In short: The comment establishes that the 6.8-mile roadless corridor between the Pemigewasset Extension and Pemigewasset IRAs in the White Mountain National Forest is critical for maintaining gene flow and migration routes for 32 shared species, and asserts that the DEIS fails to properly analyze the cumulative impacts of road construction on these habitats as required by 40 CFR 1508.7.
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
A1 strong: Must be answered — it names the law.
Owed an answer on Analytical gap, Legal.
Standard dismissals it defeats
- 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.
- Misreads the proposal The agency says the comment misunderstands what is proposed. Defeated when the comment engages the proposal or a named place directly.
- 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.
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.
- 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.
Topics
- Wildlife Habitat
- “road density is the single most consequential anthropogenic variable for natural community composition”
- “preserves gene flow, seasonal migration routes, and recolonization pathways for 32 shared species”
- “fenced highways cause a rapid decrease of gene flow between populations”
- “creation of isolated pockets of habitat that cannot support viable populations”
- Water Quality Quantity
- “Headwater Protection for the Pemigewasset-Merrimack River System”
- “contains the headwaters of the Sawyer River, Nancy Brook, Carrigain Brook”
- “major drainage system already documented as impaired for aluminum, pH”
- Scientific Research Evidence
- “federal scientific literature already documents”
- “Corlatti et al. 2009, Conservation Biology”
- “Cheptou et al. 2017, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B”
- “DEIS must analyze these impacts cumulatively”
The comment
Shaded passages are the ones the analysis quoted as evidence for a dimension: Analytical gapEvidenceLegal