadless Area Conservation Rule has shaped my life in ways I only fully appreciate now that it is under threat. I grew up in Virginia hiking in Shenandoah with my family, and I carried that into adulthood: climbing outdoors for the first time (and many subsequent times) in Shawnee National Forest, canoe camping in the Boundary Waters, camping in Ozark-St. Francis National Forest during spring break... Many of my happiest memories were made possible by the 2001 rule. That is part of why I oppose its rescission. Beyond recreation, there are serious public health concerns posed by the repeal of this rule, namely clean water. The Superior National Forest holds 13 inventoried roadless areas totaling 62,004 acres feeding the Boundary Waters, where I canoe camped. Those unlogged ridges filter rain through intact forest soils and deliver some of the cleanest freshwater in the lower 48 into that lake system. Across the country, more than 7,000 municipal water intakes sit in watersheds fed by roadless areas. In a time when cities are already struggling to maintain clean drinking water for their residents, can we really afford to risk that? Furthermore, the agency's own economic record cannot make the case for this action. The proposal's supporting materials state that "the total timber volume affected by this rule is less than 0.5 percent of total United States production, and the total oil and gas production from all National Forest System lands is currently about 0.4 percent of the current national production." Against that baseline, the agency's Cost Benefit Analysis projects $5.2 to $11.4 million a year in timber revenue to the Forest Service against recreation losses of at least $6.1 million a year, with a net present value spanning -$92 million to +$199 million, all while the existing road system already carries a $6.9 billion maintenance backlog. I ask that the agency reconcile the proposal with those figures and explain how an action whose own analysis cannot establish a net benefit justifies expanding a road network it already cannot afford to maintain. The concept of connecting with undeveloped land has occupied Americans since before this nation's founding, and it has played an integral part in shaping who I am. It would be a shame if my children were not able to experience that as well, to hike and camp and find themselves through getting lost. For all these reasons I support Alternative 1, the No Action alternative.

Re: Rescission of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule, Docket FS-2025-0001 The Ozark and Ouachita mountains make Arkansas a beautiful state, and they are beautiful largely because the parks and forests have been so careful about where roads go. Those choices left lovely untouched hiking spots, breathtaking overlooks, and the kind of silence that even rowdy Scout boys could feel when I took a troop to Little Blakely, all 3,342 acres of it in the Ouachita National Forest. That peacefulness is not an accident. It is the product of rules like the one this administration now proposes to discard, and I oppose that rescission. I have filed public comments several times regarding the dismantling of the Forest Service and the dangers of new road construction. No one answered me or explained why the agency was moving in this direction. This letter is my attempt, again, to place my concerns where they must be addressed. Arkansas holds 15 inventoried roadless areas totaling 95,015 acres. Bear Mountain, 1,910 acres in the Ouachita National Forest, is among them. My neighbor has hiked there for years. When she comes home from those hikes she is renewed and refreshed, and I understand why: that kind of restoration is something we desperately need in this technological age. Pedestal Rocks, 21,957 acres in the Ozark-St. Francis National Forest, is another. In Arkansas we know that roads through forests are the number one cause of fire and contamination of pristine waterways. The agency's own record agrees. The DEIS states: "Building a road into a forest at high risk from uncharacteristic wildfire effects could increase the incidence of human-caused fires. A human-caused wildland fire is nearly five times more likely to occur on essentially roaded lands than on essentially unroaded lands." The proposal nonetheless uses wildfire management as a justification for rescission. I ask that the agency reconcile that claimed justification with this ignition data and explain in its response why it is departing from findings already in its own draft environmental impact statement. The water issue is one I know from lived experience. We have had to fight to save the Buffalo River, the First National River, more than once. Back in the 1960s and again in the 2000s, a great deal of energy and money went into fighting hog farm runoff that was contaminating the river. I remember times when we could not swim because of the high bacteria count. The agency's own data shows that roads and their facilities can produce up to 90 percent of the sediment from a timber sale, and that across the Southern region, which includes Arkansas, 378 municipal water intakes sit in watersheds containing affected roadless areas. Opening 95,015 acres of Arkansas roadless land to new roads puts those intakes and the people who depend on them at documented risk. I ask that the agency explain what specific finding supports its conclusion that this risk is acceptable. The agency's road maintenance backlog makes the proposal harder to defend, not easier. I am sick and tired of my tax dollars going to destroy our public lands. So much has already been cut that skeleton teams of rangers cannot keep up maintenance on the roads already there. The agency is already billions behind on its existing road system. The case for punching new roads into country that has none, when it cannot maintain what it has, has not been made, and the agency should be required to make it before proceeding. The supporting regulatory flexibility analysis certifies no significant impact on small entities while the DEIS identifies outfitters, guides, and tour operators as affected, and its own Cost Benefit Analysis records lost recreation benefit at a minimum of $6.1 million a year. The birdwatching, hiking, and photography that draw people to these forests, where someone hoping to spot a Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Finally, The proposal solicits "any reliance interests in the current rule that could be affected by this proposal" (91 FR 53830-31), and the Cost Benefit Analysis weighs none. This comment is one such interest. The agency must identify and weigh the reliance interests described in the comments it receives, including this one, before any final rule issues. Sincerely, Margaret Cameron Little Rock, Arkansas

