ABP WINS! - 2006 Management Policies - Final Version

[base311]

Dear ABP Members and the Greater Parachuting Community at large:

It is my distinct pleasure to inform you that, with your support, the ABP has accomplished its first goal: we have convinced the National Park Service to remove the prohibitory language from the 2006 Management Policies.

Several of you have asked if this means you can now jump in NPS units.

EMPHATICALLY NO!

The ABP is currently working with a park unit to begin the planning process there. We will notify you when that process becomes public.

Please see the attached press release for more information.

Thanks, everyone, for your support.

Sincerely,
K. Gardner Sapp
Executive Director
The Alliance of Backcountry Parachutists
P.O. Box 38202
Atlanta, Georgia 30334
gardner@backcountryparachutists.org
www.backcountryparachutists.org

[truckerbase]

Good job, Gardner! And thanks...

[willz]

While I think this is a step forward, I wouldn't exactly call it a win until someone has successfully negotiated a permit. I do appreciate ABPs hard work though.

If anyone wants to read the actual text, please follow the link below. After you read the section on parachuting (8.2.2.7), read section 8.1.1 on "appropriate use." Then read section 1.4.7.1 entitled "Unacceptable Impacts." This section is important because jumping can easily be determined as making an "unacceptable impact" in the park (I thought of 5 reasons right off the top of my head). Regulations are written vaguely by the federal govt on purpose so they can make them say what they want them to say for any circumstance. Thats how the govt keeps the power and if anyone thinks the govt will ever give up its power, you're sorely mistaken. They will always control every aspect of (legal) jumping in the parks. I guess the question is what do you want to give up for a jump?

This is a LONG, hard road and I give kudos to anyone who can stay the course and see it through. I do wonder though, after someone jumps through all the hoops (and there's sure to be many) and they actually get a permit, will they quit the fight, become satisfied with that system, or keep fighting for more open and easier access for all jumpers? Ha! Who am I kidding? By that time there'll be so much politics involved that there will still be very few jumpers who will get to jump under a permit. Anyway, I don't see any jumps happening anytime in the near future unless NPS management decides they want to take a chance and allow it, which is doubtful. I hope I'm wrong though...

My 2 cents.

Actual text here:
http://www.nps.gov/policy/MP2006.pdf

[Raymond Losli]

..." Public use activity may only be permitted when it has been determined to be consistent with park purposes and not to pose an excessive risk to health and safety of visitors, especially visitors. "
---
..." This activity, if permitted, shall be managed."
.
.
What I am reading, YOU are the Visiting Jumper and YOU WILL be Managed . I see nothing gained for 5-years efforts. Except for the addition of the words (BASE jumping) in endless new stacks of federal paperwork.
It's just SOooooooo Much Easier to show Disrespect to rules and abusive power, Laugh at the asinine laws and anal attempts to control personal choice and freedom.
It Does F#ckall Nothing TO ASK for permission and play the game. From those who work-for and suck the Public-Tit for there income and there future. They are like a growing cancer who Beg like whores for federal Money-$$$$ for there working budgets. They have nothing to lose and all to gain from the continues onslaught of complicated bureaucratic regulation, fees and taxes.
What I suggest is to Just Spit in there Faces & go out and jump when you want. Go home then pack & go on with your normal life because THEY care nothing for you or your life. ALL they know and want is to control your life.
.
.

[base311]

..." Public use activity may only be permitted when it has been determined to be consistent with park purposes and not to pose an excessive risk to health and safety of visitors, especially visitors. "
---
..." This activity, if permitted, shall be managed."
.
.
What I am reading, YOU are the Visiting Jumper and YOU WILL be Managed . I see nothing gained for 5-years efforts. Except for the addition of the words (BASE jumping) in endless new stacks of federal paperwork.
It's just SOooooooo Much Easier to show Disrespect to rules and abusive power, Laugh at the asinine laws and anal attempts to control personal choice and freedom.
It Does F#ckall Nothing TO ASK for permission and play the game. From those who work-for and suck the Public-Tit for there income and there future. They are like a growing cancer who Beg like whores for federal Money-$$$$ for there working budgets. They have nothing to lose and all to gain from the continues onslaught of complicated bureaucratic regulation, fees and taxes.
What I suggest is to Just Spit in there Faces & go out and jump when you want. Go home then pack & go on with your normal life because THEY care nothing for you or your life. ALL they know and want is to control your life.
.
.

Ray... hunny... I think you quoted the wrong piece of text.

That language that you quoted above was not present in the final version. I'm not sure where you got that, but I'm figuring either from our 'Five Year EVOLUTION of 8.2.2.7' from our press release, or from the entirely wrong version of the management policies... at least NOT the final version.

While I generally agree with your position on BASE (that it is an outlaw sport that should be conducted on OUR TERMS), I must respectfully disagree with your notion that there's been, "...nothing gained for 5-years (sic) effort," with respect to Backcountry Parachuting. I won't bore you with the minutia of trying to convice you to the contrary; rather, I'd suggest you check out Plato's Parable of the Cave sometime. I think it's in Book VII of _The Republic_.

Love your work.

-Gardner Sapp

Oh... by the way... I don't think the ABP used the words 'BASE jumping' in a single official document that we proffered, so there really has been no, "...addition of the words (BASE jumping) in endless new stacks of federal paperwork."

