I oppose the full or partial rescission of the Roadless Rule. Our national lands preserve public lands for the use and enjoyment of all the public, not just for some interests over others. We need to preserve these lands not only for our own use and enjoyment, but for our children and grandchildren.
I am most familiar with and have spent the most time in and near the roadless areas within the Little Missouri National Grassland in the Dakota Prairie Grasslands in North Dakota. These lands contain some of the last 24 pieces of undeveloped public habitat in the state. These areas are important to us for hiking and camping; others share the space for fishing, hunting, and grazing cattle. Birds like owls and the state bird, the Western Meadowlark; upland game including grouse, pheasants, and turkeys; insects; hoofed creatures like deer, pronghorn antelope, bison, and wild horses, and predators like fox and coyote all live or cross through here https://www.fs.usda.gov/r01/dpg/animals-plants/animals . They can be spotted and enjoyed by us humans when the areas remain without the development of roads leading to unnecessary traffic.
Being in these wild, undisturbed, and unpolluted lands is beneficial to the physical and mental health of humans. There are so many benefits to health including "improved cognitive function, brain activity, blood pressure, mental health, physical activity, and sleep"...protective effects are now linked to improved mental health outcomes and cognitive function. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8125471/
I oppose the proposal to rescind or alter the Roadless Rule and support Alternative 1, the No Action alternative. Thank you for the consideration of these comments.