Read the comments.

I am writing to strongly oppose the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Our national forests are public lands held in trust for all of us. Once intact forests are opened to new roads and development, the ecological damage can extend far beyond the pavement. I urge the Forest Service to protect these landscapes rather than weaken one of the few safeguards that keeps them intact. Roadless areas are critical habitat. Dietz et al. (2021) examined 537 wildlife species of conservation concern and found that 308 species, or 57%, had suitable habitat within Inventoried Roadless Areas. These areas therefore provide meaningful protection for vulnerable wildlife. Roads also fragment habitat and disrupt ecological connectivity. Forman and Alexander (1998) documented road impacts including habitat fragmentation, barriers to wildlife movement, erosion, and altered hydrology. A road is not simply a line through a forest. It creates disturbance and access that can change how wildlife use an entire landscape. Fragmentation can prevent animals from moving between feeding, breeding, and seasonal habitats and can isolate populations that need connected habitat to survive. The argument that more roads will necessarily reduce wildfire risk is also not supported by the evidence. Aplet, Hartger, and Dietz (2026) analyzed more than three decades of national forest wildfire data and found approximately 1.97 fires per 1,000 hectares in Inventoried Roadless Areas, compared with 7.99 fires per 1,000 hectares within 50 meters of roads. Ignition density generally declined as distance from roads increased. Roads can improve firefighter access in some circumstances, but they also increase human activity and opportunities for ignition. Expanding roads should not be treated as an automatic wildfire solution. Road construction also has consequences for water and soil. Roads can compact soil, concentrate runoff, alter drainage, destabilize slopes, and increase erosion and sediment delivery to streams (Forman & Alexander, 1998). These impacts can degrade aquatic habitat and water quality far downstream. Protecting forests is also protecting the watersheds they sustain. Roads can further increase the spread of invasive plants. Healey (2020), using more than 15,000 forest inventory plots, found non-native plants were approximately twice as common within 152 meters of roads than farther away. Once invasive species become established, restoration can be difficult and expensive. I strongly oppose weakening the Roadless Rule because the burden of proof should be on those seeking to disturb intact public lands, not on those asking to preserve them. We already have roads and developed areas where infrastructure can be placed. We cannot recreate an old-growth forest, restore lost wildlife connectivity, or reverse decades of ecological change simply by deciding later that a road was a mistake. Protecting roadless areas does not prevent responsible wildfire management. Targeted actions can be evaluated where there is a demonstrated need without broadly opening protected landscapes to additional roads and development. The public has also demonstrated strong support for the Roadless Rule. A nationally representative 2019 survey found that 75% of Americans supported it, including majorities of Democrats, Independents, Republicans, and rural respondents (Pew Charitable Trusts, 2019). During a previous consideration of repeal, more than 625,000 public comments were submitted, with approximately 99% opposing repeal (Pew Charitable Trusts, 2026). Scientific evidence and public input point in the same direction: intact roadless forests are worth protecting. Public lands are a legacy we inherit and a responsibility we pass forward. I ask the Forest Service to reject the proposed rescission and retain the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. We should not sacrifice irreplaceable ecosystems for roads that can be built elsewhere. References: Aplet, G. H., Hartger, P., & Dietz, M. S. (2026). Three-decade record of contiguous-U.S. national forest wildfires indicates increased density of ignitions near roads. Fire Ecology. doi:10.1186/s42408-026-00450-2 Dietz, M. S., Barnett, K., Belote, R. T., & Aplet, G. H. (2021). The importance of U.S. national forest roadless areas for vulnerable wildlife species. Global Ecology and Conservation, 32, e01943. doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01943 Forman, R. T. T., & Alexander, L. E. (1998). Roads and their major ecological effects. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 29, 207–231. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207 Healey, S. P. (2020). Long-term forest health implications of roadlessness. Environmental Research Letters, 15, 104023. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/aba031 Pew Charitable Trusts. (2019). Americans Support “Roadless Rule” to Protect Remarkable Forests. Pew Charitable Trusts. (2026). U.S. Department of Agriculture Proposes Eliminating the Roadless Rule.

