Opinion ID: 416443
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Scope of the New Regulations

Text: 17 CCNV contends that it does not fall under the amended anti-camping regulations because it seeks to use sleep as a form of expression and not for living accommodation purposes. We cannot accept this argument. The regulation's exclusion of the intent of the participants or the nature of any other activities in which they may also be engaging, 36 C.F.R. Secs. 50.19(e)(8), 50.27(a) (1982), underscores the evident purpose of the regulations to cover living accommodations that may also be expressive of the demonstrators' message. Indeed, in the prefatory statement accompanying the 1982 amendments, the Park Service indicated that it was amending Sec. 50.19(e)(8) to forbid specifically the use of any such structures, including tents, for the purpose of conducting any living accommodation activity, which was defined to include sleeping. 47 Fed.Reg. at 24,304 (emphasis added). As we stated in CCNV I, the court may rely upon an agency's contemporaneously issued policy statement as an accurate representation of the agency's purpose. 670 F.2d at 1216 (citing Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. EPA, 636 F.2d 1267, 1280 (D.C.Cir.1980)). It thus seems clear to us that these demonstrators come under the new regulations. 6