Read the comments.

Dear Special Areas: Roadless Area Conservation, se01nsnn se01nsnn , I urge the U.S. Forest Service to choose the No Action alternative and keep the Roadless Rule in place. As a Vermont resident who cares deeply about wildlife and our public lands, I want these forests protected for future generations. Intact forests provide wildlife with space to live and move, protect clean water, and sustain the ecosystems that national parks depend on. Those benefits extend well beyond any boundary on a map. Opening protected roadless areas to road construction and industrial development would put those benefits at risk. Wildlife already faces enough pressure from habitat loss. We should be preserving the wild places that remain. These lands belong to the public, and their long-term health should come before short-term commercial interests. Once forests are fragmented and waterways damaged, restoring them is neither simple nor guaranteed. Please retain the Roadless Rule and protect the forests, wildlife, and clean water entrusted to your care. Sincerely, Dianne Jacques Springfield, Vermont Dianne Jacques 130 Eureka Road Springfield, VT 05156-8817 Sincerely, Dianne Jacques

The Forest Service should keep the Roadless Rule intact exactly as it is, utilizing Alternative 1 in the current DEIS. Your intent to rescind the Roadless Rule is deeply concerning. Roadless areas provide important benefits to communities across the country. We rely on them for clean drinking water, wildlife habitat, outdoor recreation, and protection from the impacts of development. These lands are also an important part of the character and identity of many communities and provide places for people to hike, hunt, fish, camp, ski and otherwise enjoy the outdoors. Of particular concern to me is that rescinding the Roadless Rule would increase development, reduce recreation opportunities, affect wildlife habitat, increase wildfire risk, and harm local economies that depend on outdoor recreation. The Roadless Rule has provided consistent, nationwide protections for these special places for decades. The Forest Service should not weaken those protections or open currently protected roadless lands to new development. I urge the Forest Service to pursue Alternative 1 and retain the existing Roadless Rule protections. Sincerely, R.S. Tracy 4545 St George Rd Williston, VT 05495-7685 rtracyjr@sover.net

We need to conserve roadless areas. We need areas where we humans aren't there with our machines or much if any of our physical presence. We need to protect areas from human tampering and recreation. We must let these small bits of land just BE. Ann Vanneman, Walingford, VT 05773.

Public lands belong to the American people and we don’t want more roads. DO NOT rescind the Roadless Rule. Listen to the America people and what we want. We want nature, wilderness, animals and peace. We want the Roadless Rule to remain. Danielle Lillard 664 Spring Hill Rd Waitsfield, VT 05673