Read the comments.

Dear Forest Service Officials, I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed timber harvesting and associated road construction projects within the Superior National Forest. As a constituent who deeply values Minnesota’s public lands, I urge the U.S. Forest Service to select the "No Action" alternative. The ecological risks to water quality, wildlife habitat, and intact forest ecosystems far outweigh any short-term timber yield. I request that the Forest Service address the following specific concerns in its environmental analysis: Watershed Protection and Water Quality: The Superior National Forest encompasses interconnected lakes, streams, and wetlands within the Rainy River and Lake Superior watersheds. Constructing new access roads disrupts hydrology, increases soil erosion, and drives sediment runoff into clean waterways. This degradation threatens local aquatic species and downstream ecosystems. Habitat Fragmentation and Wildlife: Building roads and logging intact canopy fragments critical forest corridors used by sensitive and threatened species, including the Canada lynx, northern long-eared bat, and grey wolf. Edge effects from clearcutting and road corridors favor invasive species and disrupt natural predator-prey dynamics. Buffer for the Boundary Waters: Operations near designated inventoried roadless areas or wilderness boundaries risk degrading the quiet, natural character of the neighboring Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCAW) through noise pollution, visual degradation, and edge impacts. Climate Resilience and Carbon Storage: The mature and old-growth stands in northern Minnesota serve as vital carbon sinks and natural buffers against climate stressors. Logging mature trees reduces the forest’s long-term carbon storage capacity and impairs its natural resilience. Long-Term Costs of Road Networks: Expanding temporary or permanent road networks creates persistent maintenance burdens, causes ongoing soil compaction, and opens remote areas to illegal off-road vehicle access. The agency should prioritize decommissioning existing problematic roads rather than building new ones. Under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the National Forest Management Act (NFMA), the Forest Service is obligated to fully evaluate cumulative environmental impacts and consider alternatives that prioritize ecosystem integrity and non-motorized recreation over commodity extraction. Please protect the long-term ecological health, water resources, and public legacy of the Superior National Forest by rejecting this proposal. Lastly, my HS friends and I purchased trees to be planted in memory of our friend Betsy. This is our legacy lives on in the Superior National Forest for her (see attached). Sincerely, Mary Jurgens 153 Maple Street Excelsior, MN 55331 Mary.b.jurgens@gmail.com