How do I submit a public comment on Special Areas?

The public comment window for this decision closed on October 6, 2026. The record of what was at stake stays on this page.

When is the public comment deadline for Special Areas?

The comment window closed on October 6, 2026.

Do public comments actually change federal decisions?

Yes, when they are substantive. Agencies are legally required to read and respond to substantive comments before finalizing a rule, and specific personal comments about real places and real uses carry far more weight than identical form letters. Courts have overturned rules when agencies ignored substantive comments.

Stop the plan to strip roadless protection from 44.7 million acres

← All fights

Record closed October 6, 2026

Caribou on foggy tundra — Comments closed October 6
Stop the plan to strip roadless protection from 44.7 million acres
Forest Service · National Forest System

What: The Forest Service wants to rescind the 2001 Roadless Rule and remove protections from 44.7 million acres of national forest, including 9.3 million acres in Alaska's Tongass, opening them to new roads and logging.
Where: National Forest System
How much: 44.7 million acres (incl. 9.3M in Tongass) go to 0 protected acres losing roadless protection (Alt. 2); +5-10% above current 5.5 million ccf/year nationally sawtimber harvest increase vs. today; 327 species and 71 critical habitats eSA species/habitats likely adversely affected
Decided: Comments closed October 6, 2026. No decision document is on file yet.Date from Federal Register ↗, read October 9, 2026.

Where these four lines come from

WhatOur plain-English read of the Federal Register 2026-16965 ↗. Check it against the agency’s own words under Case.
WhereThe places and states the notice names, as PLAN read them.
44.7 million acres (incl. 9.3M in Tongass) go to 0 protected“Removes IRA designation from 44.7 million acres, including 9.3 million on the Tongass National Forest” Alternative 2 – 2001 Roadless Rule Recission (Repeal)/No Rule Open the document ↗
+5-10% above current 5.5 million ccf/year nationally“a potential 5 to 10 percent increase in total sawtimber harvest on National Forest System lands compared to current harvest levels” Potential annual harvest levels Open the document ↗
327 species and 71 critical habitats“Based on preliminary draft biological assessment, “may affect, and is likely to adversely affect” 327 ESA-listed species and 71 critical habitats” Table 3. Comparison of effects Open the document ↗
DecidedOctober 6, 2026, from Federal Register, 91 FR 57841 (2026-18648), extension of the comment period ↗: “Comments on the proposed rule published August 20, 2026 (91 FR 53827), must be received by October 6, 2026.”. Read October 9, 2026. The decision document is the one on file in PLAN’s record.
Read from PLAN’s record October 25, 2026.

Who signed this

Stephen Alexander Vaden

Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture

A person signed this, not an agency. The window has closed and the signature stands, which is exactly when accountability matters.

What to say

Short is better. You are asking Deputy Secretary Vaden to answer for a decision their office made.

My name is [your name] and I'm calling from [your city and state]. Stephen Alexander Vaden, Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture, signed the decision on Stop the plan to strip roadless protection from 44.7 million acres. I'm asking that office to answer for it publicly. Please record that I called and tell me what the office intends to do.

Official channels only, about this decision. No personal phone numbers, no home addresses, no personal social accounts, and nothing abusive. The point is to make the office answer, and an abusive call is the one thing that lets it off the hook.

What the proposal said, and what the decision did

No figure from the proposal has been checked against the decision on this fight yet. What the record does hold is the issues ledger below.

No decision document is on PLAN’s record for this fight yet. When the agency’s decision lands, what it answered goes here.

PLAN's read: critical threat

A language model's read of the agency's notice, not an agency rating and not an editor's finding. It’s read from the official notice ↗, and it isn’t a grade.

The Forest Service wants to rescind the 2001 Roadless Rule and remove protections from 44.7 million acres of national forest, including 9.3 million acres in Alaska's Tongass, opening them to new roads and logging.

