Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-579840

Opposes rescissionPosted October 6, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

  • Environmental Protection Biodiversity
    • “impact it would have on the ecosystems, and the biodiversity”
    • “home to many endangered species”
    • “native plants and animals, it would be devastating”
    • “wealth of biodiversity”
  • Recreation Tourism Public Use
    • “passionate about the natural, untouched beauty”
    • “partake heavily in outdoor pursuits”
    • “Wilderness recreation and passive-use values are economically substantial”
    • “outdoor pursuits that provide rejuvenation to so many”
  • Climate Carbon Storage
    • “old-growth forests store 35 to 70% more carbon”
    • “carbon sinks for our planet to sustain”
    • “global warming hasn't expedited any faster”
  • Economic Impact Fiscal
    • “Wilderness recreation alone generates an estimated $574 million annually”
    • “passive-use value — the value people place on knowing an area remains intact”
    • “thriving industry”

What it names

Roadless areas
Bear SwampCraggy MountainLaurel MountainSouth Mills River
Works cited
10.3389/ffgc.2022.979528

The comment

I would like it to be known that the most special places on this planet are the ones least touched by humans. I was born and raised in the United States of America, a proud American, and honestly all of my fondest experiences are in remote areas of this beautiful country. It’s beauty comes from the untouched landscapes. I stand for keeping the Roadless Rule in place. As I mentioned, because I cannot emphasize it enough, I am passionate about the natural, untouched beauty of this country, and this planet. I have long been a landscape photographer, having gone to school for photography, specifically to photograph the landscape of our beautiful areas. I also partake heavily in outdoor pursuits, away from the chaos of cities. It cleanses me, and provides a reset to my system to endure the daily stresses of our society. I've lived in Michigan, and explored the Manistee National Forest, where Bear Swamp is now threatened by this potential rescinding of the Roadless Rules Act. I’ve lived in Colorado a good part of my life exploring in the backcountry, and summiting many 14ers, including the now endangered Mt. Antero. Then there’s Wyoming, where I’ve backpacked in the Teton National Forest, Montana, Idaho, Utah, California, and New Mexico. I’ve hiked along all three major trails systems that are threatened as well, which include, The Pacific Coast Trail (and John Muir Trail), the Continental Divide, and the Appalachian Trail. I’m living in western North Carolina where I now call home, and I frequently hike and bike in areas that are currently protected by the Roadless Rule Act, like South Mills River (bordering the Cradle of Forestry, the birthplace of forestry), Bearwallow, Craggy Mountain, Laurel Mountain, Linville Gorge, Sam Knob, to name a few. I can’t imagine experiencing the same joy, wonder, and awe that I have if these places were to be developed in any way, or in other words touched by humans in any destructive manner, including roads or otherwise. Not only that, but the impact it would have on the ecosystems, and the biodiversity, including all of the native plants and animals, it would be devastating. I’ve also worked in the outdoor industry, and it is largely because of my passion for the outdoors. I know firsthand that it is a thriving industry, and it is for the reason of having places like the ones that are currently protected under the Roadless Rules Act (Wilderness recreation and passive-use values are economically substantial. Economists estimate Western wilderness areas hold passive-use value — the value people place on knowing an area remains intact — at roughly $168 per acre. Wilderness recreation alone generates an estimated $574 million annually in economic value, based on an average of $39 per recreation day. Road construction in roadless areas would not destroy these values everywhere at once, but it would change the conditions on a substantial share of acreage where they currently exist (Loomis 2000; Izon et al. 2010)). There is a reason the Act was put into place, and the reason is to support something that is greater than all of us, even though it is a part of all of us. I am in full support of keeping the Roadless Rule Act in place. It is serving a need that goes far beyond humans. The old growth in many of the forests that are now threatened by the rescinding of the Roadless Rules Act, are likely a part of the reason that global warming hasn’t expedited any faster that it already has (old-growth forests store 35 to 70% more carbon, including in the soils, compared to logged stands — DA et al., 2022 (https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2022.979528)). These forests are also home to many endangered species, and other animals who continue to lose their territory to human development. We need to keep the Roadless Rules Act in place, for all life, including this one planet that we all share. There is much to lose, including but not limited to, home to many endangered species, a wealth of biodiversity, carbon sinks for our planet to sustain, outdoor pursuits that provide rejuvenation to so many, no matter the color or their skin, or who they vote for, and once it’s gone, it can never be replaced. I’m concerned that the rescinding of the Roadless Rule is for reasons that reach far beyond mere wildfire protection, and more for profit. I believe that there are better alternatives to go about wildfire protection and mitigation, while keeping the Roadless Rule in place. I strongly urge your consideration to keep the Roadless Rule in place.

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