The Public Record · Docket FS-2025-0001

Read the comments.

Every public comment on the proposed rescission of the Roadless Rule, sorted by what it talks about. Pick a topic, then narrow by position, by how hard the comment is for the agency to set aside, or by how substantive it is. Each comment is shown in full, as filed. How comments are classified and scored is explained in the Comment Analysis.

1 unique comments12 submissions

Position

Opposes rescission 100.0%

Answerability

A1 strong 0
A2 moderate 0
A3 weak 0
A0 none 1

Substance /24

Median 4middle half 4–4 · 1 scored

Topics raised

12 submissions in this letter's group · showing 1–12Clear all filters

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Oct 6, 2026FS-2025-0001-578575
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 12 submissions in its group.
I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Oct 6, 2026FS-2025-0001-580371
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 12 submissions in its group.
I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 21, 2026FS-2025-0001-451898
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 12 submissions in its group.
I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 21, 2026FS-2025-0001-451901
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 12 submissions in its group.
I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-368817
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 12 submissions in its group.
I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 8, 2026FS-2025-0001-334947
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 12 submissions in its group.
I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 8, 2026FS-2025-0001-334956
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 12 submissions in its group.
I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 8, 2026FS-2025-0001-334964
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 12 submissions in its group.
I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Aug 25, 2026FS-2025-0001-268661
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 12 submissions in its group.
I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Aug 25, 2026FS-2025-0001-269858
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 12 submissions in its group.
I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Aug 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-268206
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 12 submissions in its group.
I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Aug 21, 2026FS-2025-0001-228735
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.This comment stands for all 12 submissions in its group.
I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal to repeal or weaken the landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule that has protected wild, unfragmented forests for more than a quarter-century. The rationale offered for doing so isn’t supported by science. This action would harm — not help — our national forests. The case for prohibiting road construction and commercial logging in intact forests is just as strong today as it was in 2001, when the U.S. Forest Service first enacted this conservation rule. The rule recognizes that roadless areas serve as biological strongholds for imperiled species, that habitat fragmentation harms wildlife, and that intact forests act as buffers against the spread of invasive plant species. With more species endangered today and wildlands disappearing at a rapid pace, roadless areas are more important than ever to address ongoing wildlife decline and the extinction crisis. Roadless areas within the national forest system also contain all or part of 354 municipal watersheds, supplying drinking water to millions of Americans and saving downstream communities millions of dollars in water-filtration costs. These lands provide outstanding recreation opportunities — hiking, camping, experiencing wildlife, fishing, cross-country skiing, and canoeing. Furthermore, when the original rule was adopted, the agency was already grappling with a multi-billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog on its expansive road system. That backlog remains roughly the same today. Building more roads on top of the nearly 370,000 miles the agency currently manages would only deepen a problem that remains unsolved after 25 years. Importantly, expanding roads into forested landscapes will increase wildfire risk. Research has shown that human-caused ignitions are responsible for the vast majority of wildfires, and are roughly four times more likely to start near roads, due to causes like sparks from vehicles and unattended campfires. I urge the USDA to abandon this misguided proposal and instead reaffirm its commitment to protecting America's roadless forests for the wildlife habitat, clean water, climate resilience, and recreation values they provide to us all.
Full analysis of this comment →

Sharing & methodology

These results are meant to be shared.

Please cite us. This analysis is the intellectual property of Roadless.org and Nicholas Holshouser. You are welcome to reproduce it — every reproduction must include this citation:

Roadless.org and Nicholas Holshouser, “2001 Roadless Rule Revision — Substantive Analysis,” https://roadless.org.

How it works. A large language model (an open-weight Qwen3.8 model) reads each substantive comment and copies, word for word, the passages that carry its analytical gap, evidence, request, alternative and connection to the place; it returns no scores. Code grades those passages 0–3 on eight dimensions — evidence, legal grounding, engagement with the environmental analysis, analytical gaps, alternatives, specific requests, position, and local knowledge — with legal grounding taken from a citation scan, not the model. For the strongest tenth on each side, the copied passages are checked against the comment and shown as exhibits. A comment counts as “substantive” when it clears a floor filter — it must show at least one substantive signal (a named entity, a specific citation, a stated analytical deficiency, or first-person testimony), which screens out one-line and purely conclusory submissions before any model scoring.

The full method. Every step, why it is done that way, its known limits and a glossary: Methodologies →

The data. The full canonical dataset — every comment on Docket FS-2025-0001 — is available from Regulations.gov's bulk download, the canonical source: https://www.regulations.gov/bulkdownload. Download the CSV directly (Regulations.gov keeps this link working until October 18, 2026): https://bulk-downloads.regulations.gov/mv4-z8fw-q5jx.csv.

Roadless.org — analysis of the public comment docket.
Media inquiries welcome — nicholas@wanderingnature.com.