I am writing to oppose the proposal to fully or partially rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I live in Grand Junction, Colorado and recently retired from a 30-year career as a Park Ranger and Outdoor Recreation Planner with the Bureau of Land Management.
In addition to my vocational connection to public lands, I am a lifelong beneficiary of the settings, activities, and experiences offered by America’s public lands, including many areas administered by the U. S. Forest Service. Starting in early childhood, National Forests in Colorado, including Arapahoe, Routt, White River, Rio Grande, Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison, have been the places I’ve gone to hike, backpack, fish, bike, and ski. They provide a place to disconnect from the stresses of modern life, reconnect with nature, spend time alone and with family and friends, improve my physical fitness and nourish my spirit.
Another special place for me and my family is the Bridger-Teton National Forest in Wyoming. Since I was seven years old, I’ve experienced the Bridger Wilderness on week-long backpacking and fishing trips nearly every summer. Those trips and others in roadless areas of the Bridger-Teton, and Colorado National Forests have been essential to my quality of life.
Accessing and participating in outdoor recreation often requires roads and trails. And I am grateful for the road system that provides access to our Forests. I also appreciate the broad spectrum of opportunities and experiences that our public lands provide – from scenic highway drives to OHV recreation, equestrian outings, mountain biking adventures, hiking on developed trails, and exploring wilderness areas where there are only primitive trails or no trails at all.
The U.S. Forest Service currently manages approximately 380,000 miles of roads and nearly 160,000 miles of trails. For twenty-five years, the roadless rule has kept 44.5 million acres of America's wildest national forest off-limits to new roads. This rule, and subsequent roadless rules like those enacted in Colorado were the result of extensive public involvement (over 1.6 million public comments). Rescinding the rule now would largely negate years of collaboration, negotiations, and agreements between diverse stakeholder groups. A Pew survey (Feb 2026) measured 76% voter support for keeping the rule — bipartisan, across every region of the country.
Protecting our remaining roadless areas will allow recreationists like me to continue to enjoy ample opportunities for road and trail-based recreation like mountain biking and OHV use, while preserving the opportunity for solace and the challenge of primitive backcountry experiences. Rescission of the Rule would open the door to actions that could permanently deprive me personally, and our society collectively, of the activities and experiences provided by roadless landscapes.
Preserve the Roadless Area Conservation Rule by selecting Alternative 1, the No Action Alternative of the draft EIS. Fully or partially rescinding the Roadless Rule under Alternatives 2 and 3 of the draft EIS would be a grave mistake.