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 comments42 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

42 submissions in this letter's group · showing 1–20Clear all filters

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 16, 2026FS-2025-0001-421993
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 15, 2026FS-2025-0001-403619
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-379371
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-388363
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-392213
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 13, 2026FS-2025-0001-373187
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-342596
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-345794
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-349073
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-353708
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-355637
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-357440
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-358273
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-360283
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-362320
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-364467
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-368814
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-370317
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 9, 2026FS-2025-0001-339058
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 9, 2026FS-2025-0001-340500
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 42 submissions in its group.
Dear U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz, I’m writing to urge you to choose Alternative 1 and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule intact. One of my biggest fears for our country’s future is the destruction or deterioration of our environment that will have lasting affects on my children, grandchildren and future generations. I do not believe we need this to develop our economy or production capacity. For 25 years, the rule has safeguarded nearly 45 million acres of backcountry across U.S. national forests. These roadless areas provide numerous benefits to the American public, from clean air and water to vital wildlife habitat and diverse recreation opportunities — all while still allowing responsible forest management. Rescinding or altering this rule puts these lands at risk by opening the door to logging, oil-and-gas drilling, and other development. It will also fragment habitat, introduce invasive species, increase wildfire risk, and bring noise and light pollution. At a minimum, I insist that you extend this comment period to at least 90 days and hold hearings across the U.S. in all areas affected, so the public can fully weigh in. This proposal does not have my support. I urge you to choose no-action and uphold the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Ellen Punyon 4949 N Territory Ave Tucson, AZ 85750-5961 epunyon@gmail.com
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.