which is under the jurisdiction of the United States Forest Service, a federal agency with its own federal law enforcement officers. County sheriffs have concurrent jurisdiction on all forest lands, as do county police and local police depending on location, community boundaries and locals laws. So too do state law enforcement agencies, namely state wildlife wardens, state troopers and state police or bureaus of investigation. Many local gatherings occur in remote areas, with county sheriffs being the primary response. They often request deputies from neighboring counties and officers from area police departments. Additionally, it is common for state conservation and wildlife officers and state troopers to deploy. The Forest Service has often received assistance from the FBI, US Marshalls for fugitives, DEA for drug trafficking and other federal agencies. The USFS has tried to prevent these gatherings from taking place because it denies all others access to the forest and the surrounding area for the duration of the gathering or insisted that a group-use permit be signed, contending that this is standard practice for large groups wishing to camp on public land and that it is necessary to protect public safety and the local environment. Gathering organizers generally contend that the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights give them the right to peaceably assemble on public land and that requiring a permit would violate that basic right by turning it into a privilege to be regulated. In 1984, the Forest Service enacted a regulation requiring a permit for any expressive assembly of ten or more people on Forest Service lands. This was unenforced for a year and a half before the Service attempted to apply it to the gathering in Arizona in 1986. Judge Bilby called attention to the selective enforcement of the regulation, and in any case ruled it unconstitutional, in part because it required expressive assemblies, but not non-expressive ones, to obtain permits. The U.S. government has in the past pressured individuals to be representatives of the Gathering (e.g., to sign a permit), however, this is in violation of the well-established Rainbow principle that "no individual may officially represent the Family as a whole." A number of court cases have resulted from both Forest Service prosecutions and Rainbow Family-inspired legal actions against enforcement activities; the Forest Service found itself rebuffed by the judge in a defendant class suit originating from the 1987 North Carolina gathering, among other