I reside in the state of Missouri. Missouri is a land of beautiful forest lands, including the Ozark-St. Francis National Forest. Ninety-five thousand acres of the Ozark-St. Francis National Forest are designated as Inventoried Roadless Areas that are protected by the current federal Roadless Rule. The Roadless Rule was put in place to protect wildlife habitat to support many diverse and vulnerable or endangered species, to allow forests to act as natural filters and protect drinking water sources, and to offer hiking, hunting, fishing and other outdoor activities without roads damaging the forest environment. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's proposal to rescind the entire Roadless Rule would negatively impact the National Forest in Missouri and other forests throughout the nation by allowing new home building, commercial timber harvesting and other industrial activities in the Inventoried Roadless Areas. The USDA argues that this change would reduce wildfire risk and improve local forest management flexibility. However, research has shown that construction and use of roads through forest lands increase human activity and fire ignition risk. Most wildfires are started by people, not by the forests themselves. Allowing logging and other commercial activities in the forest areas could harm water quality, wildlife, and recreational opportunities. Please keep the existing 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule in place and prohibit road construction, reconstruction and timber harvesting across all inventoried Roadless Areas, with the current narrow exceptions of public health and safety emergencies, valid existing rights, and active mineral leases. Our National Forests deserve our protection so that they can continue to serve and protect our environment.

Dear Secretary Rollins, For a parent, the fact that this rule has held across multiple administrations isn't bureaucratic trivia — it's evidence that it represents something durable enough to keep. As I walk through the woods with my children I point out the names of things, their uniqueness and beauty, and I am always proud when the facts I've imparted come back to me in conversations with them. Without exposure to wild and natural areas, we don't value them and forget that we share the planet with many ecosystems, plants and animals that are interconnected with us. The planet's health is our health. I've heard migratory birds (like the Cerulean Warbler cited below) in roadless forests that I hear nowhere else, felt quiet and peace that no urban park can provide. The record should reflect that the experiences just described are not anomalous but representative of what the 2001 Rule makes possible. Regarding the East Fork in the Ozark-St. Francis National Forest, Arkansas: Invasive Species Colonization Along Road Corridors — Road construction creates a linear disturbance corridor of bare soil, compacted earth, and altered light conditions that invasive plant species exploit for establishment and spread. These invasive species are a major threat to the survival of native species. The roadless condition of the East Fork IRA, Ozark-St. Francis National Forest, maintains contiguous interior forest canopy that shields Cerulean Warbler (Setophaga cerulea) nests from edge predators and Brown-headed Cowbird parasitism. This intact condition is itself the protection — once a road fragments the canopy, the edge effects are permanent and cumulative. Without site-specific analysis of how road construction in the East Fork IRA fragments interior forest breeding habitat for Cerulean Warbler (Setophaga cerulea, G4), the DEIS does not meet the requirements of the MBTA and EO 13186. The agency cannot lawfully proceed on an incomplete record. "Although most forest interior nesting species did not appear to avoid edge habitat along paved or unpaved forest road corridors, there were differential rates of nest predation and brood parasitism along varying widths of road corridors, suggesting that some corridors, particularly wider corridors with mowed edges, may be creating ecological traps for some migratory species of forest interior nesting songbirds." — USDA Forest Service, Gallatin National Forest Travel Plan FEIS - Issue 14: Migratory Birds, 2006 The Federal Register Notice initiating the rescission states the goal explicitly: to "facilitate domestic production" of "timber, energy and mineral production... to the maximum possible extent." The proposal is being advanced under Executive Orders 14192 (deregulation), 14225 (timber expansion), and 14154 (energy unleashing), and follows other administrative actions calling for a dramatic increase in logging and oil and gas drilling on federal lands. An increase in these industrial activities would worsen climate change, destroy recreation areas, put the lands at greater risk of wildfire, destroy wildlife habitat, and threaten drinking water sources. “Road and trail corridors through continuous forest habitat can lead to increased nest predation rates since smaller forest patches may be easier for predators to penetrate, and roads and trails provide travel corridors for predators to access forest interior from nearby open habitat. Forest interior migratory bird species tend to be vulnerable to predation and parasitism because they often have open cup nest structures, poorly developed defense mechanisms, nest close to the ground and typically only produce a single, relatively small clutch each breeding season. — USDA Forest Service, Gallatin National Forest Travel Plan FEIS - Issue 14: Migratory Birds, 2006 (https://www.fs.usda.gov/media/53140)” The Rule is sound; the proposed rescission is not; the Department should act accordingly. With appreciation, Ms. Ashley Harper CommentID: RLC-20260902-9F3V2T

