Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-314018

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Posted September 4, 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
    • “provides for species like wolverine and lynx”
    • “wildlife we work to protect lives in these areas”
    • “depends on habitat free from human development”
    • “keep our forests for the animals”
  • Water Quality Quantity
    • “clean, cold water for downstream communities”
    • “cold waters that we love to swim in”
    • “for the fish”
  • Recreation Tourism Public Use
    • “love to hike, camp, and hunt”
    • “best backcountry recreation in the state of WA”
    • “last places on public lands free from industrial development”
  • Climate Carbon Storage
    • “Destroying the US FORESTS with clear cuts is wrong”
    • “it will enhance the effects of climate change”

What it names

National Forests
Colville National ForestGifford Pinchot National ForestWenatchee National Forest
Roadless areas
Dark DivideLiberty Bell

The comment

Growing up in the mountains of the Pacific Northwest, we love to hike, camp, and hunt. Roadless areas are some of the last places on public lands free from industrial development. In Washington, that means country like the Dark Divide in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest, Liberty Bell in the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest, and Abercrombie-Hooknose in the Colville National Forest. Growing up in the Pacific northwest, our family loves to hike, camp and hunt. We also visit lands in So. Carolina and GA. We love forested land. Forested land provides for species like wolverine and lynx, and clean, cold water for downstream communities. Much of the wildlife we work to protect lives in these areas and depends on habitat free from human development. They also support cultural and subsistence practices and some of the best backcountry recreation in the state of WA. We want to keep our forests for the animals, for the fish and the cold waters that we love to swim in. Destroying the US FORESTS with clear cuts is wrong, it will enhance the effects of climate change. We must protect our forests............no extra forest roads!

Keep learning. Keep speaking up.The Roadless Rule depends on public engagement. Share what you've learned.

© 2026 roadless.org - Defending America's Last Wild Forests

Privacy Policy|Questions or concerns? noroads@roadless.org|Follow us: @defendroadless