Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

“I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule…”

Campaign: One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. It counts as one unique comment. The record does not say which organisation ran it.

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24
  • 6,401 submissions
  • 751 versions of the text
  • 27 added words of their own

When it arrived

Submissions received each day. Tap or hover a bar for its count.

Sep 10Sep 20Oct 6

Sep 11: 1,688 submissions, 0 unique comments

What it names

National Forests
+ Plumas National Forest
Roadless areas
Middle ForkSouth Fork+ Black Mountain+ San Jose+ Santa Cruz+ Santa Rosa

Names marked + were added by senders and are not in the shared letter.

The letter

As sent in FS-2025-0001-345246, the comment that stands for the group.

I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is. The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Sincerely, Steve Gross La Mesa, CA 91941
← All campaigns

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