Dear Department of Agriculture Leadership: As a resident of New England, one of the things that draws me to this region is the diversity of landscape that exists. Living in the North Shore of Massachusetts and having the beauty of the roadless land of the White Mountain National Forest within reach has been such a gift. I believe that regulation of this land should remain to keep it protected. In the fall of 2021, I took my younger sister on her first hike in the White Mountains. We went with a friend up Champney Brook Trail and Piper Trail to summit Mount Chocorua, with pit stops at Middle Sister and Champney Falls. The time we spent trekking 6 miles through the foggy and dense forest to be rewarded with breath-taking views above the clouds sparked a love for the White Mountains in both my sister and I. In a fast-paced world that is constantly keeping busy, the untouched forest is an oasis. Rescission of the roadless rule would mean losing the chance to protect this oasis for the next generation. I do not want to lose the opportunity to pass on the experience of hiking to those who come after me. For 25 years, the U.S. Forest Service has committed to managing these forests without building roads that enable harmful activities like major logging operations or oil-and-gas drilling. Thanks to this commitment, myself and countless others have been able to enjoy the beauty of the undeveloped backcountry of the national forests. The proposed rollback of the 2001 Roadless Rule puts the 44.5 million acres of this forestland oasis at risk. “Based on road-effect zones, an estimated 15–20% of the United States is ecologically impacted by roads. Road avoidance, especially due to traffic noise, has a greater ecological impact than roadkills. The still-more-important barrier effect subdivides populations, with demographic and probably genetic consequences. Road networks crossing landscapes cause local hydrologic and erosion effects, whereas stream networks and distant valleys receive major peak-flow and sediment impacts. — Forman et al., 1998 (https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207)” “wildfires are almost twice as likely to occur in roaded areas as in roadless areas, because roadless areas are generally located further away from communities and are harder to access — U.S. Senate, 2025 (https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/2042/text)” Additionally, I'd ask you to consider the existing backlog of maintenance that exists in the current forest road infrastructure today. If the Forest Service is unable to maintain the roads that have already been built today, I'm concerned of the impact of additional roads to this already costly backlog. “Even with the Roadless Rule in place, the Forest Service already has a 360,000 mile road system – twice as long as the nation's highway system – crisscrossing national forests. This forest road infrastructure is already so big that the Forest Service cannot afford to properly maintain it, triggering a maintenance backlog that has ballooned to billions in needed repairs. — Earthjustice & organizations, 2025 (https://earthjustice.org/document/roadless-rule-ngo-sign-on-letter-9-19-25)” “the Forest Service has an enormous backlog of maintenance needs for the existing 368,102-mile road system of the Forest Service that will cost $5,980,000,000 to eliminate — U.S. Senate, 2025 (https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/2042/text)” Thank you for your time in considering this comment. Do not rollback the Roadless Rule. With respect,

Dear Secretary Rollins, Roadless country is the reason I go out there at all. I love taking my children to hike and explore the natural beauty of these areas When you hike to the top of craggy pinnacle, the unspoiled terrain is what makes the view so awe inspiring If this rule is rescinded, we all lose one of the last places we can go to enjoy no roads Regarding the Craggy Mountain in the Pisgah National Forest, North Carolina: New road construction, reconstruction, and associated development fragment habitat, introduce disturbance, and eliminate roadless character. A large share of the U.S. is already road-affected. An estimated 15 to 20 percent of the contiguous United States is ecologically affected by roads, accounting for edge effects, runoff patterns, and downstream disturbance — not just the area of road surface itself. Roughly 80 percent of Earth's terrestrial surface remains roadless, but most of that area is fragmented into patches smaller than 1 square kilometer (Forman & Alexander 1998; Ibisch et al. 2016). — Alexander, 1998 (https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207); Forman et al., 1998 (https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207); Selva, 2016 (https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf7166) Rescinding the Roadless Rule would open the Craggy Mountain, Pisgah 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. These beautiful unspoiled lands are what make America great. Rescission is not justified; the Department should allow the Rule to continue protecting inventoried roadless areas. Yours truly, Natalie Musser

