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 comments25 submissions

Position

Opposes rescission 100.0%

Answerability

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

Substance /24

Median 4middle half 4–4 · 1 scored

Topics raised

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

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-480180
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 24, 2026FS-2025-0001-480880
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 21, 2026FS-2025-0001-459918
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, backpacker, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry experiences. I have been backpacking and mountain biking in Pisgah National Forest for over 20 years, and the area is unmatched for its rugged trails and profound sense of remoteness. The areas impacted by the roadless rule contain some of the finest trails in the Southeast. People travel from across the country to experience them. Introducing new road networks and resource extraction would permanently destroy the wilderness character of these rare, wild places. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 16, 2026FS-2025-0001-430825
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an advocate for wildlife and outdoor recreation advocate and enthusiast I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable habitat for dwindling wildlife populations, I know that protecting these lands is critical to preserving health and vitality of our constantly challenged, life-supporting ecosystems. Many of my most memorable experiences have been while camping and hiking in places like these. I want future generations to have the same opportunities I have had to be inspired by the grandeur of nature and come to understand our place within it. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Sep 9, 2026FS-2025-0001-341147
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Sep 3, 2026FS-2025-0001-311245
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences. I spend a lot of time on the backcountry trails in Pisgah National Forest, and these roadless areas are irreplaceable. In a world increasingly dominated by urban sprawl and endless paved roads, riding deep into the forest is my way to unplug and feel genuinely connected to nature. Preserving these remote, undeveloped corridors ensures that future generations can experience that same raw, quiet escape. PLEASE STOP THE SPRAWL!!! Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Aug 31, 2026FS-2025-0001-291798
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
To the USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active gravel biker and mountain biker; I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable biking experiences. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement. Thank you.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Aug 28, 2026FS-2025-0001-279361
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences. [INSERT YOUR PERSONAL CONNECTION HERE] Example prompt: Share a specific memory, favorite local trail, or National Forest area that matters to you. (e.g., “As someone who regularly rides the backcountry trails in the Pisgah National Forest, these Roadless Areas offer a remote, high-quality riding experience that cannot be replicated on developed lands. Protecting these corridors ensures future generations of trail users can enjoy the same primitive, pristine environment.”) Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 6/24Aug 28, 2026FS-2025-0001-282385
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, hiker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences. As someone who regularly rides and hikes the backcountry trails in the Pisgah National Forest, these Roadless Areas offer a remote, high-quality riding experience that cannot be replicated on developed lands. Protecting these corridors ensures future generations of trail users can enjoy the same primitive, pristine environment. I often spend time hiking or biking Sam Knob, Graveyard Ridge, Middle Prong, South Mills River, and Laurel Mountain. These areas are near and dear to our community and the many visitors that come to our area to seek refuge from urban environments. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Aug 27, 2026FS-2025-0001-273763
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 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences. I am an active user of the public land in Pisgah National Forest. If the roadless rule were to be rescinded, logging and other commercial activity could not only completely destroy beloved sections of our forest, but impact all users' quality of use through pollution, noise, and other byproducts of commercial activity. One of the most magical parts of life in Western North Carolina is being able to escape the commotion of the city and find serenity in the ancient lands of the forest. It is something that must be protected. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Aug 27, 2026FS-2025-0001-273840
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, fly fisherman, outdoor industry professional, and outdoor enthusiast, I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking, hiking, camping, and fly fishing experiences. As a career outdoor industry professional, access to these areas is critical to the health and success of the outdoor industry. The outdoor recreation industry is valued at nearly $700b, remaining a significant player in our countries economy. These wild places must remain intact to support many industries outside of the outdoor industry as well, such as local businesses, hospitality, and for future generations to enjoy. My family and I use these areas regularly to recreate and find respite, so opening up access with roadways will impact them in a negative and irreversible manner. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA1 strongSubstance 7/24Owed an answerAug 27, 2026FS-2025-0001-274080
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
