Comment Analysis · Docket FS-2025-0001

FS-2025-0001-580125

Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 7/24Posted October 6, 2026 On Regulations.gov

In short: The comment documents that the Sleeping Giant in the Shoshone National Forest, Wyoming, is a specific area where rescinding the Roadless Rule would permit road construction, citing USDA Forest Service (2000) data to establish that roadless areas are critical for maintaining high-integrity watersheds and functional ecosystems.

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 eliminated The agency says it considered and eliminated the alternative the comment proposes, with a reason. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • Misreads the proposal The agency says the comment misunderstands what is proposed. Defeated when the comment engages the proposal or a named place directly.
  • 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.
  • 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.

Topics

  • Recreation Tourism Public Use
    • “backcountry hiker and explorer”
    • “serenity and beauty of this area would be ruined with roads”
    • “One road can destroy the quietness of an entire basin or drainage for miles”
    • “destroy any sense of wonderment and awe”
  • Water Quality Quantity
    • “Roadless areas anchor the highest-integrity watersheds”
    • “watersheds with the highest ecological integrity scores tend to be dominated by wilderness and roadless areas”
    • “functional soils, hydrology”
  • Wildlife Habitat
    • “loss of wildlife diversity”
    • “support functional soils, hydrology, and food webs that fragmented forests cannot replicate”
    • “wilderness areas free from signs of human activity”

What it names

National Forests
Shoshone National Forest
Roadless areas
Sleeping Giant

The comment

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

Dear Secretary Brooke L. Rollins: I am a backcountry hiker and explorer. We are so lucky as a country to still have these wilderness areas free from signs of human activity. It’s a very humbling experience to spend days alone in these roadless areas and once they are gone they are gone forever. The serenity and beauty of this area would be ruined with roads. One road can destroy the quietness of an entire basin or drainage for miles. We live in a crowded enough country why would anyone want to take away the little bit of wilderness that remains here. Having this place left intact to see what it was like before humans left their mark is what makes it so special. A road ruins this. It would bring noise pollution, garbage, human caused fire risks, and a loss of wildlife diversity . Regarding the Sleeping Giant in the Shoshone National Forest, Wyoming: Intact roadless landscapes support functional soils, hydrology, and food webs that fragmented forests cannot replicate. Roadless areas anchor the highest-integrity watersheds. Within the National Forest System, watersheds with the highest ecological integrity scores tend to be dominated by wilderness and roadless areas — over 50 percent roadless or wilderness cover in 81 percent of the highest-integrity subbasins. Watersheds with the lowest integrity scores show the opposite pattern: little roadless cover and moderate to high road density (USDA Forest Service 2000). — USDA Forest Service, 2000 (https://www.fs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/roadless/roadless-feis-volume1.pdf) Rescinding the Roadless Rule would open the Sleeping Giant, Shoshone National Forest to road construction and associated ground disturbance. The direct and indirect effects of that activity are precisely what makes a specific comment about this area necessary. Roads would destroy any sense of wonderment and awe and a sense of humility that only comes with a roadless wilderness I'm not asking the Department to do something difficult. I'm asking it to leave a working rule alone. With thanks, CommentID: RLC-20261006-VIS49C

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