“Dear Secretary Rollins: I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to…”

Dear Secretary Rollins: I wish to express my strong opposition to the U.S. Forest Service's proposal to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The designated roadless areas on our national forests are some the last remaining wild places in America where nature is at its best. It's because they are undeveloped that they are deeply cherished by generations of hunters, anglers, hikers, equestrians, naturalists, birders, campers, and others. It's because they are undeveloped that they provide priceless natural-resource services to rural communities and all Americans, including clean drinking water and purified air, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, especially for rare species, and ecological biodiversity. Once these environmental and recreational assets are impaired or destroyed, they won't come back for a very, very long time. Here are additional reasons I urge you to maintain the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as is: - Protect clean drinking water. Communities including Harrisonburg, Staunton, and others downstream rely on clean, low-cost drinking water from roadless areas in the national forest. - Safeguard rich wildlife habitat. These areas provide habitat for black bears, rare salamanders, 250 bird species, and other wildlife. Roadless areas in Virginia’s national forest contain exceptional biodiversity, including 43 at-risk species and species found nowhere else on Earth. - Offer outstanding outdoor recreation. Visitors can hike, mountain bike, fish, hunt, camp, ride horses, study nature, and find solitude and renewal in these wild places—experiences that are essential to America’s outdoor tradition. - Strengthen local economies. People who visit roadless areas support nearby communities by spending on food, fuel, lodging, campsites, gear, and other services. Among other things, the Forest Service says repealing the Roadless Rule will allow for better fire management in these areas, and more "local control" over individual national forests. However: - More roads increase wildfire risk. The rule already allows fuel reduction, small tree thinning, and other wildfire prevention management. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. Nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within 1/2 mile of roads. From 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in roaded areas than in roadless forest tracts. Even the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology organization supports the current Roadless Rule. - More roads increase non-native species. Road construction equipment disturbs the soil and carries seeds of non-native species into remote areas that previously harbored only native plants. Non-native species (e.g.,stilt grass, garlic mustard, “mile-a-minute,”) crowd out and native wildflowers and other plants. - More vehicles mean more erosion. Dozens of volunteers with the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club maintain 61 trails in two districts on the George Washington National Forest that combined, have the most concentration of roadless acreage in the East, about 154,658 acres. Potential increases in vehicles on the steep slopes would lead to severe erosion, damaging both trails and streams. - The Forest Services is severely underfunded. The agency has a $9 billion maintenance backlog on 370,000 miles of road already under its purview. Muddy runoff from unmaintained roads pollutes streams and degrades adjacent ecosystems. - Local control will not be sufficient. While staff decision-making at the forest level is important to address localized conditions, it is not an adequate substitute for a national conservation-oriented initiative such as the Roadless Rule. Further, the current administration’s policies have added blanket mandates on the agency while simultaneously cutting the workforce, scientific capacity, and budget. Thank you.