Dear Secretary and Chief:
The experience of moving through national forest that the 2001 Rule has maintained in its current condition has shown me, as an outdoor enthusiast, that the Rule's value is not merely symbolic — it is operational, categorical, and responsible for the specific landscape I access — and the Department should not rescind it without a demonstrably superior means of achieving the same protection.
Areas like Benton Range, CA allow me to disconnect from the hustle and bustle of daily life, and to reconnect with nature and what matters - a clean environment that has biodiversity and provides an opportunity for all life to thrive.
When an individual has to put effort into getting into the forest, they are rewarded far more - knowing that they had to plan and prepare to be one with the ecosystem. More roaded forest does NOT help our environment, nor do they help the human spirit. We are meant to put effort into adventures in order to be rewarded.
Regarding the Benton Range in the Inyo National Forest, California:
“National-scale analysis found 77% of roadless areas have potential to conserve threatened & endangered species, with strong concordance with grizzly recovery zones. — Loucks et al., 2003 (https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-00528-070205)
The 8.9-mile corridor between Benton Range and Glass Mountain sustains gene flow for 27 species, including Greater Sage-Grouse (G3), Owens Pupfish (G1), Pinyon Jay (G3). Road construction in either IRA severs this exchange, isolating populations that depend on movement between areas for genetic diversity and recolonization after local disturbance.”
These lands have been protected for good reasons. The Department should let them stay that way.
With appreciation,
Rachel Grace
CommentID: RLC-20261007-5ED64G