Skip to comments.El Dorado County Sheriff Strips Forest Service Of State-Law Enforcement Power ( CA )
Posted on 06/22/2013 6:12:03 PM PDT by george76
The El Dorado County Sheriff says hes not happy with the U.S. Forest Service, so hes stripping them of their authority by keeping them from enforcing state law within the county.
Sheriff John DAgostini is taking the unusual step of pulling the police powers from the federal agency because he says he has received numerous, numerous complaints.
In a letter obtained by CBS13, the sheriff informs the federal agency that its officers will no longer be able to enforce California state law anywhere in his county.
I take the service that we provide to the citizens of El Dorado County and the visitors to El Dorado County very seriously, and the style and manner of service we provide, DAgostini said. The U.S. Forest Service, after many attempts and given many opportunities, has failed to meet that standard.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacramento.cbslocal.com ...
Give that man a ceeegar!
Must be a California nuance allowing traffic law enforcement powers to be granted on a county by county basis by the Sheriff.
The Sheriff is the highest law enforcement authority. They supercede the Feds, AFAIK.
stripping them of their authority by keeping them from enforcing state law within the county.
We will now aee a showdown with DHS Waffen SS. This ain’t time for popcorn.....it’s push coming to shove.
Guess the growers got sick of being messed with.
Too bad the feds will ask Kamilla to remove him.
Comments at the site are about 99% with the sheriff.
Most of ED Co. is National Forrest.
Sheriff Gil Gilbertson of Josephine County, OR had the same problems with the USFS not so long ago and the two counties are not far apart as the crow flies.
Good to see some sheriff's standing up for states rights.
Two or three more of these an' we might just see a warrant for the arrest of the criminals in the white house .... and beyond.
Every conservative in America needs to get off their mammon-worshiping, lazy, fat ass and elect a Constitutional, pro-2nd amendment sherff in their counties. If you care more about money than your children’s future, you deserve every obuma misery delivered on you.
“why would the feds be enforcing state law?”
Any sheriff in the country can “delegate” law enforcement duties to those he “deputizes.” My guess is that these a$$holes overstepped their agreed to duties and were harassing citizens. I’d like to see more of it. BTW, more than half of the sheriffs in CA support the 2A. The bad actors are the “perfumed princes” in LA, SD, SF and a few other places. You know where all the crimes are committed and they won’t issue you a CCW permit. The rural counties in this state generally will issue you a CCW.
In always figgured you for a Confederate. ;-)
Nice to see the Sheriffs pushing back
The feds are grabbing our 10th Amendment and other rights as fast as they can get away with it.
“We will now aee a showdown with DHS Waffen SS.
There will be no confrontation. The DHS are stupid, 30 IQ slobs who will run at the first hint of a confrontation.
How does sergeant dave know that?
sergeant dave knows that because he communicates with these fat slobs.
If you’re scared of fat ameba blobs squished behind a desk, that’s your problem.
The NFS was charging people to go up the Mt Evans road. Turns out it is Denver property and that had to stop.
I bet THAT felt good!
With the number still on board the Lesser evils bandwaon, and screaming when others call them on it, we are a LONG way from getting people to do that.
“Guess the growers got sick of being messed with.”
There is no connection! The Feds can enforce Federal Law in the National Forests which account for a large portion of the land within El Dorado County. What they can no longer do is stuff like issue traffic tickets and other State LEO functions.
Here is the El Dorado Sheriff’s webpage: https://www.edcgov.us/sheriff/
You will note in the list of “services” he provides includes issuing and maintaining CCW permits. Send him an e-mail and thank him for how he runs his office, I did.
Read the Sheriff’s letter to Joe Biden
Here is my kind of LEO!
I'm not talking about your local yokels.
He can tell the Forest from the Treason.
I see and he’s right.
They should only be enforcing fed laws, not piggybacking state laws for revenue share.
“I bet THAT felt good!”
