Opposes rescissionA1 strongSubstance 4/24Owed an answerPosted September 16, 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
A1 strong: Must be answered — it names the law.
Owed an answer on Legal.
Standard dismissals it defeats
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Outside the scopeThe agency says the comment asks about a different action. Defeated when the comment is specific and tied to this proposal.
This deregulation will only lead to greater Federal overreach. The USDA's own site states that this rescission is meant to support Executive Orders, but they clearly intend to ransack the forests if given access to wilderness.
E.O. 14192, "Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation," means they can use deregulation as an excuse to undo conservation protections in order to profit from destroying the land;
E.O. 14225, "Immediate Expansion of American Timber Production," has obvious intentions;
E.O. 14154, "Unleashing American Energy," means resource extraction at any cost to the land, whether drilling, mining, etc., they mean to gut it so they can line oil and gas billionaire's pockets;
and E.O. 14153, "Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential," means they'll build roads in some of the most untouched wilderness areas to log and drill for oil.
We don't need to develop more gas, oil, and timber sites. They're not going to lower gas and construction prices, nothing in this proposal will benefit the American people save for a few of the ultra-rich. Please, please, we cannot allow this action to move forward!