utilizes permits to graze cattle are in the main lands managed by the bureau of land management and or the united states for service now has a public lands rancher mr stone has depended upon his ability to graze on the public land there was seven months afterwards there was a one line statement made by the regional forester that he considered accessories to be willful that occurred seven months after the actual terminations permit curd so the first time in october first mr stone was no longer allowed the benefits of his license at that point and seven months later the forest service looking back during the ministry review process made a one line indication that it was it was  willful that statement the size of being after the fact in our opinion beyond when it should have occurred is contradictory to the position the forest service took at the time of the show cause letter which occurred july twelfth response to mr stone's appeal and it was a response of documents that was filed by the forest service in response to the field mr stone filed where mr stone said basically the had the opportunity and they believe that to be willful to say yes yes it is this is that time they didn't think there was any reason that made a difference as a lot of validated did what precludes them from signing and going back and not changing the facts but looking at the same facts and clause letter inform him of his most recent violations and gave him the opportunity to remedy violations so right there is what the forest service at that time believed to be here's a notice of the violations and your opportunity if you're right there if they willful but the facts of this case support a conclusion that it was willful so the statutory notice requirement doesn't apply what's wrong with that well that's that's that's the typical post hoc rationalization that's going back that's making a decision for one reason under you know as an agency and then when finding out that that's incorrect or have and have in the court this court and i started to determine that that's that process is incorrect went back and go well it may be incorrect for this reason but we'll find another reason to do it i mean the reason they terminated  back to the agency to have that done or any kind of opportunity for mr stone to go up there and show him prove that it wasn't well for me all we have and we were assuming that we don't actually have a finding of wolf and we have a one line statement by the regional force that he explained he considers excess use to got to rain up there that the cattle can go back and forth and you're basically spend your time rounding them up and i think the record would reflect that mr stone did work with the forest service in fact during the process of his term permit he had an increase of cattle right and that's because according  holder to have you know being given notice of the violations alleged violations an opportunity to respond if you're taking that right away you have to just to be consistent with the statute give them opportunity  that was we can do it doesn't matter it's willful because mr stone made the comment this was not willful and they said that's irrelevant it's not they also stated that you have your opportunity notice to comply if they believe that they were if they believe that was  show cause letter isn't sufficient because it's doing two things at one time and that's why you know answer the questions somewhat for you the other is too and th through to sixty nine granted him another another review in august of two thousand and two and found that because many if not all of mr stone's permit violations appear to have been willful section five fifty eight simply does not apply on to notice an opportunity to comply i'm not going to take my twenty minutes unless the court has any specific questions what i would like to just address those briefly if i may i do think that the amount of notice killer in this case seems much least in the past and finally i'd like to point out you know we do have an endangered species issue here and this is an empty exercise on the part of the forest service in terms of protecting the nation's resources at this point  scene in the allotment his change there have been fires there has been drought more species have been identified in the neighborhood and it's not it's not as if this is a fugitive action against mr stone for no purpose whatsoever but the agency i think the record  to help him come into compliance if there are no further questions i don't think so thank you very much finding wolf before they initiated the action and that's what that stands for doesn't it doesn't give it its inability just to go through the process and disregard the requirements under five five eighty and then after the fact so by the way it's they didn't do that the reason they didn't do that is because they believe that they were following by five eighty through this show cause whether they believe that's what it was just like they were and choose to be they believe that's that was a process the forest service had was we're going to follow this we're going to give you a show cause letter give you thirty