NPS POLICIES CAUSE ANOTHER BASE DEATH

[guest]

Once again, a skydiver has died as a direct consequence of the National Park Service's perverted policies. Neither Frank nor Jan would be dead today had it not been for this policy promulgated by an NPS sexual pervert named M. Scott Conelly and continued by individuals that can only be described as Connelly's Cops.

And we are Connelly's Kids: Connelly's Cops stick it to us the same way M.Scott sticks it to the young boys of whom he is so fond (remember, he's out of jail already and no doubt back to his delightful old habits).

Andy West can talk all he wants about personal responsibility, and he's not wrong, but he misses the larger point: Government accountability.

Frank would not have jumped into the raging Merced River and Jan would not have jumped El Capitan with borrowed gear had it not been for continuing persecution of BASE jumpers by the NPS. Period.

And now they are both dead because of it. It's happened again, and let no one lose hope over the outcome. Once again, a skydiver has died as a direct consequence of the National Park Service's perverted policies. Neither Frank nor Jan would be dead today had it not been for this policy promulgated by an NPS sexual pervert named M. Scott Conelly and continued by individuals that can only be described as Connelly's Cops.

And we are Connelly's Kids: The NPS sticks it us the same way M.Scott sticks it to the young boys of whom he is so fond (remember, he's out of jail already and no doubt back to his delightful old habits).

Andy West can talk all he wants about personal responsibility, and he's not wrong, but he misses the larger pointl: Government ACCOUNTABILITY.

Frank would not have jumped into the raging Merced River and Jan would not have been jumping El Capitan with borrowed gear had it not been for continuing persecution of BASE jumpers by the NPS. Period.

And now they are both dead because of it. But people, don't lose hope, and don't whine about Jan's death shutting down opportunities forever to BASE jump in NPS-occupied zones. This is simply a larger and louder wakeup call that this persecution and discrimination must stop.

The best way we can honor Jan's memory is to hold her alongside Frank as an example of how NPS's perverted policy leads to tragedy -- over and over and over again. That's the bottom line: How many more people have to die before the perversion stops?

Finally, let me say to all the flame weenies and back-seat whiners:

1) I counted Jan Davis among my very close friends and her death affects me deeply on a personal level, and I know her spirit is smiling at these words and saying, "Yeah, what he said."

2) Save your shitty little second-guessing remarks for your fellow defeatists. Now is the time to stand in solidarity together against the NPS instead of -- once again -- fighting amongst ourselves and pointing fingers of blame.

[guest]

I've heard a lot of this "blame the NPS" theme on the board, and it's time for it to stop.

First of all, let me say that I think the NPS policies are completely ridiculous and discriminatory. And although I've never met Mr. Connelly, he seems to have been on a mission to squash our sport and obviously has some serious personal problems to sort out. Lastly, I owe a debt of gratitude to those who participated in the protest jump, trying to gain myself and every other base jumper access to our parks.

But regardless of how wrong the NPS policies are, they are NOT to blame for Frank's death. Nor are they to blame for Jan's death. When we hurt...when we're mourning the loss of people who died too soon, we want someone to focus our anger on, because it's easier to be angry than anguished. And that's what we're doing. But the reality is, no one forced Frank to jump into the river. Before he jumped, he knew what would happen if he got caught, and he jumped anyway. At the moment of decision (or maybe he had even made the decision before the jump), he chose not to face the consequences of his actions, and tried to escape through the river. By his own choice, he ran into the river and it killed him. If he had submitted to the cops, he'd be out a set of gear and have paid some fines, but he'd still be alive. How many of his friends and family would gladly pay 10 times that amount now to have him back with them? Doesn't that put it in perspective? And with Jan, it wasn't NPS policy that killed her, either. We, the base jumping community, decided to hold the protest jump. We didn't have to. She didn't have to jump in it. She chose to. She knew what would happen after the jump before she decided to be a part of it. She chose the gear she would use, and she jumped off the cliff. Habit took over in her mind, I guess, and it killed her. But it was her decision to step off the edge with that gear on her back, and no one forced her to participate in the protest that no one forced us to have. The best way to honor the memories of these two fallen friends is not to make them into examples of what NPS is doing to us, but to learn from their mistakes while we continue to pursue a cause they believed in--legal BASE in national parks.

If I went out, bought a gun, loaded it, and shot myself in the head, would I then sue the gun manufacturer for my injuries? Of course not! Because when you boil it down to the bottom line, it was my choice and my action that produced my injuries. It is the same with jumping off cliffs and bridges and everything else--it is inherently dangerous, and no one can claim with a straight face that they didn't know that before they took the leap. And if you do something against the law, as dumb as the law may be, you cannot tell me that you did't expect to be punished if you got caught.

I know sometimes you just need to vent and place the blame on something/someone concrete, especially when the world around you seems full of unexplainable tragedies, but please know that it is dangerous to promote this "pass the buck" way of thinking. Eventually it will come back to bite us because it makes us look like a bunch of angry children who are too foolish or cowardly to accept personal responsibility for our actions and for the danger inherent to our sport. The government is not my babysitter (nor do I want it to be), and I do not hold it accountable for my actions.

Bottom line: We need to stand together in opposing ludicrous NPS policies, but we need to stand in the truth by putting the ultimate responsibility where it belongs. Even if it's hard to do in the wake of such painful losses.

My prayers are with Tom and all of you struggling with Jan's home-going (because we all know that angels on loan to us go back home to God)...

[guest]

As a climber and hiker and outdoor enthusiast, I am curious as to whether you have ever considered what would happen if/when a BASE jumper lands on someone ? There are some places where BASE jumping is fine. But Yosemite is a crowded place, especially under El Capitan. It is irresponsible and self centered to focus on your rights to pursue a fleeting adrenalin rush when you are putting others at risk. Have you ever thought that the NPS may have a fair reason to not want you jumping into a crowded area ?

[guest]

I guess with that attitude they should ban climbing and hiking because I wonder if you have considered what would happen if/when a Hiker/climber lands on someone? Did you ever consider that? Isn't that just as irresponsible and self-centered then? Would you like those rights taken away from you? Unless of course there are no climbing or hiking fatalities. If it would invade your sport, would you feel the same way? I think not.

[guest]

I do not BASE jump and I am not a ranger. But I was sitting in El Capitan meadow Friday and watched the most horrible event I will ever see. At first I was laughing at the circus going on around me. The swarming rangers and the protest banners and the picnicking families were surreal. The idea that I was about to watch someone jump off a 3600 foot cliff was surreal. I ate lunch, I soaked in the inconceivable beauty of Yosemite Valley.

The Event going on around me was very inappropriate for such a Valley. I thought to myself that the NPS and the BASEjumpers should not do this again, this was more degrading to the surrounding Wilderness than their battle of wills deserved. I watched bikes ride into the grass and protest signs dug into the soil of the meadow and big fat ranger boots digging in and damaging what was not being protected.

Then it began. We watched and were amazed at the first few guys that jumped. It looked beautiful. They fell along the granite for a brief frightening few seconds and then opened their parachutes and sailed slowly down to the valley floor. I envied them as I envy birds, I wished I could see what it looked like from up there.

On the valley floor everyone was cheering. The rangers were happy that this really was a peaceful protest. The jumpers shook hands with the rangers as they were arrested. The feeling in El Cap meadow was one of elation.

My friend and I were saying to each other, "They should be able to do this legally. This is just like hang gliding and they do that through organization and safety-related permits." Their cause was soaking in to us, we were general public on the fence that were being swayed.

Then the fourth person jumped. She fell and fell and fell and fell in a terribly infinitely long span of time. It was 20 seconds but seemed like a thousand 20 seconds. I thought "Wow, this person is really going." "Whoa, that's fast!" "That's a long..." "That's too long..." "That person is going to hit" "That person is going to hit right now in front of all of us" and then the body disappeared and there was a horrible deafening silence of hundredths of a second and then a Sonic BOOM that shook every person in the meadow to their core. The sound of Death. A lightning-fast public needless professionally-filmed Death. And then it was silent again. Til someone cried/screamed, "DID YOU SEE THAT? WE JUST WATCHED THAT PERSON DIE!!" and then I breathed again. I had just watched someone jump from the top of the most beautiful cliff on earth to a horrible death in front of me and her family and friends and supporters and detractors and everything.

Then the sirens went off and the employees of the National Park Service had to go deal with what was left. Normal people who you will never meet had to go pick up the pieces of a body all afternoon under El Capitan. Incident Commanders had to command, peons had to drive, workers had to work. Those employed by the Park Service had to deal with the horrific aftermath of the unspeakable event that we had just watched. My friend and I wandered away, slowly with everyone else.

I do not want to ever see that again. I am saddened that I now have this horror permanently burned into my memory. Jan Davis did not further her cause. She wanted to prove that this sport is safe and harmless to the Wilderness and that she and all of you should be able to jump from where you want. She wanted to prove that BASEjumping is appropriate for the Wilderness of our country. Yosemite should not be an event and it should never be a place for a circus. I will not argue that Yosemite is a sanctuary without problems, but Friday proved to me that this is a new circus that Yosemite does not need.

We all should have the right to do what we want. But that right does not supercede the right of Wilderness to exist. It does not overrule the wishes of John Muir and Roosevelt and Lincoln to set aside certain wonders of our world to be protected for all time. I do not have the right to drive a Humvee through El Capitan meadow, and I'm really glad. Someone has to protect Yosemite from all of our varied and personal wishes.

Jump off other things. Go jump in the Grand Canyon of the Tuolumne where noone will see you. Enjoy what you do for that moment that I envied early on Friday, and end your bitter battle against people you do not know that you conveniently lump into a faceless governmental child-molesting "Them". That's not reality and you know it.

I think BASEjumping would have had a real chance at becoming legally accepted if the protesters had proved that the sport is safe and not taxing on the Wilderness or the staff trying to protect and uphold Yosemite National Park. This was not proved. So now it will not be legal. Do not sully the memory of Jan Davis by petulantly trying to lay blame.

I will never be able to look at El Capitan and enjoy its simple natural beauty again. I will always think of the death that I watched. A senseless meaningless death. I now do not want anyone to have the legal right to do that again.

Hayes Roberts

[guest]

Mr Roberts,
I understand your reactions to the sight you witnessed, but you must understand that the events you describe are far from normal. Although NPS in not at fault in the incident, neither could this be described as normal conditions. Jan's death, was the result of conditions that would not occur in a legal jump.
I agree completely with your comparison to a circus, that kind of traffic should be left out of a beutiful sight like yosimite. That was particular to this jump and was a side-effect of the protest - A protest that would not happen if it were legal.
I have to ask you why the change of mind reguarding the legality of BASE? Was it because Jan died? Jumpers know the risk and choose to take it. Just like a motorcyclist, skier, or even surfer. There must have been witnesses to the accidents of Sonny Bono, Christopher Reeves, and countless bikers and surfers who have died doing their sports. It certainly must have been traumatic to them, but society cannot protect everybody from all forms of trauma.
The only difference is that BASE is high profile and has a low number of participants. It is the nature of human beings to fear that which they don't understand, but that does not justify prohibiting all activities that do not fall into "normal" classifications.
I was not going to respond to your post, but I am impressed by the fact that you used your name instead of anonymous. I respect that and thought it deserved an appropriate response.
Todd

[guest]

So you see something that offends you and disturbs you and so you think it should be made illegal.

