Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-460814

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
    • “shelter vulnerable wildlife”
    • “fragment wildlife habitat”
    • “spread invasive species”
    • “undermine ecological resilience”
  • Water Quality Quantity
    • “safeguard clean drinking water”
    • “degrade water quality”
    • “clean water”
  • Climate Carbon Storage
    • “store massive amounts of carbon”
    • “buffer the worsening impacts of climate change”
    • “climate stability”
  • Recreation Tourism Public Use
    • “hike, forage, bike, fish, camp, ski, climb”
    • “recreation opportunities”
    • “simply breathe in a world that feels increasingly chaotic”

What it names

Works cited
10.1016/j.biocon.2026.11195010.1186/s42408-026-00450-2

The comment

Secretary Rollins, I am writing because I’ve reached my limit. I strongly oppose the USDA’s proposal to eliminate or weaken the Roadless Rule, and I am decidedly fed up with a government and a Congress that keep putting profit ahead of the needs of citizens, wildlife, and the environment. This proposal is not just misguided — it is reckless, destructive, and completely out of step with what the American people deserve. Enough is enough. Roadless forests are among the last intact, resilient ecosystems we have left. They safeguard clean drinking water, shelter vulnerable wildlife, and store massive amounts of carbon that help buffer the worsening impacts of climate change. Millions of people rely on these places to hike, forage, bike, fish, camp, ski, climb, and simply breathe in a world that feels increasingly chaotic. These landscapes are not expendable. They are irreplaceable. Expanding roads into these areas would cause permanent harm. Roads spread invasive species, fragment wildlife habitat, degrade water quality, and undermine ecological resilience. They also increase wildfire ignition risk — a fact well‑documented in research. Once roads and clearcuts carve up these landscapes, the damage is permanent. Weakening or repealing the Roadless Rule would be a grave mistake with consequences that cannot be undone. I do not support any of the proposed action alternatives that roll back the Roadless Rule. I urge the USDA to abandon this destructive effort and instead strengthen its commitment to protecting America’s roadless forests — for the clean water, climate stability, wildlife habitat, and recreation opportunities they provide. This country cannot afford more policies that sacrifice long‑term public good for short‑term political or financial gain. Our forests, our communities, and our future deserve better. Leave the Roadless Rule in place. References: Aplet, G.H., Hartger, P. & Dietz, M.S. Three-decade record of contiguous-U.S. national forest wildfires indicates increased density of ignitions near roads. fire ecol 22, 8 (2026) https://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-026-00450-2 Mildrexler, D.J., Berner, L.T., Law, B.E. & Both, M.S. Roadless rule rescission threatens highest integrity forest ecosystems in the United States. Biological Conservation 321, 111950 (2026) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2026.111950 Sincerely, Gerald Hallead Traverse City, MI 49684-6605 photodude48@gmail.com

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