The Public Record · Docket FS-2025-0001

Read the comments.

Every public comment on the proposed rescission of the Roadless Rule, sorted by what it talks about. Pick a topic, then narrow by position, by how hard the comment is for the agency to set aside, or by how substantive it is. Each comment is shown in full, as filed. How comments are classified and scored is explained in the Comment Analysis.

1 unique comments13 submissions

Position

Opposes rescission 100.0%

Answerability

A1 strong 0
A2 moderate 0
A3 weak 0
A0 none 1

Substance /24

Median 5middle half 5–5 · 1 scored

Topics raised

13 submissions in this letter's group · showing 1–13Clear all filters

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Sep 3, 2026FS-2025-0001-310343
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.
For 25 years, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of our nation's most intact fish and wildlife habitat, protected clean water and sustained outstanding backcountry hunting and fishing opportunities. And roadless does not mean unmanaged. The rule allows important management activities, including hazardous fuels reduction and habitat restoration, while keeping these lands open to hunting, fishing, grazing and recreation. I urge you to not change the roadless rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 26, 2026FS-2025-0001-271008
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.
I urge you NOT to abandon the Roadless Rule. For 25 years, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of our nation's most intact fish and wildlife habitat, protected clean water, and sustained wildlife habitat and outstanding backcountry recreational opportunities. As you know, the Rule allows important management activities, including hazardous fuels reduction and habitat restoration, while keeping these lands open to hunting, fishing, grazing and recreation. Claims that wholesale rescission is necessary to address wildfire risk simply are not true. The Roadless Rule already provides flexibility for fuels treatments and other management activities WITHOUT requiring permanent new roads. And recent research found that wildfire ignitions were roughly four times MORE likely to occur near roads than in roadless forests, underscoring that more roads are not necessarily the answer to wildfire risk. Roadless areas are also some of the few public lands that don't come with a permanent maintenance bill attached. As you know, the USFS has 370,000+ miles of roads it struggles to maintain. I am told there is a maintenance backlog of over $10.8 billion. Given funding reductions, now is not the time to add more. In 2001, when the Rule was enacted, more than 99% of the 1.6 million public comments were in support. Keep the Rule intact. Please.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 6/24Aug 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-266414
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.
I am opposed to the proposal to resind the Roadless Area Conservation. For 25 years, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of our nation's most intact fish and wildlife habitat, protected clean water, and sustained wildlife habitat and outstanding backcountry hunting and fishing opportunities. All this while allowing important management activities, including hazardous fuels reduction and habitat restoration, and keeping these lands open to hunting, fishing, grazing and recreation. Claims that wholesale rescission is necessary to address wildfire risk is simply false and misleading. The Roadless Rule already provides flexibility for fuels treatments and other management activities WITHOUT requiring permanent new roads. Recent research found that wildfire ignitions were roughly four times MORE likely to occur near roads than in roadless forests, underscoring that more roads are not necessarily the answer to wildfire risk, but instead increase the risk for ignition. Roadless areas are also some of the only public lands that don't come with a permanent maintenance bill attached — the USFS already can't keep up with the 370,000+ miles of roads it has, with a maintenance backlog of over $10.8 billion. Let’s not add more. I greatly value vaste tracts of unbroken landscapes and the resiliency they provide to our nation and world. Fragmenting these special landscapes is short sighted and nations like our should invest in keeping roadless areas roadless. Let's fund federal agencies at appropriate levels to utilize science based management tools instead of inacting policies to forever ruin our special landscapes. .
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 23, 2026FS-2025-0001-261789
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.
As a hunter and angler I can attest from my experience in Federal lands that for 25 years, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of our nation's most intact fish and wildlife habitat, protected clean water, and sustained wildlife habitat and outstanding backcountry hunting and fishing opportunities. Now, roadless does not mean unmanaged. The Rule allows important management activities, including hazardous fuels reduction and habitat restoration, while keeping these lands open to hunting, fishing, grazing and recreation. Claims that wholesale rescission is necessary to address wildfire risk simply are not true. The Roadless Rule already provides flexibility for fuels treatments and other management activities WITHOUT requiring permanent new roads. And recent research found that wildfire ignitions were roughly four times MORE likely to occur near roads than in roadless forests, underscoring that more roads are not necessarily the answer to wildfire risk. Roadless areas are also some of the only public lands that don't come with a permanent maintenance bill attached — the USFS already can't keep up with the 370,000+ miles of roads it has, with a maintenance backlog of over $10.8 billion. Let’s not add more.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 22, 2026FS-2025-0001-247020
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.
Do not Rescind the Roadless rule. I am completely against it but do support the No Action Alternative. The Roadless Rule already provides flexibility for fuels treatments and other management activities without requiring permanent new roads. And recent research found that wildfire ignitions were roughly four times more likely to occur near roads than in roadless forests, underscoring that more roads are not necessarily the answer to wildfire risk. The current rule allows important management activities, including hazardous fuels reduction and habitat restoration, while keeping these lands open to hunting, fishing, grazing and recreation. Do not rescind the roadless rule.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 22, 2026FS-2025-0001-254742
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.
For 25 years, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of our nation's most intact fish and wildlife habitat, protected clean water and sustained outstanding backcountry hunting and fishing opportunities. And roadless does not mean unmanaged. The rule allows important management activities, including hazardous fuels reduction and habitat restoration, while keeping these lands open to hunting, fishing, grazing and recreation. Why is this administration set on destroying our beautiful wilderness? Please do not recind this policy.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 21, 2026FS-2025-0001-231547
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.
For 25 years, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of our nation's most intact fish and wildlife habitat, protected clean water, and sustained wildlife habitat and outstanding backcountry hunting and fishing opportunities. Now, roadless does not mean unmanaged. The Rule allows important management activities, including hazardous fuels reduction and habitat restoration, while keeping these lands open to hunting, fishing, grazing and recreation. Claims that wholesale rescission is necessary to address wildfire risk simply are not true. The Roadless Rule already provides flexibility for fuels treatments and other management activities WITHOUT requiring permanent new roads. And recent research found that wildfire ignitions were roughly four times MORE likely to occur near roads than in roadless forests, underscoring that more roads are not necessarily the answer to wildfire risk.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 21, 2026FS-2025-0001-233796
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.
