[pct-l] Search and Seizure

[chadk3 at sbcglobal.net (Chad Killingsworth)]

As I prepare for a 2005 through hike of the PCT, the bear canister issue has
been one I've been paying special attention to in the archives. Even when I
hiked the AT in 2002, the issue of search and seizure of a backpack was of
great interest.

I plan on carrying a bear canister everywhere it is required. I also plan on
fully cooperating with any ranger or other law enforcement officer in
regards to this regulation - except at the point they ask to search my pack.
At this point I will politely decline as a matter of principle - the same
response I would give if an officer asks to search my car.

The basic question that Jeffrey Zimmerman was addressing still seems to be
valid - even outside of the bear canister discussion. I'd vary much like to
see more intelligent information on this topic, especially as it relates to
legal precedent.

Piper a.k.a. Chad Killingsworth

-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Kraft [mailto:waynekraft@verizon.net] 
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 9:58 PM
To: pct-l@mailman.backcountry.net
Subject: [pct-l] Search and Seizure

As a government prosecutor of some 20 odd years experience, I was about to
post my brief explaining how I'd win your motion to suppress the evidence
yielded as a result of the ranger's warrantless search of your backpack upon
her probable cause to believe you'd violated the law (she saw you haul a
ripped gunny sack containing 3 lbs. of Snickers bars out of your tent when
you broke camp this morning) and exigent circumstances (she saw a confirmed
Snickers-addict black bear sniffing the wind just over the next ridge).  But
then I made the following observations:

1.  Some of you folks are just a law unto yourselves. I've seen your type a
thousand times across the table. I have no truck with you and confess a sort
of bemused admiration for your willingness to absorb the punishment heaped
upon you.
2. Dave pretty much said it all.

But here's the deal.  The government has found itself a problem:  Human-food
habituated bears.  After much debate and deliberation and expense, the
government has settled upon a solution: mandatory use of bear cannisters in
the backcountry. If the problem of human-food habituated bears abates, the
government will conclude that bear cannisters work and will continue the
program as it is.  If the problem does not abate and hikers are found to be
a compliant group of bear cannister carriers, the government will conclude
that mandatory bear cannisters don't work and will try something else.  If,
God forbid, the problem does not abate and hikers are found to be an
arrogant, lawless bunch of know-it-alls, well, hold onto to your hats.
Trails will be closed, penalties increased and back country arrests made.
Some hikers will discover that resisting arrest is a more serious offense
than failing to carry a cannister and that the unlawfulness of the arrest is
not a legal defense to to the crime of resisting arrest.  Others will find
their Lekis useless while hiking handcuffed to the trail head.  

Personally, I've found that rangers and law enforcement officers have never
yet failed to reward my cheerful cooperation with their requests.  You can
make friends and gain a certain amount of breathing room this way.  If, on
the other hand, you choose to protest the injustice of the intrusion, do it
honorably in the tradition of Ghandi, Thoreau and Martin Luther King.  Don't
tell lies, mislead and conceal the truth. Be politely outspoken in your
defiance of injustice and accept the consequences as your badge of courage. 

Above all else, of course, HYOH.

Wayne Kraft