Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-488209

Opposes rescissionPosted September 28, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

Environmental Protection Biodiversity
- “protects public lands against degradation”
- “landmark moment in extending protections”
- “good sense from an environmental protection standpoint”
Economic Impact Fiscal
- “helped end decades of expensive overbuilding”
- “backlog of infrastructure projects”
- “rule makes good fiscal sense”
Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “countless recreational experience”
- “diminished without the rule's protections”

The comment

I strongly oppose the proposed repeal of the 2001 Roadless Rule. I believe strongly in the value of this rule. It protects public lands against degradation. When it was issued, the roadless rule was a landmark moment in extending protections to areas outside congressionally designated wilderness areas. Moreover, it helped end decades of expensive overbuilding of the Forest Service road network, overbuilding that left the USFS with a backlog of infrastructure projects that it could not possibly catch up with. In other words, the rule makes good fiscal sense as well as good sense from an environmental protection standpoint. I can personally attest to its effects. Forest Service lands protected by the roadless rule have provided me and my family with countless recreational experience that would have been diminished without the rule's protections. Sincerely, Bryant Etheridge 607 Marshall St Lexington, VA 24450-1921 bryantetheridge@hotmail.com