I am writing in opposition to altering or repealing the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I am a former forest service natural resources employee and an active recreational user of my local national forests and inventoried roadless areas are a critical component of the US forest service's land management strategy of balancing ecosystem maintenance with recreational and resource extraction. Many inventoried roadless areas preserve ecologically sensitive areas of our national forests from the habitat fragmentation, increased wildfire risk, and water quality degradation that roads bring to an area. Limpy Rock in the Umpqua National Forest is an inventoried roadless area that I have visited several times to birdwatch and observe the rare Kalmiopsis plants that grow there and only a few other places in the world. This roadless area and the rare endemic plant that it protects are a tourism draw for the area. Removing this area's roadless protections to allow for timber sales would potentially drive the local Kalmiopsis population to extinction. Other inventoried roadless areas such as Shasta Costa on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest and Tahkenitch on the Siuslaw National Forest are similarly a recreational draw because of the lack of roads and their associated industrial use. I made an effort to visit these areas despite the lower level of access because of the relatively intact nature of the ecosystems in these areas and the fragments of late seral ecosystems that remain within them. The Roadless Area Conservation Rule already provides the ability to conduct ecological forest management activities within roadless areas, and the construction of roads if needed for wildfire response, so there is no need to modify the roadless rule in order to respond to wildfires on our national forests. Please protect these areas from the degradation that roads bring by not altering or repealing the Roadless Area Conservation Rule.