Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

“: Proposed rescission of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule (Docket FS-2025-0001) I am writing to oppose the…”

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 6/24
  • 69 submissions
  • 67 versions of the text
  • 47 added words of their own

When it arrived

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

Sep 4Sep 10Oct 1

Sep 4: 37 submissions, 1 unique comments

What it names

National Forests
Superior National Forest+ Bitterroot National Forest+ Mark Twain National Forest
Roadless areas
+ Lakes Basin

Names marked + were added by senders and are not in the shared letter.

The letter

As sent in FS-2025-0001-315602, the comment that stands for the group.

: Proposed rescission of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule (Docket FS-2025-0001) I am writing to oppose the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. For 25 years, this rule has protected 45 million acres of National Forest System land from new road construction and large-scale logging, while still allowing recreation and responsible forest management, including wildfire prevention. It was created through one of the most extensive public processes in federal rulemaking history, and the public has supported it overwhelmingly ever since. In Minnesota, 62,000 acres of the Superior National Forest are protected under this rule. These roadless areas border the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and safeguard the clean water, intact forests, and critical wildlife habitat — including habitat for the threatened Canada lynx — that define this landscape. Building roads into these areas would fragment habitat, threaten water quality in one of America’s most treasured wilderness watersheds, and add costly new road maintenance obligations to a Forest Service road system that is already underfunded. The Roadless Rule works. Rescinding it would undo a quarter century of protection that the American public asked for and continues to support. I urge the Forest Service to withdraw this proposal and keep the 2001 Roadless Rule fully in place.
← 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: https://www.regulations.gov/bulkdownload.

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