Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-585357

Opposes rescissionPosted October 6, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

  • Wildlife Habitat
    • “flourishing of the plant and animal life”
    • “critical habitat for wildlife”
    • “large roadless tracts”
  • Water Quality Quantity
    • “clean our drinking water”
    • “roadless areas... provide... clean our drinking water”
  • Recreation Tourism Public Use
    • “enormous resource for the recreation economy”
    • “visits many of these forests”
    • “antidote to our underpaid and tiring working lives”

The comment

My family and I oppose the rollback of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as it protects what remains of our national forests. Forests are not city parks. The flourishing of the plant and animal life in them requires that they be large roadless tracts. These protections are vital in the Midwest where we are still recovering from two centuries of indiscriminate logging. From Wisconsin's Chequamegon-Nicolet to Michigan's Ottawa, Hiawatha, and Huron-Manistee, the Midwest’s national forests have important roadless areas that provide critical habitat for wildlife and also clean our drinking water. These roadless areas are also an enormous resource for the recreation economy in the Midwest. My rural family visits many of these forests whenever we have time off. They are an important antidote to our underpaid and tiring working lives. Stop rolling back protections for our public lands and leave our last wild forests intact. Working Americans demand it. Sincerely, Alex Morrison Sincerely, Mrs. Alex Morrison 210 Center St Hancock, MI 49930-2106 philtechart@gmail.com

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