Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-463727

Opposes rescissionPosted September 22, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

  • Wildlife Habitat
    • “safeguard some of our nationals most intact fish and wildlife habitat”
    • “protect fish, wildlife, wild places”
    • “habitat restoration”
  • Recreation Tourism Public Use
    • “provides amazing outdoor experiences”
    • “frequently recreates on portions of the Mark Twain National Forest”
    • “those of us willing to "earn it"”
  • Economic Impact Fiscal
    • “nearly $11 billion in deferred maintenance”
    • “does not need to add anymore roads to its network”
    • “simply does not make sense financially in the long or short term”

What it names

National Forests
Mark Twain National Forest

The comment

I am a Missouri resident that frequently recreates on portions of the Mark Twain National Forest as well as other National Forests throughout the country. I am personally opposed to any move to fully rescind the 2001 Roadless Area conservation Rule. This rule helps to safeguard some of our nationals most intact fish and wildlife habitat and provides amazing outdoor experiences for those of us willing to put in the effort. This existing rule provides flexibility for wildfire mitigation activities, habitat restoration, grazing, and recreation. With nearly $11 billion in deferred maintenance, the USFS does not need to add anymore roads to its network- this simply does not make sense financially in the long or short term. I support the no action alternative- leave this rule as is to protect fish, wildlife, wild places, and those of us willing to "earn it".

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