Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Posted August 22, 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.
I am TOTALLY against destruction of the Shenandoah Valley. How much more greed is to be dispensed? Protect Our Roadless National Forests—Do Not Open Them to Development
I strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s decision to rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule.
Our national forests belong to all of us. They should be protected for clean water, wildlife, recreation, quiet solitude, and for future generations—not opened up to roads, logging, and development that could permanently alter some of our most treasured wild places.
This issue is especially important here in the Shenandoah Valley. The proposed Shenandoah Mountain National Scenic Area includes five extraordinary roadless areas—Oak Knob, Gum Run, Skidmore Fork, Little River, and Ramseys Draft Addition—together encompassing approximately 70,000 acres. These areas represent the largest concentration of roadless lands in the eastern United States.
For 25 years, citizens and conservationists have worked to secure permanent protection for the Shenandoah Mountain landscape. That effort has never been about keeping people out. It has been about protecting the things that make these public lands so valuable to everyone: clean drinking water, exceptional outdoor recreation, and critical wildlife habitat.
Once roads are constructed and forests are fragmented, we cannot simply undo the damage. A road is not merely a line on a map. It can bring logging, increased traffic, erosion, invasive species, habitat fragmentation, and permanent changes to the character of a wild landscape.
We should be moving forward—not backward.
The Shenandoah Mountain National Scenic Area deserves permanent protection, and the roadless areas within it deserve to remain intact. After 25 years of work toward that goal, it would be incredibly short-sighted to weaken the protections that have helped preserve these lands.
I urge the U.S. Department of Agriculture and our elected representatives to reject the rescission of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule and protect our remaining roadless national forest lands. I also urge the Senate Agriculture Committee to move forward with permanent protection for the Shenandoah Mountain National Scenic Area.
These lands are not ours to consume. They are ours to safeguard.
We owe it to the people who worked for 25 years to protect them, to the communities that depend upon their clean water and natural resources, and most importantly, to the generations who will inherit what we choose to protect—or what we choose to destroy.
Please protect the roadless lands of the George Washington National Forest and support permanent protection for the Shenandoah Mountain National Scenic Area.