In short: The comment establishes that the Draft EIS fails to include an alternative that strengthens protections, rendering a full and fair analysis impossible, and specifically identifies the 2001 Roadless Rule as the necessary framework for protecting headwaters, wildlife habitat, and carbon sinks in national forests.
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, Alternative.
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
- Wildlife Habitat
- “provide habitat for many imperiled species such as California condors, grizzly bears and wolves”
- “sustain wild salmon, especially in Alaska”
- “migratory game corridors for species such as elk and mule deer remain intact”
- “sanctuaries of the last remaining fragments of old growth forests”
- Water Quality Quantity
- “headwaters of many of our great rivers”
- “vital for maintaining clean drinking water for communities across the country”
- “one of the largest sources of municipal water supply in the nation”
- Climate Carbon Storage
- “help to keep carbon dioxide levels from rising to an unlivable concentration”
- “Mature forests are natural carbon sinks that store carbon dioxide”
- Environmental Protection Biodiversity
- “critical to our nation's ecological health”
- “diverse forests, wetlands, canyons and other undeveloped lands”
- “protect our last remaining wild places”
The comment
Shaded passages are the ones the analysis quoted as evidence for a dimension: Analytical gapLegal