Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-395489

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Posted September 14, 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

Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “Recreating in these spaces, unimpacted by roads”
- “privilege we must preserve for future generations”
- “avid proponent of the USA's wildlands”
Wildlife Habitat
- “Wildlife will be negatively impacted by vehicle traffic”
- “few remaining tracts of wild land”
Forest Management Wildfire
- “does not reduce wildfire risk”
- “no meaningful benefits for the American people”

What it names

National Forests: Dixie National Forest

The comment

I am submitting this comment in opposition to the USDA's proposed rescission of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule (Docket No. FS-2025-0001). I am an avid proponent of the USA's wildlands, including Utah's Dixie National Forest and Ohio's Wayne National Forest. Recreating in these spaces, unimpacted by roads, is a privilege we must preserve for future generations. Wildlife will be negatively impacted by vehicle traffic in our few remaining tracts of wild land. This proposal does not reduce wildfire risk or have meaningful benefits for the American people. I urge the Forest Service to select Alternative 1 and keep the Roadless Area Conservation Rule fully intact.