“I oppose rescinding the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. It has helped protect roadless areas, and adjacent…”

I oppose rescinding the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. It has helped protect roadless areas, and adjacent Wilderness areas, on national forests for 25 years. If anything is done with the Roadless Area Conservation Rule, it should be strengthened to eliminate logging and roadbuilding loopholes and provide better protection to roadless areas and adjacent Wilderness areas. Roads fragment wildlife habitat. Existing roadless areas provide habitat for many threatened and endangered native species. Roadless areas also provide important migration corridors. Roads threaten high-quality streams and rivers. Dirt and sediment that runs off roads impairs habitat for fish and aquatic wildlife, and roads in steep, rugged country increase the risk of landslides that suffocate streams and rivers with mounds of mud. More roads will result in more human-caused fires in the backcountry. Research shows that more than 60 percent of human-caused fires on national forests in the Lower 48 states are ignited within 1/8-mile of the nearest road, and 95 percent are ignited within 1/2-mile. Roadless areas provide for recreation, like camping, hiking and backpacking, hunting and angling, wildlife viewing and photography, and other activities. Large sections of the Continental Divide, Pacific Crest, and Appalachian National Scenic trails cross protected roadless areas. The Forest Service already has a huge road system—stretching 380,000 miles, which is longer than the country’s highways—with an estimated maintenance backlog of over $8.6 billion. Thank you.