Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-224887

Opposes rescissionA3 weakSubstance 10/24Owed an answerPosted August 20, 2026 On Regulations.gov

In short: The comment places on the record a specific geographic location (Mogan Ridge, Hoosier National Forest, Indiana) and documents a deficiency in the agency's analysis where the small-business certification contradicts the DEIS findings regarding lost recreation benefits and the misapplication of national expenditure data to local outfitters.

Scored directly — The comment's whole text was scored on its own.

Scorecard

Each dimension is scored 0–3; the eight sum to the substance score out of 24.

  • Specific placeNames a specific location — from a region down to an exact creek, trail, road, or map reference.
  • Local knowledgeDraws on a first-hand connection to the place — visits, sustained activity, occupation, or a professional role.
  • EA analysisEngages the agency's environmental analysis directly.
  • Analytical gapIdentifies something the analysis fails to address.
  • EvidenceBacks claims with specific facts, data, or research.
  • RequestMakes a specific, actionable request of the agency.
  • AlternativeProposes a different course of action.
  • LegalCites statutes, regulations, or legal obligations.

How hard it is to set aside

A3 weak: Substantive, but easier to set aside.

Owed an answer on Analytical gap.

Standard dismissals it defeats

  • Misreads the proposal The agency says the comment misunderstands what is proposed. Defeated when the comment engages the proposal or a named place directly.
  • Outside the scope The agency says the comment asks about a different action. Defeated when the comment is specific and tied to this proposal.

Still open to the agency

  • Alternative already eliminated The agency says it considered and eliminated the alternative the comment proposes, with a reason. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
  • Already addressed The agency says its analysis already covers the point. Defeated when the comment cites the law itself: there is no analysis to cite against a statutory claim.
  • Deferred to a later decision The agency says the point belongs to a later, site-specific decision. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
  • Not required The agency says the analysis the comment asks for is not required. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
  • Preference noted The agency notes the comment as a statement of preference and takes no action on it. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
  • No cause and effect shown The agency says the comment asserts a harm without showing how the action causes it. Defeated when the comment shows the mechanism.
  • Certified not substantive The agency certifies the comment raises nothing substantive. Defeated when the comment alleges illegality, which is substantive by the definition the certification runs on.

Topics

  • Recreation Tourism Public Use
    • “My family likes to hike and camp in areas where the night sky is bright”
    • “We like to spend time in nature an refresh ourselves”
    • “Great family conversations happen here in the quiet privacy”
    • “I am an amateur photographer and especially enjoy the wildlife lookouts”
  • Water Quality Quantity
    • “our water sources are protected an filtered through natural unpolluted ground”
    • “It is vital to help protect our watershed and maintain clean water”
    • “It protects against the horrible flooding caused by asphalt and concrete”
  • Wildlife Habitat
    • “disturbs the birds and wildlife that has been untouched since Indiana was made a state”
    • “maintain clean water and the trees and wildlife native to Indiana”
    • “The remoteness and wilderness is the very reason we love it so much”
  • Forest Management Wildfire
    • “The claim roads are needed to fight fires, when roads are the cause of 90% of fires”
    • “More roads mean more fires. That's documented historical statistics”
    • “I don't like to think what would have happened I dry grass nearby”

What it names

National Forests
Hoosier National Forest
Roadless areas
Mogan Ridge

The comment

Shaded passages are the ones the analysis quoted as evidence for a dimension: Analytical gapEvidenceLegal

Re: Rescission of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule, Docket FS-2025-0001 My family likes to hike and camp in areas where the night sky is bright without light pollution, the air is clean and smells of trees and sunlight, and the only sounds are birds and rustling leaves. Taking old growth trees and bulldozing throughout the area ruins that, disturbs the birds and wildlife that has been untouched since Indiana was made a state. I want my boys to understand what was here. And our water sources are protected an filtered through natural unpolluted ground. It protects against the horrible flooding caused by asphalt and concrete, and erosion caused by dirt or gravel roads. We like to spend time in nature an refresh ourselves. A reset if you like. We come home tired, dirty maybe, but brighter, happy, rejuvenated by time in clean air, surrounded by things that are untouched by our modern lives, and help remind us of what's really important. To look up through the dark night a s see stars and talk about perspective, or navigation. Great family conversations happen here in the quiet privacy that become part of our family story and strengthen our relationships. We've seen the damage caused by lightening strikes, luckily the dense greenery slowed the fire and the thunderstorm put it out shortly afterward. I don't like to think what would have happened I dry grass nearby, or if the wind had pushed it down a roadside towards homes in the dark. Yes I commented in 2025, and called all my federal elected representatives, I honestly don't understand why they keep trying to do something they know the people are so opposed to. It doesn't make sense. More roads mean more fires. That's documented historical statistics. More roads mean more money needs to be allocated, but they not o ly can't afford to maintain the roads already on public forests, but keep cutting the budgets, and firing the people that do the work to take care of it all. My family has been hiking and camping here for years. The Lookout tower on Hickory Ridge is a favorite destination. My family has been cominghere for years. It's the closet National forest area and we love it. Our forests and lakes are something I was raised to love and taught my three boys the same. We have always explained why we leave no trace and take nothing but memories and pictures. We enjoy camping and hiking, I'm an amateur photographer and especially enjoy the wildlife lookouts. We have seen some crazy destruction caused by storms once a trail was blocked by several downed trees. The cleanup had been delayed by the fact everything had to be backpacked in. But the remoteness and wilderness is the very reason we love it so much. It's what Indiana was before it was Indiana. It's is critical that we protect this little slice of timelessness. We expect to go back for at least one more trip before winter school schedules permitting, and I'm looking forward to going more often with just my husband when he retires, now that the boys are in graduate school. I believe we should keep and protect the roadless rule. It is vital to help protect our watershed and maintain clean water and the trees and wildlife native to Indiana. We have traveled to many parks at the national and state level, and hope to see more after retirement when we can be away from home longer and travel farther. I am writing in opposition to the rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule, and specifically about Mogan Ridge (8,435 acres), Hoosier National Forest, Indiana. I ask that the agency disclose and analyze the site-specific environmental consequences of the proposed rescission for each of these areas, including the effects of the road construction and timber harvest it would newly allow. I raise the following issues for the record and ask that the agency respond to each of them: First of all :The small-business certification contradicts the analysis beside it The proposed rule certifies no significant impact on small entities while the DEIS names outfitters, guides and tour operators as affected and its own figures put lost recreation benefit at up to $6.1 million a year. The supporting regulatory flexibility analysis reaches its no-impact conclusion by spreading the $9 million annual expenditure loss across every small firm in the sector nationally, rather than assessing the outfitters and guides actually holding permits in the affected areas. The claim roads are needed to fight fires, when roads are the cause of 90% of fires. The fact the administration keeps cutting the budget and firing the foresters and firefights and cannot afford to maintain the roads we have. But most of all they know Americans do not want this, but they ignored the public comments before, canceled public meetings, and keep trying to do it anyway. Stop trying to privatize out public lands or allowing private entities to profit off nationally protected resources. Sincerely, Andrea Rademacher LAFAYETTE IN

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