What’s at risk

The agency's own preliminary biological assessment found the rescission likely to adversely affect 327 ESA-listed species and 71 critical habitats, and the operable timberland it would open is mostly mature or old-growth forest (11-16 percent old growth, 54-63 percent mature). Water for millions of people, including nearly 5 million in the Pacific Southwest Region alone, flows from watersheds inside these roadless areas, and the road system the agency wants to expand already carries a $6.9 billion maintenance backlog it cannot fund.

If this goes through

Rescinding the rule would let local officials authorize new permanent and temporary roads and could raise sawtimber harvest 5 to 10 percent above today's 5.5 million ccf per year, with a final rule targeted for 2027. Separate law already requires the Forest Service to sell at least 250 million more board feet of timber every year through fiscal year 2034, so this rescission would compound a harvest increase already locked in by statute, and the changes remain in place until another rulemaking or Congress acts.

Our plain-English read of the official notice ↗. Check it against the agency’s own words below.

By the numbers, from the agency’s own document

Acres losing roadless protection (Alt. 2): 44.7 million acres (incl. 9.3M in Tongass) go to 0 protected
Alternative 2 – 2001 Roadless Rule Recission (Repeal)/No Rule
“Removes IRA designation from 44.7 million acres, including 9.3 million on the Tongass National Forest”
Open the document ↗
Sawtimber harvest increase vs. today: +5-10% above current 5.5 million ccf/year nationally
Potential annual harvest levels
“a potential 5 to 10 percent increase in total sawtimber harvest on National Forest System lands compared to current harvest levels”
Open the document ↗
ESA species/habitats likely adversely affected: 327 species and 71 critical habitats
Table 3. Comparison of effects
“Based on preliminary draft biological assessment, “may affect, and is likely to adversely affect” 327 ESA-listed species and 71 critical habitats”
Open the document ↗
New permanent road miles built in IRAs since 2013: ~60 miles (against 9,500 miles already there)
2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule Implementation
“Best available records of permanent road construction indicate that approximately 60 miles of roads were built within inventoried roadless areas after 2013”
Open the document ↗
Statutory minimum annual timber sale increase, FY2026-34: at least 250 million board feet more every year
Table 4. Ongoing and reasonably foreseeable actions
“sell a quantity of timber on National Forest System land that is at least 250 million board feet greater than the quantity that was sold”
Open the document ↗

Source: the agency’s document ↗

The agency’s case, tested

What the agency argues, and whether its own record backs it

3
Hold up: 4
Not fully backed

The Agriculture Department proposes to repeal the 2001 Roadless Rule on about 44.7 million acres of national forest, including the Tongass. It says a single national ban limits local managers' flexibility to deal with wildfire, insects and disease, and that local forest plans are better suited to decide where roads and logging belong.

“The Department is proposing this rule rescission to reduce regulatory burden and return land management decision-making for inventoried roadless areas to local Forest Service officials.”
Purpose and Need for Action

