Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-430807

Opposes rescissionA1 strongSubstance 3/24Owed 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 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.
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.
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.

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.
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.
Outside the scope The agency says the comment asks about a different action. Defeated when the comment is specific and tied to this proposal.

Topics

Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “experience the outdoors”
- “hike, camp, climb, ski”
- “get away in nature”
Wildlife Habitat
- “wildlife need large expanses of unbroken wilderness”
- “jeopardize this valuable resource”
- “construction of roads”
Environmental Protection Biodiversity
- “unbroken wilderness”
- “valuable resource”
- “keep the original 2001 Roadless Rule”

What it names

Law cited: 66 FR 3244

The comment

Dear Secretary Rollins, I am writing from Bozeman MT to oppose any change to the 2001 Roadless Rule, 66 FR 3244. People choose to live in Bozeman so they can experience the outdoors and get away in nature. Whether it be to hike, camp, climb, ski, and simply be there. In addition, wildlife need large expanses of unbroken wilderness to thrive. Any construction of roads can jeapordize this valuable resource we have and it would be shortsighted to not keep the original 2001 Roadless Rule, 66 FR 3244 in place. Thank you.