Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-613353

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
- “loss of quiet, remote, and self-reliant recreation”
- “public needs roadless areas in the National Forests”
- “loss of non-vehicular recreation”
- “loss of wild, quiet spaces”
Wildlife Habitat
- “wildlife inhabitants need to exist”
- “loss of wildlife habitat”
Environmental Protection Biodiversity
- “These special lands of ours along with their wildlife inhabitants need to exist”
- “loss of wild, quiet spaces for all of us”

What it names

National Forests: Black Hills National Forest

The comment

To the USDA Forest Service: I am against the Proposed change to the Roadless Rule. Under the Summary of potential impacts, subtitle Recreation, I see mentioned the loss of quiet, remote, and self- reliant recreation. In the Black Hills National Forest of South Dakota, the existing roads are overrun with ATV vehicles and jeeps. There are not enough employees to supervise the roads that we already have. Roads that regular 4 wheel drive vehicles could use several years ago are used down to bare rocks that are now impassable except by the ATVs that made it happen. The public needs roadless areas in the National Forests. These special lands of ours along with their wildlife inhabitants need to exist. I think the end of the Roadless Rule will bring loss of non-vehicular recreation and loss of wildlife habitat and loss of wild, quiet spaces for all of us. Thank you