I strongly oppose the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I live in the Methow Valley in Washington state and I spend significant time on the surrounding public lands hiking, hunting, climbing, and adventuring. These forests are not simply areas on a map to me—they are the places that makes this valley an incredibly special place to live. The remaining roadless areas around the Methow provide wildlife habitat, clean and intact watersheds, opportunities for hunting and other backcountry recreation, and places where people can experience public land without the constant presence of roads and motorized access.
I am particularly concerned about what rescission could mean for the large Inventoried Roadless Areas surrounding the Methow Valley, including the Sawtooth, Long Swamp, Tiffany, and Pasayten Rim areas. The Okanogan National Forest contains hundreds of thousands of acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas, including approximately 122,000 acres in the Sawtooth area and 66,000 acres in Long Swamp. These landscapes are directly connected to the places where local residents like me hunt, hike, fish, camp, and recreate. I value having some public lands where road access remains limited and wildlife can move through relatively intact habitat. Once a permanent road is constructed into an undeveloped landscape, its impacts—fragmentation, increased human access, erosion, maintenance needs, and changes in wildlife use—cannot simply be undone.
I understand the Forest Service's concern about wildfire, forest health, and the need for active management. However, I do not believe rescinding a nationwide protection for roadless lands is necessary to accomplish those goals. The existing rule already contains mechanisms for exceptions and management activities, and the Forest Service has other tools available to address hazardous fuels and forest health where treatment is genuinely warranted. Removing the Roadless Rule would instead eliminate an important safeguard for the remaining undeveloped portions of our national forests and place decisions about these landscapes increasingly at the project level. The Forest Service itself acknowledges that the proposed rescission would remove the existing national prohibitions and return these decisions to individual forest planning and local project decisions.
As a Methow Valley resident and public-land hunter and backcountry user, I ask the Forest Service to retain the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The Methow Valley already has extensive roads and developed access; what is increasingly scarce are large, intact landscapes where wildlife habitat, watersheds, hunting opportunities, and quiet recreation can persist with minimal additional fragmentation. These lands belong to all Americans, including future generations. Please do not trade away their roadless character for short-term flexibility. I urge the Forest Service to choose the No Action alternative and maintain the protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule.