Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-274855

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Posted August 27, 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

Wildlife Habitat
- “distance to unpaved road was the model that most influenced daily nest survival”
- “preserve nature and animals”
- “protect critical habitat for animals and plants protected under the Endangered Species Act”
- “harm the wild homes of more than 500 protected species”
Forest Management Wildfire
- “Keeping these areas roadless is what protects us against wildfires”
- “wildfire-ignition density was lowest in designated wilderness areas”
- “highest wildfire-ignition density was in lands within 50 meters of roads”
- “Reading the statistics about how this will increase wildfires was infuriating”
Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “As a hiker and nature lover who plans a trip every year”
- “recently been getting into birding and its brought me such joy”

What it names

Works cited: 10.1002/ece3.1049

The comment

As a hiker and nature lover who plans a trip every year I urge the Forest Service to keep these protections in place. I've recently been getting into birding and its brought me such joy. Reading things like from a sample of 463 nests of 17 songbird species, landscape features (distance to forest edge, unpaved roads, and power lines) influenced daily nest survival was devastating. For all nesting species combined, distance to unpaved road was the model that most influenced daily nest survival. Numerous nest predators, including brown-headed cowbirds, mammalian mesopredators, and snakes, have been shown to preferentially occupy habitat edge over interior. Rat snakes were frequently associated with road edges, indicating that not all edges are functionally similar. — Brett A. DeGregorio, Patrick J. Weatherhead, Jinelle H. Sperry, 2014 · Ecology and Evolution (https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.1049). It's so important to preserve nature and animals - we're the stewards and protectors of this planet. Since 2001, the Roadless Rule has helped protect critical habitat for animals and plants protected under the Endangered Species Act, with more species protected each year. Rescinding the rule would harm the wild homes of more than 500 protected species, including American wolverines, gray wolves, Canada lynx, grizzly bears, Quino checkerspot butterflies, and northern spotted owls (as well as countless species not protected under the Act, like Alexander Archipelago wolves and Queen Charlotte goshawks). — Center for Biological Diversity, 2025 (https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/Roadless-Rule-rollback/) My long-term partner is a firefighter. Keeping these areas roadless is what protects us against wildfires. From 1992 to 2024, in all 8 contiguous-US Forest Service regions combined, wildfire-ignition density was lowest in designated wilderness areas (1.7 fires/1,000 hectares), followed closely by that in Inventoried Roadless Areas (1.9 fires/1,000 ha). The highest wildfire-ignition density was in lands within 50 meters of roads (7.4 fires/1,000 ha), and the second highest wildfire-ignition density was in lands outside of the 100-m road buffers, but not in wilderness or roadless areas (3.5 fires/1,000 ha). — Aplet, Gregory H.; Hartger, Phil; Dietz, Matthew S., 2025 (https://www.wilderness.org/sites/default/files/media/file/Summary%20NFS%20roads%20fire%20paper%20-%202025.pdf) Reading the statistics about how this will increase wildfires was infuriating. Even though these fires will, on average, be smaller than fires farther from roads, but there will be more of them, and some of them will grow to become large fires. — Aplet, Gregory H.; Hartger, Phil; Dietz, Matthew S., 2025 (https://www.wilderness.org/sites/default/files/media/file/Summary%20NFS%20roads%20fire%20paper%20-%202025.pdf)