Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-360891

Opposes rescissionPosted September 12, 2026 On Regulations.gov

Exact copy — Byte-identical to another submission. This comment stands for 2 submissions in its group.

Not scored for substance: the comment does not clear the floor of substantive signal.

Topics

Forest Management Wildfire
- “Rather than reduce the risk of wildfires, it will only increase it”
- “fragmenting or dividing forests into smaller areas via roads could actually directly result in an increased likelihood of extreme wildfires”
- “The construction of roads would further exacerbate this risk”
Wildlife Habitat
- “protects some of the wildest forests we have left”
- “forests that protect critical wildlife habitat”
- “Revoking the Roadless Rule puts landscapes, wildlife, and communities at risk”
Water Quality Quantity
- “protect critical wildlife habitat and drinking water for millions”
- “drinking water for millions”
Public Opinion Support
- “wildly popular across the country”
- “over 600,000 people submitting comments to the US Forest Service last year in support of keeping the rule in place”
- “American people overwhelmingly called for our national forests to be protected”

What it names

Works cited: 10.1038/s41467-024-53460-6

The comment

Going through with this decision to repeal the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule will cause immense harm to our country. Rather than reduce the risk of wildfires, it will only increase it. A recent study (doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-53460-6) concludes that fragmenting or dividing forests into smaller areas via roads could actually directly result in an increased likelihood of extreme wildfires. Whats more, 13% of roadless land currently protected experienced wildfires of high or moderate severity between 1984 and 2024 as per the Trump administrations Federal Register filing. The construction of roads would further exacerbate this risk. Not only would our beautiful forests, which are a source of pride for many Americans, be marred by these potential roads but they would also become much more dangerous to surrounding communities. I strongly object to this measure to remove protections from our public lands and urge the Department to reconsider. The Forest Service should keep the Roadless Rule intact exactly as it is. Do not weaken or repeal this critical policy. National forests are the heart of our public lands. The Roadless Area Conservation Rule protects some of the wildest forests we have left, forests that protect critical wildlife habitat and drinking water for millions. Revoking the Roadless Rule puts landscapes, wildlife, and communities at risk. Not only is the Roadless Rule good policy, it's also wildly popular across the country, with over 600,000 people submitting comments to the US Forest Service last year in support of keeping the rule in place. And more than 20 years ago, the American people overwhelmingly called for our national forests to be protected for future generations. Revoking the Roadless Rule would destroy the natural inheritance we leave for our children.