Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-596274

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
    • “hiker/backpacker for nearly 60 years”
    • “enjoyed trekking through these precious few areas of wilderness”
    • “birding areas alone attract as many tourists as they do residents”
  • Environmental Protection Biodiversity
    • “preserve the wilderness that still exists”
    • “precious few areas of wilderness”
    • “roadless wilderness areas are a precious resource”

What it names

National Forests
Apalachicola National ForestOcala National Forest

The comment

As a 42-year resident of Florida, and a hiker/backpacker for nearly 60 years, I am opposed to lifting any of the restrictions currently in place for Roadless Area Conversation in Florida's national forests. My family and friends and I have enjoyed trekking through these precious few areas of wilderness in the Sunshine State for many decades, from the Keys and the Everglades in the south, to Ocala National Forest and others in the state's central region, to Apalachicola National Forest in the Panhandle. Florida is one of the fastest-growing states in the nation, in terms of population and development, and so it needs to do everything it (and the federal government)) can do to preserve the wilderness that still exists, for our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren. Our birding areas alone attract as many tourists as they do residents. These roadless wilderness areas are a precious resource for our state and its citizens.

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