Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-456355

Opposes rescissionPosted September 21, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

  • Environmental Protection Biodiversity
    • “ecosystem health”
    • “wildlife habitat and landscape connectivity”
    • “Forest fragmentation has a significant impact on wildlife”
    • “degradation of forest habitat”
  • Water Quality Quantity
    • “clean water and healthy watersheds”
    • “add nutrients and sediment to streams and rivers”
    • “affecting downstream ecosystems”
  • Recreation Tourism Public Use
    • “hiking and backpacking”
    • “natural spaces untouched by human infrastructure development”
    • “most memorable experiences on the Pacific Northwest Trail”
  • Economic Impact Fiscal
    • “cost of expanding the National Forest road system”
    • “immense financial cost in building and maintaining roads”
    • “long-term cost of maintaining, reconstructing, and eventually decommissioning additional roads”

What it names

National Forests
Kootenai National Forest

The comment

I live in Corvallis, Oregon and am writing to urge the U.S. Department of Agriculture to retain the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule and select the No Action Alternative. My connection to National Forest lands includes hiking and backpacking. Having natural spaces untouched by human infrastructure development is crucial not only for ecosystem health but also for allowing people to connect with the earth, improving both physical and mental health. Northwest Peak is one place that has shaped my views on this proposal. It is within the Northwest Peak Inventoried Roadless Area in Kootenai National Forest. My time hiking on Northwest Peak was one of the most memorable experiences on the Pacific Northwest Trail. I began the hike full of doubt, but a sky full of stars glowing in a golden sunset allowed me to reset and find the ground. I am concerned about the cost of expanding the National Forest road system. There is not only an immense financial cost in building and maintaining roads, but also a huge cost to the ecosystems that are disrupted by development and increased human traffic. I am concerned about wildlife habitat and landscape connectivity. Forest fragmentation has a significant impact on wildlife and the degradation of forest habitat. I am concerned about clean water and healthy watersheds. Increased human traffic in wild areas will add nutrients and sediment to streams and rivers, affecting downstream ecosystems, including agriculture, fish, and other aquatic animals. I believe maintaining a national conservation baseline matters. The beauty of these natural areas cannot be replicated, regrown, or replaced by a form of human development. These areas have developed over geological time frames, and ignorant human activity in the name of short-term gain has no place without careful ecological consideration. Before rescinding the national rule, I would like USDA to answer this question: How would USDA account for the long-term cost of maintaining, reconstructing, and eventually decommissioning additional roads? For these reasons, I urge USDA to retain the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule and select the No Action Alternative. Thank you for considering my comments.

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