Sieg Heil.

You represent what is wrong with this country, sir. Your eloquent, well-reasoned presentation was utterly sophist: It looks good on the surface, but is actually invalid... just as was the rhetoric of the Third Reich and the response of the NPS to adventure skydiving.

Sieg Heil!

Get a clue, Mr. Roberts: If it wasn't for the NPS's perverted policy, there would have been no circus in the Valley on Friday. Period. There are no circuses for the climbers, who die in greater numbers than the BASE jumpers and impact the poor workers more than do the BASE jumpers with their activities.

There is no circus when tourists in street shoes slip off wet rocks and drown in the Valley’s rivers -- each year in Yosemite in greater numbers than all the BASE jumpers who have ever been killed in Yosemite -- and seriously endanger the lives of all those poor workers you cited who have to try and rescue them or recover their bodies.

That was precisely the point of the protest. There should be no circus and there _would_ be no circus but for this policy promulgated by a pervert and those who continue to follow his lead by molesting us the same way M. Scott Connelly molested little boys.

And I guess you like your Death quiet, where you don’t have to see it. Where, sir, is your self-righteous indignation over Frank Gambalie’s death, precipitated by this same perverted policy? I guess it’s okay if you don’t have to be personally traumatized by it. Would that you had the same passion for the butchery in East Timor.

Sieg Heil!

Your eloquence makes me sick. You’re like the politician with the glib tongue who is utterly clueless as to the consequences of his actions, or even the meaning of his words.

You were certainly happy to experience the elation and joy of BASE jumping before the blood flowed. Why do you think that is, sir? It’s because if you are not a coward, you are too timid to take chances. You want rewards without price, and BASE jumping offers great rewards to participants and spectators alike, but it is not without price.

The purpose of the protest was not to "prove" that BASE jumping is safe; only a sophist like you would even entertain the notion that anyone would seek such a thing. BASE jumping is _not_ safe; it is dangerous and you can die doing it. Did it not occur to you that each and every one of the people jumping from that cliff could die? Does it not occur to you that each and every climber on that cliff could die?

And how dare you invoke the names of Roosevelt, Muir and Lincoln. Lincoln, of course, had nothing to do with the formation of national parks, so your ignorance shows on this one -- unless, of course, you meant Lincoln as the first president to abuse the power of the federal government over the sovereignty of the states, but that’s another story, though it is germane to this discussion in general terms.

And what do you think Mssrs Roosevelt and Muir would think of the Yosemite police state? Protect and sanctify the wilderness? When you protect the flowers and meadow grasses but turn Yosemite Valley into a prison, you do _not_ preserve the wilderness. I would rather be free in a garbage dump than jailed in a garden.

So you don’t want to see Death ever again.

Sieg Heil, you poor spoiled fascist child. Death touches us all, everywhere, all the time, and Jan Davis died in a brave and dramatic way, and you, Mr. Hayes Roberts, should get down on your knees every night and pray that you die as well as she did, because it is obvious you will never be able to live as well as she did.

So the "horror" of Jan’s death is "permanently burned into (your) memory." Poor poor cowardly Mr. Roberts. You know, if you had despised the jumpers and their pastime before Jan died, then you would be morally and intellectually justified to make such a statement. But you, sir, are such an unspeakable coward that you freely admit how much you loved the whole experience until the periodic consequences of that experienced smacked you upside your sophist head.

And factually speaking, Jan did not want to "prove that the sport is safe and harmless." She wanted everyone to know what unfair, illegal, discriminatory, _perverted_ policies are pursued by Connelly’s Cops against a group of adventure athletes who are being systemically molested in exactly the same way that M. Scott Connelly molested young boys. And yes, she should have put her life before her property, but that doesn’t change the perversion she chose to fight with her actions.

And you know something else? Martin Luther King said, anyone who isn’t willing to die for something doesn’t deserve to live.

So pray tell, Mr. Roberts, what are _you_ willing to die for? Humvee-free picnics?

And then you tell us to "Jump off other things. Go jump in the Grand Canyon of the Tuolumne where no one will see you."

Sieg Heil and don’t ask, don’t tell.

And the petulance you speak of comes not from those of us who understand political process and have long experience with NPS’s perverted police; you, sir, are the petulant one: "WAAAAAAA... I don’t want anyone to do anything that might upset my delicate little coward’s psyche. WAAA, Waaa, WAAAA!

You do offer one bright spot: I take comfort in the fact that you, indeed, "will never be able to look at El Capitan and enjoy its simple natural beauty again." As I believe Roosevelt himself said: "A coward dies a thousand deaths. A brave (wo)man dies only once."

So of course you see Jan’s death as meaningless, and of course you do not want anyone to have the legal right to do anything that might upset you -- that’s what all cowards do.

And so, Mr. Roberts, we can all hope that you will now leave this board alone and crawl into your hole where you can quiver in fear until God sends you to _your_ reward. And of one thing I am utterly certain: Wherever that reward is, it will never be alongside Jan Davis, because, as Teddy Roosevelt said, whether her death was a triumph or a failure, "(her) place will never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat."

Sieg Heil.

[guest]

You must not be much of a Yosemite climber, pal, because if you were you'd know no one in their right mind ever hangs out at the base of El Capitan because the climbers urinate, defecate and throw all their trash down there while they're climbing.

So just where in your little fascist cosmos do you rank _that_ behavior, which could easily be labeled as the "irresponsible and self centered.... (pusuit of ) a fleeting adrenalin rush when you are putting others at risk."?

Not to mention the fact (see "Sieg Heil, Mr. Roberts, Sieg Heil!" below) that El Capitan Meadow and the Valley generally is huge and would not be crowded anyway if it wasn't for the perverted policies of Connelly's Cops.

[guest]

B * R * A * V * O !!!!!!!!!!!!

[guest]

Mari darling:

It is certainly noble of you to insist that we all take personal responsibility for our actions. And it is refreshing for both you and Andy to urge this in a society which seems suicidally set on blaming everyone and everything but the individuals themselves for the things that happen to them in life.

But in so doing, you miss the larger point: Government exists to reduce harm and when its actions increase harm, _it_ must be held responsible and accountable for _its_ actions.

Fair is fair, after all.

And unfortunately, your analogy about the gun is just wrong: Suing someone because they _allowed_ you to make a personal choice that resulted in your death or injury is unconscionable cowardice; fighting against a government because it _prohibits_ you from doing something -- and that prohibition results in injury or death, well, that’s a little different animal, wouldn’t you say?

A better analogy is back alley abortions. If government prohibits abortion, abortions continue, but in much more dangerous conditions, and so, if a woman because she chose to get a back alley abortion, was she responsible for her death?

Yes, according to your view, and you’re not wrong, but in the _larger_ view, the government which prevented her from getting an abortion in safe circumstances is equally culpable.

And you must consider consistency here too: Dennis McGlynn is now doing a federal prison sentence because the government said _he_ is responsible for Paul Thompson’s death – despite the fact that Paul drove his own car, had his own boat and gear, and simply hung out with Dennis’ group. Yet, Dennis got prison time because the judge considered him to be responsible for Thompson’s death.

Yet this connection is considerably more tenuous than the much more direct line responsibilities for Frank’s death that the NPS and the scumbag who narced him have. First, Connelly’s Cops cultivate and reward the coward who narced him. Then they set up a stakeout. Then they blow the arrest and chase him into the river. Even street cops pull off of felony pursuits when they think the pursuit might result in tragedy. Not so Connelly’s Cops: They go to the limit to molest us, just like their mentor did to young boys.

Ditto for Jan: The NPS’s perverted policy that _steals_ the private property of American citizens was directly responsible for her decision to use borrowed gear – and for an alleged "crime" equal to feeding the squirrels. Imagine, Mari, how you would feel – how the country would feel – if Connelly’s Cops seized your car (and KEPT it) because you or a friend tossed a piece of popcorn out the window to a squirrel.

That’s what we’re talking about here, and _that_ is an issue involving _government_ responsibility.

Connelly’s Cops are _utterly irresponsible_ and not answerable for their actions. No Connelly Cop will ever do time for Frank’s death or Jan’s. And why would they? Even the Great Molester himself, Marshall Scott Connelly, walked out of a Fresno court on his four felony counts of unlawful sex with minors after just 16 months in a mental ward – and that after the kidnapping charges were dropped (which would have brought 20 years). As Fred Morelli said, for a non-cop, the plea bargaining for doing little boys on video starts at 25 _years_, and the usual sentence is 16 _years_, not 16 months.

So Mari, let’s hear a little from you on government’s responsibility and accountability before you attack us for blaming NPS for this situation.

I know you mean well, but face the facts: When I jumped from the Royal Gorge Bridge with Carl Boenish in 1979, the cops grabbed us, but then let us go because the only thing they could charge us with was "throwing objects from the bridge." Not being Connelly’s Cops, the local gendarmes decided it would be silly to use that law – which actually had more foundation to it than the utterly inapplicable and illegitimate usage of the "air delivery without a permit" reg, which was written before BASE jumping existed and was designed exclusively to deal with the aerial resupply of squatters and miners in NPS-occupied zones.

Government can’t have it both ways: It can’t hold us to narrow definitions and reserve broad ones for itself. It cannot claim personal responsibility for our actions, then deny any responsibility for its own.

And I say again: think about what Frank’s final choice says about Connelly’s Cops and their perverted policy: He chose to risk death rather than let those perverts put their hands on him. Ditto for Jan: She chose a greater risk of death rather than let Connelly’s Cops put their perverted hands on her cherished parachute equipment.

There are countless examples throughout history of people who chose death before submission to barbarians, scumbags and criminals. And yes, they were responsible for their own actions and deaths. But does that responsibility make their attackers any less perverted and evil?

Mari, I don’t think unkindly of you, and in general I absolutely agree with your personal responsibility mantra. But the issue here is _government responsibility and accountability_ and when you shift the focus therefrom, you so the same disservice to this crusade as do the backbiters and second guessers.

So please keep your eyes on the prize: Ending the reign of Connelly’s Cops and bringing peace once again to the valley that John Muir called God’s grandest cathedral.

[guest]

Robin, tone it down brother. Your writing is so far out there that you just come off as a kook. This is not contributing to credibility for anyone. It is hard to believe that you think this is productive.

[guest]

Base44;

You are truly a most unbelievable, self-important idiot! I won't even begin to tell you the damage dipshit "rebels without clues" like you do to our sport, because brain-deads like you are always unable to listen. What a rant! Seig Heil indeed! SHUT UP AND GO AWAY!

Rob Carlson

[guest]

Todd,

My views of the legality of BASE jumping in general did not change with the incident. The legality of jumping off of a highly visible protected section of Wilderness in Yosemite is what I meant. And I did not ever mean to imply that anyone's life was meaningless, only that a death occurred that shouldn't have and that only made suffering for all those around.
I have never seen your message board until this afternoon and looked into it to see what is happening in this community that I was thrust into recognizing on Friday. I thought it would help you to hear the perspective of a member of the general public to whom this event was not a quick flash on the news, and to let you see another view of the government you are trying to work with.

