The Moon is Waxing Crescent (14% of Full)

Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile Recent Posts
Yosemite Falls


Advanced

Re: Guns in NP, again

All posts are those of the individual authors and the owner of this site does not endorse them. Content should be considered opinion and not fact until verified independently.

avatar Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 05:06PM
How did we miss this:

http://www.nationalparkstraveler.com/2009/03/federal-judge-issues-scathing-opinion-blocking-concealed-carry-national-parks-wildlife-refug

“A federal judge, in a biting opinion highly critical of the Bush administration's Interior Department, has blocked a rule change that would have allowed national park visitors to carry concealed weapons.
In her ruling Thursday, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly scolded those who crafted the rule change for abdicating "their congressionally-mandated obligation to evaluate all reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts..."
The ruling, which also applies to concealed carry in national wildlife refuges, granted the National Parks Conservation Association, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees and the Association of National Park Rangers a preliminary injunction that blocks the rule change. .......“


http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/pdf/lap/cases/gunsinparks/injunction-victory.pdf

Perhaps we couldn't see past ...... Half Dome, of course.





The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 05:27PM
Are you surprised?

avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 06:04PM
Frank Furter: How did we miss this:

Prolly treated the topic like those topics to be avoided at family dinners: "so, dear, are you ready to settle down, yet?" (followed by hints of marriage and kids)..blah blahblah...

B
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 07:16PM
Eeek,Bee wrote:
>Are you surprised?
> Frank Furter: How did we miss this:
>
> Prolly treated the topic like those topics to be avoided at
> family dinners: "so, dear, are you ready to settle down, yet?"
> (followed by hints of marriage and kids)..blah blahblah...
>
> B
Is gun control one of those issues, like the hairy thing on Uncle Milt's nose, that cannot be discussed at the dinner table?

Guns in parks generated a few comments last year. I think even B. had something to say on the issue( So hard to pry any comment out of her).

I guess I AM surprised that the rule was blocked so quickly. Federal rulemaking is a complex process and the original commentary on this particular rule seemed to imply that undoing or thwarting it would be difficult. There does seem to be a different "awareness" of gun issues politically now-- for example, the recognition that we are shipping (presumably illegally) guns to Mexico and in that respect contributing to the border town crime is a satori, of sorts for the US government. I doubt that the Bush Administration would have acknowledged that gun situation.





The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 07:22PM
FF: Is gun control one of those issues, like the hairy thing on Uncle Milt's nose, that cannot be discussed at the dinner table?

Always a guarantee to split the ranks. It came up at a seder table three years ago and I think that a few guests threatened to leave (thats all part of the Schtik, tho)(I wish they had left!)

FF: >I think even B. had something to say on the issue( So hard to pry any comment out of her).<

Just don't accuse me of being shy winking smiley

(soon tax season will be over, and I will be unchained from the keyboard, but until then, y'all just have to suffer!)

B
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 08:12PM
<Always a guarantee to split the ranks.>
Perhaps it is a testament to Meester Rick, but this forum has been very civil even on the tough issues. You should read the Yellowstone.Net discussions. Few survivors there. Only ones left standing are waving guns.





The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 08:51PM
Frank Furter wrote:

> Only ones left standing are waving guns.

Sometimes it can be quite hard coming up with an argument (i.e. insult) that type can understand.

avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 08:49PM
FF: Few survivors there. Only ones left standing are waving guns.

Was it the same topic, guns, or do they just tend to be a rowdy bunch in general? This is my first forum (whitney is second and very genial at this time) I have heard of forums having to "shut down" for periods of time. I guess folks really get passionate about their topics?

B
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 08:52PM
I would guess it was both guns and snowmobiles.

avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 09:02PM
eeeeK: I would guess it was both guns and snowmobiles.

Now, THERES a picture of sanguinity: snowmobilers with guns!

B
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 09:07PM
Where else but West Yellowstone can one find a combination Radio Shack and Snowmobile Rental?

avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 09:39PM
eeek wrote:

> Where else but West Yellowstone can one find a combination
> Radio Shack and Snowmobile Rental?
>
It is quite a place in Winter or Summer. We also have lots of "suds and duds"-- places to get a beer and do your laundry.

The last time I snowmobiled in Yellowstone, I was passed while going 40mph, saw a snowmobile sink into the Firehole River, and noticed a guy riding a snowmobile with a dog sitting on the gas tank (they were going at least 30). What a circus! And that was after they instituted some "controls" on snowmobiles.





