Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Posted September 3, 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 eliminatedThe agency says it considered and eliminated the alternative the comment proposes, with a reason. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
Already addressedThe 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 decisionThe agency says the point belongs to a later, site-specific decision. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
Misreads the proposalThe agency says the comment misunderstands what is proposed. Defeated when the comment engages the proposal or a named place directly.
Not requiredThe agency says the analysis the comment asks for is not required. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
Preference notedThe 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 shownThe agency says the comment asserts a harm without showing how the action causes it. Defeated when the comment shows the mechanism.
Outside the scopeThe agency says the comment asks about a different action. Defeated when the comment is specific and tied to this proposal.
Certified not substantiveThe agency certifies the comment raises nothing substantive. Defeated when the comment alleges illegality, which is substantive by the definition the certification runs on.
Please, please, PLEASE retain the Roadless Rule. I have been fortunate enough to spend quality time in the Upper Wilson Creek/Lost Cove area and in other parts of Pisgah National Forest. My daughter's first job was doing conservation work in California for Americorps. Her experience exploring roadless areas in the West inspired her to accept another conservation job fighting invasive species and maintaining hiking trails. As I know and she is learning firsthand, it's important for so many reasons to keep these places wild, clean and relatively undeveloped. People from all walks of life and all economic backgrounds need places they can escape the noise and pollution of our sprawling metro areas and connect with nature. This is more true than ever as our nation gets divided into haves and have-nots--people who can afford luxury wilderness trips and those who depend on public lands. It's critically important for plants and wildlife to have uninterrupted expanses. New roads can fragment wildlife habitat, increase sedimentation and diminish the wild character of these lands. These places are formative in the lives of so many young people. This is priceless land that belongs to all of us. Cutting roads through these lands for the benefit of a few special interests will lead to their eventual destruction. Thank you for your consideration.