Purpose and needNot fully backedThe Roadless Rule limited vegetation management and contributed to a lack of active management that hurt forest health.
The document supports that the rule limited management. Timber harvest averaged about 500 acres a year, mechanical fuel work was limited, and the text says roadless designation is widely seen as a barrier to mechanical treatment. But it also cites research finding the rule didn't meaningfully constrain fuel treatments as a share of forested land. It also says insect and disease risk in western roadless areas is similar to or lower than on managed forest land.
The agency’s words, the record +Hide the words
The agency says
“The 2001 Roadless Rule limited the Forest Service’s ability to conduct vegetation management within inventoried roadless areas and has contributed to the lack of active management of the national forests, which has contributed to challenges in addressing forest health concerns.”
Rationale for the Proposed Rule
Elsewhere in the same document
“Insect and disease risk is generally higher in western regions; in western forests, the percent of forests at risk is similar or lower in potentially affected IRAs when compared to NFS forests outside of designated areas.”
Insect and Disease
EffectsNot fully backedNew roads in roadless areas would raise initial attack success and shrink fire sizes and durations.
Table 24 shows initial attack success of 94.4 percent in roadless areas versus 97.2 percent on other forest land. Table 26 shows that higher-standard roads helped contain fires. But the document says this comparison ignores that less-than-full suppression is used more often in roadless areas. It also expects most new roads to be temporary timber spurs rather than strategic fire roads. No analysis isolates the effect of roads.
The agency’s words, the record and the law +Hide the words
The agency says
“With increased road access, initial attack success rates would be expected to increase.”
Fire Control
Elsewhere in the same document
“However, this analysis does not account for fire management objectives and strategies (opportunities that may include less-than-full-suppression tactics).”
Fire Control
“New permanent road construction, strategically planned to support fuels and fire objectives, is less likely to be widespread within potentially affected IRAs, given the costs of road construction costs, maintenance funding limitations, constraints on placement of roads, and current land management plan restrictions.”
Fire Control
The law
“a detailed statement by the responsible official on- (i) reasonably foreseeable environmental effects of the proposed agency action; (ii) any reasonably foreseeable adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented;” National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C) ↗
EconomicsNot fully backedLosses to recreationists and to recreation spending near roadless areas would be small, a few million dollars a year nationally.
The agency ties the loss to the less than 1 percent of operable land harvested in a year. But roads and shifts in recreation settings accumulate and last. The Recreation section says about 52 percent of three setting classes are more likely to be affected. The same section also says the magnitude of losses is unknown. The estimate is set against roadless recreation benefits of upwards of $1.5 billion.
The agency’s words, the record +Hide the words
The agency says
“Assuming an upper limit of a 1 percent annual loss of economic benefit within the likely operable and likely operable but complex areas translates into potential annual losses for trail and dispersed area recreation of $4.8 million and $1.3 million for wildlife-related recreation, nationally.”
Economic Benefits from Recreation in Roadless Area Forests
Elsewhere in the same document
“The magnitude of those losses is unknown, but it is likely those losses would be greater under this alternative compared to either alternative 1 or 3.”
Economic Benefits from Recreation in Roadless Area Forests
“An average of about 52 percent of semi-primitive non-motorized, semi-primitive motorized, and roaded natural ROS settings within the alternative 2 affected area are more likely to be impacted.”
Recreation Opportunities and Setting
Show 1 more claim +Show fewer
- ScienceNot fully backedThe 2020 Alaska Roadless Rule environmental impact statement still adequately describes the effects of removing roadless protection on the Tongass.
  Appendix 4 reviews new executive orders, the 2025 plan assessment, a mine expansion, cruise tourism and insect outbreaks, and finds they don't change the 2020 effects. It also says the projected timber sale quantity is unchanged, so total harvest stays the same. But the 2020 figures, such as a gain of about 168,000 acres of suitable old growth, assume a timber suitability change to the Tongass plan that the document says was never issued. The new long-term timber demand analysis isn't finished, and the 2020 analysis didn't address fire and fuels.
  The agency’s words, the record and the law +Hide the words
  The agency says
  “The potential new information and changed circumstances have been found to result in no substantial changes to the analysis and the analysis remains adequate.”
  Adequacy of Effects Analysis for the Proposed Action
  Elsewhere in the same document
  “The Alaska Roadless Rule, as analyzed in the 2020 FEIS, would expand the suitable areas, due to inclusion of an administrative change to the Tongass Forest Plan.”
  Potential Timber Resources and Forest Products
  “In addition, in accordance with the 1990 Tongass Timber Reform Act (TTRA), a new long-term timber demand analysis is underway at the USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station to inform the revised plan.”
  Tongass National Forest Plan Assessment
  The law
  “ensure the professional integrity, including scientific integrity, of the discussion and analysis in an environmental document; (E) make use of reliable data and resources in carrying out this chapter;” National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(D)-(E) ↗

