I oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule and ask the Department to retain it in full.
I'm a long-time endurance cyclist and bikepacker. I've ridden the Great Divide Mountain Bike Route, including the stretch through the Carson and Santa Fe National Forests in New Mexico. The route's value comes from the intact, unroaded country around it. In Montana, the forests along the Divide matter deeply to me: the Flathead, Helena-Lewis and Clark, and Beaverhead-Deerlodge. Closer to home, Wisconsin's roadless areas in the Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest are some of the last wild places within reach of the Upper Midwest. Once roads go into places like these, that character is gone permanently.
The wildfire justification doesn't hold up. The 2001 rule already allows cutting small-diameter timber to reduce fire risk. The draft EIS should show, with evidence, which needed fuel treatments the rule has actually blocked.
The Forest Service already has a multibillion-dollar backlog of deferred road maintenance. Building new roads in remote areas is fiscally unjustifiable, and it puts watersheds, wildlife habitat, and water supplies at risk.
Public input has been clear: more than 99% of the roughly 600,000 scoping comments opposed rescission. A short comment window with no public hearings is not adequate for a decision covering about 45 million acres.
Please keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place.
Michael Gribble, Wilmette, IL