Article View: ca.environment
Article #7468Re: Disaster! (was Cal Desert Bill passes!)
From: Todd Ourston
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 1994 22:28
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 1994 22:28
44 lines
3246 bytes
3246 bytes
Eric Mankin (mankin@mizar.usc.edu) wrote: : I am quite aware that it closes some roads. It does not close them all, : and I explicitly said in the post that I might join in a suit : to reopen certain jeep trails after the park had been established: I can't imagine what grounds you would have for such a suit. The road closures are now part of a congressional mandate--the California Desert Act itself--so the NPS is not only not breaking the law by enforcing those road closures, it must enforce those road closures to avoid breaking the law. Closures to bicyclists on the basis of a blanket prohibition of bicycling in Wilderness Areas is a different matter, however. There is no congressional mandate that bicycles be prohibitted in Wilderness Areas. In fact, for the first twenty years of the Wilderness Act of 1964, it was clear that bicycles were not prohibited in Wilderness Areas. Later, at the urging of the Sierra Club, administrative policy changes were used to redefine the words adopted by Congress to make them mean that bicyles were prohibited, but Congress never agreed to or mandated that policy. In the case of closures to bicyclists in Wilderness Areas, it is still possible to change the administrative rules without changing the laws of Congress, as you erroneously suggested could be done to accomodate motorized use of ORV routes that are being closed as a result of the California Desert Act. : I thought it was good to get the park set and then work on its rules : afterward. I see. So you figured that if our legislators just passed a law that had been the focus of congressional battles for the better part of a decade, it would be no sweat to turn around and change part of that law shortly thereafter? Tell me, why would anyone in Congress want to get in the middle of that bruising battle again? : Was there anything ambiguous about the sentence, "I am : emphatically not in favor of closing all jeep trails on public land" : in the post above? Only the part about you support for the law that prohibits ORV use of some of the jeep trails that you think should remain open to ORVs. : They also (again, speaking selfishly) make a lot of noise. One of the Most modern ORVs do not make a lot of noise.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<38eo2p$hps@crl5.crl.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!nntp.crl.com!crl5.crl.com!not-for-mailReferences:
<37uou3$b0t@crl.crl.com> <37v2tb$a45@mizar.usc.edu> <38bog5$57e@nuhou.aloha.net> <38ei8e$1ic@mizar.usc.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fa1e9,863af5ff4b0f7c61 X-Google-Attributes: gidfa1e9,public X-Google-Thread: 10df74,92400604b160c5bc X-Google-Attributes: gid10df74,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-10-23 15:31:06 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!nntp.crl.com!crl5.crl.com!not-for-mail From: ourston@crl.com (Todd Ourston) Newsgroups: ca.environment,rec.motorcycles.dirt Subject: Re: Disaster! (was Cal Desert Bill passes!) Followup-To: ca.environment,rec.motorcycles.dirt Date: 23 Oct 1994 15:28:41 -0700 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] Lines: 44 Message-ID: <38eo2p$hps@crl5.crl.com> References: <37uou3$b0t@crl.crl.com> <37v2tb$a45@mizar.usc.edu> <38bog5$57e@nuhou.aloha.net> <38ei8e$1ic@mizar.usc.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: crl5.crl.com X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]