Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-440874

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Posted 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

Environmental Protection Biodiversity
- “protect the Roadless Area Conservation Rule”
- “Forests are not just empty land waiting to be developed”
- “support entire ecosystems that we cannot replace once they are gone”
- “look at these forests as living ecosystems rather than simply as resources to be extracted”
Water Quality Quantity
- “provide habitat, clean water, recreation, and carbon storage”
- “Forests affect watersheds, rivers, fish, birds”
- “protecting watersheds and clean drinking water”
Recreation Tourism Public Use
- “spends a huge part of my life outdoors”
- “I surf, hike, snorkel, and spend time studying wildlife”
- “provide places for people to hike, explore, camp, and experience nature”
Climate Carbon Storage
- “provide habitat, clean water, recreation, and carbon storage”
- “look up to giant old growth forests”

What it names

Roadless areas: Santa Cruz

The comment

My name is Kelly Dykes, and I am a senior at UC Santa Cruz studying Marine Biology. I am writing to urge you to take a stand and protect the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. As someone who studies marine biology and spends a huge part of my life outdoors, I understand how connected healthy ecosystems are to the people and wildlife that depend on them. Forests are not just empty land waiting to be developed. They provide habitat, clean water, recreation, and carbon storage, and they support entire ecosystems that we cannot replace once they are gone. The Roadless Rule has protected millions of acres of our national forests from road construction and certain types of timber harvesting for more than 25 years. The Forest Service’s current proposal would rescind the 2001 rule and remove its national restrictions on road construction, reconstruction, and timber harvest across nearly 45 million acres of National Forest System lands. This is especially concerning to me because I have built so much of my life around the outdoors. I surf, hike, snorkel, and spend time studying wildlife, and I have seen firsthand how much people depend on natural spaces for recreation and connection to the environment. As a marine biology student, I also know that protecting one ecosystem rarely means protecting just one species. Forests affect watersheds, rivers, fish, birds, and the communities that depend on them. These forests belong to all of us. They provide places for people to hike, explore, camp, and experience nature, while also providing habitat for wildlife and protecting watersheds and clean drinking water. As someone studying marine biology and hoping to spend my career protecting wildlife, I believe it is important to look at these forests as living ecosystems rather than simply as resources to be extracted. We cannot let the greed of politicians and billionaires start picking apart our beautiful country national park by park. Like you, I dream of a world that my future children and my grandchildren can miles of uninterrupted mountains, experience oceans bustling with life, and look up at giant old growth forests. Everyday I see my dream dying in the news and the press conferences, covered up by more distraction and division. My name is Kelly Dykes, and I am asking you to take a stand for these forests and the wildlife, communities, and future generations that depend on them. Please keep the Roadless Area Conservation Rule in place and protect our remaining roadless forests. Sincerely, Kelly Dykes Del Mar, CA