Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-489207

Opposes rescissionPosted September 28, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

Wildlife Habitat
- “biological function for which it was promulgated”
- “effect the wildlife that we go to see”
- “57% of vulnerable U.S. wildlife species have suitable habitat in roadless areas”
- “reduces poorly-represented species of conservation concern”
Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “spend my time hiking and birdwatching”
- “additional roads would impact the wilderness experience”
- “family has hiked and camped in these mountains”
Environmental Protection Biodiversity
- “retain it”
- “Keep the protections, please”
- “species of conservation concern”

What it names

National Forests: Pisgah National Forest
Roadless areas: Graveyard Ridge (addition)
Works cited: 10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01943

The comment

To the Roadless Rule Rulemaking Team: I live in Western North Carolina and moved here because I love the mountain and spend my time hiking and birdwatching. The 2001 Rule, by any honest reading of the federal monitoring record, has performed the biological function for which it was promulgated, and as a wildlife observer familiar with that record I urge the Department to retain it. My family has hiked and camped in these mountains and additional roads would impact the wilderness experience and effect the wildlife that we go to see. Regarding the Graveyard Ridge (addition) in the Pisgah National Forest, North Carolina: “Species-level modeling shows 57% of vulnerable U.S. wildlife species have suitable habitat in roadless areas. Adding unprotected roadless areas to protected areas markedly reduces poorly-represented species of conservation concern. — Dietz et al., 2021 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01943)” Keep the protections, please. With best wishes, CommentID: RLC-20260926-JORZ54