Dear Ms. Rollins: As someone who has watched the climate data move the wrong way for two decades, the 2001 Rule has been one of the rare protections that has held strong. Keep it there- our future depends on it. I’m an avid hiker and nature photographer who has been lucky to visit Kentucky forests as well as many of our National Parks. There is nothing that compares to the beauty of our planet, and repealing the Roadless Rule would open these spaces to the destruction of important wildlife corridors and the trees that make the very air we breathe safe. I grew up being taught that it’s up to us to take care of the Earth, and am continually frustrated to see the global temperature rising. I can point to one morning that captures all of it. Some of my best memories are in nature. The ability to see every star in the sky, hike up a mountain without a single building in sight and observe animals in their natural habitat are the true luxuries in life. The proposed rescission cannot be squared with the purposes served by the Rule or with the legitimate reliance interests it has generated over nearly twenty-five years of implementation. Regarding the Wolfpen in the Daniel Boone National Forest, Kentucky: New road construction, reconstruction, and associated development fragment habitat, introduce disturbance, and eliminate roadless character. A large share of the U.S. is already road-affected. An estimated 15 to 20 percent of the contiguous United States is ecologically affected by roads, accounting for edge effects, runoff patterns, and downstream disturbance — not just the area of road surface itself. Roughly 80 percent of Earth's terrestrial surface remains roadless, but most of that area is fragmented into patches smaller than 1 square kilometer (Forman & Alexander 1998; Ibisch et al. 2016). — Richard T. T. Forman | Lauren E. Alexander, 1998 · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics (https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207) Rescinding the Roadless Rule would open the Wolfpen, Daniel Boone 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. The domino effects mean that trees are cut, destroying the homes of migratory birds that call them home; decreased air quality due to fewer trees that turn carbon dioxide into oxygen; putting us at greater risk of wildfire; and the destruction of the natural beauty for the sake of development. Once these forests and habitats are destroyed, there is no getting them back. It is our responsibility to halt human greed and instead, protect it. 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. Although proponents of rolling back the Roadless Rule claim it is needed for wildfire management, the peer-reviewed science shows the opposite. A 2026 study in Fire Ecology by Aplet, Hartger & Dietz analyzed 32 years of wildfire data across all eight contiguous-U.S. Forest Service regions and found wildfire-ignition density was 7.99 fires per 1,000 hectares within 50 meters of roads, compared to just 1.97 fires per 1,000 hectares in inventoried roadless areas—a fourfold difference. A separate national analysis (Balch et al., PNAS 2017) found that 84% of all U.S. wildfires are human-caused. Roads are the primary vector for human ignitions, so building roads into roadless areas is likely to result in more fires, not fewer. The U.S. National Forests are the headwaters of our great rivers and the largest source of municipal water supply in the nation. According to DellaSala (2011), national forests supply drinking water to at least 124 million people in more than 3,400 communities across 33 states—roughly a third of all national-forest runoff originates in inventoried roadless areas. Roads are a major cause of water pollution: erosion rates from logging roads have been documented as much as 850% higher than from undisturbed forest. Because the 2001 Roadless Rule protects these headwaters, it is vital for maintaining clean drinking water for communities across the country. The Department is expected to give the comments and evidence in this record their due weight before proceeding to any rescission decision. Hopefully, CommentID: RLC-20260831-5SAB4V

