Basejumper.com - archive

Somebody help me here...I have seen somewhere that there is a process to appeal the denial of a special use permit.

The recent ZION permit denial because " Parachutes are considered a form of mechanized transport" seems to be one worth appealing.

Pretty thin.

I am sure there is a time limit for filing the appeal, and the clock is tickin...

Remember that this isn't an application for a special use permit. It's a Park Planning Process. Special Use permits are one time deals, where the planning process gives guidelines under which the special use permits are issued.


Having spoken with Ray O'Neil (he's the "for questions ask..." guy on the Zion letter), it sounds like the classification of BASE as "mechanized" was simply adopted from BLM and Forest Service guidelines.

Interestingly, the BLM and Forest Service basically allow BASE (which they consider mechanized) in the same places they allow other mechanized activities (mountain biking, for example). This means that BASE is not allowed in Wilderness or "recommended Wilderness" areas on BLM, Forest Service, or National Park Lands.

That leaves two ways forward:

1) Convince someone, somewhere that BASE is not "mechanized" and ought to be grouped with hiking and climbing, rather than with the "mechanized" group of mountain biking, ATV riding, snowmobiling and hanggliding.

2) Focus on gaining access to non-Wilderness areas (that allow mechanized activities) inside the National Parks.

It sounds like the second course of action is going to be the easiest, but the first is probably the one we want (since most of the really big cliffs are classified as Wilderness), especially because if there is a system that allows access to non-Wilderness areas it gives the NPS a good argument for excluding us from the big walls ("hey, we're willing to give you all the slider down stuff, now run along and play nicely...").

My first thought about the "mechanized transport" line was that the NPS has invented another reason to say no.

At Lake P**** in the mid-90's, BASE jumper's arguments that parachutes should be classified as "aircraft" were shot down. Since aircraft are permitted to land on the surface of the Lake, classifying a parachute as an aircraft would be to our advantage.

So I guess the definition of a parachute is pretty dynamic....

From Dictionary:
par·a·chute (pr-sht)
n.
1. An "apparatus" used to retard free fall from an aircraft, consisting of a light, usually hemispherical canopy attached by cords to a harness and worn or stored folded until deployed in descent.
2. Any of various similar unpowered devices that are used for retarding free-speeding or free-falling motion.
v. par·a·chut·ed, par·a·chut·ing, par·a·chutes
v.tr.
To drop (supplies or troops, for example) by means of a parachute.
v.intr.
To descend by means of a parachute.

Does not mention anything about machine or mechanized. Note the definition refers to a parachute as an apparatus.

ap·pa·rat·us (p-rts, -rts)
n. pl. apparatus or ap·pa·rat·us·es
1.
a. An appliance or device for a particular purpose: an x-ray apparatus.
b. An integrated group of materials or devices used for a particular purpose: dental apparatus. See Synonyms at equipment.
2.
a. The totality of means by which a designated function is performed or a specific task executed, as in a system of government.
b. A political organization or an underground political movement. Also called apparat.
3. Physiology A group or system of organs that collectively perform a specific function or process: the respiratory apparatus; the digestive apparatus.
4. The critical and source material that accompanies an edition of a text.

Again Nothing about machine or mechanized. Dont know if this helps.

An interesting read regarding mechanical transport can be found here: Congress's Intent in Banning Mechanical Transport in the Wilderness Act of 1964.

It's mostly about Mountain Bikes, but from provides a lot of good information that can be related to BASE.

Where does paragliding fit in? Same as hang gliding?

Neither are mechanised in any form, but if that's the way they want to play it...

Yes, with some exceptions to the negative, actually. Hanggliding is allowed in some park units (like Yosemite) where paragliding is explicitly forbidden. It's generally believed by paraglider pilots (and I think probably correctly) that this is an effort to prevent BASE jumpers from using paragliding as a road into the parks.



