Jim, and others; Let me start by stating that I am not an attorney. I have no legal training at all, but, to me, (with all due respect) the tone and content of the letter seems mixed and may not be the draft you would want to send, if in fact you are in line to start a serious, protracted challenge of their interpretation of Federal Law. Suggestion; ; I would not start this discussion of the Rangers activity , no matter how out-of-bounds, using the words " capricious, unconstitutional, or illegal"-- they sound too confrontational, especially in a first contact letter. ; While I think that all of your points of discussion are honest , factual, and passionate, I believe the discussion should, in the first volley, stick to one theme- - the points enumerating geocachers concern and consideration of the surroundings is a great place to start the discussion! However, I believe when the switch is made toward the legal definitions and supporting information, the tone of the letter changes. I think sticking to one argument would be better as a strategy; ; put our concerns and questions to THEM; Let THEM respond, with their reasoning and arguments, letting them state what statutes or interpretations they base their arguments on-- this will give us a basis on which to respond. ; At some later date it will be necessary to bring out a somewhat more "legalese response" to their arguments- I would hope we may have an attorney as a member to frame this response . I hope this makes some sense. budlvr40 (bob osterholt) I hope the above