Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

“Opposition Toward Rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule As a consulting forester with a bachelors in environmental…”

Small family: One letter sent by 3 to 9 people, copied or lightly reworded. It counts as one unique comment. The record does not say which organisation ran it.

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24
  • 3 submissions
  • 2 versions of the text
  • 3 added words of their own

When it arrived

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

Oct 6

Oct 6: 3 submissions, 1 unique comments

What it names

Works cited
10.1186/1735-2746-10-23

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

The letter

As sent in FS-2025-0001-604363, the comment that stands for the group.

Opposition Toward Rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule As a consulting forester with a bachelors in environmental science, I strongly oppose the USFS decision the rescind the 2001 Roadless Rule. While roads are essential for basic forestry practices; Forestry, let alone bulldozers do not belong in wilderness areas. The value of wilderness areas lies within their resilience. With the 2001 roadless rule in tact, these wilderness areas remain as ecosystem and public servants to current as well as future generations. As climate change continues to push us further into the unknown, these roadless wilderness areas provide essential buffers for water availability, wildlife populations, insects, reduced wildfire risk, and native plant dominance. (Miller Kenton, 1999). As I have seen first hand in my line of work, allowing the construction of roads in these areas will permanently dismantle the economical and ecological benefits associate with roadless areas. The environmental impacts associated with forest road construction are severe and expensive, especially in steep terrain (Caliskan, 2013). I would understand if the USFS decided to allow exceptions to this rule for the purpose of wildfire mitigation and public recreation in urban-wild land interfaces. However, to completely rescind the Roadless Rule is far too broad of a change. It is obvious that this decision is not in favor of the public interest, forest health, natural resource equity, or local economies. With several roadless areas right here in the San Juans, I can confidently say running a bulldozer uphill will have negative impacts to our local economies and environment (Holmes et-al. 2016). Traveling to a wilderness area is a spiritual experience that feels like traveling back in time. The 2001 Roadless Rule is one of the best decisions this country has ever made. To conclude, removing it would be one of this country’s biggest mistakes. Caliskan, E. Environmental impacts of forest road construction on mountainous terrain. J Environ Health Sci Engineer 10, 23 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1735-2746-10-23 International Journal of Wilderness. Miller Kenton, 35-39, 1999). https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C6&q=ecological+benefits+of+wilderness+areas&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&t=1791332940345&u=%23p%3DR7-IhIl3-IoJ A synthesis of the economic values of wilderness TP Holmes, …, JM Bowker, …, J Englin, …, E Hjerpe, …, JB Loomis, …, S Phillips, …, R Richardson Journal of Forestry , 2016 https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C6&q=benifits+of+wilderness+areas&btnG=#d=gs_md_aa-d&t=1791332621420&u=%2Fscholar%3Fq%3Dinfo%3AKzYOlII3gk0J%3Ascholar.google.com%2F%26scioq%3Dbenefits%2Bof%2Bwilderness%2Bareas%26dv%3D0%26output%3Daa%26ei%3DepDFatK1Ite46rQPmoOZiAE%26scirp%3D2%26hl%3Den
← 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