For 25 years, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of our nation's most intact fish and wildlife habitat, protected clean water, and sustained wildlife habitat and outstanding backcountry hunting and fishing opportunities. Now, roadless does not mean unmanaged. The Rule allows important management activities, including hazardous fuels reduction and habitat restoration, while keeping these lands open to hunting, fishing, grazing and recreation. Claims that wholesale rescission is necessary to address wildfire risk simply are not true. The Roadless Rule already provides flexibility for fuels treatments and other management activities WITHOUT requiring permanent new roads. And recent research found that wildfire ignitions were roughly four times MORE likely to occur near roads than in roadless forests, underscoring that more roads are not necessarily the answer to wildfire risk. Roadless areas are also some of the only public lands that don't come with a permanent maintenance bill attached — the USFS already can't keep up with the 370,000+ miles of roads it has, with a maintenance backlog of over $10.8 billion. Let’s not add more. We, Public Land Owners, know all of this. That’s why in 2001, when the Rule was enacted, more than 99% of the 1.6 million public comments were in support.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 21, 2026FS-2025-0001-235391
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.
For 25 years, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of our nation's most intact fish and wildlife habitat, protected clean water, and sustained wildlife habitat and outstanding backcountry hunting and fishing opportunities. Now, roadless does not mean unmanaged. The Rule allows important management activities, including hazardous fuels reduction and habitat restoration, while keeping these lands open to hunting, fishing, grazing and recreation. Claims that wholesale rescission is necessary to address wildfire risk simply are not true. The Roadless Rule already provides flexibility for fuels treatments and other management activities WITHOUT requiring permanent new roads. And recent research found that wildfire ignitions were roughly four times MORE likely to occur near roads than in roadless forests, underscoring that more roads are not necessarily the answer to wildfire risk. Roadless areas are also some of the only public lands that don't come with a permanent maintenance bill attached — the USFS already can't keep up with the 370,000+ miles of roads it has, with a maintenance backlog of over $10.8 billion. Let’s not add more. We, Public Land Owners, know all of this. That’s why in 2001, when the Rule was enacted, more than 99% of the 1.6 million public comments were in support. And we still are 25 years later. These untouched wilderness areas are special to USA, not only for for human beings but the rich wildlife within. It’s crucial we maintain these naturally pure areas, once you start knocking it down, it won’t come back. Please do your part to CONTINUE to protect this resource.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 20, 2026FS-2025-0001-224026
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.This comment stands for all 13 submissions in its group.
For 25 years, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of our nation's most intact fish and wildlife habitat, protected clean water, and sustained wildlife habitat and outstanding backcountry hunting and fishing opportunities. Now, roadless does not mean unmanaged. The Rule allows important management activities, including hazardous fuels reduction and habitat restoration, while keeping these lands open to hunting, fishing, grazing and recreation. Claims that wholesale rescission is necessary to address wildfire risk simply are not true. The Roadless Rule already provides flexibility for fuels treatments and other management activities WITHOUT requiring permanent new roads. And recent research found that wildfire ignitions were roughly four times MORE likely to occur near roads than in roadless forests, underscoring that more roads are not necessarily the answer to wildfire risk. Roadless areas are also some of the only public lands that don't come with a permanent maintenance bill attached — the USFS already can't keep up with the 370,000+ miles of roads it has, with a maintenance backlog of over $10.8 billion. Let’s not add more. We, Public Land Owners, know all of this. That’s why in 2001, when the Rule was enacted, more than 99% of the 1.6 million public comments were in support.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 20, 2026FS-2025-0001-224044
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.
This plan to rescind the Roadless Rule is an insulting, patronizing slap in the face to every American citizen and sportsperson who has ever enjoyed public lands, Roadless or not, and every American citizen and sportsperson who may in the future enjoy them. For 25 years, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of our nation's most intact fish and wildlife habitat, protected clean water, and sustained wildlife habitat and outstanding backcountry hunting and fishing opportunities.This outlandish move to rob Americans of the Roadless Rule is a move that will strip protections from roughly 44.7 million acres of the best backcountry hunting and fishing habitat left in the country. Now, roadless does not mean unmanaged. The Rule already allows important management activities, including hazardous fuels reduction and habitat restoration, while keeping these lands open to hunting, fishing, grazing and recreation. Claims that wholesale rescission is necessary to address wildfire risk simply are not true. The Roadless Rule already provides flexibility for fuels treatments and other management activities WITHOUT requiring permanent new roads. And recent research found that wildfire ignitions were roughly four times MORE likely to occur near roads than in roadless forests, underscoring that more roads are not necessarily the answer to wildfire risk. Roadless areas are also some of the only public lands that don't come with a permanent maintenance bill attached — the USFS already can't keep up with the 370,000+ miles of roads it has, with a maintenance backlog of over $10.8 billion. Let’s not add more. We, Public Land Owners, know all of this. That’s why in 2001, when the Rule was enacted, more than 99% of the 1.6 million public comments were in support, and hopefully even more will join me in criticizing this ridiculous and insulting plan to do away with the Roadless Rule that does so much to protect our public lands.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 20, 2026FS-2025-0001-224190
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.
I am an avid outdoorsman, a hunter, fisherman, and camper. I am writing in this capacity to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescinding of the Roadless Rule. For 25 years, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of our nation's most intact fish and wildlife habitat, protected clean water, and sustained wildlife habitat and outstanding backcountry hunting and fishing opportunities. Now, roadless does not mean unmanaged. The Rule allows important management activities, including hazardous fuels reduction and habitat restoration, while keeping these lands open to hunting, fishing, grazing and recreation. Claims that wholesale rescission is necessary to address wildfire risk simply are not true. The Roadless Rule already provides flexibility for fuels treatments and other management activities WITHOUT requiring permanent new roads. And recent research found that wildfire ignitions were roughly four times MORE likely to occur near roads than in roadless forests, underscoring that more roads are not necessarily the answer to wildfire risk. Roadless areas are also some of the only public lands that don't come with a permanent maintenance bill attached — the USFS already can't keep up with the 370,000+ miles of roads it has, with a maintenance backlog of over $10.8 billion. Let’s not add more. Keeping wild areas truly wild, and available for hunting, fishing, and outdoor recreation, is absolutely vital to the sustainability of the large tourism sector of our economy. Please do not hinder the growth and development of this important sector of the economy by rescinding the Roadless Rule. The survival of several species, and the livelihood of all those who depend upon them, depend upon it. Rescinding this rule would be a massive mistake. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 20, 2026FS-2025-0001-225332
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 13 submissions in its group.
For 25 years, the Roadless Rule has conserved some of our nation's most intact fish and wildlife habitat, protected clean water, and sustained wildlife habitat and outstanding backcountry hunting and fishing opportunities. Now, roadless does not mean unmanaged. The Rule allows important management activities, including hazardous fuels reduction and habitat restoration, while keeping these lands open to hunting, fishing, grazing and recreation. Claims that wholesale rescission is necessary to address wildfire risk simply are not true. The Roadless Rule already provides flexibility for fuels treatments and other management activities WITHOUT requiring permanent new roads. And recent research found that wildfire ignitions were roughly four times MORE likely to occur near roads than in roadless forests, underscoring that more roads are not necessarily the answer to wildfire risk. Roadless areas are also some of the only public lands that don't come with a permanent maintenance bill attached — the USFS already can't keep up with the 370,000+ miles of roads it has, with a maintenance backlog of over $10.8 billion. Let’s not add more.
Full analysis of this comment →

