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

[pct-l] Thru-Hikers and cans (was Scary bear story &nothangingfood)



I didn't put this on before, but why not stir up the pot a little.  As some
of you
know, I work Law Enforcement for the Sheriff's department in Riverside
County.
This is what I did in Yosemite when I was asked, no.... make that told to
show
my bear can two years ago.  I asked the Park Ranger if he had a search
warrant.
He got P.O.'d and told me to show him the can.  I told him "no, not unless
you
have a search warrant.  He said "what are you, a lawyer?"  I said "no, a
cop".  He
just walked away.  Since that time I have checked with several lawyers and a
judge
who agree with me that I did not have to show it to him.  The reason:  if
they do not
have probable cause to make an arrest, they also do not have any legal
reason to
search your pack.  Important point, you see a ranger keep your pack on, it
is
like a part of your clothing on your person at that point and as best I can
tell
a warrant is needed to search it.
That was my method.... However if he wants to get c.s. he might be able to
find
something else to arrest you for.  Say, that six-pack you downed at Tuolumne
Meadows
might qualify you for a drunk in public arrest.  Be cautious.
The funny part was that I had a cannister... His crappy attitude just ticked
me off
enough so I wasn't going to show it to him.   Yes, I know, I'm not the
smartest person
in the world.  Enjoy!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Saenz" <msaenz@mve-architects.com>
To: "Hiker" <hiker@godlikebuthumble.com>; <pct-l@mailman.backcountry.net>
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 1:26 PM
Subject: RE: [pct-l] Thru-Hikers and cans (was Scary bear story
&nothangingfood)


Semantics.

The USFS, being a branch of the US Dept. of Agriculture, is headed by a
political appointee.

Given enough political pressure, ANY policy can be enacted, changed or
repealed.

I imagine if a few key congressional/senate committee members make a
call to Ann Veneman, Dale Bosworth (current chief of forestry) would
soon get "marching orders" to send down the pecking order to our local
forest managers...

Do any other national forests require bear cans? If it's only
California, then if enough constituents lobby for a change in this
policy, then it would be a relatively easy matter of our Federal
Representatives applying the correct pressure on the right people to
make the change. It's still high school civics concepts.

The question really is: do the majority of people who use the national
forests object to the policy of requiring bear cans?

Remember: it took only a vocal lobbying group to force the passage of
"The American Disabilities Act (ADA)", which benefits less than 1% of
the population. (I reference this over and over because it directly
affects me and I wholeheartedly disagree with it. But it illustrates my
point.)

M i c h a e l   S a e n z
McLarand Vasquez Emsiek & Partners, Inc.
A r c h i t e c t u r e    P l a n n i n g    I n t e r i o r s
w  w  w  .  m  v  e  -  a  r  c  h  i  t  e  c  t  s  .  c  o  m


-----Original Message-----
From: Hiker [mailto:hiker@godlikebuthumble.com]
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 12:30 PM
To: pct-l@mailman.backcountry.net
Subject: RE: [pct-l] Thru-Hikers and cans (was Scary bear story
&nothanging food)

At 09:53 AM 7/26/04, Mike Saenz wrote:
>But when the rubber meets the road (or the boots hit the trail?), when
>these laws are passed, we as citizens are obliged to comply with them.


The bear can rules are NOT laws that are "passed."

They are administrative rules imposed by the Forest Managers for their
forests. There is no way to "vote them out" or change the rule via the
normal legislative process that we learned in Civics class.

Depending on the "rule" there may or may not be a review process and a
comment period, but in the end the Forest Manager can pretty much do
whatever he wants within his own forest, without much oversight from the

USFS region, or from Washington DC.

About the only recourse a citizen's group has is a lawsuit, if they can
find a law that the Forest Manager's rule is breaking.

For example: a good argument can be made that small town politics in
Bishop
California, with old alliances and feuds have more to do with Inyo NF
regulations on Pack Outfits,  than sound forest management practices.

Also, the whole Bear Can debacle can be traced back to a relationship
between the Inyo NF wilderness manager, and her counterpart in SE/KI
National Park. Once the personal decision had been made by those two
that
bear cans were the only acceptable method of protecting food in the
backcountry, no amount of logic or argument was going to change the
mandate.

Since SE/KI and Inyo are the principal powers in the Sierra Interagency
Black Bear Group, bear cans are here to stay in the whole Sierra.

Have Fun, all IMHO.

Hiker


_______________________________________________
pct-l mailing list
pct-l@mailman.backcountry.net
unsubscribe or change options:
http://mailman.hack.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l


_______________________________________________
pct-l mailing list
pct-l@mailman.backcountry.net
unsubscribe or change options:
http://mailman.hack.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l