Conference calls

[hippiestead]

Ok, I'm going to admit it, when it comes to this Rainbow political stuff I am completely lost!!! I've been trying to relay info so more folks will know what's really going on but it's difficult to sort the opinion from fact (not to mention the fact that I don't trust the government, which makes it very hard for me to post anything could be construed as 'siding with the man') As far as I know, this year has been one of the more interesting years for Rainbow politics...lots of folks involved in various conference calls, meetings and so on...& as far as I can tell, the info is available to everyone that cares to subscribe to the agr mailing list (not agr the group...you sign up for the mailing list thru welcomehome.org (http://welcomehome.org/) ). But for those who do not care to subscribe but want to have a general idea of what's up on the political side, here's the basic lowdown:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark Rey, the undersecretary for the Department of Agriculture sent the following letter to be shared with All Rainbows:



>> Based upon our conversations, as well as conversations with other Family members over the last few weeks, I would like to offer the following clarification of the Forest Service's approach to the 2007 Gathering. The Agency's authority to require group use permits is in place and has been upheld by the Courts. However, the Forest Service does have discretion with respect to the enforcement of this authority. Pursuant to that discretion, and recognizing the unique nature of the Rainbow Family, we propose the following:
>>
>> 1. The Rainbow Family would recommend 2 or 3 alternate locations for the Forest Service to consider as soon as possible. Initial scouting of sites should be done in cooperation with local Forest Service personnel. In the future, this date should be much earlier to allow the Forest Service adequate time to analyze the potential sites.
>>
>> 2. The Forest Service would quickly evaluate the sites and give the Rainbow Family an answer on suitability before Spring Council.
>>
>> 3. Beginning at Spring Council, an operating plan would be prepared in
advance of the gathering in collaboration with the Rainbow Family. The plan
would be subject to mutual modifications as the Gathering sets up. No
permit would be issued. The Forest Service would exercise its discretion and refrain from any enforcement of a permit requirement provided that the operating plan is followed. Failure to comply with the operation plan will result in enforcement of the current regulations.
>>
>> 4. All laws will be enforced on the National Forests similar to other recreation gatherings and forest visitor use.
>>
>> 5. A declaration of emergency will be for the purpose of addressing resource impacts.
>>
>> Please feel free to circulate with other members of the Rainbow Family.
>>
>>
>> MARK REY


This letter was sent out in late April.

[hippiestead]

1st Conference call:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

At 11:38 AM 6/1/2007, peacetri...@wildrockies.org wrote:


* * * * * * * * * * * * * April 20, 2007


10:00am
Telephone conference call:


Brian Michaels
Sephra *- scribe


Ric & Cheryl - summerbreeze and raven
Thomas - Peace Park, D.C.


UnderSecretary of Agriculture Mark Rey
John Twiss - Chief Law Enforcement for Forest Service


SB- Summer Breeze
RG- Raven
Thomas- freedom of assembly


SB- OP not a signature but volunteer will attend
and cooperate she doesn’t want to be ticketed
wants to assist in health and safety issues with
local fs personal. Willing to be a contact person
as long as she is given a way out-she does not want to be targeted or
arrested.


BM- wants to know if this year is going to be
like the years before the Regs were in place.
Wants to know what is on Rey’s mind.


MR- very consistent and has some authority for
bending rules but the family has to do some
things different *especially earlier site selections


BM-did you rec and review the scouting report (email)


MR- yes rec.


BM-wants assurance no road blockade and violence,
arrest, confiscation. Wants to develop some type
of insurance plan from the gov. for cooperative
dialogue with scouts and resource.


MR-prosecution for scouting? is that what are you
are asking. He lost the point?


BM- yes once scouts are exposed they feel like
they are targets for LEO because they are on the
sites early doing pregathering work*that is what
has led to the clandestine matter we now do. We
would like assurance that they will not be
targeted because they are already known to LEO


JT-he would recommend to Rey that all scouts
working w/ the Gov to select site and prepare
would rec no violations could or would be issued.
But any unannounced or deceptive scouting could and should be ticket.


BM- wants signed document to assure


JT- as long as it is under 75


BM- what do they do to make people disappear?
Once the 75th person shows up what do you expect
them to do? They cannot and will not send them away.


JT- how many people does it take?


BM- how can we do this when we do not know?


