Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-541755

Opposes rescissionPosted October 4, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

  • Water Quality Quantity
    • “protect the headwaters that supply our drinking water”
    • “Healthy forests clean our water and air”
  • Environmental Protection Biodiversity
    • “provide habitat for native species”
    • “biodiversity that keeps these ecosystems healthy”
    • “protect the last undeveloped areas”
  • Recreation Tourism Public Use
    • “support outdoor recreation and tourism”
    • “local economies and livelihoods depend on”
    • “give people places to restore their physical and mental health”
  • Forest Management Wildfire
    • “roads are a well-documented source of fire ignitions”
    • “most urgent fuel reduction needs are near the communities”
    • “without opening protected backcountry to road building”

What it names

National Forests
Tahoe National Forest

The comment

Dear Special Areas: Roadless Area Conservation, se01nsnn se01nsnn , I am writing to oppose the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (Docket FS-2025-0001, RIN 0596-AD66). I live in Truckee, California, near the Tahoe National Forest. The Roadless Rule protects the last undeveloped areas of our national forests, and these lands do work that affects every Californian. They protect the headwaters that supply our drinking water. They support outdoor recreation and tourism that local economies and livelihoods depend on. They provide habitat for native species and the biodiversity that keeps these ecosystems healthy. I want to be clear that I understand and value the need for active forest management. I live with wildfire risk every season, and I support the Forest Service's work to thin overgrown stands and reduce hazardous fuels. But rescinding the Roadless Rule is not the right way to accomplish that goal. Building new roads into undeveloped forest brings more people, vehicles, and equipment into remote areas, and roads are a well-documented source of fire ignitions. The most urgent fuel reduction needs are near the communities and infrastructure at risk, and that work can and should move forward without opening protected backcountry to road building and logging. We also need to recognize that people and nature are deeply interconnected. Healthy forests clean our water and air, support the species that keep ecosystems in balance, and give people places to restore their physical and mental health. Many of these benefits can't be easily measured in dollars, and that's exactly why they are so often undervalued. Once undeveloped land is opened to roads and logging, the damage to those connections can't be undone, and a cost benefit analysis will never capture the full loss. I urge the Forest Service to withdraw this proposal, keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place, and focus its forest management efforts where they will do the most to protect communities. Sincerely, Andrea Luck Truckee, CA Andrea Luck 10795 Pine Cone Road Truckee, CA 96161 Sincerely, Andrea Luck

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