The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 09:27PM

> Was it the same topic, guns, or do they just tend to be a rowdy
> bunch in general?
guns, pistols, shotguns, gun rights, gun wrongs, big guns, little guns, chewing gum, etc

Guns seem to set off some level of irrational discussion that is not rivaled by evolution or religion. Otherwise seemingly reasonable people develop a glazed look, begin to speak in tongues, and automatically regurgitate NRA dogma like they were members of sleeper cells or had been infected by an alien being from a really bad Sci Fi movie.

You can check it out at:
http://forums.yellowstone.net//index.php especially the campfire talk or politics forums.

>> I would guess it was both guns and snowmobiles.<<
The biathalon of the future: like a cross between "the road warrior" and a shooting sport





The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 10:01PM
I'm surprised anyone noticed that Obama's administration reversed anything Bush did.

P.S. I still CCW
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 10:33PM
FF: >You can check it out at:
http://forums.yellowstone.net//index.php especially the campfire talk or politics forums.<

Wow; took a peek: really BAD politic chit chat. I could feel the rancor -- very unpleasant (like the pile of work next to me) It was sort of unnerving to see a bulletin stating that a thread had been locked out due to "the direction it was heading in". geez, this is supposed to be fun!

Vince: >I still CCW<

Define CCW, please.

B



Post Edited (03-27-09 23:00)



The body betrays and the weather conspires, hopefully, not on the same day.
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 27, 2009 11:06PM
Bee wrote:

> FF: >You can check it out at:
> http://forums.yellowstone.net//index.php especially the
> campfire talk or politics forums.<
>
> Wow; took a peek: really BAD politic chit chat. I could feel
> the rancor -- very unpleasant (like the pile of work next to
> me) It was sort of unnerving to see a bulletin stating that a
> thread had been locked out due to "the direction it was heading
> in". geez, this is supposed to be fun!
>
> Vince: >I still CCW<
>
> Define CCW, please.

"Carrying a concealed weapon". It refers to the permit issued for people to carry a concealed firearm. At least in California one would need to have one in order to legally carry a loaded firearm in most incorporated areas of California and many populated unincorporated areas.

I think it's legal to carry an unloaded and unconcealed weapon in California, but people would probably call the cops.

It would actually be legal to carry an unconcealed weapon in most National Forest areas. I have yet to come anyone with a gun though. I did hear about one guy who panicked when he saw a dog approaching him at a National Forest (might have been in Arizona?) and killed the dog and I think he also shot the owner.



Post Edited (03-27-09 23:14)
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 28, 2009 11:14AM
y_p_w wrote:

> Bee wrote:
>
> >
> > Vince: >I still CCW<
> >
> > Define CCW, please.
>
> "Carrying a concealed weapon". It refers to the permit issued
> for people to carry a concealed firearm.


Glad to hear the alternate meaning of the acronym; I thought that it meant 'crazies carrying weapons.'

So Vince, even though you have returned to the sphere of the sane, I regret to inform you that those corvids (your photo in the Aphids thread) are still going to drag off your Bronco when your back is turned, CCW or not. Also, I trust that you will abide by the law and not be CCW inside National Park boundries.



Post Edited (03-28-09 11:15)



THE YOSEMITE POST
Voice of the Rocky Marmot Empire
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 28, 2009 11:24AM
Always looked like counter clockwise to me.

avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 28, 2009 11:31AM
szalkowski: >I thought that it meant 'crazies carrying weapons<

Funny!! I thought that the only civilians in the US who carried concealed weapons were Diamond Brokers -- are you transporting diamonds, Vince?

B
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 28, 2009 12:24PM
Bee wrote:

> Funny!! I thought that the only civilians in the US who carried
> concealed weapons were Diamond Brokers -- are you transporting
> diamonds, Vince?

Just the diamonds? Not the whole field?

avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 28, 2009 01:12PM
Bee wrote:

> I thought that the only civilians in the US who carried
> concealed weapons were Diamond Brokers



Nevada has one of the most lenient policies among all the states for issuing concealed weapon permits.

Essentially, you can walk into any police station and tell them that you need one because you are afraid that the alien spaceship which you saw last night was planning to return and kidnap you. Response from the person at the desk: 'No problem! Do you want permits for all of your two dozen handguns?'
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 28, 2009 01:47PM
<Nevada has one of the most lenient policies among all the states for issuing concealed weapon permits>

What constitutes a concealed weapon in Nevada? Some states include brass knucles, strange martial arts weapons, knives over 4 inches in length, and, my favorite, sling shots.





