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 comments38 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

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

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Oct 6, 2026FS-2025-0001-582923
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am an outdoor recreationist who regularly visits roadless areas on America's national forests and I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Oct 1, 2026FS-2025-0001-529546
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am an avid outdoor recreationist who regularly visits roadless areas on America's national forests and I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary. Sincerely, Caitlin Funston
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 22, 2026FS-2025-0001-466643
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy, especially in my home state. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation and untouched wildlife are crucial parts of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary. Do not rescind the Roadless Rule. Any "regulatory burden" that is reduced by this proposal is vastly overshadowed by the damage and headache it would cause for those on the ground.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 21, 2026FS-2025-0001-453220
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am an avid outdoor recreationist who regularly visits roadless areas on America's national forests and I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. Not only would the rescission of the Roadless Rule hurt the Outdoor Recreation community, but it would also further endanger millions of acres of Old Growth forests, which have been in existence for far longer than any person can really fathom, as well as thousands of native species, whose habitats have already been severely shrunk due to human intervention. We owe it to the world we live in to begin to actually treat it with the utmost respect. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and it is also crucial to the survival of millions of acres of wildlife. Rescinding the Roadless Rule is an unpopular, unnecessary, and unwise decision.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-379280
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am writing to express my stance on the 2001 Roadless Rule Rescission (FS-2025-0001). As a person who regularly recreates in roadless areas of nearby national forests, I urge this rule remain intact exactly as it is. The Roadless Rule is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. Thank you for your time.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 14, 2026FS-2025-0001-390873
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 6/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-347714
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am an avid outdoor recreationist in the white mountains of New Hampshire, roadless areas on America's national forests, I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-359361
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am an avid outdoor recreationist who regularly visits roadless areas on America's national forests and I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. 85% of fires start within .5 miles of the road. Wildfire roads are already established for fire fighters should they need them. The excelleration of fires is a man made problem. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary. We don't need private companies/entities to build roads for their own use to deforest or build more private residences.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-361696
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am an avid outdoor recreationist who regularly visits roadless areas on America's national forests and I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary. Protect and save the trees, grounds, waters, and wilderness.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 12, 2026FS-2025-0001-370274
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am an avid outdoor recreationist who regularly visits roadless areas on America's national forests and I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary. There is no logical reason to be rescinding the Roadless Area Conservation Act it will do nothing but destroy our forests and our earth for a little bit of profits.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 9, 2026FS-2025-0001-340429
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am an avid outdoor recreationist who regularly visits roadless areas on America's national forests and I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary. Sincerely, E C Virginia resident
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 7, 2026FS-2025-0001-325145
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am an avid outdoor recreationist who regularly visits roadless areas on America's national forests and I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary. I love being able to walk outside and enjoy nature as intended and to destroy it when we don't need it. The Sequoia National Park is one of the most beautiful places I have been to. This is just one of the many places that are protected by the Roadless Rule and is America's second national park. To remove protections from it and potentially destroy it is damaging this country's protected land that has trees that have been protected since 1890.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 7, 2026FS-2025-0001-325682
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I OPPOSE the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 7, 2026FS-2025-0001-332843
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am an avid hiker who regularly visits roadless areas on America's national forests and I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary. Sincerely, Matt Wastradowski
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 3, 2026FS-2025-0001-308547
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 3, 2026FS-2025-0001-309856
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am an avid outdoor recreationist who regularly visits roadless areas on America's national forests and I support the No Action alternative in the current Draft EIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. I am proud of and appreciate the wonders and quiet of our national forests and want these beautiful qualities preserved. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. It would be an incredible loss to my experience of outdoor recreation for these protections to be lost, as well as the communities supporting outdoor recreation. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 3, 2026FS-2025-0001-311755
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am concerned citizen and avid lover of our stunning outdoor spaces who regularly visits roadless areas on America's national forests and I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule. This policy is so important to conserving outdoor spaces, which in turn matters for our outdoor recreation community and tourism industries. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 1, 2026FS-2025-0001-298801
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Aug 31, 2026FS-2025-0001-291432
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
I am an avid outdoor recreationist who regularly visits roadless areas on America's national forests and I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. Additionally, the protected areas provide vital habitat for 1,500 wildlife species—and drinking water supplies for 60 million Americans. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Aug 31, 2026FS-2025-0001-291684
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 38 submissions in its group.
Hello, I am an avid outdoor recreationist who regularly visits roadless areas on America's national forests and I support the No Action alternative in the current DEIS. I am deeply concerned with the idea of rescinding the Roadless Rule, which is extremely important to the outdoor recreation community and the outdoor recreation economy. The rescission would remove important protections for approximately 45 million acres of backcountry national forests, including more than 25,000 miles of trails, 10,000 climbing routes, nearly 1,000 miles of whitewater, and more than 10,000 miles of mountain biking. Research has shown that, "4% of all ignitions reported between 1992 and 2017 occurred in roaded national forest lands compared to just 26% in roadless areas" (https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac13ee/pdf). Thus, rescinding the Roadless Rule would like increase wildfires. Please listen to the countless scientists who are opposed to rescinding this rule. I strongly support maintaining the Roadless Rule as is. Outdoor recreation is a crucial part of our country's economy, and rescinding the Roadless Rule is unpopular and unnecessary. Please do not let your greed guide your decision on this matter. Cutting down our forests will inevitably lead to the downfall of the world, which you would be responsible for if you rescind this rule. Sincerly, Andrew Gigler
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.