Re: Suprise Canyon Meetings!!
The folks that want to simply get away from Landuse issues (and ignore the political activist side of wheeling as a sport) need to realize that the Surprise Canyon debate has all the credentials to set precedence. The potential precedence is that a Congressionally recognized RS 2477 cherrystem road near designated Wilderness can be closed, simply due to it's proximity to potential T&E species in the adjacent Wilderness, without the ruling of Congress.
Think about Dusey-Ersham, Fordyce Creek, Rubicon, Sherman Pass, Monache (all in the Sierra Nevada), and the trails in your neighborhood that are adjacent to designated Wilderness?
The litigation by the CBD is a test case to determine if greens can legally stipulate a court order to overrule a Congressional Act (the Act that originally wrote the cherrystem or trail designation as acceptable, adjacent to designated Wilderness without a buffer zone). Many public land advocates fail to grasp the importance of the exclusion and restriction of buffer zones written into the original Wilderness Act of 1964 (preventing the debate of species protection on lands adjacent to Wilderness)?
Think about the result if they get away with the concept? They will be able to overrule an Act of Congress through litigation and brokered legal stipulations. The result allows them the power to litigate the Judicial branch of our government in their favor, without any of the checks and balances of the Executive and Legislature branches of government, without the oversight of elected officials.
They potentially will be able to have an extreme green (deep ecology) ideology supporter (lets say a Judge appointed to the District 9 Court, the same Court that ruled "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional) make an independent ruling without constitutional checks and balances inherent in or system of government. Think about this result, again, someone none of the public elected will overrule our two elected branches of government on a public land management issue (the status of established public rights of way on public land).
Guess who advised the Clinton Administration to try bypassing Congress and the Judicial branch of government by pushing through the Roadless Rule, without valid public or judicial review, maybe extreme environmental appointments in government? It requires little guessing to determine who is trying to ignore the US Constitution regarding the issues behind the Surprise Canyon litigation.
You may have never thought a bunch of respectful hard working people like off-road enthusiasts would be unknowingly caught up in constitutional law issues, but there is a reason off-road enthusiasts are hard in the crosshairs of the extreme environmental gun site, we are the defenders of the constitution in this issue.