I am sorry for everyone involved. And I wish you the best in your cause.

Hayes

P.S. Abraham Lincoln designated the Yosemite Land Grant sometime during the Civil War at the requests and descriptions of western travelers, never having been there but protecting it for all time.

[guest]

Just what part of my writing is so far out? Try being half as specific as I am and your complaint might have a little credibility... brother.

[guest]

I suppose I don't always listen as carefully as I should, Mr. Carlson, but at least I know how to read and I didn't sleep through history and civics class.

[guest]

action must be taken we dont need the key we'll break it

[guest]

What parts are so far out? How about Nazi references to someone who witnessed and was deeply moved by a tragic event. Also your inability to see that the person who steps off the cliff is taking responsibility for their own actions. I, also, was in El Cap Meadow on Friday, and saw something that will haunt me forever. I'm not a base jumper, and won't ever try it, but I'm not against anyone doing it (even after what I saw). So many of the arguments to allow jumping here in the park say that people should be able to jump because they are the ones taking the risk, but here when something went wrong, you scapegoat the NPS. Did the NPS strap that borrowed chute on Jan? No. She strapped it on herself. Did she know the danger of jumping with unfamiliar gear? I would hope so. Who has to take ultimate responsibility? The person who stepped off the edge. And how about this, if she had followed NPS policy, she would be alive today. I've lived here in Yosemite for over 12 years, and believe me, I'm no fan of the NPS, but they weren't to blame here.

I've prayed every day for Jan and her family and friends, I'm truly sorry for their loss. Please celebrate life, it's precious.

[guest]

I should make clear at the outset that I am not a base jumper, but have only a few skydives to my name. It may also be, because I am an English and not a U.S. lawyer, that the suggestion set out below is not possible, or has been tried before. If I am reinventing the wheel, I apologise in advance!

There are 2 ways to go about changing a law (and/or practice) with which you disagree: one is to lobby government into legislating, the other is to challenge the status quo in the courts.

In English law, if you do not like a decision made by the executive (e.g. Government, a particular department of the Government, or an executive agency such as the NPS), you can in certain circumstances apply to the courts to "judicially review" the decision. If they do, they either ask the secretary of state (or whomever) to take the decision again, taking into (or leaving out of) account something which they should (or should not) have taken into account first time round, or quash the decision on the basis that it is not a decision which could/should rationally have been reached. In very many cases, of course, the courts decline to intervene altogether.

It seems to me that this analogy (if available in U.S. law, and it would suprise me if it is not) could be used to challenge the NPS policy of refusing to issue permits. It would require very careful planning and preparation, very good and experienced lawyers, and the courage (and money) to see it through all the way (say to the Supreme Court). But if it can be shown (1) that there is such a policy on the part of the NPS and (2) that the policy cannot be defended on any rational ground, then there may be a powerful case to argue which could result in the NPS policy being declared illegal.

I rather doubt that the sexual pecadilloes of the originator of the present NPS policy would feature strongly or at all in the case (sorry, BASE 44!), but there seem to be very strong policy (as opposed to personalised) arguments which could well get a sympathetic hearing.

In the first instance (and *please*, I am not trying to teach anyone to suck eggs here), the CJAA could get an opinion from a public law expert as to whether such a course of action is possible and feasible and, if so, on the evidence (and steps) which would be needed to get such a challenge off the ground.

Just my two cents worth.

[guest]

I should have added (or started by saying) that I was much saddened to hear of Jan Davis's death, which was reported over here on national radio on Saturday morning.

My thoughts and prayers are with her family and friends at this time.


Better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

[speed]

You need to grow up and take responsibilitie for your own actions. With such childish attidudes like this we will never get BASE jumping accepted and anything more than a death wish.

NPC did not hold a gun to her head and tell her to jump borrowed or untested gear. $1500 for a new base set up seems REALLY cheap to me for the price of my life.... AND I am sure any of the BASE manufactures would have work out a VERY good deal for her for doing such a visible jump and taking the fines/arrest for the good of BASE.

[guest]

Why is it that reading-challenged strident flame weenies like you can't get it through your addled little pates that there is such a thing as shared responsibility and mutual accountability?

Every post I have made here acknowledges the personal responsibility of Frank and Jan for the choices that led to their deaths, so save the snotty little "attidude" on that score.

My continuing point is that the NPS is equally culpable for these two outcomes by virtue(!!) of its perverted policy.

Finally, idiot child, buying brand new gear is still untested, unfamiliar gear -- borrowed gear, in essence, and it still would have been a one-parachute rig which Jan would have been unable to deploy when her arm went out (because $1500 would not be enough to outfit her with the Sorcerer two-parachute BASE rig).

[guest]

Dear Road Rage:

Thank you for your answer. It’s refreshing to get a post from someone who reads well and thinks clearly, and so let me respond to you point-by-point:

The Nazi references were _not_ about Mr. Roberts being deeply moved by a tragic event; they were about his repeatedly stated position that the activity should be banned because he didn’t like being upset. It is the repression of others with whom you disagree that is Nazi-like and that was his principal theme and that was why I sieg heiled him.

And just a tangent on Nazis for a moment. I got into an interesting discussion a while back with a German national who teaches at Berkeley and climbs a lot in Yosemite, and she took great issue with me calling Connelly’s Cops "Nazis."

"You ain’t never _seen_ real Nazis," she said (I’m paraphrasing). "_I_ know what real Nazis are like."

And she’s right and so are you: Neither Connelly’s Cops nor Mr. Roberts can, at their present level of development, rival the Nazis of the 1940s.

But as I said to the professor, little Nazi acts come before big Nazi pogroms – and both only happen when mostly decent people such as Mr. Roberts stand idly by while the little fascists get bigger and stronger. What’s the old adage: The only way evil can exist is for good people to do nothing."

Most Germans were _not_ in the Nazi, but their silence and acquiescence to the Nazis when they were little junior storm troopers allowed the seeds of evil to sprout large.

And what is most important for any society to understand is that all junior Nazis will grow bigger and stronger if good people let them. We all forget that the Nazis were _elected_ in Germany, that they then _passed laws_ that discriminated against a small powerless group within their general population, and that said discrimination turned next to repression, then to pogrom, then to extermination. And there was the famous poem by the Reverend Martin Miemoller, a Protestant minister who was jailed later in the war by Hitler:

When they came for the comunists, I said nothing because I wasn’t a communist.
When they came for the trade unionists, I said nothing because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews, I said nothing, because I wasn’t a Jew.
When they came for the Catholics, I said nothing because I was Protestant.
And when they came for me, no one said anything because no one was left.

And that is why I said Sieg Heil to Mr. Roberts, Road Rage: He not only refuses to defend us, he has joined with the junior Nazis when they "come for us." And I do believe Mr. Roberts may be a "good person" in the general sense of the term and that’s why I was so tough on him; he needs a wake-up call for his Nazi-based attitudes, before it’s too late for him and the community in which he lives.

As for my "inability to see that the person who steps off the cliff is taking responsibility for their own actions."

I have never said otherwise. Look closely at all my posts. I don’t deny that Frank and Jan were ultimately responsible for the choices they made that resulted in their deaths. But as I said less politely to the much less polite "Speed," I can’t figure out why so many people have so much trouble understanding the concept and _fact_ of mutual responsibility and accountability. Frank and Jan _also_ died because of NPS’s perverted policy. Period.

Just as, 20 years ago, the irresponsible behavior of BASE jumpers and the less than honest effort of the NPS _combined_ to create the situation which exists today.

Mutual responsibility, shared accountability. That is, in fact, a principal theme among BASE jumpers today on this subject: As Avery said in the press release: Yes, we manmde mistakes 20 years ago but we’ve learned and now it’s time to revisit this issue – reasonably and FAIRLY.

And you see, Road Rage, _you are fair_ in your perceptions and attitudes on this. Even though, like Mr. Roberts, you "saw something that will haunt (you) forever," you immediately went on to say (_unlike_ Mr. Roberts) that while you aren’t a BASE jumper and won’t ever try it, you’re "not against anyone doing it (even after what (you) saw)."

This is the mark of an emotionally and intellectually honest person and a true citizen in a free society: A willingness to let others live – and die – according to their own choices and desires, a willingness to accept in others behavior you would never choose for yourself and may not even understand.

You also wrote: "So many of the arguments to allow jumping here in the park say that people should be able to jump because they are the ones taking the risk, but here when something went wrong, you scapegoat the NPS.

I’ll say one more time: Frank and Jan are absolutely responsible for the choices they made that led to their deaths, but NPS is equally culpable for pursuing a perverted policy that created the environment that brought about those deaths. This is not scapegoating the NPS; it is simply bringing attention to the fact that it takes two to tango, and when one partner steps on the other’s toes, both partners have some level of responsibility.

And this idea of shared responsibility is recognized by the civil courts: Defendants in cases are regularly found 20 percent liable or 60 percent liable or 80 percent liable for a particular outcome, and the wrongful death lawsuits against NPS being contemplated now could bring about a very interesting jury verdict in terms of how much responsibility for those two death lay on the jumpers themselves and how much with the purveyors of the perverted policy which contributed to them.

And some the things those juries will examine are the questions you asked: No, the NPS didn’t strap that borrowed chute on Jan. She did indeed strap it on herself. And yes, she knew the danger of jumping with unfamiliar gear, and she knew her shoulder was acting up on her too. And yes, she was ultimately responsible for what happened to her, and if she had gone along with NPS policy, she would still be alive today. But NPS policy _contributed_ to her death, NPS shares responsibility for her death, and NPS must be held accountable for her death.

And thank you for your prayers for those of us who knew and loved Jan. We all do appreciate the outpouring of care and concern from people like yourselves.

Please, please remember, though, that Jan _was_ celebrating life at the moment of her death. That is the primary lesson everyone should take from this.

[guest]

Seig heil yourself pal! I notice you didn't even sign your name, or am I supposed to be hip enough to know who you are by your hip low BASE number ?

I don't jump anymore, but I made one (legal) jump off El Cap on Aug. 10, 1980 and it was a beautiful experience, the coolest thing I've ever done in my life. I've always favored the legalization of BASE jumping in Nat'l Parks too and I think Friday's demonstration was a cool idea.

The thing about a demonstration is that you're trying to reach, educate, and persuade the public to accept your point of view. If you actually rad Mr. Roberts' letter, he sounds like the kind of J.Q. Public the demonstration was intended to reach. In fact, he was impressed up until Jan bounced. In my skydiving years I saw 6 people bounce and it was always horrific. I'm reminded of the awful sound a human body makes on impact, a sound that can be heard a mile away. We as jumpers can understand it a little better, but to the whuffos out there, it's so much worse. I don't blame Mr. Roberts for feeling the way he feels, I quite understand.

Unfortunately the demonstration failed in its purpose, it did not demonstrate the safety of Base or any other kind of jumping. I don't know why a person with over 3000 jumps wouldn't reach for her reserve, I didn't understand it when jeanni McCombs did the same thing years ago on a regular airplane skydive. I guess it just happens and the only person who knows isn't talking.

And one more thing. If Mr. Hip #44 is who I think he is, I seem to recall reading something about him in Skydiving Magazine long ago. Something about abandoning a dying BASE jumper at the foot of Half Dome, because he didn't want the Park Rangers to seize his rig. If there are any questions about THAT, I'm sure Mike Truffer at Skydiving Magazine has the story in his files.