Dear Secretary and Chief: As someone who has walked the same public land for years, I notice what changes. Roads change everything. I am writing to express my strong opposition to the Department of Agriculture’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. For 25 years, the Roadless Rule has served as a foundational conservation policy, safeguarding 58.5 million acres of undeveloped national forest lands A relationship of this kind constitutes a cognizable public interest, and one the Department is statutorily bound to consider. Regarding the Comanche Peak Adjacent Area in the Arapaho & Roosevelt NFs, Colorado: New road construction, reconstruction, and associated development fragment habitat, introduce disturbance, and eliminate roadless character. A large share of the U.S. is already road-affected. An estimated 15 to 20 percent of the contiguous United States is ecologically affected by roads, accounting for edge effects, runoff patterns, and downstream disturbance — not just the area of road surface itself. Roughly 80 percent of Earth's terrestrial surface remains roadless, but most of that area is fragmented into patches smaller than 1 square kilometer (Forman & Alexander 1998; Ibisch et al. 2016). — Richard T. T. Forman | Lauren E. Alexander, 1998 · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics (https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207) Rescinding the Roadless Rule would open the Comanche Peak Adjacent Area, Arapaho & Roosevelt NFs 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. I urge the Forest Service to select Alternative 1 (No Action) in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement to maintain full protections for these undeveloped areas based on the following substantive points: •Ecosystem and Biodiversity Protection: Roadless areas encompass vital, unfragmented habitat for over 1,600 threatened, endangered, and sensitive species. Constructing roads through these pristine forest fragments migration corridors, introduces invasive weed species, and increases poaching risks. •Watershed Security: Roadless national forest lands safeguard the source waters for 354 municipal watersheds, providing clean, reliable drinking water to millions of Americans. New road construction significantly increases soil erosion, sedimentation, and runoff pollution in these municipal water supplies. •Wildfire Risk and Forest Management: Removing roadless protections under the guise of wildfire mitigation is counterproductive. Studies show that road construction increases human-caused fire starts. The agency should focus its resources on strategic, community-adjacent hazardous fuels reduction rather than opening remote backcountry areas to commercial development. •Economic Value: Intact roadless areas support thriving outdoor recreation economies, clean air, soundscapes, and carbon storage. The DEIS acknowledges that eliminating these protections risks long-term economic harm to local communities reliant on sustainable recreation and tourism. I request that the Forest Service uphold the 2001 Roadless Rule to preserve these intact landscapes for current and future generations. I ask that these comments be read alongside the many others opposing rescission and that the Department act consistent with the weight of that record. Yours sincerely, Dianne Dallin CommentID: RLC-20260829-V4D9KS

I am commenting on this proposed rule as an outdoor enthusiast who has an interest in the field of road ecology, particularly sections of the proposed rule that state this recision is necessary to reduce regulatory burden and maximize the development and extraction of natural resources within the National Forest System. Rescinding the National Forest Roadless Area Conservation Rule would be extremely harmful to American wildlife and ecosystems. Roads are the leading direct cause of vertebrate mortality by humans (which in turn harms the humans involved in these collisions) as well as the cause of significant loss in species populations near roads, due to the way in which roads alter natural migration patterns, landscape features, and water flows (Richard T. T. Forman, Lauren E. Alexander. 1998. ROADS AND THEIR MAJOR ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 29:207-231. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207). This has only been increasing over the last 50 years (Jacob E. Hill, Travis L. DeVault, Jerrold L. Belant, Research note: A 50-year increase in vehicle mortality of North American mammals, Landscape and Urban Planning, Volume 197, 2020, 103746, ISSN 0169-2046, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103746), and the effects of road systems on local ecology extends outward over 100 meters and is not confined to the road area itself (Forman, R.T.T. (2000), Estimate of the Area Affected Ecologically by the Road System in the United States. Conservation Biology, 14: 31-35. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.99299.x). Roads fragment animal populations and contribute to population and genetic changes in all kinds of animals, from grizzly bears (Proctor MF, McLellan BN, Strobeck C, Barclay RM. Genetic analysis reveals demographic fragmentation of grizzly bears yielding vulnerably small populations. Proc Biol Sci. 2005 Nov 22;272(1579):2409-16. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2005.3246), to frogs (Beebee TJ. Effects of road mortality and mitigation measures on amphibian populations. Conserv Biol. 2013 Aug;27(4):657-68. