Opposes rescissionA1 strongSubstance 4/24Owed an answerPosted 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
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.
Howdy Hey!
Im a rural community memeber of Havanna, FL and I implore you not to pass 36 CFR Part 294 RIN 0596-AD66.
We need trees to produce oxygen, I dont wanna live life likes its the Lorax and I have to buy air. The Roadless Rule helps maintain biodiversity in our industrial country which is critcal to the Earth's health. We as the apex predator have a duty to service all the other beings on this planet keeping them and their homes safe.
Additionally, I love to travel and see how the trees, earth, and even the air are diffrent in diffrent states. It would be detrimental in revune for rurual areas as forsaking the Roadless Rule would destroy the hiking, camping, and outdoor wildreness industries. I dont want another oil spill in the middle of a forest to destroy thousands of acres of land.
I am begging you to keep nature safe. I want kids to be able to look at it in awe of how old and tall these trees are. Wondering about all the things they've seen. I want people to be able to play in the woods across all of America pretending to be faires or sprites and ignore for just a minute that AI will destory it all.
Our country already has bad enough enviormental, health, and finical issues due to AI. Getting rid of the Roadless Rule would just expidite our demise; I want to live a long and healthy life. I cannot do that if our country doesnt protect its natural wildlife.
Please drop 36 CFR Part 294 RIN 0596-AD66 and protect the Roadless Rule. I want our public and protected lands to stay Public and Protected.
Sincerely,
24 and not wanting to watch Earth die