Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-455283

Opposes rescissionPosted September 21, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

  • Water Quality Quantity
    • “protecting the soils from severe erosion”
    • “pollute potable water sources”
    • “buffer zone for rainfall runoff”
  • Environmental Protection Biodiversity
    • “destroy aquatic habitat”
    • “areas on our national forests that are still wild”
    • “intrinsic value of knowing there are areas... that are still wild”
  • Economic Impact Fiscal
    • “not enough money in the budget to fix them”
    • “not be enough income to pay for reopening and or constructing new roads”
    • “Do not open more roads until you can pay for the ones that you have a legitimate right to use”

What it names

National Forests
Kootenai National ForestWhite Mountain National Forest
Roadless areas
White Mountain

The comment

I thank you for this opportunity to comment on the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule by the USFS. I am a lifelong resident of New Hampshire. Having spent much time in the forest at an early age it made sense to study forestry as a science at the University of New Hampshire, where I graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree in forestry in 1975. From 1971 to 1975 I was a part time USFS employee in the White Mountain National Forest in New Hampshire and the Kootenai National Forest in Montana in 1975. Without the possibility of full time USFS employment two friends with forestry degrees and myself started a private forestry consulting firm (Forest Land Improvement) in New Hampshire in 1975. It evolved into a multifaceted business covering all aspects of forest management activities including USFS contract work covering mostly timber stand improvement. The business became a corporation which I owned for the prior 5 years to my retirement in 2020. The business continues today under new ownership, providing continuity to the many clients using its forest management services. My total time of employment in this firm was 44 years. I have given a great deal of thought about the roadless rule rescission. I am against this and will list a few reasons. ~We are experiencing more severe weather events particularly rain in the WMNF. Accessible roads have washed out and there is not enough money in the budget to fix them. Do not open more roads until you can pay for the ones that you have a legitimate right to use. ~Much of the 2001 roadless areas have had timber stand improvement work following extensive cutting in the past. This growing stock will not be ready for intermediate, low value thinnings for another 20+ years and maturity for another 50+ years. There will not be enough income to pay for reopening and or constructing new roads. ~The roadless areas lie with the upper elevation limits of the forest. The forest growth in this area is a buffer zone for rainfall runoff thus protecting the soils from severe erosion. Its this erosion that can potentially pollute potable water sources and destroy aquatic habitat. ~The intrinsic value of knowing there are areas on our national forests that are still wild provides a physical and emotional attachment for the people of this country both forest users and non users to a time when our country was being first settled.

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