Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-578017

Opposes rescissionA1 strongSubstance 13/24Owed an answerPosted October 6, 2026 On Regulations.gov

In short: The comment establishes that the proposed rescission of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule contradicts the agency's own fire science data (DEIS Table 21) and cost-benefit analysis, fails to address the legal deficiencies identified by the Ninth Circuit in prior state-by-state attempts, and ignores the statutory authority upheld by the Tenth Circuit under the Organic Act and Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act.

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 Analytical gap, Evidence, Legal.

Standard dismissals it defeats

  • 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.
  • Misreads the proposal The agency says the comment misunderstands what is proposed. Defeated when the comment engages the proposal or a named place directly.
  • 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.

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.
  • 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.
  • 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.

Topics

  • Forest Management Wildfire
    • “Building a road into a forest at high risk from uncharacteristic wildfire effects could increase the incidence of human-caused fires”
    • “human-caused wildland fire is nearly five times more likely to occur on essentially roaded lands”
    • “Opening that landscape to new roads in the name of fuels management contradicts the agency's own ignition data”
  • Wildlife Habitat
    • “home to bull trout, Oregon spotted frog, northern spotted owl, white-headed woodpecker, redband trout, and elk”
    • “largest intact temperate rainforest left on Earth”
    • “over 12,930 miles of salmon-producing streams”
  • Water Quality Quantity
    • “depends on the water, recreation, and resources that forest provides”
    • “Nine municipal watersheds are named in DEIS Table 2”
    • “1,466 municipal water intakes sit in watersheds containing affected roadless areas”
  • Economic Impact Fiscal
    • “total timber volume affected by this rule is less than 0.5 percent of total United States production”
    • “recreation losses of at least $6.1 million a year and a net present value spanning -$92 million to +$199 million”
    • “expanding a road system already carrying a $6.9 billion maintenance backlog”

What it names

National Forests
Deschutes National ForestOlympic National ForestTongass National Forest
Law cited
28 U.S.C. Section 1291Executive Order 14153

The comment

Shaded passages are the ones the analysis quoted as evidence for a dimension: Specific placeLocal knowledgeEA analysisAnalytical gapRequest

Re: Rescission of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule, Docket FS-2025-0001 Eight years on the Deschutes National Forest left marks on me that do not fade. I hiked it, camped in it, fought fire across it, canoed it, skied it, and spent years helping manage it. I know what the Roadless Rule means to that land, and I know what losing it would mean. That is why I am filing this comment in opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (Docket FS-2025-0001). The agency's own fire science should stop this proposal before it goes any further. The draft environmental impact statement contains the agency's finding that "Building a road into a forest at high risk from uncharacteristic wildfire effects could increase the incidence of human-caused fires. A human-caused wildland fire is nearly five times more likely to occur on essentially roaded lands than on essentially unroaded lands." The Deschutes holds 11 inventoried roadless areas totaling 136,446 acres, home to bull trout, Oregon spotted frog, northern spotted owl, white-headed woodpecker, redband trout, and elk. Opening that landscape to new roads in the name of fuels management contradicts the agency's own ignition data. I ask that the agency explain why this proposal departs from those prior findings and reconcile the rescission with the fire density data reported in DEIS Table 21. The economic case for rescission is equally hollow. The agency's own record shows that "the total timber volume affected by this rule is less than 0.5 percent of total United States production, and the total oil and gas production from all National Forest System lands is currently about 0.4 percent of the current national production." The agency must reconcile that fact with its own cost-benefit analysis, which projects $5.2 to $11.4 million a year in timber revenue to the Forest Service against recreation losses of at least $6.1 million a year and a net present value spanning -$92 million to +$199 million, and explain how any action whose own numbers cannot demonstrate a net benefit justifies expanding a road system already carrying a $6.9 billion maintenance backlog. My sister lives near Olympic National Forest and depends on the water, recreation, and resources that forest provides. She and the communities around her are precisely the people that figure disappears for in the ledger this proposal pretends is favorable. The Tongass National Forest alone exposes how far the agency is willing to go. It is the largest intact temperate rainforest left on Earth, holding 110 inventoried roadless areas totaling 9,339,575 acres, with over 12,930 miles of salmon-producing streams and roughly 44 percent of all the carbon stored by United States national forests. Under both action alternatives the Tongass keeps zero acres of roadless protection, a result the agency acknowledges is driven directly by Executive Order 14153. Nine municipal watersheds are named in DEIS Table 2. I will not accept the framing that opening this ecosystem to oil companies represents sound stewardship, and the agency must explain how that outcome serves the public interest it is charged to protect. This is not the first time the agency has tried to dismantle the national rule by substituting state-by-state approaches. The record reflects that "the USDA discussed its dissatisfaction with the Roadless Rule and highlighted its rejection of the Roadless Rule's 'inflexible one-size-fits-all nationwide rulemaking approach.' 70 Fed.Reg. at 25,656." That attempt failed, and courts found it wanting. Utah alone holds 222 inventoried roadless areas totaling 4,013,529 acres, including the High Uintas country I have hiked, camped, photographed, and explored. Across the Intermountain region, 1,466 municipal water intakes sit in watersheds containing affected roadless areas. The State of Utah should not be permitted to destroy this wilderness, and a patchwork of state-level substitutes offers no assurance it will not. The agency must address how this proposal avoids the deficiencies the Ninth Circuit identified when the national rule was last dismantled this way. Finally, the agency cannot credibly claim the 2001 rule exceeded its statutory authority. The Tenth Circuit held: "Exercising jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1291, we REVERSE the district court's order granting Plaintiffs declaratory relief and issuing a permanent injunction, and REMAND the case for the district court to vacate the permanent injunction." The court upheld the agency's authority under the Organic Act and the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act and found no de facto wilderness designation. The agency must explain, squarely and specifically, the legal basis for any position to the contrary. Don't let this happen! Sincerely, A couple from: Oregon, Utah, Colorado

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