Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-531487

Opposes rescissionPosted October 1, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

  • Wildlife Habitat
    • “protect wildlife habitat”
    • “Roadless landscapes can provide large, relatively intact areas for wildlife”
    • “Roads can fragment habitat”
    • “maintain connected habitat”
  • Water Quality Quantity
    • “clean drinking water”
    • “protecting intact watersheds”
    • “affect soils and waterways”
    • “Clean drinking water is a public resource”
  • Cultural Heritage Indigenous
    • “profound cultural and spiritual importance to the Blackfeet people”
    • “traditional cultural resources, sacred places”
    • “connected to Blackfeet cultural practices and gathering”
    • “significance extends far beyond their potential value for timber”
  • Environmental Protection Biodiversity
    • “intact landscapes that make our nation special”
    • “important ecosystems that support communities”
    • “protect these irreplaceable Montana landscapes”
    • “retain protections for the ecological... values of roadless areas”

What it names

National Forests
Flathead National ForestLewis and Clark National Forest
Roadless areas
Middle Fork

The comment

I am a Montana resident living on the Blackfeet Reservation, near the Lewis and Clark National Forest, Flathead National Forest and the Wild & Scenic Middle Fork of the Flathead River. I strongly oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I value our roadless lands because they protect wildlife habitat, clean drinking water, and the intact landscapes that make our nation special. These places are not simply undeveloped land—they are important ecosystems that support communities, wildlife, and future generations. I am particularly concerned about the potential impacts on the Badger-Two Medicine. The Badger-Two Medicine is a place of profound cultural and spiritual importance to the Blackfeet people. It contains traditional cultural resources, sacred places, and areas connected to Blackfeet cultural practices and gathering. Management decisions affecting these lands should recognize that their significance extends far beyond their potential value for timber, roads, or other extractive uses. I am also concerned about the effects of additional roads and development on wildlife habitat and water resources. Roadless landscapes can provide large, relatively intact areas for wildlife and can help maintain connected habitat. Roads can fragment habitat, increase human access and disturbance, and affect soils and waterways. Clean drinking water is a public resource that Montana communities depend upon, and protecting intact watersheds should be a fundamental consideration in federal land management. I understand that the Forest Service is considering wildfire risk reduction, forest management, and local decision-making as reasons for rescinding the Roadless Rule. Those concerns deserve consideration, but rescinding a nationwide protection is a much broader action than addressing specific forest-health or wildfire-management needs. The Forest Service should evaluate whether those objectives can be achieved through carefully targeted management while retaining protections for the ecological, cultural, and water-resource values of roadless areas. Please retain the 2001 Roadless Rule and protect these irreplaceable Montana landscapes for present and future generations. Thank you for considering my comment.

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