Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-258009

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Posted August 23, 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 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.
Misreads the proposal The agency says the comment misunderstands what is proposed. Defeated when the comment engages the proposal or a named place directly.
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.
Outside the scope The agency says the comment asks about a different action. Defeated when the comment is specific and tied to this proposal.
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

Water Quality Quantity
- “protect the water resources”
- “keep a healthy wildlife balance”
Wildlife Habitat
- “keep a healthy wildlife balance”
- “limit intrusion into delicate ecosystems”
Forest Management Wildfire
- “damaging wildfires have been close to roads”
- “More roads means more human-caused wildfires”
- “allow for more fire suppression where it is obviously needed”
Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “provides us nurturing experiences on trails”
- “not allow easier access by the public to the current roadless areas”

What it names

National Forests: Prescott National Forest

The comment

The Roadless Rule has helped protect our beautiful national forests for many years. My town is within the Prescott National Forest and provides us nurturing experiences on trails in our Forest. The most important rules should protect the water resources, keep a healthy wildlife balance, and limit intrusion into delicate ecosystems. The vast majority of damaging wildfires have been close to roads and started by humans. More roads means more human-caused wildfires. I would recommend modifying the roadless rule to allow for more fire suppression where it is obviously needed, but not allow easier access by the public to the current roadless areas. Please do not rescind this important rule.