Basejumper.com - archive

I don't know if this could pose an issue or not. Could it be yet another charge that could be leveled against us?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/09/25/forest-service-proposes-new-rule-charging-media-to-film-in-wilderness-areas/?intcmp=latestnews

Lee

Would be funny to get away with basejumping, but getting fined for using a GoPro. But am I reading it different in that the law only seems to aimmedia/film crews etc on commercial assignments? Meaning its only commercial exploits that will need permits (which is pretty common worldwide).

But today a lot of our video crosses the line to some extent. It's all about interpretation and they do the interpretation.

Lee

I forget but I know there was an incident or maybe even just a thread where a jumper said he was going to jump with a gun and shoot back! Also as jumping in the parks is illegal anyways what are you planning to do with the video you shoot? Post it on YouTube? Look up El Cap Wingsuit BASE jumps, or Half dome Wingsuit Base on YouTube and you won't find any POV footage cuz that could be used against you! So the only thing I'm thinking is if you get caught jumping in the valley and are sporting your GoPro they would tack on an additional fine beyond unlawful aerial delivery! As it stands if you get nabbed they will take your camera anyways, so...

This is FOREST SERVICE -- completely different agency. It is NOT illegal to jump in Forest Service-occupied territory in general, though there may be select places where it is.

You are correct about what would happen in NPS-occupied territory; they would indeed slap you with filming-w/o-a-permit charges too just to be tools, and it would be arguable because so many GoPro heroes make money from their MeTube channels.

So far, though, it is only proposed regulation -- and now that the big dogs in media know about it, there is a good chance it will not end up in the CFRs because it butts up against First Amendment issues.


44

Thanks for the clarification, I do know that in general BASE is permitted within Forest Service lands! Although a fellow jumper did try and get a group of us Ski BASERs shut down jumping in Forrest Service lands once. The Forrest Service showed up at our event and told us we couldn't jump cuz it was a Falcon nesting area! After a little back and forth the gave us the green light to jump! I forget who it was who ratted us out to them, it was back in 06, Tom might know. Forget the NPS though, I was thinking the same thing as you in terms of people not production companies making money off their footy on YouTube, as technically that is commercial use also. So yeah that would suck, but in general Forest Service Lands aren't monitored like the Valley so I dont think it's a worry unless your footage gained national attention or some Forrest Service rangers just happened to be around! If George Lucas wants to go film Ewoks on Forrest service lands, I'm with making him pay for a permit!

Not that it matters here but when dealing with things like this in their territory, in a legal sense, I would be specific with wording because they certainly are.

I would say BASE is a lawful activity, not a 'permitted' one. 'Permitted' conveys the sense that someone needs to grant permission.

Also, they can't give you the green light or the red light to jump if they have no authority to regulate it.

By permitted, I meant allowed! As far as the green light was concerned, let me clarify that as well, when we showed up at the cliff that mornings Forrest service rangers where there waiting and told us "We heard you were going to jump off the cliff and we cannot allow that because you might endanger the Peregrine Falcons nests, and that there was a nesting season that was protected under law. McConkey used some Jedi mind tricks, said "oh that cliff, that's not the one we are jumping off" he then pointed to another one and said that's the cliff we are jumping off, and they said that one was ok! In the end of the back and forth they allowed us to jump at correct exit point and I made my first ski base

Nice work. Congrats on getting that ski-jump in!

I would not use 'allowed' either. Is still conveys that someone has to grant permission and that by 'not being allowed' you are breaking a law.
Here is the definition of 'not allowed'- Illegal; illicit; inadmissible
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/not+allowed

You are not allowed to disturb the falcons but that's all they have the power to regulate.
There are no BASE jumping laws that the forest service can enforce so they can't allow it or disallow it if they do not have the authority to do so. They may act like they are allowing you to jump the other exit but in reality they are not.

I know it may just be semantics to most but I know it plays a big role in legal wranglings and also in the perception people have of the sport. People think most all BASE jumping is illegal or controlled in some way because of the wording being used and it's incorrect application by law enforcement, media and jumpers themselves. Generally people don't get arrested for BASE jumping, they get charged with other things. Changing the public's perception of the 'legality' of BASE would be a big step forward for us.

I think my pilot chute might of hit someone on the exit I pitched so fast!
The highlight of the day was seeing Jim Rippy throw the Rippy flip, appear to have line twist and just come out on heading, mind boggling

FYI... further developments...


44

actually you should bring a GoPro but leave it turned off and make sure the memory card is full of gay porn.

when you do get caught, tell the rangers you are positive your footage is in there somewhere and they should watch every second...

And that would bother them, how? I seem to recall some thing about an incident concerning a child molester in Yosemite.

Lee

. Sensationalist journalism is all this is. I deal with BLM and Forest Service permits quite often. It's always been this way. BLM and USFS go by the same permitting regulations. If the filming is Commercial in nature from conception to capture than it requires a permit. If commercial use of personal documentary or editorial style footage ends up being used commercially at some point down the road than a permit is not required as their was no commercial intent to begin with. If you were filming people jumping with the intent of selling directly to those jumpers than that would require a permit as it's commercial in nature and results in direct sales.

. Open to interpretation yes maybe but they are also pretty well established rules already.

hey they might recognize themselves...

http://www.redtube.com/662740

(nsfw)

I knew it would be gay before I clicked the link but I just watched all 23 minutes to make sure.

yeah, you saw the base jump, right?