FS-2025-0001-461669

I have been a regular hiker in National and State Forests for over ten years. During that time, I have been a resident of California, Utah and Wyoming, experiencing firsthand the results of different state's forest management policies as well as federal policy. I have also seen personally taken before-and-after photos of the results of logging, and spoken to people in the industry. There is no doubt in my mind that we desperately need to rescind the 2001 Roadless Rule. To protect and preserve our National Forests as the priceless treasures that they are, we must reduce fire fuels and enable and maintain the necessary road access. Secondarily, though also important, National Forests are a public resource whose stated purpose under the Organic Administration Act of 1897, under which most national forests were established, is: "No national forest shall be established, except to improve and protect the forest within the boundaries, or for the purpose of securing favorable conditions of water flows, and to furnish a continuous supply of timber for the use and necessities of citizens of the United States…" Rescinding the Roadless Rule is a return to the integrity of the purposes for which National Forests were instituted. ref: https://www.fs.usda.gov/forestmanagement/aboutus/histperspective.shtml I 100% agree with Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz when he said, “Active forest management is not an option. It’s essential. More than 40% of inventoried roadless areas, primarily in the West, have high or very high wildfire hazard potential. And only 5% of those areas have received hazardous fuels reduction treatments since 2014." Approximately 35% percent of national forest land is available for regularly scheduled timber harvest, and about ½ of 1 percent of those trees are harvested in any 1 year. This is just one example of how the planned and intended reduction of wildfire fuels in the forests is far below original calculations. ref. https://www.fs.usda.gov/about-agency/newsroom/releases/usda-acts-remove-roadless-rule-restrictions-exacerbate-rising, https://www.fs.usda.gov/forestmanagement/aboutus/today.shtml Recent White house Administrations and misguided environmental groups have sought to limit human interference with the forests. Leaving the caretaking to Nature results in catastrophic wildfires, Nature's way of clearing out the forests of deadwood. Unfortunately, everything else in and near the forest will burn, too - animals, insects, birds, people, and homes. According to the National Interagency Fire Center, between 1983 and 2000, no single year had more than 7.4 million acres burned by wildfire in the U.S. After the Roadless Rule took effect in 2001, at least 13 years had burns exceeding 7.4 million acres, and three of those years exceeded 10 million acres, a heartbreaking 35% escalation in devastation. (see US Wildfires chart) To put these numbers in perspective, before the Roadless Rule, from 1989 to 2001, wildfires scorched 46 million acres in the U.S. In the 12 years from 2012 to 2024 - with the Roadless Rule "protecting" our forests for more than 20 years - the number of acres burned MORE THAN DOUBLED to almost 93 million acres destroyed by wildfire. ref. US Wildfires chart Those who blame climate change for increased wildfire devastation should be the loudest proponents of rescission of the Roadless Rule. If rising temperatures are literally fanning the flames, our mandate to act with proven stewardship strategies is that much more imperative. Aggressive thinning, controlled burns, and responsible harvesting are the sustainable, environmentally responsible paths to preserve our national forests. Proof that the Roadless Rule is, actually, groundless, can be found in the Black Hills National Forest in South Dakota and Wyoming. (see photo of the Black Hills National Forest) The areas inside the yellow lines in the photo were thinned in 2005. The areas outside are being devoured by beetles that were unable to penetrate the thinned areas. The thinned areas stand resilient, their canopies green and unbroken. Outside the thinned area is pestilence and death, brought to you by the policies and fallacies in the Roadless Rule and its supporters. ref: Black Hills National Forest photo To sum up, I love our forests. They are a source of solace, a respite from the cacophony of the digital world, and majestically beautiful. To continue to let them burn in the Roadless Rule's foolish pursuit of preservational purity would be ignorant and backwards - completely counterproductive to the goals of conservation. I support the USDA and the Forest Service in the rescission of the Roadless Rule.