Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-605366

Opposes rescissionPosted October 7, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

  • Forest Management Wildfire
    • “Fire is a part of the ecosystem”
    • “more roads lead to more fire activity”
    • “Roads in forests are not a recognized wild-land fire management policy”
  • Recreation Tourism Public Use
    • “recreating at the following USFS properties”
    • “Forests already have more roads than most people could explore in a lifetime”
    • “no practical or logistical need, from a recreational perspective, for more”
  • Climate Carbon Storage
    • “address fires of increasing intensity is to address climate change”
    • “real national priority that needs to be addressed”
  • Governance Policy Process
    • “repeal of the Roadless Rule is a step backwards in public lands management”
    • “hands them to special interests who are willing to pay for them”
    • “This is not the mandate that the USFS has been given by Congress”

What it names

National Forests
Bighorn National ForestBlack Hills National ForestBridger-Teton National ForestBuffalo Gap National GrasslandCaribou-Targhee National ForestChequamegon-Nicolet National ForestChippewa National ForestColville National ForestFlathead National ForestGallatin National ForestGifford Pinchot National ForestHiawatha National ForestHuron-Manistee National ForestLincoln National ForestMedicine Bow-Routt National ForestOlympic National ForestOttawa National ForestShawnee National ForestShoshone National ForestSierra National ForestStanislaus National ForestSuperior National ForestThunder Basin National GrasslandWasatch-Cache National ForestWenatchee National ForestWhite River National Forest

Attachments

1 file. Counts as 1 — Counts as one: The attachments enclose no one else's submissions; the comment counts as one.

  • Own letter

The comment

Continued: 4. Fire is a part of the ecosystem. To the extent that the rationale is reducing fire, the rationale is wrong, as other commenters have pointed out and as the rationale points out, that more roads lead to more fire activity. But also the entire proposal is misplaced — because the most effective way to address fires of increasing intensity is to address climate change. That is the real national priority that needs to be addressed that the government is completely failing to address. Roads in forests are not a recognized wild-land fire management policy, as other commenters have pointed out. *** Put simply, the repeal of the Roadless Rule is a step backwards in public lands management. It effectively takes public lands out of the hands of the people they are set aside for — the American public — and hands them to special interests who are willing to pay for them. This is not the mandate that the USFS has been given by Congress. The mandate is the manage these lands for multiple uses. Creating new roads in forests prioritizes only one use, timber harvesting, over all others. *** My experience in this comment is drawn from recreating at the following USFS properties: Little Missouri National Grassland; Buffalo Gap National Grassland; BigHorn National Forest; Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest; Hiawatha National Forest; Ottawa National Forest; Huron-Manistee National Forest; Superior National Forest; Chippewa National Forest; Shoshone National Forest; Custer-Gallatin National Forest; Flathead National Forest; Bridger-Teton National Forest; Caribou-Targhee National Forest; Gifford Pinchot National Forest; Olympic National Forest; Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest; Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest; Colville National Forest; Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest; Arapaho National Forest; White River National Forest; Black Hills National Forest; Thunder Basin National Grassland; Unit-Wasatch-Cache National Forest; Sierra National Forest; Stanislaus National Forest; Lincoln National Forest; and Shawnee National Forest. My major takeaway from all these experiences is that these Forests already have more roads than most people could explore in a lifetime. There is quite simply no practical or logistical need, from a recreational perspective, for more under the rationales that the USFS has proposed in this rule change.

Keep learning. Keep speaking up.The Roadless Rule depends on public engagement. Share what you've learned.

© 2026 roadless.org - Defending America's Last Wild Forests

Privacy Policy|Questions or concerns? noroads@roadless.org|Follow us: @defendroadless