Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

“I live in Draper, Utah and am writing to urge the U.S. Department of Agriculture to retain the 2001 Roadless…”

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 3/24

11 submissions
10 versions of the text
11 added words of their own

TopicsGovernance Policy Process Wildlife Habitat

The letter's full analysis →Every submission of it →

When it arrived

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

Oct 5Oct 6

Oct 5: 8 submissions, 1 unique comments

What it names

National Forests: + Olympic National Forest

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

The letter

As sent in FS-2025-0001-578933, the comment that stands for the group.

I live in Draper, Utah and am writing to urge the U.S. Department of Agriculture to retain the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule and select the No Action Alternative. My connection to National Forest lands includes hiking and backpacking, hunting or fishing, camping, wildlife watching, and living in or near a National Forest community. Our National Forest lands are a national resource first and foremost and a local resource secondly. They should be managed accordingly. I am concerned about the cost of expanding the National Forest road system. We don't need more roads than what exist currently. Before rescinding the national rule, I would like USDA to answer this question: Why are the Roadless Rule's existing exceptions insufficient to meet legitimate wildfire, public safety, and forest-management needs? For these reasons, I urge USDA to retain the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule and select the No Action Alternative. Thank you for considering my comments.

← 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.