The old Redriverclimbing.com Forums
https://rrcarchives.com/forums/
"I don't think a court or an insurer would buy it." versus The court or an insurer would not buy it for reason X and there are two precedents Y and Z. Y and Z are both very relevant in that . . .Barnacle Ben wrote:Hey, what makes you think that I'm not that person?caribe wrote: Could someone who has experience with KY Rec. Land Use Law comment with some explanation?
I would be curious to know what the Access Fund has to say on the issue before declaring it dead. Also, I can't seem to wrap my brain around how the FS implements a parking fee and isn't bound by all the same restriction we are talking about?caribe wrote:If there is no way around 'agency law' the parking fee proposal is dead. Hell, even what was said here could be used in court to establish agency. This actually does appear to be an impasse.
It's the federal government. They can, literally, create laws.bcombs wrote:Also, I can't seem to wrap my brain around how the FS implements a parking fee and isn't bound by all the same restriction we are talking about?
Agree, except I would replace "roadside" with the "Red River Gorge region"caribe wrote:RS is oversubscribed. That is the main issue.
+1toad857 wrote:Agree, except I would replace "roadside" with the "Red River Gorge region"caribe wrote:RS is oversubscribed. That is the main issue.
yepToad wrote:Do you think that if people pay a fee that they will feel even more entitled? Fuck bro, I paid my two bits. Rover is coming with and I'm gonna shit where I please. Dude.