If you've got the time to spare, it's somewhat interesting to read through the comments (they're all posted in the "Reading Room"). A lot of ones that don't really make a whole lot of sense ("I like the forest! Keep it protected!"...uh, okay, so which alternative are you supporting? Protect it from what, marmots?), a fair number of ones that clearly don't understand what the forest service can and cannot do with respect to Wilderness (yes, capital W, Congressionally-designated Wilderness) and/or the process and stated intent for RWAs and WSAs.
Make sure to filter out form letters, though, or you end up seeing a lot of the same out-of-state form letters from people who (based on the viewpoint they're endorsing) don't sound like they understand the scale of the CGNF or the amount of already designated Wilderness.