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
Count
Position
Answerability
Substance /24
Order
12 submissions in this letter's group · showing 1–12Clear all filters
  1. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 4, 2026FS-2025-0001-311977
    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 am strongly opposed to the proposed changes to the Roadless Rule, and I do not support moving forward with this rule. Our roadless forests are some of the most valuable and irreplaceable public lands we have. They provide critical wildlife habitat, protect watersheds and clean drinking water, support recreation, and preserve the natural character of our forests for future generations. Opening these areas to increased road construction, logging, and development could cause lasting damage to ecosystems that have taken generations to develop. Once intact forestland is fragmented by roads and development, it is extremely difficult to restore it to its original condition. Roads can also increase erosion, disrupt wildlife habitat, spread invasive species, and negatively affect water quality. I believe our public forests should be managed with long-term conservation and responsible stewardship in mind, rather than prioritizing short-term development or resource extraction. The Roadless Rule provides an important safeguard for some of our nation's remaining wild and undeveloped forests. I urge decision-makers to reject this proposal and maintain strong protections for roadless areas. These forests belong to all of us, and we have a responsibility to protect them for future generations
    Full analysis of this comment →
  2. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 4, 2026FS-2025-0001-312191
    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 am strongly opposed to the proposed changes to the Roadless Rule, and I do not support moving forward with this rule. Our roadless forests are some of the most valuable and irreplaceable public lands we have. They provide critical wildlife habitat, protect watersheds and clean drinking water, support recreation, and preserve the natural character of our forests for future generations. Opening these areas to increased road construction, logging, and development could cause lasting damage to ecosystems that have taken generations to develop. Once intact forestland is fragmented by roads and development, it is extremely difficult to restore it to its original condition. Roads can also increase erosion, disrupt wildlife habitat, spread invasive species, and negatively affect water quality. I believe our public forests should be managed with long-term conservation and responsible stewardship in mind, rather than prioritizing short-term development or resource extraction. The Roadless Rule provides an important safeguard for some of our nation's remaining wild and undeveloped forests. I urge decision-makers to reject this proposal and maintain strong protections for roadless areas. These forests belong to all of us, and we have a responsibility to protect them for future generations.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  3. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 4, 2026FS-2025-0001-314738
    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 am strongly opposed to the proposed changes to the Roadless Rule, and I do not support moving forward with this rule. Our roadless forests are some of the most valuable and irreplaceable public lands we have. They provide critical wildlife habitat, protect watersheds and clean drinking water, support recreation, and preserve the natural character of our forests for future generations. Opening these areas to increased road construction, logging, and development could cause lasting damage to ecosystems that have taken generations to develop. Once intact forestland is fragmented by roads and development, it is extremely difficult to restore it to its original condition. Roads can also increase erosion, disrupt wildlife habitat, spread invasive species, and negatively affect water quality. I believe our public forests should be managed with long-term conservation and responsible stewardship in mind, rather than prioritizing short-term development or resource extraction. The Roadless Rule provides an important safeguard for some of our nation's remaining wild and undeveloped forests. I urge decision-makers to reject this proposal and maintain strong protections for roadless areas. These forests belong to all of us, and we have a responsibility to protect them for future generations.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  4. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 3, 2026FS-2025-0001-308032
    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 am strongly opposed to the proposed changes to the Roadless Rule, and I do not support moving forward with this rule. Our roadless forests are some of the most valuable and irreplaceable public lands we have. They provide critical wildlife habitat, protect watersheds and clean drinking water, support recreation, and preserve the natural character of our forests for future generations. Opening these areas to increased road construction, logging, and development could cause lasting damage to ecosystems that have taken generations to develop. Once intact forestland is fragmented by roads and development, it is extremely difficult to restore it to its original condition. Roads can also increase erosion, disrupt wildlife habitat, spread invasive species, and negatively affect water quality. I believe our public forests should be managed with long-term conservation and responsible stewardship in mind, rather than prioritizing short-term development or resource extraction. The Roadless Rule provides an important safeguard for some of our nation's remaining wild and undeveloped forests. I urge decision-makers to reject this proposal and maintain strong protections for roadless areas. These forests belong to all of us, and we have a responsibility to protect them for future generations.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  5. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 3, 2026FS-2025-0001-308381
