Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-609298

Opposes rescissionPosted October 7, 2026 On Regulations.gov

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

Topics

  • Recreation Tourism Public Use
    • “backpacked in the Gila National Forest”
    • “life changing and life affirming”
    • “never saw nor heard another person, vehicle or anything else manmade”
    • “quiet solitude”
  • Environmental Protection Biodiversity
    • “naturally magical places”
    • “watching ducks, beavers, a bear and tons of other animals”
    • “destroy the Gila and millions of acres National Forest System lands”
    • “maintain and sustain the Gila and other National Forests”
  • Legal Regulatory Framework
    • “The 2001 Roadless Rule is not redundant”
    • “It is not regulatory overreach”
    • “Policies, processes and plans are not Regulations”
    • “The National Forest System requires the 2001 Roadless Rule”

What it names

National Forests
Gila National Forest

The comment

I strongly oppose USDA rescinding, repealing or removing, of modifying the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (2001 Roadless Rule). I’ve backpacked in the Gila National Forest in New Mexico several times. It’s life changing and life affirming. It is the most incredibly beautiful, naturally magical places I’ve ever had the pleasure to enjoy. One time my boyfriend and I backpacked for 5 nights and 6 days, and we never saw nor heard another person, vehicle or anything else manmade. Instead we saw skies so lit up with stars we almost didn’t need headlamps to cook. We were woken up at night by a large herd of elk thundering past. We followed a trail that crossed the Gila River over 50 times. We spent hours at a pond and stream watching ducks, beavers, a bear and tons of other animals using the water. I’d say I enjoyed the quiet solitude but nature is actually quite loud when it’s not drowned out by humans and our trucks, cars, heavy machinery, utility infrastructure constantly buzzing. Repealing, rescinding or removing the 2001 Roadless Rule would end the nationwide prohibition on new road construction and timber harvesting and other human activities across approximately 730,000 acres of the Gila National Forest. That’s a quarter of the Gila directly and much more in the vicinity. It would destroy the Gila and millions of acres National Forest System lands. The 2001 Roadless Rule is essential to retain the promise and the integrity of the National Forest System. The 2001 Roadless Rule i not redundant. It is not regulatory overreach. The Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, as amended by the National Forest Management Act of 1976, and the associated land management planning processes and plans are not appropriate and effective mechanisms. Policies, processes and plans are not Regulations. They are not Rules. The National Forest System requires the 2001 Roadless Rule to maintain and sustain the Gila and other National Forests I know and love, and the dozens of National Forests don’t know yet. I dream of the Gila and hope I have the privilege to trek through its quiet loud nature again.

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