Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-580395

Opposes rescissionPosted October 6, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

  • Recreation Tourism Public Use
    • “hikes and backpacking trips in the wilderness”
    • “sacred sense of that untrammeled wild space”
    • “precious to me”
  • Forest Management Wildfire
    • “repeatedly impacted by enormous wildfires”
    • “Roads dramatically increase that risk”
    • “Vehicles spark fires”
  • Climate Carbon Storage
    • “with climate change the risk of extreme drought only increases”
    • “measured only 8 inches of rain for the entire calendar year”

What it names

National Forests
Gila National Forest

The comment

I strongly oppose rolling back the Roadless Rule. For the past 25+ years I have lived within a couple miles of the Gila Wilderness. My hikes and backpacking trips in the wilderness and the broader Gila National Forest are precious to me, as is what I might call a sacred sense of that untrammeled wild space. I have also been repeatedly impacted by enormous wildfires in the national forest. In 2025, I measured only 8 inches of rain for the entire calendar year. There’s no getting around the fact that with climate change the risk of extreme drought only increases, and with that, wildfire. Roads dramatically increase that risk. Vehicles spark fires, and careless drivers toss cigarettes and take other high-risk behaviors deeper into the tinder-dry forest. We are in a time when greater caution, not less, is needed. Roadless areas must be kept roadless.

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