NPS Management Policies (annoying)

[waltappel 1]

In case you are in the mood to be annoyed, here is a link to a recent draft of the National Park regs:

http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?projectId=13746&documentID=15714

From "NPS Management Policies June 06 - Chapter 8 - Use of the Parks" comes this little jewel. Nothing new, but still annoying, of course:

8.2.2.7 BASE Jumping

BASE (Buildings, Antennae, Spans, Earth forms) jumping—also known as fixed object jumping—involves an individual wearing a parachute jumping from buildings, antennae, spans (bridges), and earth forms (cliffs). Generally this is not an appropriate public use activity within national park areas, and is prohibited by 36 CFR 2.17(a)(3), unless determined to be appropriate through a park planning process, in which case a permit will be necessary.

Walt

[base311 0]

Walt and others,

The Alliance of Backcountry Parachutists received and reviewed the June 16, 2006, draft of the 2006 Management Policies and immediately began working on comments to the draft and restoration of the ABP letter-writing system to again call on our members and supporters to respond to the third draft. The current version is the third 'official draft' and the fourth draft if you count the 'unofficial re-write' leaked by PEER.org and others.

At this point, responding to these changes are a little trickier as the 'formal comment period' has closed; I read that as there is still an 'informal comment period,' so the ABP is gearing up to respond 'informally,' and has already expressed its displeasure in telephone communications with certain agency heads.

The timing goes like this: tomorrow, July 7, 2006, the internal (NPS agency) review draft will be presented to the National Leadership Council for its stamp-of-approval. There is still time to make 'informal comments' and we have some language drawn that we will be submitting to the Office of Policy and others. Additionally, Jason Dawson has a meeting scheduled in Washington with Karen Taylor-Goodrich, Associate Director For Visitor And Resource Protection, next tuesday, July 11, 2006, where he will express our concerns about the latest language in the draft and also hope to forge a relationship with another upper-level official.

So, at this point, my suggestion is for everyone to sit tight and wait for us to issue an 'Action Alert' calling all hands to submit letters through our letter-writing system.

As for the current draft language, it's much better than the 2001 version of the policies, not as good as the 2nd official draft (which had struck the entire chapter 8.2.2.7), but does signal we're approaching some middle ground where we can all be a little happier. Politics is about finding middle ground and we are still working hard to find something we can all live with.

Please stay tuned and, at a minimum, please subscribe to the ABP action alert list at http://www.backcountryparachutists.org/

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

[skreamer 1]

How about the 'New Park Rules' bit in the following :

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,640190694,00.html

What has been your organisation's reaction to that?

[MB38 0]

Quote

How about the 'New Park Rules' bit in the following :

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,640190694,00.html

What has been your organisation's reaction to that?

For the lazy:

• Prohibited B.A.S.E. jumping at Snow Canyon State Park. Utah State Parks staff recommended the ban due to violations of park policy regarding "stay on the trail" and potential conflicts with other user groups. B.A.S.E. jumping is now prohibited at both Dead Horse Point and Snow Canyon state parks.

I really don't know what I'm talking about.

[Treejumps 0]

Hi Gardner,

Given that the new Sec. of the Interior was most recently the govenor od ID, maybe its a good time to go over the NPS's head. Go straight to the top and see if that moves things along.

Cya

[base311 0]

Quote

How about the 'New Park Rules' bit in the following :

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,640190694,00.html

What has been your organisation's reaction to that?

The Utah Parks Board action simply reaffirms the current regulation regarding unpowered flight in Utah state parks so that the Snow Canyon manager can continue to prohibit the activity until the "stay on the trail" issue and potential conflicts with other user groups can be properly addressed.

The ABP supports this essentially interim action because:

1) the action made no new law (please refer to Utah Administrative Regulation R651-602-3. Powerless Flight Launching and Landing);
2) there are good reasons to "go slow" specifically at Snow Canyon (pm me for details); and
3) the action does not affect ABP's ongoing access dialogue with the Utah State Parks department.

If you'd like to stay up to date on ABP actions, please subscribe to the ABP action alert list at http://www.backcountryparachutists.org/

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

[FIREFLYR 0]

After hving a few drinks and reading this post and it's responces i became curious....
In the laws and rules concerning the state parks and 'un-powered flight' and 'staying on the paths' is there any specific wording to differenciate humans and any other of 'gods creatures' why can the birds fly un molested through and land in state parks but not humans ? do the deer have to walk on the paths too?
I feel we have been un fairly targeted, and descriminated against.
~J

"One flew East,and one flew West..............one flew over the cuckoo's nest"
"There's absolutely no excuse for the way I'm about to act"