Sharing & methodology

These results are meant to be shared.

Please cite us. This analysis is the intellectual property of Roadless.org and Nicholas Holshouser. You are welcome to reproduce it — every reproduction must include this citation:

Roadless.org and Nicholas Holshouser, “2001 Roadless Rule Revision — Substantive Analysis,” https://roadless.org.

How it works. A large language model (an open-weight Qwen3.8 model) reads each substantive comment and copies, word for word, the passages that carry its analytical gap, evidence, request, alternative and connection to the place; it returns no scores. Code grades those passages 0–3 on eight dimensions — evidence, legal grounding, engagement with the environmental analysis, analytical gaps, alternatives, specific requests, position, and local knowledge — with legal grounding taken from a citation scan, not the model. For the strongest tenth on each side, the copied passages are checked against the comment and shown as exhibits. A comment counts as “substantive” when it clears a floor filter — it must show at least one substantive signal (a named entity, a specific citation, a stated analytical deficiency, or first-person testimony), which screens out one-line and purely conclusory submissions before any model scoring.

The full method. Every step, why it is done that way, its known limits and a glossary: Methodologies →

The data. The full canonical dataset — every comment on Docket FS-2025-0001 — is available from Regulations.gov's bulk download, the canonical source: https://www.regulations.gov/bulkdownload. Download the CSV directly (Regulations.gov keeps this link working until October 18, 2026): https://bulk-downloads.regulations.gov/mv4-z8fw-q5jx.csv.

Roadless.org — analysis of the public comment docket.
Media inquiries welcome — nicholas@wanderingnature.com.