The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 28, 2009 12:29PM
eeeek: >Not the whole field?<

Field?

B
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 28, 2009 12:50PM
Bee wrote:

> eeeek: >Not the whole field?<
>
> Field?

Baseball.

avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 28, 2009 12:56PM
eeeek: Baseball.

Ahhhh-- American Pasttime. I dont know anything about baseball, but I do prefer soccer.

B
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 28, 2009 02:23PM
szalkowski: Nevada has one of the most lenient policies among all the states for issuing concealed weapon permits.

Are these permits only good in the boundaries of the state they are issued in? (say, Vince is visiting daffodil hill about 30 min from where I am at...wonder if he is packing here in the Sunshine State...!)

B
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 28, 2009 02:54PM
Bee wrote:


> Are these permits only good in the boundaries of the state they
> are issued in?

Unfortunately, no. (They are rather like a driver's licence in that regard.)



Post Edited (03-28-09 14:56)



THE YOSEMITE POST
Voice of the Rocky Marmot Empire
Re: Guns in NP, again
March 28, 2009 08:32PM
Soccer? Where's my gun?!

Okay, I know it's the most popular sport in the world.
I'd rather watch grass grow.

For whatever reason, soccer will never be a mainstream sport in the USA. It's simply un-American! What more can I say?

Bee, no offense to your sports tastes though!





Bill
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 28, 2009 08:59PM
wbmyosemite:>I'd rather watch grass grow.<

I laugh; first time I saw baseball, I marveled at how green the grass was, and I thought that it was the most interesting aspect of the game!


>It's simply un-American! What more can I say?<

more laughs; soccer players are bigger celebrities than basketballs' everywhere else in the world! (and the players are quite handsome winking smiley

B
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 09:30AM
I did not bring a gun on Saturday's road trip...but you can bet my little sister did! She also CCW.

I don't know if you've ever been to Marshall Gold Discovery State Historic Park, (where gold was first discovered in CA's Mother Lode in 1848) but there is a large monument to Marshall overlooking the Coloma Valley. I hadn't noticed this before, but it appears John Marshall also carried heat:




avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 09:34AM
Is that a slingshot in that holster?





The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 11:15AM
Why use an acronym that only means anything to a small segment of the population? Call a spade a spade, at least if you're going to advocate something, don't hide it behind letters, like they do with some "sensitive" physical conditions for TV ads. CCW has always been the abbreviaton for counterclocwise; to use it for something like packing a gun makes no sense.

As long as it's done legally, no one can really say much about it, but it's certainly nothing to brag about...or at least why I should be impressed escapes me.

Discussions on boards like that remind me, in some ways, of those 'boom-boom' stereo guys who drive around with the bass going full blast, thinking they're impressing everyone around, where in reality most people think something way different than that. Or the ones that feel they need multiple doberman/rottweiler/pitbull-type dogs for "protection". Same principle...feeling the need to pack a weapon under what most would consider 'normal circumstances' is not really much to brag about, more of an insecurity than anything.

'course, I guess having that 'protection' is why they're all still alive, and the rest of us aren't...

Gary
CCW=counterclockwise
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 12:39PM
Sierrafan wrote:

> 'course, I guess having that 'protection' is why they're all
> still alive


I guess that I really wouldn't call being in a constant state of frenetic paranoia "alive."

The following is a link that I came across a couple years ago while doing a quick websearch:
http://www.earthmountainview.com/
I refer to it as 'The Great Central Valley Nuthouse Clearing Center.' Enjoy. (I hope that it doesn't drive anyone to go CCW.)

By the way, there is a nice website for looking up the meanings of acronyms:
http://www.acronymfinder.com/



Post Edited (03-29-09 12:48)



THE YOSEMITE POST
Voice of the Rocky Marmot Empire
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 02:03PM
szalkowski wrote:


>
> By the way, there is a nice website for looking up the meanings
> of acronyms:
> http://www.acronymfinder.com/
>

>
> Post Edited (03-29-09 12:48)
Now technically an acronym should form a word. The initial letters of something are just an initialism. Unless CCW is pronounced To See Dubya and means something, it is probably not a true acronym.
Or am I being anacronistic?





The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 30, 2009 04:27AM
Frank Furter wrote:

> Now technically an acronym should form a word. The initial
> letters of something are just an initialism.


Congratulations Frank, you may possibly be one of the last three people in the world that remembers the term initialism. (I know that I had forgotten it long ago. Good catch.)

