Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-303377

Opposes rescissionA2 moderateSubstance 12/24Owed an answerPosted September 2, 2026 On Regulations.gov

In short: The comment establishes that the DEIS fails to analyze Clean Water Act Section 404 obligations for the North Fork Middle Fork American River IRA in the Tahoe National Forest, specifically regarding the discharge of fill material into waters of the United States during road construction.

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

Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “traveled specifically to roadless areas because of the experience they offer”
- “backpacked, hiked and fished along this part of the river”
- “love to spend time in actual nature”
- “public reliance interest that federal rulemaking is obligated to consider”
Water Quality Quantity
- “Clean Water Act Section 404 jurisdiction over any activity involving discharge of fill material”
- “necessitates stream crossings where fill material is discharged directly into waters of the United States”
- “assess cumulative fill material discharge from road construction”
- “Stream fragmentation is a leading threat to freshwater fish diversity”
Wildlife Habitat
- “Road networks are a common disturbance on the landscapes that cause habitat fragmentation”
- “Roads serve as dispersal corridors where invasive plant propagules are spread”
- “The mortality of wildlife resulting from collisions with vehicles is considered one of the main negative effects”
- “Roadkill can increase the risk of local extinction by reducing effective population size”
Legal Regulatory Framework
- “DEIS fails to analyze Clean Water Act Section 404 obligations”
- “demonstrate compliance with Section 404 permit requirements”
- “no discharge of dredged or fill material may be permitted if a practicable alternative exists”
- “Rescission is unwarranted; the Department should allow the 2001 Rule to stand”

What it names

National Forests: Tahoe National Forest
Roadless areas: North Fork Middle Fork American River
Works cited: 10.1002/rra.7007510.1038/s41597-024-04207-x10.1111/ddi.70002

The comment

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

Dear Chief Schultz: As someone who has traveled specifically to roadless areas because of the experience they offer, I want to register that this rescission would be a real loss — not a theoretical one. I have backpacked, hiked and fished along this part of the river and love to spend time in actual nature. Not one as road took me to.. If a single memory can stand for the whole of that attachment, it is this one. We rode in by horse one year to make the journey more memorable. 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 North Fork Middle Fork American River in the Tahoe National Forest, California: Waters of the United States flow through the North Fork Middle Fork American River IRA, Tahoe National Forest, establishing Clean Water Act Section 404 jurisdiction over any activity involving discharge of fill material into these streams. Road construction through the North Fork Middle Fork American River IRA, Tahoe National Forest, necessitates stream crossings where fill material is discharged directly into waters of the United States, each crossing independently requiring Section 404 authorization. The DEIS fails to analyze Clean Water Act Section 404 obligations specific to the North Fork Middle Fork American River IRA, Tahoe National Forest. The agency must identify all jurisdictional waters, assess cumulative fill material discharge from road construction, and demonstrate compliance with Section 404 permit requirements. "Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes a program to regulate the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. Activities in waters of the United States regulated under this program include fill for development, water resource projects (such as dams and levees), infrastructure development (such as highways and airports) and mining projects. Section 404 requires a permit before dredged or fill material may be discharged into waters of the United States, unless the activity is exempt from Section 404 regulation (e.g., certain farming and forestry activities). The basic premise of the program is that no discharge of dredged or fill material may be permitted if: (1) a practicable alternative exists that is less damaging to the aquatic environment or (2) the nation's waters would be significantly degraded." — U.S. Environmental Protection Agency “Road networks are a common disturbance on the landscapes that cause habitat fragmentation and create edges with high resource availability that can act as important channels for the spread of invasive alien plants in various habitats, including nature reserves. Roads serve as dispersal corridors where invasive plant propagules are spread by humans, vehicles and animals using roadways as travel paths. Research indicates that invasive plant richness and density generally decrease with the distance from roads, whereas native species show variable distribution patterns near roads. Proximity to roads often correlates with higher invasion rates, reducing native diversity. — Diversity and Distributions (Wiley), 2025 (https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.70002)” “Stream fragmentation is a leading threat to freshwater fish diversity and is often caused by the installation of impassable culverts at road–stream crossings. In the United States alone, millions of culverts contribute to this fragmentation. Emerging research suggests that smaller barriers, such as culverts, can have cumulative effects on riverine fragmentation that are comparable to those of large dams. — River Research and Applications (Wiley), 2026 (https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.70075)” “The mortality of wildlife resulting from collisions with vehicles is considered one of the main negative effects of roads on numerous species. Roadkill can increase the risk of local extinction by reducing effective population size and genetic diversity, while also limiting demographic and genetic rescue mechanisms. Estimates can reach to 340 million of birds killed on the roads in USA, 194 million birds, 29 million mammals in Europe and 17 million of birds and mammals in Latin America. — Scientific Data (Nature), 2024 (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-024-04207-x)” Rescission is unwarranted; the Department should allow the 2001 Rule to stand. Warm regards, CommentID: RLC-20260902-85M1ZX