I oppose the proposal to rescind (fully or partially) the Roadless Area Conservation Rule
I live in Alaska (and formerly lived in Idaho), and I work as an outdoor educator and a ski patroller. Public lands are crucial to my work and livelihood. Without robust public lands I don't have a job, or career that I have had for close to two decades. I also recreate on public lands, so they are a large part of every facet of my life.
In Alaska several areas will be impacted by rescinding the Roadless Rule. I live close to and work in the Chugach National Forest. I spend time both personally and professionally in the Chugach backpacking, packrafting, mountaineering, and sea kayaking. And I know many other people hunt, fish, and do other recreation in this area. Additionally rescinding the roadless rule will have a negative impact on wildlife and the local ecosystem. As humans we do not live in a silo, and anything we do that negatively impacts the natural world negatively impacts us as well. Protecting large swaths of public lands is crucial for our survival.
For the above reasons full or partially rescinding the Roadless Rule under Alternatives 2 and 3 in the EIS draft would be a huge mistake. I oppose the proposal to rescind or alter the Roadless Rule and I support Alternative 1, the No Action alternative.
Thank you