Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-599800

Opposes rescissionPosted October 7, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “cares about recreation and natural spaces”
- “make them unusable for recreation and tourism”
- “sacred spaces”
- “UNTRAMMELED by man”
Forest Management Wildfire
- “fallacy that this will create fewer fires”
- “Fires are FOUR times more likely to start near a road”
- “Fires are sparked by roads”
- “We need MORE fire fighters, not more roads”
Environmental Protection Biodiversity
- “endanger those spaces”
- “losing millions of acres of sacred spaces”
- “UNTRAMMELED by man”

The comment

I have a family who cares about recreation and natural spaces. Taking away the Roadless Rule would endanger those spaces and make them unusable for recreation and tourism. It is a fallacy that this will create fewer fires. Fires are FOUR times more likely to start near a road. Fires are sparked by roads, this was observed BY the Forest Service. We need MORE fire fighters, not more roads! We need more funding for the USFS. This is only being done because of special interests groups and loggers. My family EMIGRATED here for logging, but they would hate to see the roadless rule repealed. This is a disgusting exercise of priories based on capitalistic endeavors by rich people. The only people who are benefiting are the rich (who pay LOWER taxes somehow). The poor and middle class who need these areas to be UNTRAMMELED by man are losing millions of acres of sacred spaces.