Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-437397

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 2/24Posted September 17, 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 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

  • Water Quality Quantity
    • “headwaters of our great rivers”
    • “maintaining clean drinking water”
    • “building more roads means more water pollution”
  • Wildlife Habitat
    • “Roadless areas are havens for wildlife”
    • “protect the homes of threatened species”
    • “keeping habitats intact and free of industrial development”
  • Recreation Tourism Public Use
    • “quality dispersed recreation opportunities”
    • “treasured for hunting, fishing, and wildlife viewing”
    • “remote pristine areas”
  • Cultural Heritage Indigenous
    • “traditional subsistence practices of Indigenous communities”
    • “sustain wild salmon”

Attachments

1 file. Counts as 1 — Counts as one: The attachments enclose no one else's submissions; the comment counts as one.

  • Own letter

The comment

I strongly oppose repealing the Roadless Area Conservation Rule as it would not be in the long-term interest of the American people, the National Forests or the communities they serve. The U.S. National Forests are the headwaters of our great rivers and the largest source of municipal water supply in the nation, serving over 60 million people in 3,400 communities in 33 states. The 2001 Roadless Rule is vital for maintaining clean drinking water for communities across the country. Major U.S. cities including Los Angeles, Portland, Denver and Atlanta receive a significant portion of their water supply from national forests. But building more roads means more water pollution, threatening these crucial water sources. These remote pristine areas provide quality dispersed recreation opportunities and are treasured for hunting, fishing, and wildlife viewing.  Roadless areas are havens for wildlife, keeping habitats intact and free of industrial development. These backcountry forests protect the homes of threatened species such as California condors, grizzly bears and wolves in the Yellowstone area, native trout in the Pacific Northwest, migratory songbirds in the Appalachian hardwoods and more. They also sustain wild salmon, especially in Alaska where they are the lifeblood for both the fishing industry and traditional subsistence practices of Indigenous communities.  The Roadless Area Conservation Rule must be preserved in its entirety. Thank you. Brian Buxton 8451 Monterey Ct, Eden Prairie, MN 55347

Keep learning. Keep speaking up.The Roadless Rule depends on public engagement. Share what you've learned.

© 2026 roadless.org - Defending America's Last Wild Forests

Privacy Policy|Questions or concerns? noroads@roadless.org|Follow us: @defendroadless