OREGON SHERIFF GIL
GILBERTSON CONTINUES STAND AGAINST U.S. FOREST SERVICE
by Sarah Foster November 23, 2011 NewsWithViews
Josephine County, Ore. -- Two months
ago Gil Gilbertson, the sheriff of this rural county in
southern Oregon,
drafted a 10-page report
exploring the origins and extent of federal power within
a state and emailed his findings to various parties,
asking for comment.
Since the report was in
rough-draft form he was somewhat
surprised
that it went viral, but it shows there are a lot of
people hungry for information about how much power
(particularly law-enforcement power) the federal
government actually wields within a state, where that
power comes from, and the limits to that power.
Gilbertson continued his
research and recently completed a 13-page revised and
updated version, retitled:
Unraveling Federal Jurisdiction within a
State. It is highly footnoted
with references to statutes and court decisions.
This a “must read” for
anyone concerned about infringements against the 10th
Amendment and federal encroachments in general – like
road closures, Wild Lands and Monument designations,
mining and other resource uses. In other words, this is
for anyone and everybody with an interest – no matter
how casual -- in accessing the public lands, either as a
“resource user” (a rancher or miner) or simply a casual
vacationer who enjoys weekend camping.
“If you’d told me two
years ago that I would be writing such a document, I
would have probably walked away from you shaking my
head,” the sheriff notes in the introduction.
“This paper is a result
of a clash with the federal [U.S. Forest Service] law
enforcement in this county, from citizens complaining of
what can only be described as harassment and violations
of their rights,” he explains. “The first time I
approached the USFS the door closed regarding any
discussion. The USFS advised me to file a Freedom of
Information (FOI) request. “
Eventually Gilbertson was
able to discuss the issue with the Forest Service. “Most
of my questions were answered except for one:
Where does the USFS’s authority come from?
(bold-face in original). The answer(s) were surprising.”
Finding the answer is one
of five tasks he set himself, which he lists as follows:
1. Identify true
jurisdictional authority of the Federal
Government
2. Examine and expose how the
reserved powers of the States are usurped by
federal agencies writing and enforcing their
self-imposed codes and regulations
3. Examine how the health,
safety, and welfare of the Citizens within the
State are undermined
4. Provide a positive and
equitable solution
5. Coordinate with like-minded
Sheriffs to take a formal stance on these
issues.
Mission Creep
To sum up his conclusions
regarding federal authority in a very small nutshell:
the original idea was for the federal government to hold
public lands within a state in trust, with the intention
being for eventual disposal. Gilbertson writes:
“The public lands (out West) were
considered by many as the ‘problem lands.’ However,
the approved procedure, since the passage of the
Resolutions of October 1780, was that the central
government held the lands in trust. Upon a state
being admitted to the Union, the federal government
had the trust authority and obligation to dispose of
the lands for expansion, exploration, occupancy, and
production by setters.
“Slowly, over the years many of
these ‘public lands’ held in trust seemingly became
more desirable to retain, rather than for disposal.
Newly formed federal regulatory agencies worked
their way into existence, each taking an
increasingly expanding role (enter ‘mission creep’).
By 1976 complete and total disregard for the trust
obligation to dispose of public land was made clear
in the Federal Lands Policy and Management Act
(FLPMA), which states: ‘…that it is the
policy of the United States that the public lands be
retained in Federal ownership.’”
Sheriff Gilbertson talked
with NWV about his report, expanding on his views about
the division of power between federal and state
governments.
[Book
predicts the safest place in America to ride out the
coming apocalypse is Josephine County, Oregon]
He strongly questions the
legality and constitutionality of executive orders and
various regulations, as well as laws like FLPMA,
observing that Congress has the sole authority to make
law, not the president, not the agencies. Not
surprisingly he takes sharp issue with President Obama
who has declared he’ll “circumvent the Constitution”
through the use of executive orders.
“The Constitution is
clear on who has police and legislative powers. Those
executive orders are not law,” said Gilbertson.
And while FLPMA is a
congressionally passed statute, it delegates undue
powers to the agencies. “Congress cannot give an agency
the ability to write rules and regulations and enforce
them as if they were law,” he said. “Congress has to do
that. These agencies write their own rules and
regulations as they go along and enforce these as law.”
“The big issue, as I see
it,” he continued, “is that all these things combine.
You have DEQ, EPA, all these federal entities. And as
all these federal agencies evolved over the years,
there’s been mission creep. They decided, well, we need
to fix this; this gives us more powers, and so forth, so
we’ll just write down more rules and regulations. They
were allowed to get away with it for whatever reason,
and now they enforce those as laws. But it’s clearly
stated that that can’t be done -- I spelled that out in
my document,” he said.
Moreover, “Forest
reserves were not federal enclaves subject to the
doctrine of exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the
United States. Local peace officers were to exercise
civil and criminal process over these lands. Forest
Service rangers were not law enforcement officers unless
designated as such by state authority.”
The federal government
sees it otherwise, so in addition to expanding claims
for general regulatory power agencies like the Forest
Service are attempting to extend the reach of law
enforcement authority – a matter that adds to
Gilbertson’s concerns.
“The U.S. Forest Service
and BLM are really stepping outside their authority in
that the Constitution does not give them that,” he
observed. “The Tenth Amendment clearly reserves police
rights to the states.”
Law Enforcement
Power Grab
Sheriffs in other
counties have taken note of this development. In his
report Gilbertson refers to a
one-page position paper
by the Western States Sheriffs’ Association that concurs
with his observations, and in fact grew from his earlier
one. He writes, quoting from the WSSA statement:
“The USFS recently sent out a
communication dated July 15, 2011, titled
Federal Register publication of Final Proposed Rules
[Title 36] 262, 261, and 212 purportedly to
clarify and expand their authority.