Where its own record backs the agency

AlternativesKeeping national roadless boundaries while loosening prohibitions was rejected because national boundaries impose an administrative and legal burden and restrict local discretion.Why it holds +
The Implementation section backs the burden point. It says exception use was limited partly by rigorous project-level analysis and review requirements. Alternative 3 keeps national boundaries on about 13 million acres, but it removes them on 31.7 million acres and adds locally led boundary changes. The rejected alternative kept all 44.7 million acres under national boundaries, so the two aren't equivalent. The tension is a matter of degree.
The agency says
“In addition, maintaining national roadless boundaries would require project-level analysis considerations of roadless values which have been, and would continue to be an administrative and legal burden for the agency.”
Alternatives That Would Modify the Rule Prohibitions or Exceptions
Its own record backs it
“The alternatives presented in detail below represent a reasonable range of rulemaking alternatives that are technically and economically feasible and consistent with the stated purpose and need.”
Proposed Action and Alternatives
“In addition, alternative 3 would continue the existing Rule’s exceptions and provides for locally led boundary modifications which could enable local units to propose adjustments where the nationally derived boundaries do not align with local data or conditions.”
Alternatives With a Different Geographic Scope of the Rule
EffectsRepeal or the modified rule would open more opportunities for hazardous fuel treatment in high-priority firesheds.Why it holds +
Table 22 shows 7,236,418 acres of roadless land in high-priority firesheds. Table 28 shows about 16.4 percent of that is likely operable and 35.3 percent is likely operable but complex. That supports added opportunity. The Social and Economic section adds that road costs and declining budgets mean the overall increase in treatment capacity would be modest.
The agency says
“Alternatives 2 and 3 would provide additional opportunities for hazardous fuel treatments in priority firesheds and other high-risk areas, when compared with alternative 1.”
Conclusion
Its own record backs it
“Approximately 3.6 million acres (52 percent) of the high priority firesheds in the potentially affected IRAs are in the likely operable or operable-but-complex condition, meaning that mechanical fuels reduction activity could be feasible.”
Hazardous Fuels Reduction
EffectsExisting forest plans and project design would reduce or mitigate the harms of new roads and logging.Why it holds +
The claim only says effects could be reduced or mitigated, and the document backs that. Plans further restrict road construction on 21.8 million acres (54.5 percent) and timber harvest on 26.7 million acres (66.5 percent) of affected roadless land. Monitoring shows best management practice compliance between 85 percent and 98 percent. Still, 108 of 126 plans were developed under the 1982 regulations, many are less likely to address roadless areas, and the document doesn't measure how much harm plans would prevent.
The agency says
“Across all alternatives, potential adverse effects could be reduced or mitigated by existing land management plans and individual project design.”
Comparison of Alternatives
Its own record backs it
“Therefore, these plans are less likely to have incorporated IRAs into their management areas or provided specific direction for these areas.”
Relationship of the 2001 Roadless Rule to Land Management Planning
“Land management plan direction allows or generally allows road construction across 44.5 percent of the potentially affected environment (see also Appendix 1 – IRA Acreage Summarized by Region).”
National Forest Transportation System

How this was read

Read from the agency’s own decision document ↗, all 333 pages. Every quote is checked word for word against it, a claim marked contradicted stands on a quote from the same document, and a second reading argued the agency’s side of every verdict before it was published. The verdicts are our reading; the quotes are the agency’s. A court can set aside agency action it finds “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law” (5 U.S.C. 706(2)(A) ↗), which is why these gaps are worth putting in the record.

In the agency’s own words

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA or Department) is proposing to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (2001 Roadless Rule), which established broad prohibitions on road construction, road reconstruction, and timber harvesting within inventoried roadless areas on National Forest System lands. The intent of this proposed action is to reduce regulatory burden and return decisionmaking for the management of inventoried roadless areas to the land management planning process at the individual national forest level. Rescission of the national-level prohibitions provides responsible officials with flex…

Federal Register 2026-16965 ↗

The groups on this fight

15 groups work this ground: Bitterroot National Forest, Chugach National Forest, Flathead National Forest

Works this ground means the editors' sourced record puts the group on this land, not that it has taken a side on this decision. Give straight to them; nothing routes through us.