Raven- water and parking are the largest main pre issues


SB-depends on people and time of year, if you
have questions about the process then please come
to the council and you can see how it works. You
have been extended an invitation. If they believe
they will be targeted then they will be fearful.
If you want more time then that could bring more numbers.


JT- the timing of your decisions is not working
for us. The time issue is the most unresolvable
issue we have. We will not bend on it.


Raven- due to weather conditions the water issue
is sometime impossible to tell until closer to the gathering time.


SB- a solution to early site selection
precriteria could be to have alternative sites
within a local. If an agreement for an
alternative site. Looked at sites with Tim *Lynn
he stated they needed something from MR re:
alternative means of compliance. Talks about N.
Mexico and early site selection this really can
happen (named a lot of W. Virginia gov. people) She feels targeted.


JT- pick 3 sites tentative document for this
year-preapproved site-no prosecution because it will be legal gathering


BM-will you put in writing-Gov will email us on
Monday w/ a statement re: alternative means and OP.


SB- what about people who wont or don’t check in w/ the Gov.?


JT- question we need to know early not at spring council


BM- firm language not wishy washy we can run
smoothly but it will take 2-3 years to really establish a smooth processes.


JT-will send us some language to circulate and go
over on Tuesday and then we can talk again and
work this out if satisfied. Members will come
forward and tell where gathering will be.


SB-appeal/grievance can sue gov and that is okay?


Raven-follow up appointment


JT- Let’s wait and see how it goes w/ BM (he is
the one who will take care of circulating and a
good constant contact point for us to talk to.)


emails provided
Raven/Thomas- suggestions
1. * * * * OP
2. * * * * Excessive force
3. * * * * regional as opposed to annual


Doesn’t tell LEOs what to do but once they say
that the family is cooperating then the locals
back off and are happy to cooperate. They have
withheld resource people back they now will be much more active


He wants to move on and spend his 4th of July some where else.


BM- let’s try try for next year to keep you out.

[hippiestead]

2nd Conference call:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

May 01, 2007


10:00am
Telephone conference call:


Brian Michaels
Sephra - scribe


Garrick Beck


John Buffalo


And


Tom Millet- [Office of General Counsel]


Mark Rey [Under Secretary of Agriculture for
Recreation
and
Resources]


John Twiss [Chief of Law Enforcement for U.S.F.S.]


Small chit chat and introductions


MR- We got BM and GB comments and likes a lot of
the formulation. It included several things that
we had not thought of. But we still like our
formulation better. Especially as to having a
specific date agreed to in the letter.


BLM ­ How do you want to refer to this missive
you are sending us? As a letter? as a directive?


MR ­ (he chuckles) It could be a letter, a
communiqué. Can we refer to it as a “Proposal from the Forest Service?”


BLM -Sure that would be fine. That’s just what it is.


JT- The #1 thing we want to work on today is:
Advanced notice of location of the
gathering. This is necessary, which creates a
time line in order to help local resource
planners prepare for the local impact and to help
better accommodate the gathering. TIMING ISSUE is
the largest and most important issue to the gov.
at this point. Our idea is to have 2 sites by May
10. If not that date then what date? Why would
the family need longer? We want ­ no, we must
have this far before your spring council.


BM- There are problems with having to have a date
certain right now. None of the people on the
phone here today can give you that answer because
we are not the ones one the ground actually doing
the scouting work. That date has to come from the
decisions of the scouts. We can take information
and relay it, but we cannot give you an answer
when the sites will be found. You wouldn’t want
to rely on our answer anyway. I think we have to
realize this is a 2-3 year process in order to
build a trust between both sides. It will take at
least that long to get all the people involved in
the hands-on work comfortable with a cooperative
way of thinking and operating at the gatherings.
So once again, your question needs to go to
Spring Council, to be decided by the people who are actually on sites
looking.


GB- None of us on the phone here today has
actually been scouting in many years - if even
ever. But I am in regular contact and can
communicate with scouts on the ground and pass
the information that we are discussing here
today. I can request their input regarding time
line issues. There is a strong feeling that with
an Operating Plan that works, in place, the
people will, in the future, assist in earlier
site selection. It is really my belief that we
are going to be able to come up with an Operating
plan that will satisfy everyone’s needs.


BM - well that would and certainly is our sincere
hope. But we do not and would not even try to
answer or speak for anyone other than ourselves
as to any certain or specific issue or question.
I just want to get that straight and clear at
this time. These conversations we are having are
hopefully establishing a framework for us to work
in -- just like before the regs. were put into place.


