“place protection decisions in local forest planning processes”
“prone to political pressure and short-term resource extraction”
“withdraw the proposed repeal, maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule”
The comment
I am firmly against USDA's proposal to revoke the 2001 Roadless Rule.
Roadless national forests represent some of the last untouched public forest landscapes we have. They safeguard clean drinking water, wildlife habitats, salmon streams, ancient forests, outdoor activities, and essential areas for communities, Tribal Nations, and future generations. Once these areas are cut by new roads, logging, and industrial activities, the destruction is irreversible.
The USDA should not eliminate a national protection that has shielded roadless forests for over 20 years. The existing Roadless Rule already permits necessary activities to mitigate wildfire risk, so repealing it is unnecessary for community safety. In fact, more roads can lead to greater risks of human-caused fires, habitat fragmentation, erosion, and increased long-term management costs.
I am also worried that rescinding the rule would place protection decisions in local forest planning processes, making intact forests more prone to political pressure and short-term resource extraction. Public forests should be managed for clean water, biodiversity, climate resilience, Indigenous stewardship, and public benefit, not opened to more roadbuilding and logging.
Please withdraw the proposed repeal, maintain the 2001 Roadless Rule, and choose the strongest option to protect roadless areas throughout the National Forest System.
Thank you for considering my comment.