In short: The comment establishes that the agency's programmatic analysis is insufficient because it fails to evaluate specific recreational activity impacts on Eastern Black Rail habitat in the East Fork Inventoried Roadless Area, and cites Section 404(f)(2) to argue that road construction requires a permit if it impairs water flow or circulation.
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
A2 moderate: Hard to dismiss — it shows cause and effect.
Owed an answer on Analytical gap.
Standard dismissals it defeats
- 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.
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.
- 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.
- 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
- “unique and threatened creatures that call this place home”
- “degrading habitat for Eastern Black Rail”
- “concentrate human disturbance along corridors through Eastern Black Rail habitat”
- Water Quality Quantity
- “Increases in fine sediments are known to change grain size distribution”
- “degradation of spawning grounds”
- “negative impacts on embryo survival of gravel-spawning fish through suffocation”
- Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “treasure the beauty, recreation, and history that these areas maintain”
- “catharsis that results from discovering the land under your own power”
- “better protected than tarnished by an unneeded road”
- Environmental Protection Biodiversity
- “Roadless regions are bastions of the natural world”
- “facilitate introduction of invasive species”
- “open previously inaccessible terrain to resource extraction”
Attachments
3 files. Counts as 1 — Counts as one: The attachments enclose no one else's submissions; the comment counts as one.
- Supporting material
- Supporting material
- Own letter
The comment
Shaded passages are the ones the analysis quoted as evidence for a dimension: Analytical gapEvidenceLegal