GB- The biggest problem with us scouting specific
sites earlier is that in the late summer and fall
sites either have different water and spring flow
conditions or the sites get snowed in and it’s
impossible to scout them. It just can’t be done
until after snowmelt in the springtime.
Otherwise, sites that look dry in the fall are
soggy the next spring or visa versa.


BM-We cannot make any definite promises. It is
important you not walk away from these
discussions expecting something to happen that we
cannot in good faith tell you is going to happen.
But we are willing to try and communicate with
the family and resolve your questions especially
since you have been so accommodating to us so far
in our telephone discussions. By meeting in
person and on the telephone and having an open
dialogue like this with different people present
has really shown a good faith effort on your part. It is appreciated.


JT- The key stumbling block is the family’s
timing process- what about changing the time line
as far as scouting potential sites?


GB-Realistically, scouts could be able to get you
some possible sites earlier if we have a
co-operative experience this year, and if we
begin checking possibilities before winter.


BM ­ Okay what are your other concerns today?


MR -When would we be starting to develop an Operating Plan?


BM- Well here in turn is the problem: when the
permit requirement was not in place it was much
easier for us to do the leg work during scouting
and seed camp. But once the over 75 people
requirement started it became hard for the people
on the ground to work together with your resource
people and do the necessary planning.


GB ­ HHHere’s how it could possibly work: Scouts
provide you with two or three possible locations-
pre-reserve these sites - in time for you to do
the necessary review for your pre-approval.
Then these sites get brought to Spring Council
for a decision. But you, your resource teams
begin to develop Operating Plans right then, just
as soon as you pre-approve the sites. The details
of the land uses, parking, particular routes for
trails, etc. can be developed once a site is
consensed on and as people arrive on the chosen
site resource rangers and gatherers can work out
the myriad details together. But there’s an
Operating Plan begun just as soon as a site is pre-selected as a
possibility.


MR- When is Spring Council?


{DEAD SILENCE}


BM- ah I don’t know


GB- um


Buffalo- I don’t know


BM-Usually the beginning of June


JT- Okay back to a timeline ­Can scouts provide 2
or 3 sites soon enough for us to evaluate? You
know this means reviewing on maps, on the ground,
checking with local resource contracts: grazing
rights, water rights, checking on historical
sites, native and ancient peoples’ uses, etc.
This has to be done in time for us to provide you
with our recommendations before or by Spring
Council. That way we would have through June to
work out the balance of the OP. The OP should and
could be amended as we go. This only makes sense
and modifications are okay as long as they are
made in good faith. We cannot be led to believe
one site and then changed at the last minute; we
want to be kept in the loop and informed along
the way. This will also allow us to provide
resources that may have been and were kept back in the past.


GB- I think that scouts have suggested the
McLellen Lake Site (this should and could be
looked at as a good faith effort already made.)


JT- May 10 would be the latest date for the
Forest Service to get sites reviewed and get the
info back to the family before Spring Council. We
would hope to ask the family to make the decision
on the site by mid-May in order to prepare the
community and allocate the necessary resources.
This really does not give the forest service much
planning before it is already June and as we all
know people start to gather at the beginning of
June and then we could have chaos going on and this is what we hope to
avoid.


GB- The problem I foresee with this is that the
earlier a site is chosen the earlier people are
going to come and start setting up. Not just
people who are setting up kitchens and medical
and water lines; people who are coming just for
the Gathering. The moment we have a site picked
people are going to start showing up, and if we
don’t have our infrastructure in place:
sanitation, recycling, all of that, then we won’t
be able to handle that influx of people.


JT- [W]e don’t really see this as a problem.


GB ­ If we pick a site by mid-May instead of
seeing the Gathering process simplified we are
going to see it stretch out longer and longer. We
are going to have a 10-week Gathering from the
middle of May until the end of July instead of
the 5 or 6 weeks we now have. I guarantee you
that if we pick a site in the middle of May we
will end up having two whole Gatherings: one over
the Memorial day weekend and then another one
over the Fourth of July. We aren’t prepared for
that. You aren’t prepared for that. No one’s prepared for that.


BM- [O]nce again I have to go back to seeing this
as a three year process to build this framework
we need to trust each other. Now it is May 1st,
May 15 is not feasible. What do we do about this year?