I bet that I have no idea what you’re talking about, Toad. Clue me in, buddy.
“With the number still on board the Lesser evils bandwaon, and screaming when others call them on it, we are a LONG way from getting people to do that.”
What are you talking about?
The State of California will intervene on the Forest Service’s behalf, and restore their police powers. They will have the same ability as the California Highway Patrol.
Reciprocal agreements. Feds enforce state speed limits along with other traffic laws. County sheriffs often have agreements to patrol federal land to assist federal law enforcement. The agreements are set up at the county level.
I believe that in Utah the State (or a county, I can’t remember the details) tried to halt Forest Service personnel from enforcing state and local laws (speeding, etc.). Court said they couldn’t block it. So you have Feds acting like local cops.
“I’m not talking about your local yokels.”
I’m sorry, but I have no clue what you’re talking about.
Letting us know about those lazy slobs.
I’m talking about how we can’t expect most of the right to lift a finger to do what you suggested when most are fully content to keep electing the same do nothings or worse, more ‘help the Democrat” Republicans. Many posted repeatedly before and after the election that we HAVE to vote for ‘lesser evils’, AKA unprincipled Repubs so that we don’t get Dems.
People with that MENTALity ain’t gonna do what you asked. They will do whatever needed to not rock the boat.
all sheriffs need to remember feds operate in their counties at their discretion.
State patrol has to defer to a county sheriff because in western states, an elected county sheriff trumps the unelected hwy patrol.
I can’t disagree with a word you said. You’re on target, buddy. I think that it’s up to you and me and others like us to wake up these fat-ass conservatives from their bloody mammon stupor.
If not you and me, who?
Hey, Toad. Always appreciate your input. Follow the posts to the end, and let us know what you think.
Semper fi, buddy.
Sheriffs in Colorado have been steppin’ up pretty good too.
Odd things have been going on in this county. It is a heavily Republican county, starting east of Sacramento and ending at South Lake Tahoe. About half the county is federal forest lands.
The county has been very nervous about Agenda 21, because it sees itself a prime target to have its infrastructure destroyed by the federal government, with the idea of muscling the people who live there out. The Forest Service has been at the forefront of this.
Equally odd, a state mandated civil grand jury was tasked to investigate local government in the county, but after a heated dispute, 14 of the 19 members of the grand jury resigned as a group. Therefore a judge dissolved the grand jury.
While they cannot say what happened or why they quit, I suspect that they were being used to pressure county and local officials, and they refused to do it.
Governor Brewer signs HB 2551
June 21, 2013
Governor Jan. Brewer on June 19 signed House Bill 2551 (off-highway vehicles; use; authority; enforcement). The bill clarifies state authority in how it will enforce federal Travel Management Rules regarding off-highway vehicle use on U.S. Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management lands.
The Arizona Game and Fish Commission voted in March to support HB 2551, but made its support contingent on adoption of amended language that would address the commissions concerns about unintended limitations on officers ability to enforce resource damage laws or road closures for public safety purposes, such as during forest fires. Subsequent amendments addressed the commissions concerns.
The legislation, sponsored by Sen. Chester Crandell (R-Heber) and Rep. David Gowan (R-Sierra Vista), passed the Arizona Senate and House in May.
The bill permits Game and Fish officers to enforce laws related to habitat damage and other duties important to the departments mission, while giving officers discretion in enforcing federal travel management rules that are lower priority or that might impede achieving wildlife management objectives.
The Arizona Game and Fish Commission has expressed long-standing concerns that the new forest Travel Management Rules put undue constraints on reasonable public access, are inconsistent across the different forests and therefore confusing to outdoor recreationists, and could impede the commissions and departments ability to meet wildlife management objectives.
In addition to the Arizona Game and Fish Commission, SB 2551 is supported by county sheriffs and county supervisors throughout Arizona.
