> By the way not sure where you are reading that the bucket was "abandoned"...I think Wasson was occupying the campsite when he was cited, not 100% sure of that though.

Well, I am not 100% sure either, but from my reading (last para. pg. 4), it sounds like he left the site, and FS moved in to clean up. But maybe they moved in and cleared it all out while he was still occupying. So you could be right.

SC wrote: > The Wasson case is quite interesting. But it does not address the situation that Inyo N.F., in all backcountry areas of its jurisdiction except the Whitney Zone, does not require the carrying out of human waste. How would the courts look at the situation of unequal enforcement of §261.11(d) by Inyo?

eje67 wrote: Can you flesh this out a little bit?

Not sure what more info you want, but I'll try. It goes along with the above:
SierraNevada wrote> I think it would be a tough sell to a judge that every backpacker is required by 36 CFR §261.11 to carry their human waste out of every National Forest, even their waste water (pee?).

eje67 wrote> I could definitely see that being a sticking point for a judge.

Adding to that:
Ever since the Forest Service has come into being, it has been standard accepted practice for anyone using the backcountry to dig catholes and bury their human waste. Now, with Inyo destroying their receptacles for human waste (torching the toilets), they are selectively (only in the Whitney Zone) requiring people to carry out their human waste. Yet it is still acceptable practice to bury human waste everywhere else in the Inyo backcountry.

With the commonly accepted practice of burying human waste, and its not being specifically described in §261.11, it leads me to say the phrases in §261.11 are all that apply:
(b) ...leaving refuse, debris, or litter in an exposed or unsanitary condition.
That implies burying human waste is acceptable.
(d) Failing to dispose of all ...sewage, waste water... by removal from the site or area, or by depositing it into receptacles or at places provided for such purposes.
Specifying "sewage, waste water" appears to mean septic tank effluent from recreational vehicles.

Given the commonly and historically accepted practice of burying human waste, I think it could be argued that nothing in §261.11 could be used to enforce use of WAG bags.

(I should add, that I fully agree with SierraNevada that everyone should do the right thing and use and pack out WAG bags. I am only trying to focus on what the law requires and what could be legally enforceable.)