Letter from Rainbow Legaliaison 2/21/93
RAINBOW FAMILY LEGALIAISON
P.O. Box 27217
Washington, D.C. 20038
February 21, 1993
Old Executive Office Building Rm. 218
17th Street & Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500
SUBJECT: A possible alternative to needless regulations.
A couple of points which may have been lost in yesterday's
Perhaps the fact most pertinent to OMB consideration is that the
in Vermont, 1991 the Forest Service spent somewhere around
$300,000.00. Apparently the most significant result of that
expenditure was that "(s)ome local citizens were irritated by the
increased law enforcement presence (and) felt it was an
unnecessary show of authority that turned their community into a
police state." Rainbow Legaliaison Appendix A, pg. 4.
Yesterday I ended by asking your correction if,
Today, let's pretend the Forest Service shows that a group of
fifty people get together twice a year on Forest Service land to
toast marshmallows with flamethrowers, and that that practice has
caused several forest fires. Before drafting a regulation to ban
marshmallow toasting, would it not be more reasonable and prudent
for the agency to first notify the offending assemblage of their
injurious behavior. This would allow the offenders an
opportunity to alter their activities to eliminate the injurious
behavior, while avoiding the expense of a regulation that would
additionally punish public lands users who toast marshmallows
without starting forest fires.
If the Forest Service has evidence of some injurious group user,
can the Forest Service also show some evidence that they sought
any remediation short of regulation?
For peace through reason,
1) the Forest Service has offered some fact to show that
peaceable assemblies pose a threat to public lands, or
2) there is any logical reason to regulate "inalienable
rights" without any threat to public lands.
FS Regs Page | PCU Administrative Record
Rainbow in Court | Government Views | Public Views
1601 Pennsylvania Avenue