Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 6/24Posted August 21, 2026 On Regulations.gov
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
A0 none: Counted, not answered.
Still open to the agency
Alternative already eliminatedThe agency says it considered and eliminated the alternative the comment proposes, with a reason. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
Already addressedThe 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 decisionThe agency says the point belongs to a later, site-specific decision. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
Misreads the proposalThe agency says the comment misunderstands what is proposed. Defeated when the comment engages the proposal or a named place directly.
Not requiredThe agency says the analysis the comment asks for is not required. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
Preference notedThe 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 shownThe agency says the comment asserts a harm without showing how the action causes it. Defeated when the comment shows the mechanism.
Outside the scopeThe agency says the comment asks about a different action. Defeated when the comment is specific and tied to this proposal.
Certified not substantiveThe agency certifies the comment raises nothing substantive. Defeated when the comment alleges illegality, which is substantive by the definition the certification runs on.
As a former Trump Administration appointee at the U.S. Department of the Interior, an avid hunter and angler, and someone who grew up in Louisianas Kisatchie National Forest, I urge you to keep the Roadless Rule in place exactly as it is.
I have spent much of my life on public lands, and I believe conserving wild, undeveloped places is both a deeply American tradition and a responsibility we owe future generations. Like millions of Americans who have spoken out since 2001, I support the Roadless Rule and value the 44.7 million acres of undeveloped national forest lands it protects.
The Roadless Rule safeguards clean drinking water, protects important fish and wildlife habitat, and preserves the large, intact forests that hunters, anglers, hikers, paddlers, and other outdoor recreationists depend on. These lands are also part of our country's natural heritage, and once they are fragmented by roads and development, it is extraordinarily difficult to restore what has been lost.
Protecting public lands should not be a partisan issue. I urge the Forest Service to maintain the Roadless Rule as it currently stands and select Alternative 1, No Action.
Thank you for considering my comments.