[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[pct-l] Last Straw...



the reason hey allowed mutilpla use is the area I live the shoeshine 
forest were the forests service was started was on land people were all 
ready using you all ready had hose people ion there you ahd people 
setting up homes ect. So to pelse every one they alowed muti use. that 
is the same resion why there is an airport in grand tetion natinal parkt 
he only natinal park that has an airport. It is also why you can hunt in 
the grand tetoion natianl Park the only natinal park you can hunt in. 
when they wnet to set it up the airport was there and  people were 
huting there and peopel were lsaying liek hell your gona stop us from 
hunting or shut our airport down.  so they knew that that was the onylw 
ay they would get there park same wayw ith the firest they knew that was 
the only way they wcould get there foerest.  Just like we well some 
don't want roads what if there was a groups ayign I don't want 
backpackers in the forest. just has therea re group saing I don't want 
hourses. or I don't want huitng or ect. the forest service balnces all 
uses so evry one can use them. I mean I am sure youw ouldnt want them to 
say soory you cant hike here. just has my famiy wouldnt want them tosay 
soory you can't  let your cattel graze int he firest.
Gary Wright wrote:

> On May 6, 2005, at 7:31 PM, Jeff Moorehead wrote:
>
>> You seem well-informed on this point so let me ask you another 
>> question. Would it really take an act of Congress to redefine the 
>> implementation of 'multiple use'? I am very curious as to whether the 
>> NFS is really bound by the instructions of Congress or whether it 
>> does not act on its own (even though it could) due to 
>> economic/political lobbies.
>
>
> I'm not a specialist, I just read a lot. :-)  Basically all federal
> departments are only allowed to act within the specific provisions of
> the law that created them or subsequent laws that provide more 
> instructions.
> For example, the Department of Homeland security only exists because
> Congress passed a law instructing the executive branch to implement it.
>
> Sometimes Congress gives the Executive a lot of leeway in implementing
> things (thus the changing roadless rules between the Clinton and Bush
> Administrations).  Sometimes they are very specific.  From what I've
> observed, Congress is lazy.  They'll start with some guidelines
> reached via some messy political process and then let the administration
> proceed.  If the administration does something that kicks up some dust
> (i.e. Congressmen start hearing from the voters), then Congress make
> refine or change the rules in some way to ensure that they get 
> re-elected,
> umm.. I mean to ensure that they are representing the voters.
>
> I haven't read the specific law that created the NFS but I suspect that
> it has lots of details on what is to be managed and how.  Similarly the
> law that created Wilderness areas also has rules about how those lands 
> are
> to be managed (or not depending on your point of view).  So to the
> extent that 'multiple use' is a phrase that appears in the law that 
> created
> the National Forest Service the NFS is constrained by the definition 
> of that
> term as specified in the law.  They might be able to creatively interpret
> the definition but ultimately only Congress can change the mandate.
>
> _______________________________________________
> pct-l mailing list
> pct-l@mailman.backcountry.net
> unsubscribe or change options:
> http://mailman.hack.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>
>