"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Greg" wrote in message
...
The thing that makes this unconstitutional is that there is a federal
regulation. This is a state issue.

So are a number of other wildlife regulations. I suspect it has to do with
one of two things:

1) If the Feds do a study first, they make the regulation

2) If a state stands to **** off a group of some sort, politicians find a
way to get the Feds to make the rule. This keeps the in-state blowjob
cycle
intact. We used to call it "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours". Now
it's the blowjob cycle.

Some Florida politician didn't want to **** of boaters, so he arranged for
the Feds to do it.

No. Save the Manatee sued the Feds and got a "back-room" settlement. Gale
Norton decided not to enforce the settlement and was forced by a
Clinton-appointed US district court judge (Emmitt Sullivan--the same guy
that ordered the release of Cheney's task force energy documents) to enact
the zones or be held in contempt. Sullivan sits on a bench in DC, not
Florida...and knows nothing about manatees except what SMC tells him.

Here's the enemy:
http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/sullivan-bio.html

In response, Norton instituted the zones...but the Feds don't have the
resources to enforce them. :-)

Now, local law enforcement is refusing to do the Fed's dirty work. :-)