“Roadless rule already allows important wildfire work”
“nearly 250k acres have been treated in California's roadless areas”
What it names
Roadless areas
Nevahbe RidgePine CreekSan JoaquinWheeler Ridge
The comment
Hi, I am a snow scientist, avid recreationist, and resident of Mammoth Lakes in the Eastern Sierra. I am writing today to tell you that I strongly oppose the proposed recission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (Roadless Rule). I am urging the Forest Service to retain the current Roadless Rule by selecting Alternative 1. I urge the Forest Service to reject the proposed nationwide rescission under Alternative 2, as well as any alternative that substantially weakens protections. As a snow scientist who works in water resources, I feel particularly qualified to mention that these roadless areas serve as critical sources of clean water for millions of Americans, protecting watersheds from sediment and pollution [Della, Sala (2011).] As a regular citizen, I am concerned because these roadless areas provide the quiet backcountry experiences that I value with family and friends. Many of these areas I have been hiking, skiing, climbing, fishing, and camping in since I was a child and I would be devastated to lose them: Wheeler Ridge and Pine Creek Canyon, Laurel and McGee, Nevahbe Ridge, Saddlebag and Tioga, The Hoover area, deep in the San Joaquin, and I live near the Sherwins in Mammoth Lakes. These areas support the outdoor recreation that sustains our local economy. The Roadless rule already allows important wildfire work - I believe I read that nearly 250k acres have been treated in California's roadless areas since 2001. Removing the national protections that have been in place for multiple decades now would open these last intact forests to new roads and industrial logging when, quite frankly, agency capacity for careful planning and public engagement is already stretched. I want my future children to be able to enjoy these areas as I did. Please keep the Roadless Rule in place.