On Sept. 21, the Western States
Sheriffs Association responded with a position paper
to this USFS publication by writing: “The
membership of the Western States Sheriffs
Association has reviewed the proposed rule changes
and believes they exhibit the following: (1) an
absolute disregard for the sovereignty of the
individual States, (2) a disregard for the authority
of the Office of Sheriff, and (3) A continued
inability of the Forest Service to understand the
mission and function of its Law Enforcement
component."
Additionally, “This effort is
viewed as an unnecessary and unauthorized expansion
of federal police powers. The ultimate legal and
constitutional authority for the protection of the
public and the land within an individual county is
vested in the Office of Sheriff. The Roles and
responsibilities for the Office of Sheriff are well
enumerated within the laws of each State, and the
Sheriff possesses the authority to extend
enforcement powers as appropriate.
“It is the position of this
committee that the membership of the Western States
Sheriffs’ Association utilizes all appropriate
methods and resources to oppose this effort.”
Title 36 of the Code of
Federal Regulations deals with the U.S. Forest Service.
Section 212 is about Travel Management within the
national forests.
NWV contacted Dave Brown, Sheriff of
Skamania County, Wash., for additional information.
Sheriff Brown is the chair of the Public Lands Committee
of the WSSA that drafted the Position Paper. He said he
hoped to have it adopted by the association at its
annual meeting.
“It has not been adopted,
but my hope is that it will be at our spring conference
next March when it’s presented to the entire
membership,” Brown said.
Brown said his committee
relied for background on the first report Gilbertson
sent out in mid-September. His further observations to
NWV were particularly chilling.
“Essentially they are
nationalizing their ability to do law enforcement. Right
now the ability for them to enforce is based on … rules
that are made at the district ranger’s office or the
forest supervisor’s office,” he said. “They want to take
that authority away from local rangers and forest
supervisors and basically put it into their back pocket
to do consistent enforcement nationally.”
A National Police
Force in the Making
And this is about more
than simply the road closures which are going on in all
the national forests. As Brown sees it, these new
provisions spell the way to a national police force.
The new rules will give the federal law enforcement the
authority to enforce state laws on county roads across
national forest land and on roads outside the national
forests.
Asked if they’d be
enforcing all laws and ordinances on land outside the
national forests, Brown said, “no – They would
essentially be enforcing those state traffic laws that
we would currently enforce and some drug enforcement
laws, abandoned property issues, things like that.”
“Most people don’t follow this or pay attention to it,
but if we don’t [the federal government] will have
everything they want to basically create a national
police force,” he said.
Which is why the proposal
has created a “firestorm” among western sheriffs. “We
recognize it as them kicking us in the face and saying,
‘We don’t really care about you being the sheriff: we
are going to give ourselves this authority,’” Brown
said.
Corralling
Runaway Government
The question for
concerned Americans is how to stop the train, something
easier said than done, though not necessarily
impossible. “The real solution is to encourage Congress
to comply with, and enforce the Constitution with the
intent and guidance as written,” Gilbertson writes. “The
PEOPLE vested the authority in Congress to accomplish
this task. Put law enforcement aback where it belongs,
within the several states. “It is my hope this letter
[report] will serve as an awakening to the public and
for elected officials to exercise the proper conduct to
stop this runaway government. It is also my hope that
Sheriffs throughout the United States will join to bring
our Republic form of government back to the people.”
NOTE: Josephine County is
on the California-Oregon state line across from Siskiyou
County, a county that ranchers, farmers, miners and
their allies are calling “ground zero” in the
intensifying battle over land use and access to public
lands. Siskiyou County is where the federal government,
in lockstep with local environmentalists, seeks to
remove three clean hydro-power dams on the Klamath River
– an action that will wipe out what’s left of the once
vibrant ranching and farming communities. A fourth dam,
in Klamath County, Ore., is also slated for demolition.
On Oct. 22, eight brave
sheriffs – seven from northern California and one from
central Oregon -- put their careers in law enforcement
on the line by addressing an audience of nearly 1,000
people at a rally in Yreka, the county seat of Siskiyou
County. The event was sponsored by Support Rural America
and other groups; the panel was introduced and chaired
by Jon Lopey, Sheriff of Siskiyou County.
“By their testimony these
fine sheriffs’ verbally documented the assault on
sovereignty and the abridgement of individual rights …
that they have personally witnessed,” says retired
Sheriff Jim R. Schwiesow in a recent NewsWithViews
column.
Sheriff Gilbertson was
not among the eight panelists. He and his wife had made
vacation plans and reservations over a year ago and it
was not possible to change these. But although not able
to attend in person, his report on federal jurisdiction
speaks eloquently for him.
The event was videotaped
and posted at
ConstitutionalSheriffs.com.
Contact
Sheriff Gil Gilbertson
Earlier Story
1 -
Sarah Foster:
Oregon Sheriff Stands Up Against the U.S.
Forest Service: July 2, 2011
Archive of
articles by Sheriff Gilbertson
1 -
Unraveling Federal Jurisdiction within a
State, Nov. 8, 2011
2 -
Federal Jurisdiction Within a State:
Posted by US-Observer, Oct. 8, 2011 (10 pages)
3 -
Sheriff Wants Holders of Concealed Weapon
Permits to Remain Private:
11-28-08
4 -
Sheriff Seeking Stable Funding for His
Office: 7-22-08
5 -
Introducing Sheriff Gil Gilbertson
10-30-07
For More
Information
1 -
Public Lands Committee, WSSA:
Position Paper: Re. Proposed Rules
Changes by the U.S. Forest Service Law Enforcement:
Sept. 21, 2011