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 comments45 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
45 submissions in this letter's group · showing 1–20Clear all filters
  1. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 16, 2026FS-2025-0001-421211
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is to keep America’s wild places safe and protected! The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Sincerely, Anne Greene Saco, ME 04072
    Full analysis of this comment →
  2. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 16, 2026FS-2025-0001-421262
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is to keep America’s wild places safe and protected! The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Sincerely, Anne Greene Saco, ME 04072
    Full analysis of this comment →
  3. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 16, 2026FS-2025-0001-421404
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is. The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Jeanne Turrigiano VOTER Sincerely, Jeanne Turrigiano Cathedral City, CA 92234
    Full analysis of this comment →
  4. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 16, 2026FS-2025-0001-423896
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is. The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Richard Lintz jr Sincerely, Sincerely, Richard Lintz jr Pittsburgh, PA 15212
    Full analysis of this comment →
  5. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 15, 2026FS-2025-0001-405670
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is. The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Richard Lintz jr Sincerely, Sincerely, Richard Lintz jr Pittsburgh, PA 15212
    Full analysis of this comment →
  6. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-378893
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is to keep America’s wild places safe and protected! The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Sincerely, Anne Greene Saco, ME 04072
    Full analysis of this comment →
  7. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-378928
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is to keep America’s wild places safe and protected! The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Sincerely, Anne Greene Saco, ME 04072
    Full analysis of this comment →
  8. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-379027
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is. The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Jeanne Turrigiano VOTER Sincerely, Jeanne Turrigiano Cathedral City, CA 92234
    Full analysis of this comment →
  9. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-380440
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is. The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Richard Lintz jr Sincerely, Sincerely, Richard Lintz jr Pittsburgh, PA 15212
    Full analysis of this comment →
  10. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-388043
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is to keep America’s wild places safe and protected! The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Sincerely, Anne Greene Saco, ME 04072
    Full analysis of this comment →
  11. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-388070
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is to keep America’s wild places safe and protected! The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Sincerely, Anne Greene Saco, ME 04072
    Full analysis of this comment →
  12. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-388138
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is. The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Jeanne Turrigiano VOTER Sincerely, Jeanne Turrigiano Cathedral City, CA 92234
    Full analysis of this comment →
  13. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-389050
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is. The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Richard Lintz jr Sincerely, Sincerely, Richard Lintz jr Pittsburgh, PA 15212
    Full analysis of this comment →
  14. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-391654
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is to keep America’s wild places safe and protected! The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Sincerely, Anne Greene Saco, ME 04072
    Full analysis of this comment →
  15. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-391696
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is to keep America’s wild places safe and protected! The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Sincerely, Anne Greene Saco, ME 04072
    Full analysis of this comment →
  16. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-391809
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is. The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Jeanne Turrigiano VOTER Sincerely, Jeanne Turrigiano Cathedral City, CA 92234
    Full analysis of this comment →
  17. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-393510
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is. The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Richard Lintz jr Sincerely, Sincerely, Richard Lintz jr Pittsburgh, PA 15212
    Full analysis of this comment →
  18. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-402702
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is to keep America’s wild places safe and protected! The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Sincerely, Anne Greene Saco, ME 04072
    Full analysis of this comment →
  19. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-402769
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is to keep America’s wild places safe and protected! The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Sincerely, Anne Greene Saco, ME 04072
    Full analysis of this comment →
  20. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-402974
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

    Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 45 submissions in its group.

    I oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge you to maintain the existing Rule as is. The Roadless Rule protects the watersheds of many of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers in California, as well as many rivers and streams deemed eligible for national protection by the Forest Service. The roadless areas through which these wild rivers flow are an important refuge for threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. They provide outstanding opportunities for outdoor recreation in a primitive setting, such as hiking, backpacking, whitewater boating, mountain biking, and even motorized recreation on existing legal trails. Roadless areas provide clean water for wildlife and recreation and the rivers that flow from the roadless areas into reservoirs are an important source of high-quality water for downstream communities and farms. Many rivers to consider include but are not limited to the North Fork American, Tuolumne, South Fork Kings, Middle Fork Feather, and North Fork Kern. The Roadless Rule does not limit public access. Most roadless areas are legally available for public recreation under the Rule – they are simply closed to new road building, commercial logging, and other development that requires new roads. It is not true that roadless areas increase wildfire threats. Roads – not roadless areas – are a primary source of wildfire starts. I urge that Roadless Rule be retained to protect our wild places for recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and as important sources of clean water for our communities and farms. Sincerely, Jeanne Turrigiano VOTER Sincerely, Jeanne Turrigiano Cathedral City, CA 92234
    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: https://www.regulations.gov/bulkdownload.

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