To: USDA Forest Service Planning Team Re: Notice of Intent to Rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (90 FR 42179) Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences. I go to the mountains all the time. My friends live there. I bikepack and backpack in the wilderness. I learn about nature there. I need that space. Others do too. We have a lot of roads. Can’t we utilize what we have more effectively? Crimony. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement. -Ed (See attached file.)
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Aug 27, 2026FS-2025-0001-274102
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences. My family has been involved in mountain biking and hiking. We have been part of the founders of teams for youth mountain biking through the GA Cycling Association for 2nd through 12th graders across Georgia. This is a youth development program that we have been blessed to see change not just students but families' lives over the last 14 years. Protecting these lands also protects the opportunities our families have to become healthier both in body and mind, build stronger family units and give students confidence and leadership skills. Our sociaty desperately needs our next generations to develop these qualitites. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. We are expecting you to uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement. Thank you for your time.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Aug 27, 2026FS-2025-0001-274192
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences. I’ve ridden DuPont National Forest & plan to ride Pisgah in October. These roadless areas offer an excellent riding experience that can’t be replicated. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Aug 27, 2026FS-2025-0001-274234
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain areas. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Aug 27, 2026FS-2025-0001-274281
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences. I use Roadless Areas in various parts of the country in keeping with the American ideal of rugged individualism and the ‘wild west’ thrill of remote adventures. These protected areas foster key elements of personal character that have significantly contributed to the success of America. The 2001 Rule was the result of well considered ideas with significant patriot support. Why would we abandon this great achievement? Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Aug 27, 2026FS-2025-0001-274289
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry experiences. I often visit our protected areas and share them with my children. These are unspoiled and should be cherished as such. To rescind this rule would be devasting to us and future generations. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Aug 27, 2026FS-2025-0001-274558
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences. As a father of 2 children, who regularly spends time in Pisgah, Cherokee, and Nantahala National Forests, these Roadless Areas offer a remote, high-quality back packing, and riding experience that cannot be replicated on developed lands. These areas are incredibly special to share with the next generation. Protecting these corridors ensures future generations of trail users can enjoy the same primitive, pristine environment. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Aug 27, 2026FS-2025-0001-274726
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences. Example prompt: Share a specific memory, favorite local trail, or National I I I I utilize Roadless Areas in the greater Chattanooga area which offer a remote, high-quality riding experience that cannot be replicated on developed lands. The ability to recalibrate in the woods is a cornerstone of my positive mental health, from which I contribute positively to my community. Loosing the protection of these corridors would be an irreversible devastation to our culture at large. Protecting these corridors ensures future generations of trail users can enjoy the same primitive, pristine environment. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
Full analysis of this comment →
Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Aug 27, 2026FS-2025-0001-274801
PLACESTANDDOCGAPEVIDASKALTLAW
Campaign — One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. See the letter, its submissions and topics.One of 25 submissions in its group.
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team, As an active trail advocate, hiker, mountain biker, and member of the Southern Off-Road Bicycle Association (SORBA), I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I urge the Forest Service to select the “No Action” alternative, maintaining the vital protections provided by the 2001 Roadless Rule. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protect intact watersheds, preserve natural landscapes, prevent harmful forest fragmentation, and safeguard irreplaceable backcountry mountain biking experiences. I live a mile from Pisgah National Forest, and the ability to enjoy nature is a huge economic engine for this area. Rescinding the roadless rule would be killing the goose that keeps laying the golden eggs here, season after season. These Roadless Areas offer a remote, high-quality riding experience that cannot be replicated on developed lands. Protecting these corridors ensures future generations of trail users can enjoy the same primitive, pristine environment. Rescinding the 2001 Rule threatens to open these prized lands to road construction and resource extraction, risking the integrity of beloved non-motorized trail networks, increasing the spread of invasive species, and damaging the outdoor recreation economy that local communities rely upon. The Forest Service should prioritize protecting these unique backcountry spaces. Please uphold existing protections and adopt the “No Action” alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement.
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.