Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Posted October 6, 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.
“select Alternative 1 (the No Action Alternative)”
“Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) fails to demonstrate”
“reject the proposed rule”
The comment
Subject: Public Comment Supporting the "No Action" Alternative – Opposing the Rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (Docket FS-2025-0001)
Dear USDA Forest Service Planning Team,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. As a resident of Herndon, VA and someone who regularly enjoys recreation and appreciates the beauty and necessity for clean water in Utah forests near Moab these lands are deeply important to me. I have visited often and have family residing in that area and the protection of these lands is a high priority for me.
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) fails to demonstrate that rescinding the Roadless Rule will reduce wildfire risks, improve ecological health, or benefit local economies. Instead, opening over 45 million acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas to new road construction and commercial logging will fragment vital wildlife corridors, disrupt intact watersheds, and threaten clean drinking water supplies. Furthermore, the Forest Service already struggles with a massive maintenance backlog for its existing road network; building and maintaining new roads in remote backcountry is a poor use of public resources and runs counter to the public interest.
For these reasons, I urge the Forest Service to reject the proposed rule and select Alternative 1 (the No Action Alternative) to keep the 2001 Roadless Rule fully intact.
Sincerely,
Barbar Welsh
Herndon, VA 20170