[guest]

Dear JT:

You make some interesting points, and the "It's Our Park Too!" lawyer, Fred Morelli, may find them useful as he continues his pursuit of this through the courts.

In fact, if you would be so kind as to contact Fred through this board, I think he would like to talk with you.

As you said, English and American law may be different on this "judicial review" point, and from the criminal side, we already have a mixed bag of judicial review on this subject, but the administrative law approach sounds interesting.

Thank you very much for your constructive contribution to this issue.

[guest]

Hear, hear. The purpose and meaning of natural parks has been discussed for years, but one thread is always there - we all feel that the experience of nature AS IT IS is important to us, for the spirit, the soul, the intellect.

BASE jumping from El Capitan is an arrogant misuse of a very public place and asset. Arrogant because a few people want to grandstand their personal thrill seeking. When I go to Yosemite I do not need or want to have my stomach wrenched by someone's stunt.

There are a lot of restrictions on what one can do in "the wild". Motorbikes are prohibited on most trails. Jet skis are increasingly seen as a nuisance and banned. Mountain bikes are not allowed on certain trails at Mt. Tam where they were virtually invented.

For me, these are all reasonable and proper restrictions. BASE jumping from El Cap is an abuse of a national treasure and an insult to the millions of people who go the parks for some peace and inspiration.

DAR
Berkeley, CA

[guest]

I'm a former BASE jumper and skydiver. I think BASE jumpers should have some kind of legal access to the park.

I can't blame the NPS for this tragedy. That is absurd.

Bottom line: the time to make safety compromises is NOT when staging a high-profile protest like this. You should NEVER make safety compromises in this sport.

They should have had the world's five best BASE jumpers on that rock, with the world best gear. Nothing less.

I'm angry and disgusted by what has happened. But it is not towards the NPS that I direct most of my anger.

This is a wake-up call, people. Hear it.

[guest]

Please explain to us (those that do not basejump) what exactly the NPS policy is on basejumping and how that caused the death of the individual in question.

[guest]

Dear Mr. Brown:

You too make a reasoned response that misses only on a couple of points, so let me clarify some things for you.

First of all, I’d have to dig out my logbook, but I think we made a legal jump the same day or within days of each other. I did mine the day before Jerry Bird and Stan Brown’s group made theirs.

I’m glad you’ve favored legalization and thought the demo was a good idea. Moreover, you’re absolutely right that it’s bad news watching someone bounce, and that it’s no doubt worse for whuffos. And I don’t blame Mr. Roberts for _feeling_ about it the way he did.

What is unacceptable is his Nazi-like that it should be banned because _he_ doesn’t like it. Stomping on the rights and choices of people with whom you disagree is a precursor of repression and a much greater horror than hearing the sound of a body hit the ground at 120 miles per hour.

And Mr. Brown, the demonstration did _not_ fail in its purpose; it was _not_ designed to "demonstrate the safety of Base or any other kind of jumping." BASE jumping is _not_ safe. It is dangerous and you can get killed doing it. The purpose of the demonstration was to demand an end to the perverted policy that has created the current situation.

You also said: "I don't know why a person with over 3000 jumps wouldn't reach for her reserve, I didn't understand it when jeanni McCombs did the same thing years ago on a regular airplane skydive." Well, I don’t know what jeanni’s problem was, either, but Jan’s problem was: She didn’t have a reserve to reach for.


Unfortunately, you did so well in your post up until the end, when you kind of trampled all over your right hand man Richard: I’ve never jumped Half Dome or been on any Half Dome ground crews. That was some other guys.

[kleggo]

yo jackson
you do realize that "most" base jumps from the captain end with the jumper landing in the meadow, not "under el capitan". those that don't still would likely land in the trees, not the talus adjacent to the face.

but to answer your question
"I am curious as to whether you have ever considered what would happen if/when a BASE jumper lands on someone ? "

i reply
pretty much the same thing that would happen if a climber or other outdoor enthusiast took a whipper off the face and slammmed into a belay slave.
how likely is that to happen?
much more likely IMO than a base jumper landing on someone.
have you ever seen how maneuverable modern canopies are?

you also state
"It is irresponsible and self centered to focus on your rights to pursue a fleeting adrenalin rush when you are putting others at risk."

you're a climber right, or so you claim above. you should know what adrenalin and risk are about.
if you've ever climbed above someone or left ANY pro in a rock or led a aprtner up a sketchy route YOU have irresponsibly put others at risk. think about it.

and finally you ask,
"Have you ever thought that the NPS may have a fair reason to not want you jumping into a crowded area ? "

yes, i have. they do not.

any other ????????????'s

[guest]

Your question has two parts: Let me answer the first one below, and refer you to the posts "I’m for real and you are almost on the right track" and "You’re close to the right track too."

The history of NPS BASE policy was outlined in issue #184of Skydiving Magazine. It is reprinted in part below, courtesy of Skydiving Magazine.

= = = =
SOME BACKGROUND
The National Park Service has routinely filed illegal air delivery charges since the late 1970s against anyone caught parachuting from cliffs in NPS-controlled areas, most notably, Yosemite Valley in central California. (Those caught are also charged with conspiracy when two or more people are involved.)
Cliff jumping began there in 1978 when freefall cinematographer Carl Boenish led a skydiving expedition up the backside of El Capitan, the Valley’s famous 2,000-foot-high granite monolith. Boenish produced a spectacular 15-minute film of the adventure, which inspired hundreds of jumpers to jump thousands of times from buildings, antennas, bridges and cliffs all over the world. This new subdivision of parachuting became known as BASE jumping, after the name of the four principal object types.
Since the beginning, the height and beauty of El Capitan drew a steady stream of parachutists to Yosemite, causing much consternation in the National Park Service, which didn’t know what to make of this new recreational activity and its practitioners. So it tried to make cliff jumping go away.
The NPS refused to issue permits under the applicable powerless flight regulations and instead prosecuted jumpers under air delivery regulations designed in the 1950s and 1960s to prevent the aerial resupply of people squatting or mining in NPS-controlled areas. NPS officials defended their actions as necessary because parachuting was not "an appropriate park activity."
Then in 1980, under legal pressure from jumpers, the NPS started a cliff jumping program modeled after one it had used successfully with hang gliding: Between certain dates at certain times,12 jumpers a day would be allowed to launch from a specific spot on El Capitan.
The NPS enlisted the aid of the U.S. Parachute Association, which in its Parachutist Magazine of May 1980 published an article entitled "El Capitan Opens For Skydiving." The article was marked by an "Oh boy, a DZ in the park" mentality that ignored or was oblivious to the technical knowledge and environmental respect required for any wilderness activity. USPA’s only requirements for the long hike, the overnight stay, the demanding jump and tricky high-altitude landing were: USPA membership, A D (expert) license, a hard helmet and a square main parachute.
The stage was set for disaster. First, the NPS discovered it had created an administrative monster because cliff jumping by nature was more akin to the Valley’s completely unregulated rock climbing rather than its tightly regulated hang gliding. Jumpers and jumping so quickly became impossible to control that the NPS shut the program down after just six weeks.
This led to charges in some quarters that the program had been deliberately designed to fail. These charges were buttressed by the comments of then-Yosemite superintendent Bob Binneweis, who was quoted in the November 1980 Audubon magazine as saying: "We had to open it up to be able to manage it at all. If we had arbitrarily said, ‘no jumping,’ they would have dragged this out for years. Now that we know what the result is, our management ban will stick."
Just as importantly, parachutists arrived with their city attitudes and boogie manners at full throttle and in so doing "fouled their own nest" as then-chief ranger Bill Wendt put it. Many unprepared jumpers injured themselves, and NPS officials to this day remain aghast at the skydivers’ incredible per capita volume of littering, lawbreaking, lewd behavior, and total lack of respect for the wilderness, the park and its non-jumping visitors. In one incident at the valley’s public cafeteria, a drunken jumper screamed obscenities in front of dozens of children, elderly people and other park visitors.
After the program was shut down halfway through its inaugural test run, the two sides dug into their respective positions and began a long war of attrition that has intensified prejudices, increased penalties, magnified misunderstandings and created hard feeling all around. The U.S. Parachute Association was heavily criticized by both sides and refused to have anything more to do with it; this action was rationalized by an official declaration that BASE jumping was not a part of sport parachuting anyway.
Jumpers accuse the NPS of denying them their right to enjoy the parks like other adventure sportsmen. They specifically assert that many rangers are jackbooted zealots who routinely harass "suspected" cliff jujmpers, use personal vehicles and free time to hunt them, and employ tactics of questionable legality and ethicality. In one incident, CJAA official William Oxx was denied medical attention for a broken femur while rangers tried to coerce a confession from him.
Jumpers also call unfair the Yosemite policy of imposing $2,000 fines and total forfeiture of all equipment associated with the jump, including parachute gear, camera equipment an even motor vehicles -- all for an alleged crime listed in the Federal Code of Regulations along with playing a radio too loud in the campground.
The NPS, on the other hand, claims that the jumpers are unprincipled criminals who recklessly disregard the law and try to elude capture at every turn, to include the routine desertion of their dead and injured to avoid prosecution. NPS officials also defend their prosecutions, fines and forfeitures as appropriate because air delivery is also listed in the CFRs along with drunken driving and drug dealing.
(Although some jumpers question that parachute jumps from fixed objects constitute "aerial delivery" to begin with, since the jumps originate within the park itself and are not made from overflying aircraft. -- Ed.)
NPS further claims that cliff jumping deserves extra consideration because it involves deliberate intent and often, conspiracy, to break the laws of the United States of America. They also acknowledge in court documents that the severity of the legal penalties is intended to scare jumpers away from jumping off cliffs in NPS-controlled areas.
What the NPS didn’t figure out was that legal penalties -- even increased to the point of absurdity -- pale in significance to the physical risks of cliff jumping.
"The jump could take my life if I’m not careful," said one jumper who asked not to be identified because he still visits Yosemite regularly. "So the chance that the rangers could take my gear doesn’t affect my planning much -- except to be more discreet."

THE CURRENT SITUATION
The discretion led most jumpers in NPS-controlled areas to pursue their sport at night or in marginal weather to avoid detection. There were two exceptions: The New River Gorge Bridge in West Virginia, and at the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area.
The 876-foot-high New River Gorge Bridge has been a world-famous VASE jumping site since the early 1980s. Though illegal to jump from the rest of the year (because pedestrians are not allowed on the four-lane highway span), jumpers get their chance during the annual Bridge Day Celebration, when two lanes are closed and people can walk on the bridge.
The land under the bridge was privately owned until a few years ago, when the NPS acquired it. Jumping on Bridge Day continued, however, mostly because local citizens would have lynched the rangers if they had banned the activity that draws 250,000 spectators and their money to a remote corner of an off-the-beaten-path state.
But while the NPS does issue permits (though never for air delivery), its law enforcement officers also use the permit system as a way to build dossiers on individuals they feel may be disposed toward conspiring to violate NPS regulations against air delivery -- which means everybody who BASE jumps. Two years ago, rangers even arrested several jumpers who had outstanding warrants for such activities.

