Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 3/24Posted 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.
“being out alone in the woods around nothing human-made”
“good for the soul”
“keep growing up in a world with nature”
The comment
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE THE ROADLESS RULE!!!! I am emailing you in SUPPORT of the Alternative 1: The “No action alternative” to keep the Roadless Rule intact.
As a young person who grew up in the Midwest, went to school out in the Northeast, and who is now living in Southern California, I have seen first-hand what nature has to offer across the entire mainland US. There is no better feeling than being out alone in the woods around nothing human-made- a polution free, ecological bliss. Plain and simple, it's good for the soul.
Removing the Roadless Rule would deeply impact not only me, but millions of people across the US, thousands spieces of native flora and fauna, decrease the amounts of drinkable water, and increase the rate of forest fires.
I implore you, so I can keep growing up in a world with nature, and so the generations after me can too, DO NOT remove this rule. Ask yourself if it'd be worth it- furthering our Earth's decline by ignoring this plea. Please. Let us keep the forests safe.
Sincerely,
Orly Zuckerman
North Hollywood, CA 91601