Dear Secretary Brooke L. Rollins and the USDA: For someone who has spent thousands of hours in roadless country, I don't need a policy brief to understand what could and would be lost here — I've been in these places more than most, and I know what makes them what they are. Roadless regions are bastions of the natural world; regions in which we can exist, as closely as possible, outside of the bustle and noise of cities. These places are rare and sparse - I have to travel more than an hour, frequently multiple hours, to reach the nearest ones. And yet I do so, frequently, because I treasure the beauty, recreation, and history that these areas maintain. There is little majesty in driving straight to the zenith of vista compared to the catharsis that results from discovering the land under your own power. The East Fork Wilderness holds many treasures that few have visited - the subterranean stretches of Subway Falls stand out particularly to me. The partially collapsed hillside beneath which a drainage flows over terraces of slate - it's a sublime fall, and one better protected than tarnished by an unneeded road. The land stands for much more than what I can share in a single comment; thousands of people have traveled themselves in these undisturbed lands, not to mention the unique and threatened creatures that call this place home. There is too much that stands to be lost. Regarding the East Fork in the Ozark-St. Francis National Forest, Arkansas: The threat mechanism classified as 6.1 - Recreational activities (IUCN-CMP 6.1) is actively degrading habitat for Eastern Black Rail (Laterallus jamaicensis jamaicensis, T1) in the East Fork Inventoried Roadless Area, Ozark-St. Francis National Forest, at Negligible or <1% pop. decline severity across Small (1-10%) scope. Road networks serve as vectors for the secondary impacts classified under 6.1 - Recreational activities: they open previously inaccessible terrain to resource extraction, facilitate introduction of invasive species, and concentrate human disturbance along corridors through Eastern Black Rail habitat. A programmatic analysis is insufficient. The DEIS must evaluate 6.1 - Recreational activities impacts to Eastern Black Rail (Laterallus jamaicensis jamaicensis, T1) at the scale of the East Fork Inventoried Roadless Area, Ozark-St. Francis National Forest, with specificity adequate to inform the decision. "Increases in fine sediments are known to change grain size distribution and consequently cause degradation of spawning grounds. The increase of fines clogs the pore space and can lead to 'sustained clogging,' since the turnover rate is markedly reduced or prevented even in the case of exceptional high flows. In such situations, washed out soil (e.g., from agricultural land use) or fines may lead to sedimentation of fines on coarse bed material and/or artificially placed gravel with consequent, negative impacts on embryo survival of gravel-spawning fish through suffocation." — Springer Nature — book chapter in Riverine Ecosystem Management, 2018 “Any discharge of dredged and/or fill material into waters of the U.S. incidental to any of the exempt activities must have a permit if it is part of an activity whose purpose is to convert an area of a water of the U.S. into a use to which it was not previously subject, where the flow or circulation of waters of the U.S. may be impaired or the reach of such waters be reduced (Recapture Provision, Section 404(f)(2)). — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District (https://www.spk.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/Permitting/Section-404-Exemptions/)” No sufficient basis for rescission has been established; the Rule should stand. Earnestly,

Dear Secretary Brooke L. Rollins and the USDA: For someone who has spent thousands of hours in roadless country, I don't need a policy brief to understand what could and would be lost here — I've been in these places more than most, and I know what makes them what they are. Roadless regions are bastions of the natural world; regions in which we can exist, as closely as possible, outside of the bustle and noise of cities. These places are rare and sparse - I have to travel more than an hour, frequently multiple hours, to reach the nearest ones. And yet I do so, frequently, because I treasure the beauty, recreation, and history that these areas maintain. The Penhook Special Interest Area contains several of the most spectacular and best known waterfalls in the southeastern Ozarks. Each of them is truly magnificent to behold, and there is no way in which the region would not be severely tarnished through the creation of roads within this area. Thousands of people from across the United States and the world have taken in these falls in awe. That connection is a function of the landscape's roadless character; the proposal, by undermining the Rule that preserves that character, would undermine the connection along with it. Regarding the Penhook in the Ozark-St. Francis National Forest, Arkansas:

