Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-578254

Opposes rescissionA1 strongSubstance 16/24Owed an answerPosted October 6, 2026 On Regulations.gov

In short: The comment documents specific deficiencies in the agency's analysis regarding wildfire risk, economic net benefit, and legal authority, citing the agency's own records and Tenth Circuit precedent to argue that the rescission of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule is inconsistent with the protection of specific species, water supplies, and statutory mandates in the Monongahela and Ocala National Forests.

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

  • Wildlife Habitat
    • “signs of wildlife are signs of a healthy ecosystem”
    • “West Virginia northern flying squirrel, the Cheat Mountain salamander, the snowshoe hare, and the northern long-eared bat”
    • “Red-cockaded woodpeckers recovered there from 7 breeding pairs to 98 family groups”
    • “Florida scrub-jay, found nowhere else on the planet, depends on surrounding scrub that roads would break apart”
  • Water Quality Quantity
    • “protecting headwaters that feed the Potomac and the drinking water of Washington, D.C.”
    • “sits directly on top of the Floridan Aquifer”
    • “Alexander Springs pumps 80 million gallons of crystal-clear water per day”
    • “road construction a direct contamination pathway to the drinking water supply”
  • 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”
    • “far higher fire density on roaded land than inside the affected roadless areas”
    • “I do not understand how opening these forests to new roads reduces fire risk”
  • Economic Impact Fiscal
    • “total timber volume affected by this rule is less than 0.5 percent of total United States production”
    • “net present value spanning -$92 million to +$199 million”
    • “agency is already $6.9 billion behind on maintaining the roads it has”
    • “How does expanding a road system already carrying a $6.9 billion maintenance backlog serve the public interest”

What it names

National Forests
Monongahela National ForestOcala National Forest
Roadless areas
Cheat Mountain
Law cited
28 U.S.C. Section 1291

The comment

Shaded passages are the ones the analysis quoted as evidence for a dimension: Specific placeLocal knowledgeAnalytical gapEvidenceRequestAlternativeLegal

Re: Rescission of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule, Docket FS-2025-0001 These forests are gifts from God for us to protect. I hike in the Monongahela National Forest in West Virginia, the Ocala National Forest in Florida, and the Francis Marion Forest in South Carolina. I go there for beauty and inspiration. I look for all wildlife, even squirrels and raccoons, because signs of wildlife are signs of a healthy ecosystem. There are so few wild animals left on the planet. They deserve a place to roam free, and we deserve to see them. I oppose the rescission of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The Monongahela holds 174,885 acres across 20 inventoried roadless areas, protecting headwaters that feed the Potomac and the drinking water of Washington, D.C. Verified species there include the West Virginia northern flying squirrel, the Cheat Mountain salamander, the snowshoe hare, and the northern long-eared bat. These are not abstractions to me. When I walk those ridges and catch any sign of wildlife, I know the land is intact. The Ocala, which sits directly on top of the Floridan Aquifer, holds 4,855 acres across 2 inventoried roadless areas. Alexander Springs pumps 80 million gallons of crystal-clear water per day through karst limestone that makes road construction a direct contamination pathway to the drinking water supply of central Florida. Red-cockaded woodpeckers recovered there from 7 breeding pairs to 98 family groups because the longleaf pine stands they need have never been fragmented by roads. The Florida scrub-jay, found nowhere else on the planet, depends on surrounding scrub that roads would break apart. These are the places I photograph, looking for beauty and inspiration. I ask that this agency explain in this docket how rescinding the rule is consistent with protecting the species and water supplies these specific forests shelter. The proposal invokes wildfire management as a reason for rescission. The agency's own record states: "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." I do not understand how opening these forests to new roads reduces fire risk when the agency's own findings say the opposite. The agency must explain why this proposal departs from those prior findings and reconcile the rescission with the ignition data in its own draft environmental impact statement, which reports far higher fire density on roaded land than inside the affected roadless areas. The economics do not justify what is being proposed either. The agency's own record states: "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's own cost-benefit analysis projects $5.2 to $11.4 million a year in timber revenue against recreation losses of at least $6.1 million a year, with a net present value spanning -$92 million to +$199 million. That analysis cannot establish a net benefit. Meanwhile the agency is already $6.9 billion behind on maintaining the roads it has, on a road budget of about $73 million a year. Maintain the roads already in place. It makes no sense at all to construct new ones when we cannot afford to maintain the ones we have. How does expanding a road system already carrying a $6.9 billion maintenance backlog serve the public interest when the agency's own numbers cannot confirm a positive return? Finally, the proposal questions whether the 2001 rule was within the agency's statutory authority. The Tenth Circuit resolved that question. Its holding states: "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 found the rule was within authority Congress granted and did not create de facto wilderness. The agency must address that holding directly and state in this docket the legal basis for any contrary position. Our public lands should be managed and preserved for us to enjoy and for future generations. To destroy these forests is irresponsible and short-sighted. I urge the agency to withdraw this proposal. Sincerely, Katie Mulligan Myrtle Beach, SC

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