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12063), and even beetles (Keller I, Nentwig W, Largiader CR. Recent habitat fragmentation due to roads can lead to significant genetic differentiation in an abundant flightless ground beetle. Mol Ecol. 2004 Oct;13(10):2983-94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02310.x). Roadless areas in our national forests have already been proven vital to the protection of vulnerable species (Matthew S. Dietz, Kevin Barnett, R. Travis Belote, Gregory H. Aplet, The importance of U.S. national forest roadless areas for vulnerable wildlife species, Global Ecology and Conservation, Volume 32, 2021, e01943, ISSN 2351-9894, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01943). Moreover, opening National Forest land to roads and resource extraction does not protect against invasive species- rather, natural resource extraction can exacerbate their spread and endanger native wildlife (see example: Walsh, P. D., P. Henschel, and K. A. Abernethy. 2004. Logging speeds little red fire ant invasion of Africa. Biotropica 36: 637–640). As shown in southern California, closer proximity to a road was also the greatest determinant of when and where a wildfire occurred (Syphard, Alexandra & Keeley, Jon. (2015). Location, timing and extent of wildfire vary by cause of ignition. International Journal of Wildland Fire. 24. 37-47. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF14024). To increase rural economic development and address any future lack of fuel resources, it is recommended that the Federal administration redirect focus onto the development of sustainable and renewable energy sources, instead of depleting National Forests for fuel. It is recommended to invest in sustainable infrastructure (backed by the UN: https://www.unep.org/topics/finance-and-economic-transformations/transforming-economies/sustainable-infrastructure) and protect ecological diversity and native ecosystems for future citizens of our beautiful country, through efforts like habitat defragmentation, which have been demonstrated as successful (van der Grift, Edgar. (2005). Defragmentation in the Netherlands: A Success Story?. GAIA- Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society. 14. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.14.2.16). Keeping this Rule in place saves regulatory and financial effort later by preventing the need for mitigation measures like reforestation, highway crossings, wildlife fences, and species reintroductions in areas closed off from natural migratory patterns. In conclusion, keeping National Forest lands closed to roads protects valuable American biodiversity for future generations, reduces human-wildlife conflict, and helps to protect against wildfires and invasive species caused by human activities. Investing in sustainable, renewable energy sources and prioritizing sustainable infrastructure instead would allow the United States to ensure its place as a leader in a changing world.

Brooke L. Rollins and Tom Schultz, As a resident of a watershed-dependent community, I respectfully direct the Department's attention to the hydrological literature documenting the relationship between road density and sediment load in forest streams — literature the proposed rescission's record does not adequately engage. I am against the rescission of the Roadless Act. It would cause an increase in the number of fires in the National Forests. Also remember that for every two mature trees cut down you deplete the oxygen that a family of four would use. It would take at lease 25 years to restore those trees. Do not destroy our National Forest ! The considerations above inform the position set out in the remainder of this comment. Regarding the Tusquitee Bald in the Nantahala National Forest, North Carolina: New road construction, reconstruction, and associated development fragment habitat, introduce disturbance, and eliminate roadless character. A large share of the U.S. is already road-affected. An estimated 15 to 20 percent of the contiguous United States is ecologically affected by roads, accounting for edge effects, runoff patterns, and downstream disturbance — not just the area of road surface itself. Roughly 80 percent of Earth's terrestrial surface remains roadless, but most of that area is fragmented into patches smaller than 1 square kilometer (Forman & Alexander 1998; Ibisch et al. 2016). — Richard T. T. Forman | Lauren E. Alexander, 1998 · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics (https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207) Rescinding the Roadless Rule would open the Tusquitee Bald, Nantahala 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. Putting more roads in roadless areas will cause more fires, a loss of oxygen from the trees and more CO2 in the air that would have been absorbed by the trees. Also, the enormous loss of