“revoking the roadless rule is likely to increase wildfires”
What it names
Roadless areas
Three Sisters
The comment
I oppose the proposal to fully or partially rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I am Matt Anthon, a student and outdoor educator residing in Corvallis, OR. I spend my professional time with elementary students running around in the woods and helping them understand the natural world around us. I spent my academic time studying ecosystems, animals, natural relationships, and their importance to our Earth. An area currently protected under the roadless rule is the Three Sisters Wilderness. This area is important to many Oregon residents, including myself, but more importantly, this area includes a vast ecosystem. Animals like the American black bear, Sierra Nevada red fox, American pika, multiple species of bats, Ospreys, Bald Eagles, Rubber boas, and many, many more call the Three Sisters Wilderness home. Revoking the roadless rule puts every one of these animals at risk of habitat loss and population declines. "Ecocide" is a term that has found its way into academic curricula at many levels, meaning an extensive destruction of ecosystems caused by humans. Often committed with the knowledge that long-term damage is likely. Ecocide is harmful to any being that is dependent on natural resources, including us. If direct harm to humans is the type of plea you'd like to hear, revoking the roadless rule is likely to increase wildfires and degrade clean water sources for millions of residents. If the only type of plea that you listen to is economic-based, I'd like to highlight the impact of this decision on outdoor recreation economies. Oregon is a hub for outdoor recreation of all kinds, and it fuels the state's economy heavily. If the repeal is approved, the local economy would reflect this loss of land. I enjoy living in a world where I can experience an undefiled environment, continue to inspire future recreators and scientists, and afford to feed myself, and I hope this continues throughout my lifetime. For the reasons listed above, fully or partially rescinding the Roadless Rule under Alternatives 2 and 3 of the draft EIS would be a grave mistake that will impact the ecosystems, residents, and YOU. If the public has any real say in what happens in this decision, let it be known that WE oppose the proposal to rescind or alter the Roadless Rule,” and support “Alternative 1, the No Action alternative.”