“It has been argued that this change is necessary to address forest health, public safety and wildfire risk”
“the existing rule already allows limited exceptions to address specific management needs”
“address those needs through targeted solutions”
The comment
I am writing as a New Hampshire tourism business owner to express my opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule.
New Hampshire's mountains, forests, lakes and rivers are some of our state's greatest assets and a significant driver of tourism. They are a main reason people choose to visit New Hampshire, return year after year, and support the thousands of small businesses that make up our tourism economy.
My family has operated a hospitality business in New Hampshire for generations. Since the late 1800s, visitors have been escaping city life to come to New Hampshire to experience the natural beauty, open spaces and undeveloped landscapes that make our state different from more developed destinations. More than a century later, that is still why many of our guests come here.
If these special places are compromised by roads and development, it will be impossible to fully restore them to what they were. Conservation of these areas needs to be seen as a long-term investment in maintaining a strong tourism economy in our state.
Both visitors to New Hampshire and those who choose to move here to work and raise a family value the natural, quiet and remote recreational opportunities our state provides. People are looking for places where they can get away from noise, traffic and development and reconnect with the outdoors. That is something New Hampshire has to offer, and something we should be careful not to lose.
It has been argued that this change is necessary to address forest health, public safety and wildfire risk. As I understand it, however, the existing rule already allows limited exceptions to address specific management needs. Rather than removing protections altogether, it seems reasonable to address those needs through targeted solutions while continuing to protect these areas from unnecessary roads and development.
We have an obligation to consider the long term impact this could have for future generations. New Hampshire has benefited tremendously from generations before us who had the foresight to conserve these extraordinary places. We should extend that same stewardship to those who come after us.
I respectfully ask the USDA and Forest Service to retain the protections of the 2001 Roadless Rule and pursue targeted solutionseri for specific forest-management needs rather than eliminating nationwide protections for these important lands.
Peggy Ames
Ames Farm Inn
2800 Lake Shore Rd
Gilford, NH 03249