“One purpose of this legislation is to reaffirm the department’s leading role in protecting wildlife habitat, while ensuring that the use of our law enforcement resources are not spent on efforts that, in some instances, unreasonably reduce the opportunities for Arizonas families to fish, hunt, camp or enjoy wildlife viewing or responsible off-highway vehicle recreation, said Kurt Davis, a member of the Arizona Game and Fish Commission.
Davis said the departments education programs, scientific evaluation and law enforcement activities related to protecting wildlife habitat will continue, while balancing the ability for Arizonans to enjoy the outdoors.
This legislation simply strengthens the department’s legally recognized role to manage wildlife across all our public lands and ensures that role is more appropriately recognized and respected, he said.
He’s an elected official, answerable to his constituents, isn’t he?
Multiple rural county sheriffs from Utah testified bout the abusive use of police power by Bureau of Land Management rangers or forest protection officers with the U.S. Forest Service.
They are asserting it is time to rein in the authority the agencies should have never been allowed to exercise.
Ya know, this is pure BS. Under the doctrine of dual sovereignty, the federal law applies directly to an individual and the state law applies directly to an individual. There are two jurisdictions. If the laws conflict and the federal law is Constitutional, it pre-empts the state law.
The Sheriff cannot obstruct a federal officer from applying federal law in his jurisdiction. He can ask to be notified and present when the feds apply their law, but he cannot prohibit them.
This is the case Sheriff Mack allegedly claims gave local Sheriff’s primacy:
United States District Court
District of Wyoming
Our office has been receiving inquiries regarding the case of Castaneda v. United States, No. 96-CV-099.
This was a civil case arising out of an alleged entry into an apartment by law enforcement officials in June of 1993. The Plaintiffs, who were staying in the apartment,
alleged that the officials violated their civil rights. They filed an action against the United States, unnamed INS agents, Big Horn County, the County Sheriff, and unnamed
The complaint was filed in the Federal District Court for the District of Wyoming in May, 1996. The federal defendants were primarily represented by attorneys with the
Constitutional Torts Branch of the Civil Division of the Department of Justice. The County defendants were represented by non-federal attorneys. The case was settled
following a settlement conference in 1997. The court did not rule on Plaintiffs’ claims or any other legal issues in the case.
After the settlement conference, Big Horn County Sheriff, David M. Mattis, issued a “Policy.” In the “Policy,” the Sheriff purports to impose conditions upon federal law enforcement operations in the County.
We have learned that it has been reported, erroneously, that the court made a legal ruling in the Castaneda case regarding the authority of federal law enforcement officials
to conduct operations in the County. There was no such ruling or decision. Instead, the court simply granted a motion, submitted jointly by all the parties, to dismiss the case because the parties had settled.
This Court has never issued an order which would serve to limit the lawful activities and duties of federal law enforcement officers and other federal employees in the District of Wyoming.
Furthermore, this Court has never made the comments attributed to it which purports to advise state officers they can prohibit federal law enforcement officers or agents from entering a Wyoming County. Those alleged quotations are utterly false. Any person who interferes with federal officers in performance of their duties subjects themselves to the risk of criminal prosecution.
William F. Downes
Chief Judge, District of Wyoming
I think El Dorado I a lot like my county. The Grand Jury probably tried to subpoena state agents for violation of local rights. Their County Counsel likely told them they couldn’t. They likely tried to establish their own independent court and were told they didn’t have that power either.
The prosecutor is the highest law enforcement authority in the county.
The armed forestry officers here mostly chase away kids operating 4x4’s in restricted areas. Some areas are set aside for nesting or mating or species maintenance. Occasionally, they’ll arrest somebody for hunting or people carrying machine guns. (Seriously.) The relationship with the Sheriff is, apparently, very cordial. If the Sheriff has taken this action it indicates that the federal officers are doing something that is outrageous. Strip searches, perhaps. This is a very unexpected action and should merit a federal probe into the actions of its employees.
I’m sure Eric Holder will get right on that last.