FS-2025-0001-582611

Dear Tom Schultz, My comment is submitted from the standpoint of a resident near national forest roadless areas — someone with a direct, ongoing, geographic stake in what the 2001 Rule does and what its rescission would undo. I live in a very rural forested area directly connected to Craggy Mountain. Our water ways, watersheds, and all ecological systems are attached and affected by each others. My family, our 5 kids and two dogs, all rely on the safety of the forest around us to sustain our beautiful life. As a board member of a local non-profit supporting this community I have a deep seated commitment and dedication to protect the safety of this area fro our community. There are countless heartbreaking stories I can share related to the horrific events that unfolded the hours, days, weeks, months and years after Hurricane Helene destroyed our immediate area. Coutless community members lost lives, loved ones, and all of their wellbeing and security. We work hard every day to help support those who were directly affected. The safety of this area is pivotally attached to the adjacent roadless areas and ecosystems that support them. Our drinking water is directly sourced from these areas around us. During the aftermath of Hurricane Helene, access to clean drinking water saved our lives. We rely on it to survive here, and in times when we are cut-off from the surrounding areas it is essential for every day life to continue. During the winter we lose access to our road systems for weeks at a time every year. Attached is my full comment with cited evidence and information. The forests protected by this rule aren't in decline because of it — they're intact because of it. That's the relevant fact here.