Make Your Comment Count

Why substantive comments matter

All public comments are welcome and recorded, but only substantive comments legally compel the BLM to provide a formal response and potentially change its plan or policy recommendation.

Substantive comments are important for many reasons, including:

• Response requirements: Under the National Environmental Policy Act, the BLM is required to address substantive written comments in its final planning document. Similarly, the agency may be legally vulnerable if it fails to respond to comments on new policy proposals.
• Effectiveness: Research shows public comments lead to substantive decision changes in 62% of cases.
• Legal standing: Submitting substantive feedback is typically a requirement for legal standing if an advocate later wants to protest or appeal a decision in court.
• Outsized impact: One well-reasoned, factual comment can reshape the entire plan or policy approach, whereas a thousand identical comments are often treated as a single comment.

Writing a substantive comment

The BLM defines a substantive comment as one that:

• Questions the accuracy of information, methodology, or assumptions used in the agency’s analysis
• Presents new information or reasonable alternatives not analyzed in a plan or policy recommendation
• Causes changes or revisions to analysis or management alternatives

A substantive comment does one or more of the following:

• Provides new information relevant to analysis, a management alternative, or proposed management approach
• Identifies a different way to provide for a management need
• Points out a specific flaw in analysis
• Suggests alternate methodologies and explains why they should be used to analyze and/or develop management alternatives
• Makes factual corrections to information or analysis
• Identifies new or different sources of credible research which, if used in the analysis, could produce new or different analysis and/or management alternatives

Here are some tips for crafting a substantive comment during scoping or when commenting on a draft plan:

• Know the scope. Any comment period pertains to a specific set of issues, so make sure your comment is relevant to the issues the agency is analyzing. Comments addressing issues outside of the scope are not considered.
• Be specific. Specifics help the agency consider and evaluate the issue you’ve raised. Note details, cite precise locations, and use personal observations to make your case.
• Present solutions. You can also highlight what you think will work well. Include potential fixes to problems you’ve identified.

Examples of substantive comments

Please note these are generic examples and are not specific to any particular planning process.

“Several alternatives are purported to reduce fire risk through the construction of firebreaks. Where is the science indicating that constructing fuel breaks reduces fire risk or the extent of fire?”

“None of the alternatives restrict motor vehicles, ATVs, and dirt bikes to designated routes. That failure will lead to continued degradation of sage-grouse habitat, as ATVs and dirt bikes roam, creating still more routes that subdivide blocks of habitat.”

“‘Existing routes’ in many cases are excessive routes, including unplanned and redundant off-road vehicle tracks. Some should be closed to prevent further degradation of habitat.”

“Livestock grazing also leads to cheatgrass invasion, as overgrazing eliminates native bunchgrasses and degrades biological soil crusts, both of which represent the ecosystem’s natural defenses against this invasive weed (Reisner et al. 2013). In order to minimize the spread of cheatgrass, livestock forage removal limits need to be set under the RMP amendment, allowing no more than 25% of the available forage to be consumed each year (see Braun 2006, Holechek 2010). BLM must restore degraded habitats by managing for the elimination of cheatgrass from the system.”

“The proposed new regulation claims to have no detrimental impact on water availability in the numerous creeks that flow throughout the area. However, there is very little data available on groundwater and streamflow in the basin. Where is the science indicating the proposed development will not deplete water resources?”

“The area provides important habitat for greater sage-grouse, whose populations have declined more than 40% throughout Oregon since 2003. I am concerned that the proposed plan may not avoid impacts to sage-grouse and their habitat.”

Examples of non-substantive comments

“I do not support Alternative D.”

“Protect our resources!”

“Please extend your office hours for those who work between 8 a.m.-5 p.m. Monday-Friday.”