[Raymond Losli]

Hey ( Those things Happen ) me misreading or misunderstanding anything that I read. Not a slam on you necessarily but I will use any chance I get to bad-mouth the Fed. Park Service, aka: ' the Park Police' . I can not help myself. That is my weakness. They are just Tools & I hate them and all they represent. also: Dont call me "Honey"
I think what aggravates most of the normal people that just go about there normal lives and just want to go out a few days a year and use the Federal Parks for there part time athletic activity like BASE jumping. Is that this is a PRIME example of what it takes just to 'Change Words' . The overwhelming, time consuming, redundant energy to communicate with our governing body and make simple changes in simple WORDS that rule public movement on the very land they own and paid for.
WHY the simplicity and purity of freefall and canopy flight is a Federal Crime. Just for stepping off a park cliff and flying your parachute through the air and landing yourself on the ground. To be tracked down with guns and dogs and thrown in jail, fined, have there personal property seized and left with a Federal criminal record. This is just another PRIME example of what nonsensical madness we as citizens have let the ruling body that oversees our federal park systems turn into.
also: (Not in your Document)
There is always the OLD Trick used to keep athletic activity out of publicly owned lands. In future there always is the possibility of the most widely used tool of language by fed. and State parks for denial of public lands is "sensitive" . the attached word 'sensitive' in front of any living organism especially nesting birds is the most successful tool of the green tree hugging environmental park Nazis.
I myself have been charged with this as a BASE jumper. Along with (not posted) "Trespassing on Public Property". And then charged with "illegal take-off and landing of aircraft" on public property. Even though the 9th Circuit Court decision declared the Parachute is not aircraft.
So I rant. Sometimes I Post my Rants. I will Always hate Park Nazis. I sometimes hate my government. I will always love my country.

My post/rant was in reference to the paragraph-2, management policies 2006: leaked/draft 8-05. of the attached conditions that go along with use and gaining use of "the free Air" that blows through the Public Fed. Park systems.
* 8.2.2.7. BASE jumping the chosen language of choice is still an 'open book' of avenues of discrimination. The language is an open door for denial.
consistent with Park purposes ? Pose excessive risk, health and safety ? this activity if permitted, shall be managed ? maybe require permits and safety certification for each
participating individual ? possible recreational Fee ?
Everyone pretty much agrees that this sucks So...

Then if i read it right ? you are proposing that this Language be thrown out and be replaced by:
8.2.2.7 backcountry parachuting
* Superintendents of relevant national park areas should include backcountry parachuting in their park planning processes and, if determined to be an appropriate use activity within their respective units, such use activity may be allowed. The superintendent may require permits, designate sites or areas, and establish relevant additional conditions for backcountry parachuting in areas where it is allowed. Backcountry parachuting in violation of established conditions is prohibited by 36 CFR 2.17(a)(3).

It looks to me as this argument over acceptable language that would grant permision for us to use 'Our' public land as recreation. Is still an open door to descrimination without end by "language".
"if determined to be an appropriate use activity", "may be allowed", "may require permits, designate sites or areas", "may establish relevant additional conditions"
-
END of Rant.
.
.

[ZegeunerLeben]

...Dont call me "Honey"...

>>That's hilarious!

[Nick_D]

Gardner has graduated from the Robin Heid Writing Workshop . . .

>>Ray... hunny... I think you quoted the wrong piece of text.<<

Don't fret Ray – for a whole year I was – "Nick, Darling!"

>>I'd suggest you check out Plato's Parable of the Cave sometime. I think it's in Book VII of _The Republic_.<<

Comparing that journey of enlightenment with BASE access is classic Robin – and so 70s . . .

NickD
BASE 194

[BackcountryParachutists]

While I think this is a step forward, I wouldn't exactly call it a win until someone has successfully negotiated a permit. I do appreciate ABPs hard work though.

If anyone wants to read the actual text, please follow the link below. After you read the section on parachuting (8.2.2.7), read section 8.1.1 on "appropriate use." Then read section 1.4.7.1 entitled "Unacceptable Impacts." This section is important because jumping can easily be determined as making an "unacceptable impact" in the park (I thought of 5 reasons right off the top of my head). Regulations are written vaguely by the federal govt on purpose so they can make them say what they want them to say for any circumstance. Thats how the govt keeps the power and if anyone thinks the govt will ever give up its power, you're sorely mistaken. They will always control every aspect of (legal) jumping in the parks. I guess the question is what do you want to give up for a jump?

This is a LONG, hard road and I give kudos to anyone who can stay the course and see it through. I do wonder though, after someone jumps through all the hoops (and there's sure to be many) and they actually get a permit, will they quit the fight, become satisfied with that system, or keep fighting for more open and easier access for all jumpers? Ha! Who am I kidding? By that time there'll be so much politics involved that there will still be very few jumpers who will get to jump under a permit. Anyway, I don't see any jumps happening anytime in the near future unless NPS management decides they want to take a chance and allow it, which is doubtful. I hope I'm wrong though...

My 2 cents.

Actual text here:
http://www.nps.gov/policy/MP2006.pdf

The Alliance of Backcountry Parachutists (ABP) is a recreational access organization founded in 2001 to gain backcountry parachuting access to public lands in the United States and other countries. ABP seeks access to national park systems in the United States and other countries equal to that of other recurring recreational activities that are non-powered, non-polluting, non-damaging, and minimally intrusive.
ABP seeks access rights and responsibilities based on the backcountry management model, not the special use permit management model. The reason: Except for the roughly 2-3 minute period when we’re flying through the sky, we are no different than every other hiker or climber in the park. Period. As such, ABP advocates a backcountry parachuting access model that mirrors the type of access hikers, picnickers and climbers enjoy in a given NPS unit. ABP does not seek access via the “special use permit” access mode because said model:

• Separates jumpers from other routine recurring recreational backcountry users; and
• requires that access be controlled by both NPS and/or “outfitter”-type gatekeepers – who ultimately decide who gets to jump – and who doesn't.