[guest]

If you thought rock climbing should be banned from El Capitan as an "arrogant misuse of a public place and asset," and "an insult to the millions of people who go the parks for some peace and inspiration," you'd at least be a consistent Nazi. Personally, I think Winnebagos should be banned from the Valley, because it's one thing to climb or jump from a cliff, but it's quite another to cruise around there belching hydrobarbons.

Funny how none of you little junior fascists think it's not a crime to have Winnebagos and the sheep who drive them overrunning God's grandest cathedral, but you take exception to a few adventure athletes pursuing their joy on its walls.

Nature AS IT IS? So you want to _drive a hydrocrabon-spewing machine_ into Yosemite Valley on a _PAVED ROAD_ so _YOU_ can "experience nature AS IT IS."

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

[speed]

"Every post I have made here acknowledges the personal responsibility" -Base44

EXCUSE ME.. but where in your post did you ever responsibility in your post!! Dont give my your holier then thou bullshit. You blame NPS and thats it.


"Andy West can talk all he wants about personal responsibility,and he's not wrong, but he misses the larger point:"-Base44

This ? Doesnt sound mutal to me and but there is no other point. No matter how bad you twist it it stops at the fact the law was broken. It was put in place under the name of safety (which is bogus I think we both agree) and it was broken and someone died. They win.

If in FACT as you suggest her arm went out, dont you think there would have been a little more thrashing around to reach it with the other arm ???????

Why dont you think about what the real issues are before you start petty name calling and just placing blame on who ever you want to.

(virtue!!) - You can not say it was the NPS fault based on the fact that they have a LAW that prevent the lawful act of BASE jumping. There are channels to go through to get laws changed - we live in a democracy

I am not saying the laws are correct, and I honestly think they are biased by someone who obviously had a bad experience BASE jumping, skydiving or with jumpers, but they were put in place by people we put in official positions. If you dont like it vote!

Finally, she should have jumped her own gear, and did her arm go out? Your right in that case it would not have mattered what rig she used.

But your feeble attempt at name calling just shows how much of a self-serving BASE jumper you really are. When you realize we are all on the same side we may be able to move this sport to the next level my friend.

[guest]

Thanks Jackson! Now that you brought up that excellent point, I HAVE considered what would happen.

So, next time I find myself above the meadow with a total, I'm now prepared for what I am going to do - track like mad for one of the stake-out team at the edge of the meadow.

You know know what they say - if you can't beat 'em, squish 'em! Plus, have you seen the shape some of those guys are in? You just might survive! (don't forget to come out of your track and de-arch!)

[guest]

In your message BASE44 wrote : Suing someone because they _allowed_ you to make a personal choice that resulted in your death or injury is unconscionable cowardice; fighting against a government because it _prohibits_ you from doing something -- and that prohibition results in injury or death, well, that’s a little different animal, wouldn’t you say?

When we jump, we make a personal choice. (At least I do, no one has ever forced me to make a jump). The governmennt prohibits our hobby, and your personal feelings about how or why it is prohibited are irrelevant. One can choose to honor the prohibition and stay home, or choose to ignore it and face the charges if caught. Those are the "personal choices" available. After the decision is taken to ignore the prohibition, a jump is a jump.


Your argument fails the test of logic.

[guest]

I think BASE jumpers should have some kind of legal access to parks -- not a year-round free-for-all. But something.

But if you think that fewer BASE jumpers will die if they are given legal access, you really need to pinch yourself. You are dreaming. Wake up.

Open the doors to the parks and you'll see more jumps. The law of averages and probability will take care of the rest.

When BASE jumpers start dying legally, who are you going to blame then? Hint: the same people you should be blaming now.

We Skydivers and BASE jumpers are a rare bunch indeed; our capacity for denial is astounding.

This is not a safe sport, it's not safer than driving your car to work -- or whatever other silly cliches we've spouted in years past.

Skydiving & BASE jumping are very dangerous, very unforgiving activities that can be made reasonably safe when pursued by competent people, making smart decisions, using proper gear.

Unfortunately, there will always be the "geek factor" -- those odd ducks who are least qualified and most motivated to be in this sport. I'm more worried about them than the NPS.

Yes, get rid of the Winnbegos. Yes, Rock climbers are carving away the granite and leaving their share of blood on the walls. Yes BASE jumpers are being discriminated against.

But until we get realistic about a few things ourselves, we'll never be accepted in the parks, much less by the public.

[guest]

>Motorbikes are prohibited on most
>trails.

...on most trails; BASE jumping is prohibited in ALL national parks.

>Jet skis are increasingly seen
>as a nuisance and banned.

...on some public waterways; BASE jumping is prohibited in ALL national parks.

>Mountain
>bikes are not allowed on certain
>trails at Mt. Tam where they
>were virtually invented.

...on certain trails, BASE jumping is prohibited in ALL national parks.

Do you get the point? They're our parks, too!

[guest]

I have waited to see what everyone had to say before I "entered the fray". I feel that BASE 44 is totally RIGHT ON. If BASE jumping were legal in our National Parks, Frank would have gone and had a drink with his friends after a successful jump just like I have done many times after climbing a difficult wall. Jan Davis would have jumped her own gear that she was used to jumping and would have probably been the subject of a beautiful video of the successful and uneventful jump. No "circus" of a demonstration would have taken place. No one, except for friends would have even been looking up at El Cap for jumping activity at that exact time. Many other people would either still be alive or not have spent long stretches in the hospital, lost the full use of their legs or ruined their careers if it were not for the ridiculous policies and selective discrimination The National Park Service. I am a big wall and ice climber, skydiver, cave and wreck diver, pilot, motorcycle rider and paraglider pilot. In my opinion, BASE jumping is safer than many of these other sports and activities. It is way safer than Ice climbing, big wall climbing, and cave diving. However, BASE is illegal in our National Parks and these other sports are not. I do not think that anyone was trying to demonstrate the safety of our sport. We BASE jumpers readily acknowledge that BASE jumping is dangerous. And as far as environmental impact is concerned, thousands of tour busses run through the National Parks and in spite of repeated requests, the Park Service will not even ask them to not leave their Diesel engines running for hours while the busses are sitting in the parking lots. There was talk for years of shuttle busses in the parks with low pollution engines, yet the new busses do not met the original criteria. The concessions in the parks run their own tours with smoke spewing trucks pulling hundreds of screaming, pointing tourists and in Yosemite, one can not enjoy the peace and tranquillity of the park for the "bull horns" of the "Green Dragon" which is a tour run about every 20 minutes through the main and lower park by the concession. There is Horse crap on the trail to Half Dome left by the concession. And now there is a plan to close down hundreds of campsites and cut down old growth trees to install luxury motels in Yosemite Valley. The brothers of the Secretary of The Interior are even in control of the concessions in several parks.(can you say - CONFLICT OF INTEREST ?) Climbers routinely throw trash, cans, haul bags and poop al over the walls. Hikers and climbers put a burden on the rescue/body recovery personnel in the parks much more than BASE jumpers. As a matter of fact, Jean Boenish, myself and others have offered to provide insurance for full payment for any rescue services provided to BASE jumpers in the parks as well as supervising safety, training and the permit process just like hang gliding and this was refused by The National Park Service, along with the permits to jump. The Park Service has had years to sort this out and reach a reasonable compromise on the BASE jumping issue. I feel that the responsibility for Frank, Jan and many other fatalities and serious injuries have been a direct result of the National Park Services refusal to reach a compromise with organized BASE jumpers like they have reached with the organizations representing other sports. I strongly encourage the BASE community to think about the FACT that many of the tragedies we are witnessing today could have reasonably and easily been avoided had our NAZI, rights violating(vehicle and home searches, gun laws), murdering(Waco Texas - Ruby Ridge Idaho), lying(the president, the FBI on the witness stand, The National Park Service) government listened to us and taken reasonable action years ago to legalize BASE jumping in our National Parks. Compare statistics for injuries and fatalities resulting from BASE jumping illegally in National Parks to the ones from legal BASE jumps on BLM and at other legal sites. You will be surprised. Imagine if rock climbing and ice climbing were illegal. People would be forced to sneak in and climb at night or in really bad weather to avoid the rangers and many would die. I implore the National Park Service to stop making excuses and legalize BASE jumping in our National Parks, just like climbing and other sports before more needless deaths occur. And to all the wimps who have suddenly decided to get on this board and insult us, I have this to say. We do nothing whatsoever to hurt you or the environment. Go learn to skydive, go learn to BASE jump, go learn to rock climb, go learn to climb a frozen waterfall, go ride a street luge at 70 mph and THEN come back and tell us how you feel. Because, at this point, you are all just mindless, clueless, head-in-the-sand sheep who are blindly following your NAZI government to a "New World Order" just like Germany became under Adolph Hitler. Go get a life and leave BASE jumping to the people who really love it.

Earl Redfern

[guest]

You guys continue to astound me with your utter lack of reading comprehension and logical ability.

Try reading my posts again -- slowly (you know, maybe sounding the words out will help) and hopefull this time you will notice that there are no differences between what I've said and what you're whining about... other than the lovely little straw men you set up... of course, you probably don't know what a straw man is either.

Jeez, did either of you yo yos even make it through high school?

[guest]

Like Ouch and BC, you have a reading comprehension problem that you should address before you address this board like a grownup.

And l;et's get rioght to your point: THERE IS NO LAW AGAINST BASE JUMPING. PERIOD.

THe regulation used was created in the 1950s to address and _regulate_ (not prohibit) aerial resupply of miners and squatters in NPS-occupied zones.

It was used by the pervert Connelly so he could stick it to us the same way he sticks it to little boys. Period.

And then this perverted practice became perverted policy when Connelly's higher ups bought into, and no it has become _institutionalized conduct_ by the NPS bureaucracy. Period.

You _are_ right that we are all on the same side; that's where the glimmer of intelligence comes in. But sayiong that still doesn't stop you from attacking me and everyone else and airing our "side's" internal discussion.

Yeah, I really want you on my side: With "friends" like you, we sure don't need any enemies.

[guest]

Hey 44, sounds like you have some information that needs to be shared. That's twice you have mentioned something about Jan's arm or shoulder. What gives? My question is: If, "it still would have been a one-parachute rig which Jan would have been unable to deploy when her arm went out", what difference would it make if she were jumping her own tried and true rig. She still, "would have been unable to deploy it when her arm went out". That leads me to ask you one more time, how is the NPS partly responsible for Jan's death, and who cares if it was borrowed gear? If you know something relevent to the cause of the accident, then please share it. Otherwise, if you are publicly speculating about a possible cause of Jan going without any evidence before any investigation results are in, then chill out!

[guest]

Good questions. Let me try to answer:

1. Jan had a bad shoulder and from the video record it looks as if it went out on her when she tried to pull.

2. The difference her own gear would have made in the outcome is that her own gear was not a one-parachute, low-altitude BASE rig but a skydiving rig with which she had successfully jumped Angel Falls, bridges, buildings, various antennas, etc, etc.

3. The NPS remains culpable in part for Jan's death because if it was not for their perverted policy of seizing gear for an offense akin to feeding the squirrels (imagine if you got your car seized because you threw a piece of popcorn from it to the animals?). Whether Jan went with borrowed gear because she didn't want Connelly's Cops pawing her beloved gear or just wanted to reduce the monetary loss, I don't know because I didn't talk to her about this jump, but the fact remains: If BASE jumpers weren't treated like criminals by Connelly's Criminal Cops, she would have been jumping her familiar old gear that had kept her alive and safe during many years of adventures and demanding jumps.

