Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-294868

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 6/24Posted September 1, 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
- “maintain habitat for some of our most rare and fascinating animals”
- “grizzly bear, wolves, wolverines, lynx, goshawks, mountain lions, and black bears”
- “The best elk hunting is in roadless areas”
Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “provide important refuge and solace for people”
- “open to a variety of recreation hiking, backpacking, horse back riding”
- “quiet contemplation of the natural world”
Water Quality Quantity
- “Roadless areas provide sources of clean, fresh water”
- “intact groves of forest that catches and filters rainwater”
- “dump sediment into mountain streams”
Forest Management Wildfire
- “Building roads to log in these areas will not eliminate forest fire risk but will in fact increase it”
- “85% of wildfires in the Northern Rockies start within 1/4 mile of roads”
- “Most fires are started by people”

What it names

National Forests: Caribou-Targhee National Forest Tongass National Forest
Roadless areas: Crazy Mountains

Attachments

3 files. Counts as 1 — Counts as one: The attachments enclose no one else's submissions; the comment counts as one.

Own letter
Own letter
Own letter

The comment

As a 41 year resident of Montana and the American West, I greatly value the Roadless Rule and the resources and wildlife it protects. I am 100% opposed to rilling back the Roadless Rule. It is clear that the vast majority of Americans who commented are in favor of retaining the Roadless Rule. This rule was not passed with no public input, as the Trump Administration falsely claimed, but was the subject of hundreds of meetings and a record-breaking 1.6 million comments, 95% of which favored protected existing national forest roadless areas. In the recent administrative review and comment period, 99% of comments favor keeping the Roadless Rule. This rue is one of the most popular US government initiatives of all time. The fact that the Department of Agriculture still wants to throw this rule out shows just how corrupt and greedy this administration is. The proposal to eliminate the Roadless Rule has not been given one public meeting, because the administration knows they will get hammered by the people who support the roadless rule. The justification for getting rid of the Roadless Rule is full of holes. Building roads to log in these areas will not eliminate forest fire risk but will in fact increase it. 85% of wildfires in the Northern Rockies start within 1/4 mile of roads. Why? Humans. Most fires are started by people - neglected campfires, discarded cigarettes, sparks from chain saws or trailer chains or ATV exhaust. Discarded charcoal briquettes. Arson. In 1988 the North Fork Fire burned over 400,000 acres in Yellowstone National Park. It was started by a discarded cigarette next to a road in the Caribou-Targhee National Forest. There is every reason to leave Roadless Areas intact. It's like money in the bank - you don't pull it out and burn through it because you want something now. You save it for later. Roadless land is more rare and more valuable every day. Roadless areas provide sources of clean, fresh water. They hold intact groves of forest that catches and filters rainwater, slows the wind, cool the air and the ground, and provide oxygen and store carbon. All for free. Roadless areas maintain habitat for some of our most rare and fascinating animals - grizzly bear, wolves, wolverines, lynx, goshawks, mountain lions, and black bears. The best elk hunting is in roadless areas that are a little harder to access so the elk have places to hide. Roadless areas also provide important refuge and solace for people - those who need solitude, peace and quiet, space from the human horde. Our cities become noisier and noisier and more and more packed with traffic and bedlam. Roadless areas are available for free to those who are willing able to go a little more remote. Most roadless areas are open to a variety of recreation hiking, backpacking, horse back riding, mountain biking, ORV use. Rock climbing, backcountry skiing, mountain climbing and nature study. Bird watching, forest bathing, star gazing, quiet contemplation of the natural world. The idea that there is a bunch of valuable timber just waiting to be logged and sold is absurd. Roadless areas are still intact because the are rugged and remote and have sparse timber. The Tongass National Forest is Alaska is a different story, but the land there is steep and the forest fragile. It is our largest temperate rainforest in the US and holds old trees that have taken hundreds or thousands of years to grow. Logging it requires high-impact roadbuilding on thin soil overlain on hard bedrock. The Montana and the Northern Rockies, roadless areas are usually in rugged mountain terrain that would also require expensive, high-impact road building. These roads would degrade the land and would not be useful for long - logging roads often slip off the mountain and dump sediment into mountain streams, creating and unstable and dangerous slope that will not grow back. All for marginal timber of thin lodgepole pine or Subalpine fir that have very limited commercial value. The Forest Service already has a mukti billion dollar backlog of road maintenance - building more is insane. Who is going to want this marginal timber? Montana has only 5 major sawmills remaining. The timber industry has shrunken greatly due to shrinking demand, high operating costs (think fuel prices), market competition and lack of available labor (think ICE deporting immigrants). The housing market is way down for similar reasons, so where would the lumber go? I have personally visited many of Montana and Idaho's wild roadless areas and all are well worth protecting and would be degraded by logging and road building. The Gallatin Range and Hyalite Canyon, the Bridger Range, The Gravelley Range, the West Pioneers, Cowboy Heaven, the Swan Range and Jewel Basin, the Elkhorn Mountains, The Crazy Mountains, the Tobacco Root Mountains, the Boukder Mountains, the Snowcrest Range...these are real places that would suffer real, irreversible harm if the Roadless Rule is repealed. Keep It Roadless!