Here is a good explanatory link:
http://searchcio-midmarket.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid183_gci211518,00.html



Post Edited (03-30-09 04:46)



THE YOSEMITE POST
Voice of the Rocky Marmot Empire
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 02:39PM
szalkowski wrote:

> By the way, there is a nice website for looking up the meanings
> of acronyms:
> http://www.acronymfinder.com/
>
From the website, my favorite CCW words:

Coal Combustion Waste
Component Cooling Water
Continuous Composite Worm
Canadian Construction Women
Cold Carcass Weight
Constituent Concentrations in Wastes
Cold Coastal Waters





The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 01:12PM
szalkowski: By the way, there is a nice website for looking up the meanings of acronyms:
http://www.acronymfinder.com/

THANK you for THIS!! I was lost for a bit with the CCW, because I too, thought that it was Counter Clockwise, and when i looked it up -- THATS WHAT THE DICTIONARY SAID. Its hard enough at times to follow the many uses of language, and when obscurity mixes with obtuseness, a glassy-eyed expression takes over..

Sierrafan: but it's certainly nothing to brag about

I was going to avoid any serious comment on this thread, because it puts me in a melancholy mood, but here I go again...

As mentioned in past, I lived and worked in a time and place where guns were required. I trained, carried, and sometimes concealed. It was what you do in a war zone. But, here in the US, I liken carrying a gun to carrying a shovel when one is not digging a hole.

As to the demeanor of how one comports oneself when sidearmed? One time, friend Haim had his shirt untucked all day, and I scolded him to tuck it in. he looked at me sheepishly and said " I cannot" and pulled up the shirt a bit to show me the 9mm carefully tucked in. I was concerned that I had not brought a sidearm that day and haim smiled and said "I shoot, and YOU RUN, Shoshana (he just would not call me Bee!)"

yes, I prefer to run smiling smiley

B



Post Edited (03-29-09 13:33)



The body betrays and the weather conspires, hopefully, not on the same day.
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 05:50PM
Bee wrote:


>
> As mentioned in past, I lived and worked in a time and place
> where guns were required. I trained, carried, and sometimes
> concealed. It was what you do in a war zone.
> B
> Post Edited (03-29-09 13:33)

A little bit serious:
The Israeli example is held up as an example (lower number of gun related deaths, for example, I believe) by both pro and con gun factions.
What I have read:
1. A license is required to own a gun-- no license, no gun
2. Mostly gun ownership or possession is limited to one gun
Correct me if these are incorrect.





The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 05:05PM
CCW is beyond the mentality of Californians

Thank God for Nevada (TGFN)
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 05:27PM
Vince,

And legal hookers.

Jim
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 05:28PM
Vince wrote:

> Thank God for Nevada



I agree.

Unfortunately, some of the inmates have escaped to California. See above: TGCVNCC.
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 05:31PM
This is getting very funny. Melancholy go bye-bye, and just laugh!

B
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 05:35PM
Tom: legal only in every county in the state except Clark and Washoe

The hookers in the other counties have been doing what they do for a living for many years...picture that in your mind
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 07:04PM
Vince wrote:

> Tom: legal only in every county in the state except Clark and
> Washoe

It's population based. The county must have under 400,000 population and then counties under that threshold decide. Washoe County has laws against it as does Douglas County (couldn't they have a couple operating right at Stateline?).

avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 06:00PM
FF: 1. A license is required to own a gun-- no license, no gun
2. Mostly gun ownership or possession is limited to one gun
Correct me if these are incorrect.

Now for the funny part: you are correct for the civilian population, but, Israel has a mandatory service for all citizens, and each citizen after serving his or her 3 year service (used to be 2 years) returns yearly for 30 days of reserve duty. Inbetween this and that, you are "ready reserve" which means that you can be called up at any time...so there is a huge swath of the population that has guns coming and going at any given time (eery to see some dude with beach attire and an Uzi slung over his shoulder)

you are correct that the gun advocate uses Israel and so does the opposition. Its hard for anyone who has either been to war or lived in the condition to think of this discussion as purly academic ping-pong.