[guest]

On point 2: When Jan couldn't pull her main with her right arm, she could have pulled her reserve with her left. As it was, the only option she had was to try and pull a right-side leg-mounted pilot chute with her left arm -- which the video record shows she tried but failed to do.

[guest]

This is the biggest crock I've ever heard. Both deaths were caused by a poor decision made by the jumpers, a decision between money (equipment) and safety. Neither diver was forced to make the decision to use borrowed equipment or to go jump in a river, they made the decision on their own...equipment or safety...equipment! It may be sad that they had to make the decision in the first place, but ultimately they made the decision that led to their demise.

[guest]

This is the biggest crock I've ever heard. Both deaths were caused by a poor decision made by the jumpers, a decision between money (equipment) and safety. Neither diver was forced to make the decision to use borrowed equipment or to go jump in a river, they made the decision on their own...equipment or safety...equipment! It may be sad that they had to make the decision in the first place, but ultimately they made the decision that led to their demise.

[guest]

This is the biggest crock I've ever heard. Both deaths were caused by a poor decision made by the jumpers, a decision between money (equipment) and safety. Neither diver was forced to make the decision to use borrowed equipment or to go jump in a river, they made the decision on their own...equipment or safety...equipment! It may be sad that they had to make the decision in the first place, but ultimately they made the decision that led to their demise.

[guest]

the park's perverted policy stinks O.K.

[guest]

I never want experiance anything that again.
Climbimg must be stopped!
Now what you hip hop hippies?
no, it was not scott or frank (RIP)would be alive, mind you.

[guest]

I appreciate your reply, and while the Nazi references still don't sit well, I can understand and empathize with your feelings of shared responsibility, but ultimately, when someone base jumps, they must be 100% responsible for their actions because they will deal with 100% of the consequences, be they legal, tragic, or triumphant.


Peace

[guest]

ONce again, kid, Frank and Jan were ultimately responsible for the choices that resulted in their deaths, but NPS's perverted policies contributed thereto and there is a body of case law supporting it.

And once again, those choices would never have been made had NPS not continued to blindly follow the perverted practices of M. Scott Connelly for the last 20 years.

So try having someone read my posts to you; maybe you'll understand them better that way.

[guest]

I (hope I) have posted my email address if Fred Morelli wants to get in touch.

[guest]

Long after you melt away, the parks will remain. The parks will never boast of a renewed sense of spirit, intellect, etc. because David found his peace there. Just as you have the right to visit the park in a vegetative state(with your eyes and ears half closed, and your arms crossed), BASE jumpers deserve the independence to fulfill their calling as well. Nature speaks to people in different ways. If you truly accept yourself as one with nature you would accept how others see themselves in relationship to nature. Here's an old cliche for you: Variety is the spice of life. -Isn't life grand?

[guest]

Oh, let the little baby have at it. He's born to rant and whine. Frustration festers in him like a tumor. If he were to shut up, he'd explode.

[guest]

Base44,

I don't know that it is worth trying to explain logic to you, but I can explain why you are viewed by many as a nut-case. You have to seperate the issues if you want credibility. The fact that Scott Connelly is a convicted child molester is irrelevant. To continue to rant about "perverts" and "child molesters" clouds the real issue. Leave it alone. The Nazi references do nothing for your arguments. They make you look like an idiot.

You and I and all the other base jumpers have the same goal: Legalized jumping in National Parks. Clouding your message with raves about perverts and child molesters just confuses the issue. Even your apology to Hayes ended up insulting the gentleman. Hayes' and the rest of the general public are important to our cause. We will need more political support than the 1000 or so base jumpers we have in this country.

Remember, the issue is we are denied equal access to National Parks. We must demand that equal access is granted, and the more politically savy and publically palatable the demands, the more likely they will be granted. Can these demands be powerful, forceful, and unrelenting? Absolutely!! But we must be clear and consise.

[guest]

Hey there, young pup:

Most of your last post made pretty good sense, but you ought to quit preaching to your elders and start listening a little more carefully to them and you'll learn a l ot more quicker.

Like the old saying goes, your parents seem so dumb when you're a teenager and so much smarter after you GROW UP.

Love,


BASE44

[guest]

You may either agree with what my last post said, or you may disagree. Deflecting my comments with a weak jab about my age is pointless to the argument at hand. Yes, I am younger than you and have less experience in BASE. Now that your superior position in the sport and advanced age are clear to all let's continue.

You either agree that your previous posts with "perverts" and "Nazis" are ineffective or not. My point is that it is not effective to drag issues out of the past that cannot assist in the fight for equal access to national parks.

Is your cause to gain access, or are you supporting self help groups for the victims of child molesters? We will gain more through concise, articulate communication than through ranting and raving.

[guest]

If you want to do BASE jumping a service, read the post by OUCH! rebutting BASE44. He is the the kind of person we need to communicate the basic issues that BASE44 is ineffectively attempting to communicate.

BASE44 is clueless with regard to the politics involved. Maybe he should up his dosage of prozac.

[guest]

While most of my sympathy at the moment lies with Tom and his family, I cannot help but be surprised at the vehemence with which skydivers and base jumpers attack each other in times like this. This is a time to support each other and join together in a common cause, not to belittle and label people. Blaming the NPS for Frank and Jan's death is illogical. Suppose that I was driving 80 mph in a 55 mph zone and a cop attempted to stop me... would everyone in this group defend my actions if I suddenly started going 120 mph to outrun the cop (because I didn't want a ticket) and ended up in a fatal accident. Would you all say that it was the government's fault for preventing me from traveling at the speed I wanted to? Would you blame the cop for chasing me? Come on! We all make our choices. Jan chose her fight and made her decisions as we all do. Part of skydiving and base jumping is understanding the risks involved and taking responsibility for yourself. Most of us are critical of American society as a whole because they always believe that someone else should be responsible for their actions. Access to federal parks is similar to access to federal airports in my mind. We should be fighting this issue in the same manner. Safety was not the reason we were thrown out of Yosemite originally so it shouldn't even be an issue. This fight needs to be taken to your elected representatives through a proper campaign. Blaming the NPS for deaths in the parks will get us nowwhere except labeled as fruitcakes. The government is not responsible if I choose to break the law (whether or not I believe that law to be right or wrong is irrelevant). If I choose to break any law, I take that risk knowing full well (as Jan did) what my options are.

[imported_Tom Aiello]

I wasn't aware that BASE was legal in Tuolomne.

[imported_Tom Aiello]

Unfortunately, in U.S. law, you need a test case involoving actual parties who are harmed or otherwise effected by the law directly. It is insufficient in our courts to simply ask for review. You must first break the law, then be arrested and tried (and often must also be found guilty), then challenge the constitutionality of the law (i.e. ask for judicial review).

That was, in fact, the entire purpose of this El Cap jump--to establish the test case required for judicial review. Without the jump, your suggested course of action is impossible--with the jump it may be feasible.

BASE jumpers are neither stupid nor blind. In order to pursue legal avenues of redress, this "protest jump" was completely necessary.

[guest]

Dear fine young pup:

My comment about your age was not a weak jab but a gentle reminder that experience and knowledge change the way you see the world, and one of the chief things experience teaches is: There is usually more to a complex situation than meets the eye.

My experience with BASE, personally, professionally, and politically, goes back 21 years, to about two weeks after Carl Boenish and his crew made the first jumps and sent pictures of them to me in my slot as editor of Parachutist, the U.S. Parachute Association magazine. Soon after, I started BASE jumping and have continued to jump and write about it and think about how to solve the problem with the NPS.

Twenty-one years ago, you were probably still closer to wearing diapers than you were to getting your driver's license., and so, since you dismissed my gentle reminder, try this slap upside your eager young head, because you are a smart pup and will probably be all right with a little training and discipline.

Soooo, you said:

"You either agree that your previous posts with "perverts" and "Nazis" are ineffective or not."

No, pup, life is not that simple. According to what definition? You presume to know my purpose and intent and goals without bothering to even ask what they are. You equally presume to know those same things about the NPS.

You assume that your perception, your understanding of the problem, the issues involved, its history, the micro and macro political processes associated therewith, and the interrelationships themselves, is complete. But as Marshall McLuhan said: "Environments are invisible. Their groundrules, pervasive structures and overall patterns elude easy perception."

So from where you stand, young pup, it’s easy to make a " point is that it is not effective to drag issues out of the past that cannot assist in the fight for equal access to national parks."

But your point is baloney. You are flat out, undeniably and utterly ...wrong. In the matter of Connelly’s Cops, past IS present and that past will help the world really see this situation for what it really is. Briefly:

The structure of NPS’s perverted policy reflects the perversion of the person who promulgated it. NPS’s "management ban on BASE jumping" is actually no more than the SYSTEMIC MOLESTATION OF POWERLESS INDIVIDUALS BY EMPOWERED INDIVIDUALS WHO USE THEIR STANDING IN THE COMMUNITY TO PREY ON WHOM THEY CHOOSE.

The NPS policy toward BASE jumpers is a paradigm of predatory perversion... it’s a bureaucratic version of that supposedly respectable uncle -- the banker, the cop, the outstanding businessman -- who also sexually molests his nieces or nephews and then, even if they are brave enough to tell, they are not believed because who would think such a thing to be possible of good ol’ successful, favorite nice guy Uncle?

That is precisely -- preCISEly -- what we are dealing with here: A perverted policy which mirrors the pervert who created it and that’s why I’m starting there, at the beginning, because Lao-Tzu said: Before we can understand the universe, we must call things by their right names. And after that Santayana said: Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.

Yet you don’t want to mention past evils that are intrinsically relevant to our future. Were I to presume as much as you do, young pup, I would think that maybe you came from a family where there was sexual molestation that went unchallenged and never mentioned, and then buried in the past because it has nothing to do with today.

But I won’t and I don’t. I say this only to help you register the pattern, see the environment, understand the pervasive structure through which we are weaving today’s actions.

No, the reason you don’t want to mention past evils that are intrinsically relevant to our future is not because you’re evil or illogical or emotionally impaired; you just don’t know any better. And this is not a presumption but an analysis based upon your comments.

And so I’ll say this again a little differently: Shut up and listen. God gave us two ears, two eyes and one mouth so we could listen and watch four times more than we talk. I appreciate your elan and your intelligence and your confidence and that is why I bother to even treat with you, but you really need to sit back and watch and listen for a while. Trust me; in six months you’ll look back on these posts and say to yourself, "Jeez, I was really clueless, wasn’t I?"

And to answer your final question: My cause absolutely is to gain access, AND I am supporting a self-help group for the victims of child molesters:

BASE jumpers and NPS rangers.

We are all of us victims of the child molester Scott Connelly, and as soon as the rangers figure that out, they’ll dump his perverted policy as quickly as they dumped him once he got arrested.

But excuse me for ranting and raving.

[guest]

Read my reply to Ouch.