    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 am strongly opposed to the proposed changes to the Roadless Rule, and I do not support moving forward with this rule. Our roadless forests are some of the most valuable and irreplaceable public lands we have. They provide critical wildlife habitat, protect watersheds and clean drinking water, support recreation, and preserve the natural character of our forests for future generations. Opening these areas to increased road construction, logging, and development could cause lasting damage to ecosystems that have taken generations to develop. Once intact forestland is fragmented by roads and development, it is extremely difficult to restore it to its original condition. Roads can also increase erosion, disrupt wildlife habitat, spread invasive species, and negatively affect water quality. I believe our public forests should be managed with long-term conservation and responsible stewardship in mind, rather than prioritizing short-term development or resource extraction. The Roadless Rule provides an important safeguard for some of our nation's remaining wild and undeveloped forests. I urge decision-makers to reject this proposal and maintain strong protections for roadless areas. These forests belong to all of us, and we have a responsibility to protect them for future generations.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  6. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 3, 2026FS-2025-0001-308508
    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 am strongly opposed to the proposed changes to the Roadless Rule, and I do not support moving forward with this rule. Our roadless forests are some of the most valuable and irreplaceable public lands we have. They provide critical wildlife habitat, protect watersheds and clean drinking water, support recreation, and preserve the natural character of our forests for future generations. Opening these areas to increased road construction, logging, and development could cause lasting damage to ecosystems that have taken generations to develop. Once intact forestland is fragmented by roads and development, it is extremely difficult to restore it to its original condition. Roads can also increase erosion, disrupt wildlife habitat, spread invasive species, and negatively affect water quality. I believe our public forests should be managed with long-term conservation and responsible stewardship in mind, rather than prioritizing short-term development or resource extraction. The Roadless Rule provides an important safeguard for some of our nation's remaining wild and undeveloped forests. I urge decision-makers to reject this proposal and maintain strong protections for roadless areas. These forests belong to all of us, and we have a responsibility to protect them for future generations.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  7. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 3, 2026FS-2025-0001-308649
    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 am strongly opposed to the proposed changes to the Roadless Rule, and I do not support moving forward with this rule. Our roadless forests are some of the most valuable and irreplaceable public lands we have. They provide critical wildlife habitat, protect watersheds and clean drinking water, support recreation, and preserve the natural character of our forests for future generations. Opening these areas to increased road construction, logging, and development could cause lasting damage to ecosystems that have taken generations to develop. Once intact forestland is fragmented by roads and development, it is extremely difficult to restore it to its original condition. Roads can also increase erosion, disrupt wildlife habitat, spread invasive species, and negatively affect water quality. I believe our public forests should be managed with long-term conservation and responsible stewardship in mind, rather than prioritizing short-term development or resource extraction. The Roadless Rule provides an important safeguard for some of our nation's remaining wild and undeveloped forests. I urge decision-makers to reject this proposal and maintain strong protections for roadless areas. These forests belong to all of us, and we have a responsibility to protect them for future generations.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  8. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 3, 2026FS-2025-0001-308928
    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 am strongly opposed to the proposed changes to the Roadless Rule, and I do not support moving forward with this rule. Our roadless forests are some of the most valuable and irreplaceable public lands we have. They provide critical wildlife habitat, protect watersheds and clean drinking water, support recreation, and preserve the natural character of our forests for future generations. Opening these areas to increased road construction, logging, and development could cause lasting damage to ecosystems that have taken generations to develop. Once intact forestland is fragmented by roads and development, it is extremely difficult to restore it to its original condition. Roads can also increase erosion, disrupt wildlife habitat, spread invasive species, and negatively affect water quality. I believe our public forests should be managed with long-term conservation and responsible stewardship in mind, rather than prioritizing short-term development or resource extraction. The Roadless Rule provides an important safeguard for some of our nation's remaining wild and undeveloped forests. I urge decision-makers to reject this proposal and maintain strong protections for roadless areas. These forests belong to all of us, and we have a responsibility to protect them for future generations.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  9. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 3, 2026FS-2025-0001-309336
