Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Posted 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
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.
Hello, my name is Flynn Edgerton and I am commenting about the Mark Twain National Forest land exchange in Missouri, as it falls under the Roadless Rule. The Forest Service wants to trade 2,616 acres of public national forest to the Doe Run mining company in exchange for only about 354 acres of private land. That permanently removes more than 2,600 acres of Ozark public forest from public ownership at a seven to one loss. This land is critical to myself and countless others who use the land for outdoor recreation, as well as citizens who live in and around the considered area. Silica mining has already been opposed by residents of Missouri and the potential of lead mining in the area will present the same potential for irreversible damage to the water quality and health in the area, with knock-on effects for wildlife and residents. Please protect the Roadless Rule as it protects the health, safety, and well-being of all inhabitants of the Mark Twain National forest. Thank you for your time and consideration.