Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-598952

Opposes rescissionPosted October 6, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

What it names

National Forests
Inyo National ForestLassen National ForestLos Padres National Forest

The comment

I strongly oppose the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I live near Los Padres National Forest and oftentimes recreate in the National forests of the Sierra Nevadas (such as Inyo National Forest, and Lassen National Forest). These roadless forests are some of the last places where we can still find and experience true wilderness. They are oftentimes critically important to ensuring the local communities surrounding them are supported through tourism. The Roadless Rule is immensely important for ensuring the biodiversity, water protection, and health of this beautiful state are protected. The rule also already allows important wildfire resilience work to be conducted and opening up these areas to roads and other disturbances would increase their fire risk due to human activities such as vehicle sparks, cigarettes, and arson. Removing the national protections would open these last intact forests to new roads and industrial logging at a time when agency capacity for careful planning and public engagement is already stretched to the limits. Removing the rule would also damage the intrinsic value wilderness provides to humanity. Please keep the Roadless Rule in place.

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