I am writing to urge you to keep the Roadless Area Conservation Rule by supporting Alternative 1: No Action.
I have lived in Pierce, Kamiah, Kooskia, within the Wild & Scenic Middle Fork Clearwater River corridor, and, currently live in Moscow. As a long-time resident, recreationist and conservationist who highly values the great historical and wilderness character of our nearby Bitterroot National Forest (NF) and Nez-Perce-Clearwater NF, Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness Area (WA), and Selway-Bitterroot WA.
Enjoying and valuing these wild public places is my life-style; it’s part of who I am, and I’m not by a long-shot alone. Thousands of people – Idaho, Wyoming and Montana family, neighbors, townsfolk, as well as tourists and recreationists from all over the country and the world enter these wild places to hike, camp, swim, raft, kayak, ski, bike, horse ride, berry pick, scout wildflowers, practice photography, hunt, fish, bird, and learn and experience Lewis & Clark Expedition and Native American history … or to simply find peace and joy in nature. And they are able to do it all without despoiling the land, the rivers and lakes, nor the plant and animal life.
While Idaho operates under its own state-specific roadless rule, the proposed rescission of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule would directly affect the immediate and neighboring national forests and wilderness areas I know and use. These landscapes don't stop at state lines, nor at wilderness and national forest boundaries. Essential wildlife migration corridors, shared watersheds, old growth tree clusters, the trails and legends of Native and non-Native history, and regional recreation economies connect them directly to where I live.
The Roadless Rule has proven itself vitally protective. It continues to be supported broadly by millions of Americans. Even right here in logging country, not even the timber industry is asking for its rollback. If there is any agreement between the rural ‘left’ and the rural ‘right,’ the Roadless Rule would be the nexus!
In terms of wildfire frequency, rolling back the Roadless Rule will lead to more, not fewer. Research covering 1992–2024 found wildfires were four times as likely to start in areas with roads than in roadless forest tracts, and a separate study found more than 90 percent of wildfires nationwide occurred within half a mile of a road.
The Roadless Rule as written already allows the flexibility land managers need. It permits road construction to address fires, floods, or other catastrophic events, and to connect communities. Forest managers routinely conduct stewardship work in roadless areas — prescribed burning, wildlife habitat improvement — under the current rule.
These lands are the source of drinking water for downstream communities, home to iconic wildlife including the Yellowstone-area grizzly and elk populations and salmon species for whom Roadless Areas provide crucial sanctuary. These lands are also the backbone of regional outdoor recreation economies. Since 2001, protected roadless areas in Wyoming, Montana and Idaho have supported world-class hunting, fishing, and camping. Millions of Americans use these public lands every year, powering billion-dollar recreation economies across the West.
I urge you to reject rescission of the Rule and to keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact by supporting Alternative 1: No-Action.