Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-276259

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 6/24Posted 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
- “abundant wildlife”
- “watching the many elk and other wildlife”
- “impacts to wildlife”
- “restore the solitude, wildlife habitat”
Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “experience something increasingly difficult to find: solitude”
- “feeling of being genuinely immersed in nature”
- “quiet and lack of extensive development”
- “experiences they provide to the public”
Environmental Protection Biodiversity
- “intact forest”
- “relatively undeveloped landscapes”
- “increased fragmentation, noise, human disturbance”
- “sense of wildness”
Forest Management Wildfire
- “responsible forest management”
- “address wildfire risk”
- “targeted, science-based management”

What it names

National Forests: Coconino National Forest

The comment

I strongly oppose rescinding or weakening the current Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The area of the Coconino National Forest around coordinates 34.6033, -111.1150, near Blue Ridge Reservoir (Cragin Reservoir), is a place I have spent many years enjoying. I have returned to this area because of the opportunity to experience something increasingly difficult to find: solitude, intact forest, abundant wildlife, and the feeling of being genuinely immersed in nature. I have spent countless hours enjoying the water at Blue Ridge Reservoir and the surrounding forest, including watching the many elk and other wildlife that depend on these relatively undeveloped landscapes. The quiet and lack of extensive development are not incidental features of this area. They are precisely what make it so valuable. I am deeply concerned that rescinding the Roadless Rule would open currently protected landscapes to additional road construction and increased timber harvesting. Once roads are built into previously roadless areas, the character of those places can be permanently changed. More roads can bring increased fragmentation, noise, human disturbance, and impacts to wildlife and the solitude that people seek in our National Forests. I recognize the need for responsible forest management and appropriate action to address wildfire risk. However, eliminating broad protections for roadless areas is not the same thing as carefully managing forests. Existing protections should remain in place, while the Forest Service continues to pursue targeted, science-based management where it is genuinely needed. The forests surrounding Blue Ridge Reservoir are valuable not only for their natural resources, but for the experiences they provide to the public. They offer wildlife habitat, recreation, quiet, and a connection to nature that should not be unnecessarily sacrificed. Please maintain the current Roadless Area Conservation Rule and continue protecting the remaining roadless areas of the Coconino National Forest. Once additional roads and industrial development change these landscapes, we cannot simply restore the solitude, wildlife habitat, and sense of wildness that made them special in the first place.