Small family — One letter sent by 3 to 9 people, copied or lightly reworded. One of 3 submissions in its group; the sender added words of their own. See the letter, its submissions and topics.
Scored with own additions — A family member whose own text beyond the shared letter was scored and combined with the letter's score.
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
- “Preserving Big Game Habitat”
- “Road construction fragments critical wildlife migration corridors”
- “pushes big game like elk and deer out of their native ranges”
- “Intact, roadless acres keep wildlife populations healthy”
- Water Quality Quantity
- “Safeguarding Coldwater Fisheries”
- “Dirt roads built for extraction cause heavy soil erosion”
- “washing mud and debris into mountain streams”
- “protects vital headwaters, keeping trout habitats cold, clean, and productive”
- Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “Defending the Backcountry Experience”
- “Millions of hikers, backpackers, and anglers access national forests specifically to seek solitude”
- “Allowing new roads introduces motorized vehicle noise and heavy crowds”
- “permanently ruining the primitive backcountry environment”
- Economic Impact Fiscal
- “Fiscal Responsibility for Taxpayers”
- “U.S. Forest Service already faces a massive $10.8 billion deferred maintenance backlog”
- “fiscally irresponsible to spend taxpayer dollars on new road construction”
- “agency cannot afford to maintain the roads it already manages”