As a longtime resident of Flagstaff, Arizona, a city surrounded by the Coconino National Forest and other forest ecosystems, I would like to enthusiastically oppose the proposed action to rescind in its entirety the national 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Although I have read and considered the reasoning around lifting this rule, I believe it is not supported by any clear evidence. However, reopening old forest roads and areas to motor vehicle recreation creates several notable problems. First, with the incursion of motorized use in these areas, it actually increases wildfire risk. In our arid region, it does not take much to spark a wildfire, and parked and idle vehicles have been known to cause ignitions. Plus, the act of more fully dispersing human travel and activity on the forests only increases the likelihood of human-caused wildfire. As demonstrated this year with the Pocket Fire near Sedona (cause yet to be determined, though ignition happened near a popular recreating site), any fire in any location can impact our area with smoke, closed roads and recreation areas, and the destruction of ecosystems. The expansion of motorized use also disrupts wildlife, which can have an impact on hunting and fishing (where such vehicles cross streams and disrupt the habitat). The lifting of the Roadless Rule also could lead to unintended consequences of recreationists seeing it as a "free-for-all," perhaps violating various laws around driving on unestablished roads or into wilderness areas. I hope those who are considering this will recognize the clear problems so they will not take the blame for what overturning the rule will inflict.