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 3middle half 3–3 · 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 3/24Oct 6, 2026FS-2025-0001-577718
    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 repeal of the 2001 Roadless Rule. I spend time hiking and camping on our national forests, and I value having large areas of public land that remain wild, remote and largely undeveloped. These places provide wildlife habitat, protect watersheds, and give people the chance to experience the backcountry in a way that becomes harder to preserve once roads and development are added. Please keep the Roadless Rule in place and continue protecting these areas for future generations. ​ The parks should not be for economic exploitation.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  2. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Oct 5, 2026FS-2025-0001-558729
    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.

    I vehemently oppose the proposed repeal of the Roadless Rule (2001). I spend extensive time hiking and camping on our national forests, including the White Mountains, etc., and I see immense value having large areas of protected public land that remain wild, remote and largely undeveloped. These places provide wildlife habitat, protect watersheds, and give people the chance to experience the backcountry in a way that becomes harder to preserve once roads and development are added. Please keep the Roadless Rule in place and continue protecting these areas for future generations.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  3. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Oct 5, 2026FS-2025-0001-558775
    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 repeal of the 2001 Roadless Rule. I spend time hiking and camping on our national forests, and I value having large areas of public land that remain wild, remote and largely undeveloped. These places provide wildlife habitat, protect watersheds, and give people the chance to experience the backcountry in a way that becomes harder to preserve once roads and development are added. Please keep the Roadless Rule in place and continue protecting these areas for future generations. ​Sincerely, Matthew Meyer
    Full analysis of this comment →
  4. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Oct 5, 2026FS-2025-0001-559191
    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.

    Repeal of the 2001 Roadless Rule is the wrong idea. I spend time hiking and camping on our national forests, and I value having large areas of public land that remain wild, remote and largely undeveloped. In these wild and roadless places people can recharge in a way you can't in today's complex society. These places provide wildlife habitat, protect watersheds, and give people the chance to experience the backcountry in a way that becomes harder to preserve once roads and development are added. Please keep the Roadless Rule in place and continue protecting these areas for future generations.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  5. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Oct 5, 2026FS-2025-0001-559230
    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 repeal of the 2001 Roadless Rule. Our national forests provide wildlife habitat, protect watersheds, and give people the chance to experience the backcountry in a way that becomes harder to preserve once roads and development are added. Please keep the Roadless Rule in place and continue protecting these areas for future generations.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  6. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Oct 5, 2026FS-2025-0001-559633
    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 repeal of the 2001 Roadless Rule. I spend time hiking and camping on our national forests, and I value having large areas of public land that remain wild, remote and largely undeveloped. These places provide wildlife habitat, protect watersheds, and give people the chance to experience the backcountry in a way that becomes harder to preserve once roads and development are added. Please keep the Roadless Rule in place and continue protecting these areas for future generations. The reasons the Roadless Act was created have not changed and new management is not a valid reason to repeal it. Restore trade with Canada.
    Full analysis of this comment →
  7. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Oct 5, 2026FS-2025-0001-560279
    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 repeal of the 2001 Roadless Rule. I spend time hiking and camping on our national forests, and I value having large areas of public land that remain wild, remote and largely undeveloped. These places provide wildlife habitat, protect watersheds, and give people the chance to experience the backcountry in a way that becomes harder to preserve once roads and development are added. Keep the Roadless Rule in place and continue protecting these areas for future generations!
    Full analysis of this comment →
  8. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Oct 5, 2026FS-2025-0001-563313
    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 repeal of the 2001 Roadless Rule. I spend time hiking and camping on our national forests, and I value having large areas of public land that remain wild, remote and largely undeveloped. These places provide wildlife habitat, protect watersheds, and give people the chance to experience the backcountry in a way that becomes harder to preserve once roads and development are added. Please keep the Roadless Rule in place and continue protecting these areas for future generations. Thank you
    Full analysis of this comment →
  9. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Oct 5, 2026FS-2025-0001-563551
    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.

    Hello, any one there? I strongly oppose the proposed repeal of the 2001 Roadless Rule. I spend time hiking and camping on our national forests, and I value having large areas of public land that remain wild, remote and largely undeveloped. These places provide wildlife habitat, protect watersheds, and give people the chance to experience the backcountry in a way that becomes harder to preserve once roads and development are added. Please keep the Roadless Rule in place and continue protecting these areas for future generations. Thank you for reading this and hope that you agree and not destroy our Public Lands
    Full analysis of this comment →
  10. Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Oct 5, 2026FS-2025-0001-569752
    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.

    Example Comment I strongly oppose the proposed repeal of the 2001 Roadless Rule. I spend time hiking and camping on our national forests, and I value having large areas of public land that remain wild, remote and largely undeveloped. These places provide wildlife habitat, protect watersheds, and give people the chance to experience the backcountry in a way that becomes harder to preserve once roads and development are added. Please keep the Roadless Rule in place and continue protecting these areas for future generations.
    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