FS-2025-0001-601240

I am writing regards to the rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule. I am opposed to the rescission of this rule. I am a geologist , parent, educator, and outdoor recreation enthusiast living in the southwestern United States. I am a US-born citizen who has been paying taxes on my earnings for 50+ years. Here are some of the reasons I oppose eliminating the Roadless Rule. 1.Regarding wildfire control: Most wildfires are human-triggered. It is a documented fact that more roads in wilderness areas facilitate more human-caused fires. (Healey, 2020; https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aba031 ; Balch et al.2017, https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1617394114 ; NPS, https://www.nps.gov/articles/wildfire-causes-and-evaluation.htm ). More roads lead to more people lighting campfires or smoking in formerly roadless areas. I know from my own outdoor experiences that many people are irresponsible with flames in combustible landscapes. In addition, vehicles themselves can also generate the sparks for wildfires. This is not uncommon in Arizona, where quartz-rich rocks in access roads are a bad companion to dragging metal chains. 2.Invasive plant species are promulgated when roads are built in roadless areas. (again, see Healey 2020). For example, here in AZ, invasive buffel grass and “stinkweed” are both deadly to native vegetation and provide excellent fuel for wildfires. 3.Regarding watershed/river/landslide/erosion negative effects: the USDA’s own preliminary environmental impact acknowledges negative impacts would result from building more roads in roadless areas, particularly in reference to the Tongass Forest (https://usfs-public.app.box.com/s/gomzq6rruwsds8rw50o3j3g429utj8f6/file/2415112742244 ; see also Pew Trust, 2026 https://www.pew.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2026/10/05/us-department-of-agriculture-proposes-eliminating-the-roadless-rule#:~:text=Roads%20and%20logging%20can%20send,concentrating%2C%20or%20diverting%20natural%20flows. ) Building more roads leads to loss of vegetation, increased erosion, more sediment load in watersheds which harms wildlife habitats and water quality, and higher landslide potential. Through my geologic and recreational experiences in Arizona, Washington State, Colorado, Oregon, and other western states, I can vouch for the negative geologic and biologic effects of road building in western roadless areas. 4.Regarding outdoor recreation: this is a non-political issue for many citizens throughout the political spectrum. Hunters, anglers, hikers, campers, and fans of the beauty of America’s wild places appreciate the majesty of places where human impact is minimized. the treasure of its iconic wild places. 5.The federal lands impacted by the Roadless Rule already have roads of various types in them. Do we really need more roads in these beautiful, fragile, unique American landscapes? In summary: More roads in the Roadless Areas will have negligible effects on wildfire management, but potentially tragic consequences on water supplies, wildlife, and the landscape in these remarkable areas. The treasure of American wild places will be irreparably harmed by the rescission of the Roadless Rule. Unlike inert gold, the living treasure of the Roadless Areas must be protected and nurtured by all of us to benefit us and future generations. Please respect my concerns, the concerns of American tribes and Alaska natives (https://tlingitandhaida.gov/news/roadlessrulerollbackopposition/) (https://www.wilderness.org/articles/press-release/ncai-and-tws-condemn-administrations-proposal-rescind-roadless-rule) , and the almost one million commentors on this proposal; and reconsider the rescission of the Roadless Rule. Thank you for considering my opinion and concerns.