NPS Level 2 Wilderness Stewardship Policy Review DO 41_FR Notice
Details
The document's own metadata, straight from the source system.
- Title
- NPS Level 2 Wilderness Stewardship Policy Review DO 41_FR Notice
- Posted
- Jun 15, 2026
- Comment period
- Jun 15, 2026 – Aug 15, 2026
- FR Doc
- 2026-11958
Overview
What the public is saying — stance, who's commenting, and the issues they raise.
Stance breakdown
Who commented
Breakdown by commenter type.
Comments over time
Weekly arrivals, stacked by stance.
Support × commenter type
How each type splits across stance.
Issues raised
The docket's canonical issues. Select one to browse its comments.
Position map
Who stands where on each issue?
Every non-silent position is backed by an excerpt from the comment.
Issues shown
Choose up to five.
| Organization | Wilderness designation | Wilderness protection | Wilderness stewardship policy |
|---|---|---|---|
More Than Just Parks AdvocacyOppose Jim Pattiz, representing More Than Just Parks, opposes the review of Director's Order #41, arguing that it could weaken |
Explorer
Every mirrored comment — filter by stance, campaign, or issue.
- 9 comments from the past week
9 comments match your current view and arrived in the last week. Read this week's comments with stance, commenter type, and AI summaries on the paid plan.
- Jul 27, 2026Comment from Roger SemlerAnalysis pending📎 AttachmentRead comment →
- Jul 25, 2026Comment from Nicholas ScarboroughOpposeIndividual
The commenter, an individual, expresses strong opposition to any changes to the current Wilderness system and management policies. They argue for the continued protection of all categories of wilderness land in accordance with existing NPS policy and the Wilderness Act.
Read comment → - Jul 24, 2026Comment from Bonnie LongOtherIndividualRead comment →
- Jul 23, 2026Comment from Bruce PentzOpposeIndividual
The commenter opposes any revisions to the NPS wilderness stewardship policy that would weaken protections for wilderness study areas and lands with wilderness characteristics. They argue that such changes would permanently destroy the wilderness character of these lands and request that existing standards be preserved.
Read comment → - Jul 23, 2026Comment from Sandra ZelaskoOpposeIndividual
The commenter opposes any potential weakening of wilderness and wild lands management policies during the ongoing reviews by the BLM, FWS, and NPS. They urge the Department to prioritize long-term preservation and maintain robust management standards to protect ecological integrity and natural heritage.
Read comment → - Jul 23, 2026Comment from Evelyne PetersonOpposeIndividual
An individual visitor to the National Parks opposes any revisions to the NPS wilderness stewardship policy that would weaken protections for wilderness study areas and lands with wilderness characteristics. The commenter argues that these protections are essential for preserving the permanent character of wild lands for future generations.
Read comment → - Jul 23, 2026Comment from Margret CifaldiOpposeIndividual
The commenter opposes the wilderness policy review, arguing that it is a first step toward weakening wilderness protections to favor extractive industries and commercial development. They emphasize the importance of wilderness lands for conservation, recreation, and cultural connections.
Read comment → - Jul 22, 2026Comment from Caroline BrackenOpposeIndividual
A resident of Colorado expresses firm opposition to the proposed policy reviews by the BLM, FWS, and NPS. The commenter argues that these reviews could lead to a weakening of wilderness and wild lands management, advocating for long-term protection over short-term exploitation.
Read comment → - Jul 22, 2026Comment from Debarah TaylorSupportIndividual
A private citizen is requesting that the National Park Service uphold the existing wilderness stewardship policy under Director’s Order 41. The commenter argues that weakening protections for wilderness study areas and lands with wilderness characteristics would cause permanent damage to the land's character and suitability for future designation.
Read comment → - Jul 22, 2026Comment from Bonnie SchweinlerOpposeIndividualRead comment →
