Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-443049

Supports rescissionA0 noneSubstance 7/24Posted September 17, 2026 On Regulations.gov

In short: The comment establishes the commenter's personal standing as a disabled individual and long-time hunter who relies on specific road access to Shawnee National Forest, while documenting observed declines in local wildlife populations and supporting the maintenance of historical openings for fire access and habitat.

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

  • Forest Management Wildfire
    • “allow maintaining the roads”
    • “doing controlled burns”
    • “access the go rest incase of fire”
    • “maintain forest habitat”
  • Public Land Access Rights
    • “I m disabled and have difficulty accessing the Shawnee national forest”
    • “I need roads where I will have access”
    • “The. roads are need to access”
  • Wildlife Habitat
    • “wildlife opening”
    • “create a biologically important area for wildlife”
    • “bats need just maintaining the small openings”
    • “noticeable drop in wild life numbers”

What it names

National Forests
Shawnee National ForestShawnee National Forest

The comment

Shaded passages are the ones the analysis quoted as evidence for a dimension: Evidence

To it May concern I’m in favor of the opening on the forest to allow maintaining the roads wildlife opening and doing controlled burns. I m disabled and have difficulty accessing the Shawnee national forest. I’ve hunter there since 1978 and since then have seen a noticeable drop in wild life numbers today compared to back then.Fewer Whitetail deer , rabbits , Turkey almost no quail now and fewer bat sightings. The. roads are need to access the go rest incase of fire and to maintain forest habitat and create a biologically important area for wildlife. The opening were historically created back in the 1930s . I’m not in favor over cutting the old growth the bats need just maintaining the small openings.As some who is disable I need roads where I will have access to the Shawnee National Forest Thank you for your time and maintaining our Forest

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