Los Padres ForestWatch
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Los Padres National Forest: Has led opposition to oil drilling in the Los Padres region for two decades and is fighting the plan to reopen 400,000 acres to leasing.
Source ↗
Southeast Alaska Conservation Council
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Tongass National Forest: Southeast Alaska’s homegrown defender of the Tongass since 1970.
Source ↗
Sierra Club
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Allegheny National Forest: Longtime co-plaintiff in litigation against Forest Service timber projects on the Allegheny, including the East Side clearcutting case; works this ground at Los Padres National Forest: Plaintiff in the litigation that stopped new oil leasing on the Central Coast acreage now targeted again by BLM.
Source ↗
Center for Biological Diversity
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Allegheny National Forest: Fighting the current logging surge on the Allegheny as a threat to endangered bats and hellbenders; works this ground at Los Padres National Forest: Plaintiff in the 2020 suit that halted new federal oil leasing across the Los Padres region.
Source ↗
Alaska Wilderness League
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Tongass National Forest: Works the Tongass and the Roadless Rule fight in Washington.
Source ↗
Backcountry Hunters & Anglers
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Ruby Mountains: Nevada chapter organized within the 15-group Sportsmen for the Rubies coalition against oil and gas leasing and backs permanent withdrawal through the Ruby Mountains Protection Act.
Source ↗
Oregon Wild
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Blue Mountains National Forests: Runs the Protect the Blue Mountains comment page for this plan revision.
Source ↗
Trout Unlimited
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Ruby Mountains: Member of the Sportsmen for the Rubies coalition, which welcomed the December 2024 order pausing oil and gas leasing in the Ruby Mountains for two years and is pushing the Ruby Mountains Protection Act to make it permanent.
Source ↗
Earthjustice
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Green Mountain National Forest: Wrote technical comments opposing the Telephone Gap timber sale and mobilized public opposition alongside Standing Trees; works this ground at Los Padres National Forest: Filed the 2020 suit for ForestWatch and allied groups that blocked new federal oil leasing in the region.
Source ↗
Environment America
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Allegheny National Forest: Its Pennsylvania arm documented the forest's exposure to logging and gas drilling in a dedicated report.
Source ↗
Friends of the Earth
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Los Padres National Forest: Joined the coalition suit that halted new oil and gas leasing across the Los Padres region.
Source ↗
Natural Resources Defense Council
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Tongass National Forest: Party to the Tongass Roadless Rule litigation.
Source ↗
Southern Environmental Law Center
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Mark Twain National Forest: Its February 2024 timber targets lawsuit charges the Forest Service with ignoring the cumulative climate impacts of logging projects including one on the Mark Twain National Forest.
Source ↗
The Conservation Fund
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Mark Twain National Forest: Has conveyed more than 2,000 acres into the forest, including Current River frontage in 2016 and 229 acres at Piney Creek Wilderness in 2018.
Source ↗
Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership
Works this ground · not linked to this decision
Works this ground at Ruby Mountains: Its Nevada field representative advocated for the Ruby Mountains oil and gas withdrawal as part of the sportsmen's coalition celebrating the December 2024 moratorium.
Source ↗

Every group above is on STAND for Public Lands, with its court record, its filings and who backs it.

Who signs it

Stephen Alexander Vaden

Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture

Where the notice says so

“Stephen Alexander Vaden, Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture.” The notice ↗

More fights that need you

Demand the Army Corps stop the first Ambler Road mine8 days left Demand Answers Before Graphite Creek Buries 389 Acres of Alaska Wetlands8 days left Stop oil and gas leasing on 4,053 acres in Eddy and Lea Counties5 days left

All 28 open fights →

Go deeper, free

Scorecard

See how your members of Congress vote on public lands

Every representative, graded on the votes that decide the fate of parks, forests, and refuges.

Open ↗The map

See the places under active threat

A live map of the parks, monuments, and wild country in the crosshairs right now.

Open ↗

A wrong fact, a dead link, a form that wouldn’t take your letter: one tap and it comes to the people who build PLAN, with this fight attached.