Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-283795

Opposes rescissionA1 strongSubstance 9/24Owed an answerPosted August 28, 2026 On Regulations.gov

In short: The comment establishes that the proposed separate evaluation of the Pemigewasset and Kinsman Mountain IRAs fails to account for the cumulative impacts on a shared network of 31 species, including Northern Myotis and Tricolored Bat, thereby violating NEPA's requirement to assess cumulative impacts under 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
- “31 species depend on connectivity between these IRAs”
- “preserves gene flow, seasonal migration routes, and recolonization pathways”
- “abundance of life within them”
- “Northern Myotis (G2), Tricolored Bat (G3)”
Environmental Protection Biodiversity
- “prevent road encroachment”
- “protecting it from the consumptive practices that destroy biodiversity”
- “ecosystem services are to our livelihoods”
- “wild places have in our collective identity”
Legal Regulatory Framework
- “no administrative substitute for the Rule's categorical protection”
- “NEPA requires the DEIS to assess cumulative impacts”
- “Evaluating rescission impacts on each IRA separately violates this requirement”
- “public reliance interest that federal rulemaking is obligated to consider”
Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “outdoor enthusiast”
- “backpacking through the Absaroka Mountains”
- “inspired me from childhood”
- “quiet, remote, and backcountry recreation values”

What it names

National Forests: White Mountain National Forest
Roadless areas: Kinsman Mountain
Law cited: 40 CFR 1508.7

The comment

Shaded passages are the ones the analysis quoted as evidence for a dimension: Analytical gapEvidenceLegal

Dear Chief: The accumulation of time spent in areas currently protected under the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule has shown me, as an outdoor enthusiast, that there is no administrative substitute for the Rule's categorical protection — forest planning, project-level NEPA review, and management prescriptions have all proven insufficient to prevent road encroachment absent a rule of this kind. The spaces in NH and beyond protected by the roadless rule have inspired me from childhood. They have led me down a road to a career in Environmental Education. Teaching the next generation about the wonders the natural world, and how important ecosystem services are to our livelihoods is my whole life. With this occupation I have deep sense of the importance that wild places have in our collective identity as Americans, and strongly oppose this identity being stripped through legislation. One visit made that connection concrete. I have had the privilege of backpacking through the Absaroka Mountains in Wyoming, walking past the point furthest from roads in the continental US. In that two weeks of backpacking through remote terrain I saw places, plants, and animals worth fighting for every day. From the headwaters rivers to the abundance of life within them, the lack of roads in these wild places is key in protecting it from the consumptive practices that destroy biodiversity and ecosystem services in so many other places. What is conveyed above represents the kind of public reliance interest that federal rulemaking is obligated to consider; the rescission of the Rule would extinguish protections on which millions of Americans similarly depend. Regarding the Pemigewasset in the White Mountain National Forest, New Hampshire: Pemigewasset and Kinsman Mountain in White Mountain National Forest are not ecologically independent. 31 species depend on connectivity between these IRAs — separated by just 9.5 miles — for genetic exchange, demographic rescue after local extirpation, and access to seasonal resources. Shared imperiled species include: Northern Myotis (G2), Tricolored Bat (G3). Absent road construction, the 9.5-mile corridor between Pemigewasset and Kinsman Mountain in White Mountain National Forest remains permeable to wildlife movement. The roadless condition of both IRAs preserves gene flow, seasonal migration routes, and recolonization pathways for 31 shared species, including Northern Myotis (G2), Tricolored Bat (G3). NEPA requires the DEIS to assess cumulative impacts (40 CFR 1508.7). The 31-species network spanning Pemigewasset and Kinsman Mountain in White Mountain National Forest — including Northern Myotis (G2), Tricolored Bat (G3) — demands joint analysis. Evaluating rescission impacts on each IRA separately violates this requirement. "CEQ scoping regulations require connected, cumulative, and similar actions to be considered together in the same EIS — where proposals up for decision are functionally or economically related, those proposals must be considered in one EIS. The obligation to address cumulative impacts is not limited to actual proposals but must also include impacts from actions which are merely being contemplated. The agency is required to look at cumulative impacts 'of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions.'" — Council on Environmental Quality, Major Cases Interpreting the National Environmental Policy Act The 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule reflects a considered, durable judgment; that judgment should not be reversed. Faithfully, CommentID: RLC-20260828-E6CSJV