Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 6/24Posted September 12, 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.
To the U.S. Forest Service:
As someone who plans around finding country roads haven't touched, I have a direct stake in the continuation of this rule.
Regarding the Craggy Mountain in the Pisgah National Forest, North Carolina:
Intact roadless landscapes support functional soils, hydrology, and food webs that fragmented forests cannot replicate.
Fragmentation reduces biodiversity and ecosystem function together. A synthesis of habitat fragmentation studies spanning multiple biomes and 35 years found that fragmentation reduces biodiversity by 13 to 75 percent and impairs core ecosystem functions including biomass production, nutrient cycling, and carbon storage. Effects are strongest in the smallest and most isolated fragments and intensify with time (Haddad et al. 2015). — Haddad et al., 2015 (https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1500052)
Rescinding the Roadless Rule would open the Craggy Mountain, Pisgah National Forest to road construction and associated ground disturbance. The direct and indirect effects of that activity are precisely what makes a specific comment about this area necessary.
My family and I will lose the pristine wilderness, an experience that has immense value and is hard to find, especially in the East.
Revoking the roadless rule will damage these special lands in ways that will be impossible to reverse. What will be gained from revoking the rule is far outweighed by what will be lost.
The Department is urged to preserve the protections established by the 2001 Rule.
Warm regards,
CommentID: RLC-20260911-TEAPH0