Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 5/24Posted September 18, 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 eliminatedThe agency says it considered and eliminated the alternative the comment proposes, with a reason. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
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.
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.
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.
Outside the scopeThe agency says the comment asks about a different action. Defeated when the comment is specific and tied to this proposal.
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.
“roadless precisely because they are less accessible”
The comment
I want to express my strong opposition to the rescission of this Rule. A resident of
East Tennessee,I live adjacent to USFS lands that are being logged. Ì acknowledge the need for timber and forest management. However the Roadless Areas were set apart for their value as healthy ecosystems, wildlife habitat and places for primitive recreation.
Often tracts now covered by the Rule are roadless precisely because they are less accessible or on steep, rocky land. Cutting trees in these areas will increase the likelihood of landslides and flooding. In Tennessee and North Carolina we sustained damage to more than 190,000 acres of our National Forests from Hurricane Helene. Removing more trees increases the risk for forest damaging flooding in downstream communities. I urge you to reconsider the rescission of the Roadless Areas Conservation Rule in order to protect us from continuing damaging flooding with increased costs of recovery which impact all taxpayers.
Anne Anderson
520 Copeland Rd
Ocoee, TN 37361