Rescinding the Roadless Rule would open the Penhook, Ozark-St. Francis National Forest to road construction and associated ground disturbance. The direct and indirect effects of that activity are precisely what makes a specific comment about this area necessary. Old-forest structure takes a century or more to recover. Old forests contain snags, fallen logs, and multi-layered canopies that support distinct plant and animal communities. Commercial harvest removes these structural features, and recovery to pre-harvest structural conditions takes 100 years or more. The biodiversity that depends on old-forest structure does not return on management-relevant timescales (Quinby 2026; Duflot et al. 2025). — Quinby, Peter A., 2026 · Biosphere (https://doi.org/10.3390/biosphere2010001) The Penhook Special interest Area of Arkansas stands for much more than what I can share in a single comment; thousands of people have traveled themselves in these undisturbed lands, not to mention the unique and threatened creatures that call this place home. There is too much that stands to be lost. “Identifies the most "natural" (least human-modified) corridors between large protected areas in the U.S. Many of the highest-priority corridors fall within or overlap inventoried roadless areas, providing direct evidence that maintaining roadless protections is critical to climate-adaptation connectivity strategies for wide-ranging species. — Research - Connectivity” The Department is respectfully requested to deny rescission and preserve the Rule's protections for inventoried roadless areas. Regards, Travis Howk

Dear Brooke L. Rollins, As a parent, my objection to this rescission is grounded in the same thing that grounds most of my parenting: a refusal to let short-term convenience substitute for long-term responsibility. As a parents who’s own parents got me out into nature and still enjoy all the wonderful and diverse habitats and nature our country has to offer well into their 70s, I am writing to urge you to do what’s right so my own children can also enjoy these areas into their senior years. We have spent time hiking, fishing and exploring these ares and the pristine clear turquoise waters. The Rule has enabled the preservation of places whose value to the public is illustrated by accounts like the one above; the Department should not dismantle that framework without compelling justification — and none has been offered. Regarding the Dismal Creek in the Ozark-St. Francis National Forest, Arkansas: Interior Hardwood Forest Habitat for Bat Roosts and Breeding — The Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory and Shortleaf Pine-Oak forests within this 9,160-acre area provide unbroken canopy and mature tree structure essential for three federally endangered bat species: the Gray bat (*Myotis grisescens*), Indiana bat (*M… Degraded birding quality in the Dismal Creek IRA translates directly to lost economic activity. Fewer visitors means less spending on guides, outfitters, lodging, meals, and equipment in surrounding communities. Road construction doesn't just diminish a recreational experience — it eliminates revenue that local economies depend on. The economic harm is proportional to the recreational harm and equally permanent. The DEIS must analyze how road construction degrades the specific qualities that support birding in the Dismal Creek IRA — solitude, natural soundscape, water quality, wildlife habitat, and backcountry character — and assess the resulting decline in recreational quality and visitation. A generic statement about recreation impacts is insufficient; the analysis must address birding conditions in this specific area. "Of the nation's species currently listed as threatened, endangered, or proposed for listing under the ESA, approximately 25% of animal species and 15% of plant species are likely to have habitat within inventoried roadless areas (IRAs) on National Forest System lands. Inventoried roadless areas function as biological strongholds and refuges for many species." — USDA Forest Service “In 2004, Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth named unmanaged recreation, including impacts from OHVs, as one of four key threats facing the nation's forests and grasslands. Unmanaged motorized use, particularly OHV use, has resulted in soil erosion, watershed and habitat degradation, spread of disease and impacts to cultural resource sites. — USDA Forest Service (https://www.nfwf.org/sites/default/files/norcal/Documents/SRNFEIS.pdf)” “Of the nation's species currently listed as threatened, endangered, or proposed for listing under the ESA, approximately 25% of animal species and 15% of plant species are likely to have habitat within inventoried roadless areas (IRAs) on National Forest System lands. Inventoried roadless areas function as biological strongholds and refuges for many species. — USDA Forest Service (https://www.nfwf.org/sites/default/files/norcal/Documents/SRNFEIS.pdf)” The administrative record does not supply a reasoned basis for rescission; accordingly, the Department should decline to rescind. With thanks, Laura Gahan CommentID: RLC-20260824-3QVLLX