General Comments
Comment:
Noncommercial Distribution of Printed Material.
Several
respondents commented on some issues pertaining to the requirement to obtain a
special use authorization for noncommercial distribution of printed material.
Approximately 19 respondents stated that the agency's concerns about adverse
impacts associated with noncommercial distribution of printed material are
hypothetical or inadequate to justify the regulation.
One respondent stated
that the Bible or other religious tracts could be banned under the proposed
rule.
Four respondents stated that the special use authorization requirement
for noncommercial distribution would allow the agency to censor printed
material.
Six respondents stated that the proposed rule singles out expressive
conduct in regulating noncommercial distribution of printed material.
Three
respondents stated that the agency can address resource problems associated
with noncommercial distribution by establishing a specific and objective policy
on posting, fixing, or erecting printed material and on maintaining safe
traffic conditions, rather than deciding on a case-by-case basis where and when
the activity will be allowed.
One respondent, citing United States v. Picciotto, 875 F.2d 345 (D.C. Cir.
1989), argued that resource problems associated with posting, affixing, or
erecting printed material cannot be addressed by adding unpublished conditions
to special use authorizations, and that any desired restrictions must be
published in a rule.
Another respondent advised the agency to promulgate
regulations making each group responsible for its own discarded printed
material.
Three respondents commented that regulations already exist for
dealing with resource impacts associated with distribution of printed material.
Seven respondents questioned where they could distribute noncommercial printed
material if they could not do it on public lands.
One respondent stated that
distribution is defined too broadly in the proposed rule to allow for ample
alternative channels of communication.
Five respondents stated that the special
use authorization requirement for noncommercial distribution of printed
material could have the effect of stifling legitimate public protests of Forest
Service activities.
One respondent commented that a permit for noncommercial
distribution of printed material could be denied for any reason.
Response.
The Department has carefully examined the special use
authorization requirement for noncommercial distribution of printed material.
Based on the comments received on resource impacts and on the Department's
review of resource impacts associated with noncommercial distribution of
printed material, the Department has determined that these impacts are not
significant enough to warrant regulation at this time. Therefore, the
Department has removed from the final rule the special use authorization
requirement for noncommercial distribution of printed material.
Significant Governmental Interests
Listing of Comments
FS Regulation Page