    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 am strongly opposed to the proposed changes to the Roadless Rule, and I do not support moving forward with this rule. Our roadless forests are some of the most valuable and irreplaceable public lands we have. They provide critical wildlife habitat, protect watersheds and clean drinking water, support recreation, and preserve the natural character of our forests for future generations. Opening these areas to increased road construction, logging, and development could cause lasting damage to ecosystems that have taken generations to develop. Once intact forestland is fragmented by roads and development, it is extremely difficult to restore it to its original condition. Roads can also increase erosion, disrupt wildlife habitat, spread invasive species, and negatively affect water quality. I believe our public forests should be managed with long-term conservation and responsible stewardship in mind, rather than prioritizing short-term development or resource extraction. The Roadless Rule provides an important safeguard for some of our nation's remaining wild and undeveloped forests. I urge decision-makers to reject this proposal and maintain strong protections for roadless areas. These forests belong to all of us, and we have a responsibility to protect them for future generations.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  10. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 3, 2026FS-2025-0001-311935
    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 am strongly opposed to the proposed changes to the Roadless Rule, and I do not support moving forward with this rule. Our roadless forests are some of the most valuable and irreplaceable public lands we have. They provide critical wildlife habitat, protect watersheds and clean drinking water, support recreation, and preserve the natural character of our forests for future generations. Opening these areas to increased road construction, logging, and development could cause lasting damage to ecosystems that have taken generations to develop. Once intact forestland is fragmented by roads and development, it is extremely difficult to restore it to its original condition. Roads can also increase erosion, disrupt wildlife habitat, spread invasive species, and negatively affect water quality. I believe our public forests should be managed with long-term conservation and responsible stewardship in mind, rather than prioritizing short-term development or resource extraction. The Roadless Rule provides an important safeguard for some of our nation's remaining wild and undeveloped forests. I urge decision-makers to reject this proposal and maintain strong protections for roadless areas. These forests belong to all of us, and we have a responsibility to protect them for future generations.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  11. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 3, 2026FS-2025-0001-311942
    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 am strongly opposed to the proposed changes to the Roadless Rule, and I do not support moving forward with this rule. Our roadless forests are some of the most valuable and irreplaceable public lands we have. They provide critical wildlife habitat, protect watersheds and clean drinking water, support recreation, and preserve the natural character of our forests for future generations. Opening these areas to increased road construction, logging, and development could cause lasting damage to ecosystems that have taken generations to develop. Once intact forestland is fragmented by roads and development, it is extremely difficult to restore it to its original condition. Roads can also increase erosion, disrupt wildlife habitat, spread invasive species, and negatively affect water quality. I believe our public forests should be managed with long-term conservation and responsible stewardship in mind, rather than prioritizing short-term development or resource extraction. The Roadless Rule provides an important safeguard for some of our nation's remaining wild and undeveloped forests. I urge decision-makers to reject this proposal and maintain strong protections for roadless areas. These forests belong to all of us, and we have a responsibility to protect them for future generations.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  12. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 3, 2026FS-2025-0001-311967
    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 am strongly opposed to the proposed changes to the Roadless Rule, and I do not support moving forward with this rule. Our roadless forests are some of the most valuable and irreplaceable public lands we have. They provide critical wildlife habitat, protect watersheds and clean drinking water, support recreation, and preserve the natural character of our forests for future generations. Opening these areas to increased road construction, logging, and development could cause lasting damage to ecosystems that have taken generations to develop. Once intact forestland is fragmented by roads and development, it is extremely difficult to restore it to its original condition. Roads can also increase erosion, disrupt wildlife habitat, spread invasive species, and negatively affect water quality. I believe our public forests should be managed with long-term conservation and responsible stewardship in mind, rather than prioritizing short-term development or resource extraction. The Roadless Rule provides an important safeguard for some of our nation's remaining wild and undeveloped forests. I urge decision-makers to reject this proposal and maintain strong protections for roadless areas. These forests belong to all of us, and we have a responsibility to protect them for future generations.
    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