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 comments13 submissions
Position
  • Opposes rescission 100.0%
Answerability
  • A1 strong 0
  • A2 moderate 0
  • A3 weak 0
  • A0 none 1
Substance /24
Median 5middle half 5–5 · 1 scored
Topics raised
Count
Position
Answerability
Substance /24
Order
13 submissions in this letter's group · showing 1–13Clear all filters
  1. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 28, 2026FS-2025-0001-283577
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.

    I oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Please select the No Action alternative and retain the rule. Roadless national forests protect clean water, wildlife habitat, intact ecosystems, recreation and local economies. The existing rule already allows necessary public-safety, wildfire and restoration work. Removing it could increase road construction, habitat fragmentation, erosion and long-term maintenance costs. Please retain the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  2. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 27, 2026FS-2025-0001-276531
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.

    I oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Please select the No Action alternative and retain the rule. Roadless national forests protect clean water, wildlife habitat, intact ecosystems, recreation and local economies. The existing rule already allows necessary public-safety, wildfire and restoration work. Removing it could increase road construction, habitat fragmentation, erosion and long-term maintenance costs. Please retain the Roadless Rule!!
    Full analysis of this comment →
  3. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 25, 2026FS-2025-0001-268880
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.

    I oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Please select the No Action alternative and retain the rule. Roadless national forests protect clean water, wildlife habitat, intact ecosystems, recreation and local economies. The existing rule already allows necessary public-safety, wildfire and restoration work. Removing it could increase road construction, habitat fragmentation, erosion and long-term maintenance costs. Please retain the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  4. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 25, 2026FS-2025-0001-268938
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.

    I oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Please select the No Action alternative and retain the rule. Roadless national forests protect clean water, wildlife habitat, intact ecosystems, recreation and local economies. The existing rule already allows necessary public-safety, wildfire and restoration work. Removing it could increase road construction, habitat fragmentation, erosion and long-term maintenance costs. Please retain the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  5. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 25, 2026FS-2025-0001-269474
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.

    I oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Please select the No Action alternative and retain the rule. Roadless national forests protect clean water, wildlife habitat, intact ecosystems, recreation and local economies. The existing rule already allows necessary public-safety, wildfire and restoration work. Removing it could increase road construction, habitat fragmentation, erosion and long-term maintenance costs. Please retain the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  6. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-265163
    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 13 submissions in its group.

    oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Please select the No Action alternative and retain the rule. Roadless national forests protect clean water, wildlife habitat, intact ecosystems, recreation and local economies. The existing rule already allows necessary public-safety, wildfire and restoration work. Removing it could increase road construction, habitat fragmentation, erosion and long-term maintenance costs. Please retain the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  7. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-265210
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.

    I oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Please select the No Action alternative and retain the rule. Roadless national forests protect clean water, wildlife habitat, intact ecosystems, recreation and local economies. The existing rule already allows necessary public-safety, wildfire and restoration work. Removing it could increase road construction, habitat fragmentation, erosion and long-term maintenance costs. Please retain the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  8. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-265663
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.

    I oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Please select the No Action alternative and retain the rule. Roadless national forests protect clean water, wildlife habitat, intact ecosystems, recreation and local economies. The existing rule already allows necessary public-safety, wildfire and restoration work. Removing it could increase road construction, habitat fragmentation, erosion and long-term maintenance costs. Please retain the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  9. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-265945
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.

    I oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Please select the No Action alternative and retain the rule. Roadless national forests protect clean water, wildlife habitat, intact ecosystems, recreation and local economies. The existing rule already allows necessary public-safety, wildfire and restoration work. Removing it could increase road construction, habitat fragmentation, erosion and long-term maintenance costs. Please retain the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  10. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-267257
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.

    I oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Please select the No Action alternative and retain the rule. Roadless national forests protect clean water, wildlife habitat, intact ecosystems, recreation and local economies. The existing rule already allows necessary public-safety, wildfire and restoration work. Removing it could increase road construction, habitat fragmentation, erosion and long-term maintenance costs. Please retain the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  11. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-267719
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.

    I oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Please select the No Action alternative and retain the rule. Roadless national forests protect clean water, wildlife habitat, intact ecosystems, recreation and local economies. The existing rule already allows necessary public-safety, wildfire and restoration work. Removing it could increase road construction, habitat fragmentation, erosion and long-term maintenance costs. Please retain the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  12. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-267727
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.

    I oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Please select the No Action alternative and retain the rule. Roadless national forests protect clean water, wildlife habitat, intact ecosystems, recreation and local economies. The existing rule already allows necessary public-safety, wildfire and restoration work. Removing it could increase road construction, habitat fragmentation, erosion and long-term maintenance costs. Please retain the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  13. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-267889
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.

    I oppose rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Please select the No Action alternative and retain the rule. Roadless national forests protect clean water, wildlife habitat, intact ecosystems, recreation and local economies. The existing rule already allows necessary public-safety, wildfire and restoration work. Removing it could increase road construction, habitat fragmentation, erosion and long-term maintenance costs. Please retain the Roadless Rule.
    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.

Keep learning. Keep speaking up.The Roadless Rule depends on public engagement. Share what you've learned.

© 2026 roadless.org - Defending America's Last Wild Forests

Privacy Policy|Questions or concerns? noroads@roadless.org|Follow us: @defendroadless