B
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 30, 2009 08:02AM
Bee wrote:

> FF: 1. A license is required to own a gun-- no license, no gun
> 2. Mostly gun ownership or possession is limited to one gun
> Correct me if these are incorrect.
>
> Now for the funny part: you are correct for the civilian
> population, ..........
> you are correct that the gun advocate uses Israel and so does
> the opposition. Its hard for anyone who has either been to war
> or lived in the condition to think of this discussion as purly
> academic ping-pong.
>
> B

Interesting State by State gun law analysis by The Onion:
http://www.theonion.com/content/infograph/florida_legalizes_taking_guns
These I like the best:

Idaho—You can have a gun, or a grenade, but not both
Virginia--Non-gun-owning residents must apply for a permit to not own and operate a firearm





The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 07:21PM
The 400K law was aimed simply at Clark County years ago until the Housing Boom/Bubble, then Washoe was included. It's a state law.

No, there are no prostitutes in either Clark or Washoe County. Trust me. The hoes are law abiding.

Nye County is mostly empty (because it's radioactive) but that little corner called Pahrump is a complete mess. It used to be a nice little back-country gateway town with one four-way stopsign.

I try to stick to the out of the way spots in Northern NV. If I need to see trees I go over to Verdi or Truckee. Tahoe's a mess, too, don't go there.
Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 09:36PM
Acronyms, or whatever they are when they don't form a word, are of limited use unless they're common knowledge where they're used.

If I write that I shot a BIF using an RDS but the DR and DOF were inadequate for PP in HDR, it would probably be a fairly stupid thing to post here. In a photography forum, they'd probably understand it, but I still wouldn't use it even there, because it makes the info useless for searching out answers to questions. Get a couple of network guys together, and they might as well speak Chinese, even if you know networking pretty well, but most would know enough to not speak 'acronymese' when speaking to folks that aren't network techs. There's no reason for people to have to learn what such limited-use abbreviations mean.

At any rate, unless it's among those familiar with specific acronyms, why use them?

Vince, you're probably right about Californians not getting it...I do see from above that CCW also means 'cold coastal waters' and I'd take that one any day...I'd much rather be riding a wave in our Central CA "CCW" than packing a gun anywhere, any day. But you know how Californians are...

Bee, I'm sure there are places and situations where packing a gun is prudent or necessary. But some can't go places the rest of us go without any problems. The guy in the Yellowstone forum who said it's like wearing a seat belt...whew. Paranoia strikes deep, so they say. Or is it 'support mental health or I'll kill you...'? 8^) Either way, if I was going to pack a gun around, what would be the point of telling everyone about it? Bragging rights? Ego? Confrontation? Looking for emotional support? Recruiting? What does telling others about it accomplish?

Gary



Post Edited (03-29-09 21:43)



Gary
Yosemite Photo Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/roberthouse/yo
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 29, 2009 11:00PM
Gary: But some can't go places the rest of us go without any problems.

Gary, I fully, 100% agree with you. As I said above, here inthe US a need to carry a sidearm is like to carry a shovel in case you need to dig a hole (not counting my backpack folding shovel smiling smiley Sometimes one generates the situation to facilitate the need. I was told that the sidearm wont save me -- however, my brain will.

B
avatar Re: Guns in NP, again
March 30, 2009 07:19AM
>Vince, you're probably right about Californians not getting it...

Que?
Re: Guns in NP, again
March 30, 2009 10:52AM
bill-e-g wrote:
> >Vince, you're probably right about Californians not getting
> it...
>
> Que?

Referring to the statement a way up the thread:

"CCW is beyond the mentality of Californians"

(assuming, no doubt, that this means the gun advocates' translation of 'ccw', which I'd never heard of til now, and which I'm still trying to erase from my mind as something I'll never need to know 8^)

Gary
Re: Guns in NP, again
March 30, 2009 11:08AM
>Que?

Sorry, It was an attempt at humor...
Perhaps could be construed as slightly racist but no harm was intended...
avatar Carry Concealed Weapons in National Parks
April 01, 2009 08:26PM
Carry Concealed Weapons in National Parks - On March 19, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
issued a Temporary Injunction which enjoins the NPS from implementing or enforcing the Final Rule published in the
Federal Register on December 10, 2008, that amends 36 C.F.R. § 2.4 to allow persons to “possess, carry, and transport
concealed, loaded, and operable firearms within a national park in accordance with the laws of the state in which the
national park, or that portion thereof, is located, except as otherwise prohibited by applicable Federal law.” The court has
ordered that the NPS must enforce the regulation as it appeared prior to the above amendment. This is a Temporary
Injunction which will remain in place until the court makes a final ruling and issues any subsequent orders in this case.
We do not know when that final ruling will be issued. By court order, we are enforcing the regulation as it appeared prior
to the Final Rule of December 10, 2008. Because this involves ongoing litigation, we (NPS) cannot discuss details about
the case other than to refer folks to the court documents.

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login