Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-496228

Opposes rescissionPosted September 28, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “provide recreation and solitude”
- “My family values these areas”
- “Profanity Roadless Area in the Colville National Forest”
Environmental Protection Biodiversity
- “Roadless National Areas are some of the last best places”
- “essential that they are protected”
- “support the current 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule”
Forest Management Wildfire
- “Eighty five percent of wildfires start near roads”
- “Building more roads makes no sense”
- “Forest Service admits it cannot maintain”

What it names

National Forests: Colville National Forest
Roadless areas: Profanity

The comment

I’m writing to support the current 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I value the existing rule because it places I know and love that provide recreation and solitude. My family values these areas, especially the Profanity Roadless Area in the Colville National Forest. ( I oppose changes that repeal, weaken or rescind the 2001 Roadless Rule. Roadless National Areas are some of the last best places in our country and it is essential that they are protected. Eighty five percent of wildfires start near roads. There are 370,000 miles of roads existing today in our national forests the Forest Service admits it cannot maintain. Building more roads makes no sense!