Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 4/24Posted October 7, 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.
My name is Ian Kose, and I oppose the proposal to fully and or partially rescind the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. I live within 10 miles of national forest land in California. I work as a photographer and am consistently visiting these public lands for both work and recreation. I am originally from Portland Oregon where I also spent a lot of my early career and free time enjoying the outdoors. I am urging you to keep the Roadless Area Conservation Rule in tact, as it has never been more important to keep our wildlands wild, our ecosystems healthy, and our public lands intact and undeveloped so that current and future generations are able to learn and grow from all the benefits these areas have to offer. Removing this rule would increase fire risk as well as endanger critical water supply. The National Forest road system as it stands already has a nearly 7 billion dollar maintenance backlog, the Forest Service lacks the resources needed to maintain whats already in place. Adding more complexity to this situation would be a costly mistake. Thank you for your time.