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 comments10 submissions
Position
  • Opposes rescission 100.0%
Answerability
  • A1 strong 0
  • A2 moderate 0
  • A3 weak 0
  • A0 none 1
Substance /24
Median 2middle half 2–2 · 1 scored
Topics raised
Count
Position
Answerability
Substance /24
Order
10 submissions in this letter's group · showing 1–10Clear all filters
  1. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 1/24Sep 15, 2026FS-2025-0001-409028
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

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

    My name is Dr. Vanessa Rabito, a veterinarian, and I am writing to say I strongly oppose the proposed removal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I am a wildlife-lover and environmentalist who cares deeply about our national forests. The current proposed rescission of the Roadless Rule would remove protections on more than 25,000 miles of trails nationally. Road construction in Inventoried Roadless Areas will damage watersheds, fragment landscapes, and may increase the number of wildland fires. Do not rescind the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  2. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 1/24Sep 1, 2026FS-2025-0001-294898
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

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

    My name is Susan Morales, and I am writing to say I strongly oppose the proposed removal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I care deeply about our national forests. The current proposed rescission of the Roadless Rule would remove protections on more than 25,000 miles of trails nationally. Road construction in Inventoried Roadless Areas will damage watersheds, fragment landscapes, and may increase the number of wildland fires. Please do not rescind the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  3. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 1, 2026FS-2025-0001-295575
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

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

    I'm Alexis and I strongly oppose the proposed removal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I care deeply about our national forests and preserving spaces without human intervention. The current proposed rescission of the Roadless Rule would remove protections on more than 25,000 miles of trails nationally. Road construction in Inventoried Roadless Areas will damage watersheds, fragment landscapes, and may increase the number of wildland fires. Do not rescind the Roadless Rule. What's going to be left of our forests if we let cars take over??
    Full analysis of this comment →
  4. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 1, 2026FS-2025-0001-297167
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

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

    I am in strong opposition to the proposed removal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I am an environmentalist who cares deeply about our national forests. The current proposed rescission of the Roadless Rule would remove protections on more than 25,000 miles of trails nationally. Road construction in Inventoried Roadless Areas will damage watersheds, fragment landscapes, and may increase the number of wildland fires. For all these eco-benefits, please do not rescind the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  5. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 1/24Sep 1, 2026FS-2025-0001-297426
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

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

    I am writing to say I strongly oppose the proposed removal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I care deeply about preserving our national forests and wilderness areas. My understanding is that most forest fires are caused by humans, not naturally occurring events. The current proposed rescission of the Roadless Rule would remove protections on more than 25,000 miles of trails nationally. Road construction in Inventoried Roadless Areas will damage watersheds, fragment landscapes, and may increase the number of wildland fires. Please do not rescind the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  6. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 1, 2026FS-2025-0001-297454
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

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

    I'm writing to say that I strongly oppose the proposed removal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I care deeply about preserving our national forests, parks, and wilderness areas. My understanding is that the majority of forest fires are caused by humans, not naturally occurring events. The current proposed rescission of the Roadless Rule would remove protections on more than 25,000 miles of trails nationally. Road construction in Inventoried Roadless Areas will damage watersheds, fragment landscapes, and may increase the number of wildland fires. Please do not rescind the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  7. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 1/24Sep 1, 2026FS-2025-0001-297815
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

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

    My name is Mary Hill, and I am writing to say I strongly oppose the proposed removal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I am a hiker/birder/environmentalist who cares deeply about our national forests. The current proposed rescission of the Roadless Rule would remove protections on more than 25,000 miles of trails nationally. Road construction in Inventoried Roadless Areas will damage watersheds, fragment landscapes, and may increase the number of wildland fires. Please do not rescind the Roadless Rule.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  8. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 1/24Sep 1, 2026FS-2025-0001-299206
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

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

    I strongly oppose the proposed removal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I am a hiker and environmentalist who cares deeply about our national forests. The current proposed rescission of the Roadless Rule would remove protections on more than 25,000 miles of trails nationally. Road construction in Inventoried Roadless Areas will damage watersheds, fragment landscapes, degrade animal habitat, and likely increase the number of wildland fires. Please do not rescind the Roadless Rule. Shirlee Jellum Lyle, WA
    Full analysis of this comment →
  9. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Aug 31, 2026FS-2025-0001-291120
    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 10 submissions in its group.

    My name is John Altshuler, and I am writing to say I strongly oppose the proposed removal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I am a hiker/birder/environmentalist who cares deeply about our national forests. The current proposed rescission of the Roadless Rule would remove protections on more than 25,000 miles of trails nationally. Road construction in Inventoried Roadless Areas will damage watersheds, fragment landscapes, and may increase the number of wildland fires. Please do not rescind the Roadless Rule, mostly because once the process begins it becomes much more difficult to rectify problems when they occur...and they will.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  10. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Aug 31, 2026FS-2025-0001-291124
    PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW

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

    To whom it may concern, As a former USFS HotShot firefighter and Smokejumper, I am writing to say I strongly oppose the proposed removal of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I am also a hiker and environmentalist who cares deeply about our national forests. The current proposed rescission of the Roadless Rule would remove protections on more than 25,000 miles of trails nationally. Road construction in Inventoried Roadless Areas will damage watersheds, fragment landscapes, and may increase the number of wildland fires. Please do not rescind the Roadless Rule. Sincerely, Jack Stansfield Stanwood, WA 98292
    Full analysis of this comment →

Sharing & methodology

These results are meant to be shared.

Please cite us. This analysis is the intellectual property of Roadless.org and Nicholas Holshouser. You are welcome to reproduce it — every reproduction must include this citation:
Roadless.org and Nicholas Holshouser, “2001 Roadless Rule Revision — Substantive Analysis,” https://roadless.org.

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

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

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

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

Keep learning. Keep speaking up.The Roadless Rule depends on public engagement. Share what you've learned.

© 2026 roadless.org - Defending America's Last Wild Forests

Privacy Policy|Questions or concerns? noroads@roadless.org|Follow us: @defendroadless