[guest]

Hayes,
I too believe that we should protect such places and preserve them for future enjoyment. I agree that such a place is inappropriate for such spectacle. I look forward to a time that we will bring as little commotion with us as the clibers and hikers. We are not looking to own the park. We don't even want to run the park. We only want to share it and enjoy it with everyone else.
I want to thank you for taking the time to come to our website and gather information about us. Hopefully we can convince you that, even if you do not understand us, at least you can agree that we should have access to the park as well.
Todd

[guest]

BASE 666 - e-mail me please

Earl

[guest]

how come the two most current RESPONDERS ("reactionary") individuals are the least current base jumpers?
i would let you know you who i am but i base wearing lingerie and a lubricated glow in the dark strap on two way bridle using stolen bounced gear at nite backwards on cid ...
i love you guys
scott scott was a snot
he talked talked talked and got busted for pot
he rolled over in bed and and knocked me out but he missed this head
suckers

[guest]

how come the most current "reactionary" repliers are the least current jumpers

[guest]

TorranceBob,e-mail me ! ,Mark

[guest]

girls arn't dumb

[guest]

TorranceBob, e-mail me! ,Mark nbase41@hotmail.com

[guest]

Tom wrote:
" ... in U.S. law, you need a test case involoving actual parties who are harmed or otherwise effected by the law directly. "

Without wishing to turn this thread into a discussion forum for comparative lawyers, the same is true in English law. Showing that you have "locus standi" (i.e. that you personally have been affected by the decision) is one of the requirements to obtain leave for judicial review.

Tom wrote:
"You must first break the law, then be arrested and tried (and often must also be found guilty), then challenge the constitutionality of the law (i.e. ask for judicial review)."

But there can be instances where the executive decision cannot be challenged simply by breaking the law (e.g. a decision to deport an allegedly illegal immigrant, or a refusal to grant a passport): does U.S. law offer no means of redress in such circumstances? (It may be that these are bad examples, but I am sure you could come up with one that works in the context of the US system).

In English law too you need an "event" to give you an opportunity to review the executive decision. In this case, the "event" would be the decision by the NPS to refuse to grant a permit to an individual BASE jumper, who would then bring the application for JR in his/her name (obviously with backing/funding from the wider community).

Are you really limited in the US to challenging the constitutionality of *the law* (as opposed to the exercise of a discretion given by the law to an executive agency). This seems to me to be an important (if not the essential) distinction: it is *much* harder to challenge *the law* in this way (after all, it seems at first blush perfectly sensible to regulate "air delivery" or whatever it happens to be, and to hand the responsibility for regulating it to an executive agency), than it is to challenge *the exercise* of power or discretion under it.

Tom wrote:
"That was, in fact, the entire purpose of this El Cap jump--to establish the test case required for judicial review. Without the jump, your suggested course of action is impossible--with the jump it may be feasible."

I did not know that that was the purpose of the jump, and I sincerely apologise for my ignorance.

With respect, my suggested course of action (if it could get anywhere as a matter of law) would involve only applying for and being refused a permit. If that is not an option as a matter of US law, then obviously my idea could never take off.

Tom wrote:
"BASE jumpers are neither stupid nor blind. In order to pursue legal avenues of redress, this "protest jump" was completely necessary."

I am concerned by your last paragraph. I have re-read my post and do not believe that I made any such suggestion. Indeed, my whole post was prefaced by an apology if I was re-inventing the wheel. For the record, I do not suggest for one moment (nor do I believe) that BASE jumpers are stupid or blind. I have only admiration for (a) the courage and (b) the level of professionalism which must go into planning and executing a BASE jump.

I was only trying to be constructive: I have found in the course of my practice that exchanging ideas with other legal systems (even between systems far more different than yours and mine) can be very fruitful and enlightening. If it can't be done, however, it can't be done.

I was certainly not seeking and I have no wish to criticise (directly or indirectly) the protest jump which took place last Friday.

If the test case is to proceed, notwithstanding Jan Davis's death, then I wish it and those involved in bringing it every possible success.

[guest]

You rant and you rave so much that any good message you deliver is clouded by anger. You are just plain wrong, and other than a few other ravers like yourself, you ARE viewed as a kook and now as a crazy OLD man. You cannot seperate the issues, and they are in fact, seperate. Your lack of ability to understand this is why you will always fail. 21 years of effort and you have accomplished NOTHING! We are exactly where we were 21 years ago. Your thought process is akin to the war on drugs, which has also blindly put forth a point a view for 20 years that is neither capable of solving a problem and to rigid to change with the times to meet the challenge.

Since we can't teach an old dog new tricks, stand down and let the younger, contemporary thinkers do what your policy of anger and blind hatred has so pathetically failed at. If you think your "experience" and "past positions" have earned you respect you are sorely wrong. Your results (and angry misdirected posts) speak volumes about you.

It is obvious you fancy yourself a leader in the base community. When I started base jumping, it's funny, I never heard of you. I heard of the real leaders who continue to lead and make real strides for BASE. People like Dennis and Avery who disagree as you do with current policy, but somehow actually make things happen.

So sorry you lost your way, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

[guest]

I made use of my lunch hour today to go out and blow $40 on "Understanding [U.S.] Administrative Law" by Prof. William F. Fox Jr. I have not had time to read very much of it and it is of course very general, but what I have read appears to confirm that, in principle, it may be possible to judicially review an NPS decision not to grant a permit: abuse of discretion, after all, is one of the principal bases upon which a court will judicially review an agency decision. It may be arguable that a policy never to exercise a discretion in favour of granting a permit is an abuse of discretion.

There would undoubtedly be very many difficulties in such a case, of which standing (particularly if the reviewing court is a federal one) would be just one.

However, if (AND I EMPHASISE "IF") no one out there has sought the advice of a lawyer specialising in administrative law/judicial review on this question before now, it might just be worth forking out a few (I use the word "few" ironically, of course) bucks to do so (on the assumption that there are no BASE-jumping administrative lawyers out there who would do it for free).

If they have, and the answer was "NO", then I apologise (again) for wasting your time.

[guest]

Come on Robin, just look at the past four days of posts on the board. How can you preach about how, "we could listen and watch four times more than we talk." You have preached,derided, and condescendingly insulted just about everyone you disagree with. It appears to me that there are at least four times more Robin Heid posts here than anyone else. And I'm sure that in response to my comments you will insult me and try to deflect my comments by changing the subject, as others have already pointed out. Go ahead, Robin, count your posts, and then preach some more to us about listening. Your are digging us in deeper and deeper, and I, for one, certainly do not consider you to be any spokesman for the community of BASE! Please, back off!

Now, I predict you will demonstrate to us what I just commented about. Take it away, Robin, point by point!

[guest]

As I said before, let's talk about this in six months. Until then, try not to take your board attitude into your BASE jumps or we won't get the chance.

Love,


BASE44

[guest]

Hey Base 666,

I am extremely current. If you don't want to reveal your identity, go to www.alloutvideo.com, get my phone number and call me from a pay phone. Just because I defend Scott (but not his stupid girlfriend) does not mean that I am the enemy of any BASE jumper. Quite the oposite, in fact. So call me.

Earl

[guest]

dont pack in camp #4 again this this draws attention to us current YOSEMITE jumpers

[guest]

Until October 7th I was doing nothing but BASE jumping for several months. What do you think alloutvideo productions is all about ? On October 7th, I was sentenced to 12 years with 6 months to be served in prison(the county work farm) and the rest on probation. They said I broke into a building to get a key that I have had for years because they left the number printed on the padlock. I was locked up on October 7th and released on bond, pending appeal with the following stipulation, if you can believe this: -"REFRAIN FROM ANY BASE JUMPING ACTIVITY WHETHER LEGAL OR NOT AND REFRAIN FROM ATTENDANCE AT ANY SUCH EVENT OR ASSOCIATION AT SUCH EVENT WITH OTHER BASE JUMPERS" This is how the South Georgia court system deals with tower jumps. They charge you with several felonies and then try to extort $18,000 out of you for "damages" in trade for a misdemeanor and when you fight them they lie on the witness stand and the judge forces the jury out for days until they screw you super hard with a "compromise verdict". I have spent over$20,000 so far and it's not over yet. I am having to sell things that are precious to me to battle these evil foes. I will never give up this fight! That is why I am here, spending so much time on this board, brother. I can not jump or even make a living shooting video and I was in the middle of shooting a documentary on(legal)BASE jumping. And that's just one of the reasons I want to help get this loose-knit group of friends into the main stream and develop some POWER so that we are a force to be reconed with when "they" try to screw with any of us. So there !


Earl

[guest]

OK This has got to be a joke, man. I have never packed in Camp 4. I would be willing to bet, at this point that this is one of my climbing friends who has nothing better to do because it's getting cold in the valley. Or perhaps you are actually a ranger trying to set a trap for someone and you think that if you stir us up and get us mad, we will give you some information that you can use against us. Well the joke is on you, pal. So have a nice day and get a life. I don't even think you are a jumper at all now that I think about it. I will not waste my time responding to any more of your silly rants and I strongly encourage everyone else here to do the same. AMFYOYO BASE 666.

Earl Redfern

[Tree]

You made your case well, and I agree completely. there are proper channels and people in the base community are taking them. The protest jumps are the test case to take the legal fight to the next level (or so I presume). We will accomplish our goal of equal access through these channels, as is our right and responsibility.


You will, however, be hammered by Base44, king of all fruitcakes for making sense.

Tree

[guest]

not even at moab

[guest]

i will talk to robin now (base 44)

[guest]

i understand now , thank you
but i dont think base44 will like it

[guest]

It would be nice if the reasons, other than illegal delivery, for BASEjumping's illegal status in Yosemite were available here on this message board.

BASE44 put up something, but I don't trust his take on it any more than I could throw him.

My guess is that BASEjumping is considered too dangerous and too large of a burden on the NPS emergency systems. How is it different from climbing? How is it different from hang-gliding?

Hayes

[guest]

Dude,

In Moab I pack in the city park during the daylight and answer questions about BASE jumping from all the kids and other people who come along. It's just like in Twin Falls at the visitor center. This is how BASE Jumping should be in America, "THE LAND OF THE FREE". I do not like having to hide like a bandit, but if I have to, I do it well.

HUMITONDOWN ! ! !

Earl

[guest]

BASE 666,

It's OK man. I am a climber so I've been slandered much worse than that. You're only a baby slanderer. I have been slandered by pros. Now brother,"Listen to the force" we have all "aired it out" for a few days. So let us take the next step TOGETHER. Remember this, I would forgive a fellow BASE jumper who punched me in the nose before I would say hello to a stranger.

Earl

[guest]

Base44: The NPS is entitled to ban BASE jumping at Yosemite. By your line of reasoning no government could make any law against anything. If anyone is going to enjoy Yosemite as a wilderness area then someone has to be empowered to enforce some rules. Otherwise there would be about fifty hotels in the valley and a Jack In The Box at the top of Half Dome. Allowing BASE jumping would certainly cost the NPS significantly in manpower and money as well as unneccessary risks to the Rangers who have to climb around and scrape the occasional unsuccessful jumper off the rockwork.

