Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

“I am strongly opposed to the proposed changes to the Roadless Rule, and I do not support moving forward with…”

Campaign: One letter sent by 10 or more people, copied or lightly reworded. It counts as one unique comment. The record does not say which organisation ran it.

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24
  • 12 submissions
  • 4 versions of the text
  • 0 added words of their own

When it arrived

Submissions received each day. Tap or hover a bar for its count.

Sep 2Sep 3

Sep 3: 7 submissions, 0 unique comments

The letter

As sent in FS-2025-0001-308381, the comment that stands for the group.

I am strongly opposed to the proposed changes to the Roadless Rule, and I do not support moving forward with this rule. Our roadless forests are some of the most valuable and irreplaceable public lands we have. They provide critical wildlife habitat, protect watersheds and clean drinking water, support recreation, and preserve the natural character of our forests for future generations. Opening these areas to increased road construction, logging, and development could cause lasting damage to ecosystems that have taken generations to develop. Once intact forestland is fragmented by roads and development, it is extremely difficult to restore it to its original condition. Roads can also increase erosion, disrupt wildlife habitat, spread invasive species, and negatively affect water quality. I believe our public forests should be managed with long-term conservation and responsible stewardship in mind, rather than prioritizing short-term development or resource extraction. The Roadless Rule provides an important safeguard for some of our nation's remaining wild and undeveloped forests. I urge decision-makers to reject this proposal and maintain strong protections for roadless areas. These forests belong to all of us, and we have a responsibility to protect them for future generations.
← All campaigns

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 — Public Comment Analysis,” https://roadless.org.

How it works. Position and topic classification is performed by a large language model (the open-weight Qwen3.8 27B) that reads each comment and labels its position — supports, opposes, or neutral — and the topics it raises. Copies and campaigns are found by hashes of the text and the overlap of six-to-eight-word phrases, grouped into text families; every unique figure counts one family once. Sentence embeddings (Qwen3) find reworded templates, shown under Organized campaigns, and cross-check the families; lexical, syntactic and stylometric features (TF-IDF, spaCy) score each comment’s originality for review. Neither decides a copy count. The full method is on the Methodologies page of roadless.org.

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