The weird definition of "mechanical transport" that they are working with seems to be something like "using a device to aid transport". Of course, by that definition, I could argue that hiking is "mechanical transport" if the hiker is wearing shoes.

maybe a joint effort w/ the USHPA ( US hang gliding and paragliding assoc.) could be looked into? Hang g. is allowed in yosemite but under very strict regs. paragliders would probably like to be allowed to fly in np's.

Maybe, but I'm not certain. Reading over PG forums on the internet it appears (that may be a deceiving appearance, of course) that PG opinion is fairly split on the issue, with a substantial number of pilots who feel that distancing themselves from BASE jumpers would be a more productive path to their own access.

"distancing themselves from BASE jumper"
i could see that.
Another problem is that we don't have one umbrella organization of our own to work w/ them or the nps through.

From page 477 of referenced article:


"It is clear that with regard to non-motorized mechanical
transport, Congress intended to exclude from Wilderness only heavy,
load-bearing rolling stock or watercraft that would require roads, rail
tracks, docks, or other obtrusive infrastructure, or that would have an
undue physical or visual impact on the landscape. Congress never
desired to prohibit healthful human-powered exploration of federal
wildlands with devices that have none of the foregoing deleterious
effects."

Good catch!

BASE359

maybe our group s just too small. just a thought off my hip.... sneak in with a bigger category of sport that is banned or not banned. power in numbers works!!!!! speaking with my girlfriend who was a lobbyist in DC for years changing something like this is easy... we just need to sneak a one line sentence in a new bill. Maybe we should be looking at new ideas obviously what we have been doing isn't working too well for us. just a thought

Mountain biking might actually be a good choice for that, even though the sports seem dissimilar. Our goal is the same (to gain recreational access for an unpowered but equipment dependent sport to wilderness areas) and much of the reasoning (on what constitutes a good use in wilderness, and whether we are mechanized or not) is very similar.

This would have put the jumps under jurisdiction of the FAA. The FAA was not interested in declaring jurisdiction over the activity since the jumps did not occur from an aircraft.


I don't think there is anything wrong with landing a parachute on that lake w/o a permit - as long as you came from an aircraft. When Point Break was filmed, no aerial delivery permit was required, as I recall - TS should be able to confirm that. As I think through this, I think a ranger confirmed that in court, which changed the focus from "delivery to the lake" to "retrieval from the cliff". That led to questions like, "Would a person be charged with aerial delivery if he jumped off the cliff with a bed sheet"? The ranger's answer was, "It would depend on how he was holding it".


Exactly. If you jump off a cliff at that lake holding a bed sheet in a manner which would cause it to retard your fall (no matter how much), you are using something that (according to the gov and travisjones dictionary post here) meets the definition of a parachute and you can be charged with Aerial Delivery. (Remember, the statute states "delivery or retrieval ... via ... parachute ..." )

Ok, I've probably hijacked this thread enough.. I'm curious to see how this "mechanized transport" thing pans out.

Mark

mountain biking might not be a good ally - although they have good numbers they do damage trails sometimes seriously whereas we are pretty much zero impact

bedsheet protest jump, anyone?

I'll film it, but I need my bedsheet for my bed.
pope

Maybe we should do the protest jump at Lake P, hopping 50 feet off cliffs into the water. With lots of chicks on the boat waiting.

And we can keep adding string, pilot chutes, and harnesses until it gets illegal, with a maximun fine of $5,000 and six months in jail!

I'm curious what would happen if my 5yr old niece was standing on the edge of that cliff at L. P. throwing a G.I. Joe paratrooper toy off, letting the parachute open and drift down to the lake. Would they charge her (or her mother since she's a minor)?

Ok.. Ok.. Too dangerous...

Put her in a nice big field like E. C. Meadow and simply have her throw the toy up in the air to let it drift back down under its canopy. From what I have learned, that would qualify as both "retrieving" and "delivering" of property via parachute there...

Whether they press charges or not, I would love to hear their rational and have them explain that to a judge.