GB- We have 1 site pre-approved by the fs. Let us
get a couple of more to you as soon as we can. But we need to avoid tension.


BM- Okay for this year we need to get potential
sites to you as quickly as possible and really
try and get this year under our belt. What can we
do for this year? We need to hear from you about
the arrangements; obviously, we cannot make a
brand new start but we need to be realistic.


GB- The Forest Service and the Family have come
so far and we do not want to see this derailed.
We want to get site approval asap. I want to
thank the gov and the fs for its respect of our
gathering and its process. I also think that fall
scouting is a possibility. We want to make this
thing work. As for this year, as we know it is
already May 1st, and I do not want to promise
what I can not deliver. Rushing is not a wise way to approach this.


BM- This is going to take a lot of planning and
the more pre-understanding we all have then the
better this will all go. We were well received
once we brought in the resource people from CO to
talk to the people on the ground. We need to
communicate. Resource needs to be speaking with
the scouts directly by re-igniting their trust
(Sailor’s report email referred to) It will take
at least 2 or 3 years down the road to off set
the last number of years. Possible the best thing
we can do this year is to do an OP and gather.


MR ­ I am going to suggest as a timeline that
scouts will recommend 2 or 3 alternative sites as
soon as possible and we ­ the Forest Service ­
will evaluate these 2 or 3 alternatives as soon
as possible, before your Spring Council. Then you
will tell us at your Spring Council what site is
chosen and we can begin an Operating Plan from
there. The timing of this will show good faith.


GB- Good faith and the government’s word in
writing can help properly satisfy everyone.
Wording is very important as to how people will perceive things.


BM- What about a statement regarding legal gathering?


JT ­It will still not be legal because the
regulations are still on the books but the agency
has the discretion how to enforce and can choose
not to enforce the regulations in this situation make it a legal gathering.


GB- (defacto-custody story about 3 cases where
the gathering was deemed illegal and used in a
child custody cause in state courts.)


JT- We can not and will not address any specific
court or custody causes. If we are going to take
BM’s suggestion, and if there were conflicts with
other legal resource users, then this is an
equity problem and it opens us up to a lot of
different legal problems. In order to feel
justified we need time to work out any potential
resource conflicts- give and take. We don’t want
to be putting ourselves out there. We would have
to have recourse to ticket the illegal gatherers
in the event the Operating Plan was not followed.


GB- The legal/illegal term is very tricky. Lawful
under the OP but not lawful under permit
guidelines? Can the locals go to the gathering
and not feel like they are attending an illegal
gathering or like they are committing a crime?
How can the scouts and other early gatherers feel
safe from discrimination and early targeting for
tickets? Can it be decriminalized?


BLM - If you use your discretion not to enforce,
then what about the ‘legal’ gatherers liability
if they went about and followed the process?


Tom- the lawyer. We understand that it is hard to
do a timeline but as you can imagine it would be
equally unrealistic to think the gov could change
the whole regulatory process. What we can do will
not address every issue such as the ones you
bring up, but this approach will allow us to
develop an Operating Plan in which we will be
willing to allow the Gathering to occur. The
remedy for us, if the Operating Plan doesn’t work
out is to enforce the regulation. There is no
procedure to enforce an operating plan on the
family. We want to be as creative as we can
possibly be. A system is in effect. And we have
to work within that. As you know, it is a long
process to change regulations. We have to start
with the discretion not to enforce the regulation
and see if this works. We can look at bringing
the Operating Plan into the regulatory framework later.


BM- We understand this bridge needs to be built
gently. But we need to be able to assure people
attending that they are in no personal liability for attending.


JT- The gov is going to want everyone to know it
is still not a legal gathering but we are willing
to work with it as long as the OP is followed.


BM- What about the declaration of emergency-
could it only be issued for resources
conservation not for law enforcement purposes?
That would make a big difference locally, in the
press, in the understanding of the public. These
words will make a great difference to folks in
believing what you say. I understand there is a
drastic resource impact when we come into an
area. People, I have been told by many, are more
likely to trust this offer if you make it a
resource emergency and not law enforcement.


MR ­ We’ll look into that as a possibilty.


GB ­ This has been a long road, over 35 years of
Gathering, in all kinds of ups and downs with the
Forest Service. You know I believe it is a force
for Peace on this planet. It started here in the
National Forests of this country and it’s all
over the world now. You are part of this process
and I hope these talks with you will be seen in
the future as a real step toward peace.