Unholy alliance?

I LOVE IT!!!

Their own tactics have turned around and bit them in the butt !!

Ride on

Brewster

"There is a difference between simple and controversial activities, between mushroom gathering and 250-acre timber sales, distinctions which the judge has again required the Forest Service to recognize."

They better recognize the difference between a 250-acre timber sale and a Hare Scrambles run on an established trail system too! To me the hare scrambles seem more like a simple activity not a controversial one. :banghead:

It almost seems as if the Sierra Club and the earth muffins might be unknowingly helping us out here :banghead:

I like how they get there panties all in a wad when THERE events get cancelled. Gives them just a taste of how we feel.

I think this is fawked.

The way I read this is that the judge or somebody is back-pedaling and saying the ruling doesn't apply to all types of activities. But that's screwed up because the first time that the FS does allows an activity, e.g. harescramble, that doesn't fit well with the greenies you know they are going to sue again.

I think if I was the FS I'd do exactly what they are doing and say "fawk you" to the greenies and make sure this hurts them too.

I think the right way to correct this is to completely overturn the ruling.

I think this is fawked.

The way I read this is that the judge or somebody is back-pedaling and saying the ruling doesn't apply to all types of activities. But that's screwed up because the first time that the FS does allows an activity, e.g. harescramble, that doesn't fit well with the greenies you know they are going to sue again.

I think if I was the FS I'd do exactly what they are doing and say "fawk you" to the greenies and make sure this hurts them too.

I think the right way to correct this is to completely overturn the ruling.

Maybe, but if precedence could be set as it relates to M/C races in that they are considered a "simple" activity versus a "controversial" activity maybe we come out of this thing unscathed while the greenies are satisfied? Sounds to me like the judge is putting it back into the hands of the USFS to decide what is "simple" and what is "controversial". I am starting to think that their whole movement with this may have been driven by the "Bush sponsored" plan of any logging less than 250 acres would be categorically exempt :banghead:

Frankly, I think any logging operation whether it's 250 acres or less should not be categoriacally exempt! Now before you call me an earth muffin and I'm forced to break your other foot........ Think about how many times some of our trails are interrupted by clear cuts, wouldn't it be nice to have an opportunity to comment on that before it happens?