pure water for people everywhere. Although proponents of rolling back the Roadless Rule claim it is needed for wildfire management, the peer-reviewed science shows the opposite. A 2026 study in Fire Ecology by Aplet, Hartger & Dietz analyzed 32 years of wildfire data across all eight contiguous-U.S. Forest Service regions and found wildfire-ignition density was 7.99 fires per 1,000 hectares within 50 meters of roads, compared to just 1.97 fires per 1,000 hectares in inventoried roadless areas—a fourfold difference. A separate national analysis (Balch et al., PNAS 2017) found that 84% of all U.S. wildfires are human-caused. Roads are the primary vector for human ignitions, so building roads into roadless areas is likely to result in more fires, not fewer. The U.S. National Forests are the headwaters of our great rivers and the largest source of municipal water supply in the nation. According to DellaSala (2011), national forests supply drinking water to at least 124 million people in more than 3,400 communities across 33 states—roughly a third of all national-forest runoff originates in inventoried roadless areas. Roads are a major cause of water pollution: erosion rates from logging roads have been documented as much as 850% higher than from undisturbed forest. Because the 2001 Roadless Rule protects these headwaters, it is vital for maintaining clean drinking water for communities across the country. Major U.S. cities including Los Angeles, Portland, Denver, and Atlanta receive a significant portion of their water supply from national forests. The Department's obligation under the APA is to provide reasoned explanation commensurate with the significance of the policy change; that obligation has not been met, and rescission should be denied. Best regards, CommentID: RLC-20260824-6L33WX

Dear Secretary Brooke L. Rollins: For someone who spends real time out there, the distinction between roadless and roaded land isn't bureaucratic — it's the whole point of the trip. Regarding the Catfish Lake North in the Croatan National Forest, North Carolina: New road construction, reconstruction, and associated development fragment habitat, introduce disturbance, and eliminate roadless character. A large share of the U.S. is already road-affected. An estimated 15 to 20 percent of the contiguous United States is ecologically affected by roads, accounting for edge effects, runoff patterns, and downstream disturbance — not just the area of road surface itself. Roughly 80 percent of Earth's terrestrial surface remains roadless, but most of that area is fragmented into patches smaller than 1 square kilometer (Forman & Alexander 1998; Ibisch et al. 2016). — Richard T. T. Forman | Lauren E. Alexander, 1998 · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics (https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207) Rescinding the Roadless Rule would open the Catfish Lake North, Croatan 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. The long term effects of building these roads outweighs the benefits ten-fold. The current roads across the state are in disarray and 95 has been worked on for the last 10 years. Fix 95 before even thinking about destroying our parks to add more roads that won’t be taken care of. REJECT THE RESCISSION! KEEP OUR PARKS ROADLESS! Rescinding a settled rule is the kind of decision that should be made only on a strong record, and the record here doesn't support it. All the best, CommentID: RLC-20260824-JMR4M1

To the U.S. Department of Agriculture: As a citizen who has been attentive to the federal climate record, I submit these comments in opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule, a measure whose carbon and watershed contributions are among the few large-scale instruments that remain practically intact in the current period. Regarding the Sespe - Frazier in the Los Padres National Forest, California: New road construction, reconstruction, and associated development fragment habitat, introduce disturbance, and eliminate roadless character. A large share of the U.S. is already road-affected. An estimated 15 to 20 percent of the contiguous United States is ecologically affected by roads, accounting for edge effects, runoff patterns, and downstream disturbance — not just the area of road surface itself. Roughly 80 percent of Earth's terrestrial surface remains roadless, but most of that area is fragmented into patches smaller than 1 square kilometer (Forman & Alexander 1998; Ibisch et al. 2016). — Richard T. T. Forman | Lauren E. Alexander, 1998 · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics (https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207) Rescinding the Roadless Rule would open the Sespe - Frazier, Los Padres 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. T Rescission of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule is opposed; its retention is respectfully requested. Best regards,