No one is saying that you can't live, practice your religion, say whatever you like, or jump out of an airplane. You can even camp out and hike at Yosemite and enjoy the pristine wilderness for what it is. You can go to Fargo, South Dakota, if you like, and build a two thousand foot tower and jump off that all day long if you like. The NPS is only saying you can't jump off Half Dome, which is a pretty small thing to not be able to do and if you think that makes Rangers a bunch of Nazis then you a narrow-minded, self centered idiot with no sense of perspective and you deserve to have to live in a real totalitarian state ruled by real jackbooted thugs. Why don't you move to Tibet? They've got all sorts of things you could jump off of.

[guest]

now you have narrowed the feild by 66%
my camp #4 source was a fool
my scott source is first hand
but lets move on your friend 666

[guest]

I'm sorry. You know - the usual assumption.
I am very tired, I think I'll go away for a while. All the best to everyone here.

Earl Redfern

[guest]

When Dan Osman died slack rope jumping off the Leaning Tower they deemed it "an inappropriate use of the resource". Does this carry much weight? Is there a law? Are there penalties?
Unilatterally they decide what they feel is an OK use of the parks. It is OK if I take off and try an A5 route with clothes line and boat hooks. Now, if I need to be rescued because of being illprepared I may be asked to participate in the cost of the rescue. Fair enough, my mistake. If I go hiking with my hands in my pockets, trip, land on my head and die (like the tourist this spring) it's OK. Darwin is alive in the Valley.
Base jumpers want to be treated the same as climbers. No restrictions, no policing, no proficiency checks, no gear minimums...
The hang gliding experience in the Valley has been emasculated by restrictions. The Merced, Yellowstone and other rivers are restricted to kayakers. It's their park too.
Burden on the system? The policing of a policy that is out of line is where the real burden is. What has been the outcome of the "drug war"? Overcrowded jails and ruined lives for meaningless, victimless offences of zero tolerance.
We want to jump the walls of Yosemite without the worries of being persecuted by an inapropriate interpretation of a law meant to protect the parks from exploitation. (There is a system to issue permits though. There is a huge business doing just that in Talkeetna.)
It ain't safe but neither is climbing or walking around with your hands in your pockets. We'll take responsibility for our actions.

[guest]

Hey Earl, why don't you take a look at the thread--"Talking to strangers"!!!!!!!!!!

[guest]

Hey Earl, Why don't you take a look at
"Talking to Strangers" This is for you!!

[guest]

To Base44,
Since you're so fond of famous quotes, try this one..."me thinks he doth protest too much."
Your fixation with this Connelly person is very telling from a psychological standpoint. One might say you actually are titillated by his activities and are living vicariously through him.

Also, you nazi references fall into the same category...

Like you, Adolf Hitler preached civil disobedience and anarchy in his days before coming to power.

Seek Help!!

Your El Capitan Beer Hall Putsch was as ineffective and tactically inept as anything he ever thought up.

Seek Help!!

These verbal barrages you post are equally as inept and unsuccessful at swaying opinion as any V-1 rocket ever launched by Hitler.

Seek Help!!

Substitute the word "Jews" for each NPS reference in your mountain of diatribes, and you've got yourself a nice little Mein Kampf going there.

Seek Help!!

Could it be that you're actually a closet pedophile and neo-nazi?
It's all very Freudian...

To Earl Redfern and all other clear thinking Base jumpers out there...

Don't lower yourselves by giving Base44 a verbal "high five" when he posts that garbage. Stay on the moral high road and keep trying to get your views heard and understood. People like Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks accomplished more in just a few years than all of the screaming abolitionists had in the previous one hundred. They did this through quiet dignity and rightiousness, not ranting and name calling.
I realize you have an almost impossible task, battling an immense government monolith, but just as El Capitan will one day be so much sand in a far distant riverbed, you too can chip away at your mountain by fighting the good fight and hanging in there.

I wish you all good luck, and I hope I'm not insulting all of you who've "been there" by saying Blue skies.

[guest]

RESPECT EARL
how are they going to find a link anyway
BASE666

[guest]

Sometimes Robin darling you do go on....but I really enjoyed reading that last bit. Very eloquent and well said. You do know the language & our constitution well. I commend you for bringing up so many thought provoking comments. You are usually (what am I saying usually - I meant ALWAYS - LOL) controversial, the readers either love you or hate you, but one thing I think they can all agree on, you made them THINK! Keep it up love!

Blue Skies darling - see you in Elsinore or Yosemite or both - I hope! ......Brenda

[guest]

Robin darling, sometimes you do go on, but I usually enjoy what you have to say. I especially enjoyed reading this last posting. It was very eloquent and well said. You certainly know the language & the constitution well!

You are usually (what am i saying - usually? - I meant ALWAYS - LOL!) controversial and the readers either love you or hate you, but one thing i think most can agree on - you make them THINK!

Keep it up love! Keep stirring it up and don't let them get comfortable in their apathy! (Mari - this is NOT a dig at you or anybody in particular - just a general observation....)

See you at Elsinore or Yosemite or both I hope!

[guest]

Mr Sims,

I just heard, from a fairly reputable source, that those luxory hotels and McDonalds, not Jack in the Box, are on their way! Be looking for them in the next few years........Yummmm, McDonalds for my picnic lunch, but I can't climb the face of El Cap, then jump off of it......

And the prohibition isn't just for Half Dome....it's for a lot more cliffs than just that particularly lovely site! It encompasses all the cliffs in Zion, Lake Powell, Yosemite, just to name a few.........

[guest]

The issue that earl and i got in to is unresolved and i think deleted from all the threads on this board (print stuff...)
so i started teasing him on side issues
i am sorry for this and will say it again and again and again for the really slow learners
yes he was a stranger to me and most of us but now we all Know his mettel
i am glad and i hope every one else is
"cid" (gleaned one of My posts) "do you really want to confront Me do you really want to ##### with ME? i really dont think so"
ive forgotten more on my trips in the valley then you would ever know
i ##### bigger than a $2000 rig (though i can hardly feed myself but i wouldnt drik a coke if you paid me $20 )and i can do any time standing on my head making more friends [with strangers my way] and laughing
what part of "make damm sure did youall forget"
im glad its illegal to base jump in the park
it keeps fools and uns killed away
its my park
base jumpers are invisable by defintion
l/_... poof *

[guest]

dont get it twisted
a fellow goes in at the bridge
we enlarge the pilot chute and extend the bridle
another green friend gets it in the head on a skydive
we reccomend the cyprus
another spins in we create the first type of zoos
we were green
we suck to the best carry our own weight have patience and our own new gear and start over water
a pilot chute gets stuck on our foot
we revaluate what we are really doing here
the river is swollen
dont jump if S#### is on the launch point or
around
the sun comes up it heats the earth we live we learn we live each day to its fullest rejoicing in life helping others and asking for help
peace on earth to all of you, the rangers base heads those hurting and those hating
LOVE666
if base was legal it would take the fun out of it
ill never get caught
people on this board that imply that our frinds are the informants are using an acidemic police tactic to turn ourselves against each other
do you have any idea of the tight bind that basers have with each other...no
far greater than the rangers have with each other cause we got to mutch love i.e. we dont shoot our selves in the leg and try to say it was a drive by
but maybe they are right as i have no friends and rage up and down the valley with one chute and a 66 foot long rope
see ya

[guest]

= = = =

Mr. Baker:

You're a good writer, very observant, and obviously educated (Jeez, at least you know who Rosa and Martin are, and what a V-i1 is! :), but unfortunately, you have major deficiencies when it comes to correlating your data, making sense of what you read, and understanding basic morality .

Yes, I am fixated with Connelly, in part because the slimy little weasel strip-searched _me_ when I was arrested in Yosemite in 1979 for jumping El Capitan.

And yes, I'd like to see that slimy little weasel really fry because he walked after 16 months for the crimes he committed, when non-law enforcement pedophiles usually look at 16 YEARS.

Now, an interest in revenge and _justice_ may seem perverted to you, but tell me, sir, do you bash the kids who come forward years later to talk about abuse at the hands of priests and other trusted adults in their lives? Do you accuse _them_ of being closet pedophiles who live vicariously through their attackers? There's a bit of a stink coming from your halo, sir.

Once you get to the Nazi stuff, your conclusions wander ever further afield.

You contend that my resistance to police state thugs and their perverted policies means that I actually _support_ and "live vicariously" through them? You must have been a sociology major.

You said: "Like you, Adolf Hitler preached civil disobedience and anarchy in his days before coming to power."

And like me, so did Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, Gandhi.... jeez, dude, what kind of brain farts are you blowing our way here?

You said: "Substitute the word "Jews" for each NPS reference in your mountain of diatribes, and you've got yourself a nice little Mein Kampf going there... Could it be that you're actually a closet pedophile and neo-nazi?
It's all very Freudian..."

This is what I mean about having trouble correlating what you read: You think the victim is the aggressor, and you delight in blaming the victim for all that’s happened. Talk about Freudian. You are one very sick pup, and that "Seek Help!" mantra of yours is better directed to yourself. Maybe you can ask your police chaplain, because if I had to guess -- from a Freudian standpoint, you know -- I’d say you were an NPS law enforcement ranger or a cop wannabee...

As for Earl Redfern and all other clear thinking Base jumpers out there, when they see your post, you are going to have a little more .... data... to correlate.

And no, you don’t insult us who’ve "been there" by saying "Blue Skies." Just be advised that the second part of the refrain is "Black Death," as in" It’s beautiful out there, but dangerous, so be careful and don’t be surprised if the Reaper visits when you least expect it."

You know, of all the people who have yelled at me on this board, you’re the one who is not only the most clueless but easily the most morally depraved. Maybe you’re one of Scott Connelly’s hunting partners.

[guest]

Abuse of a National Treasure? Get a real life! John Muir started the National Parks System for the People; not "You" people. The parks are there for all to enjoy.
Should we ban all foot traffic due to the ignorance of a very few? I should hope not! Greenhorns get lost every year in the parks and have to be rescued. All because they are not educated.
On the other hand, BASE jumpers are generally educated in what they chose to do. They know the risks they are partaking. They know the aspects of the sport.
I will explain to you no more than that.


Ps never argue with an idiot, some can not tell the difference.

[guest]

There is no one else to blame for the last couple of busts, and for my friend Frank's last meeting with the Ranger's but Scott Burke!! I KNOW he kissed Frank's father's ass IN GUILT, but why doesn't he exchange words with any of us base jumpers who ended up busted AFTER spending the night with us?!! I challenge him to get in touch with ANYONE OF US base jumpers and explain to us WHY??...the Rangers knew information WE ONLY SHARED WITH SCOTT BURKE?????

[guest]

There is no one
else to blame for
the last couple
of busts, and for
my friend Frank's
last meeting with
the Ranger's but
Scott Burke!! I
KNOW he kissed
Frank's father's
ass IN GUILT, but
why doesn't he
exchange words with
any of us base
jumpers who ended
up busted AFTER
spending the night
with us?!! I
challenge him to
get in touch with
ANYONE OF US base
jumpers and explain
to us WHY??...the
Rangers knew
information WE ONLY
SHARED WITH SCOTT
BURKE?????

[guest]

There is NO ONE ELSE TO BLAME but Scott Burke for the last couple of busts, and for my friend Frank's LAST meeting with the Rangers!!! I know he kissed Frank's father's ASS in guilt, but why doesn't he exchange words with us BASE jumpers who have ended up busted after spending the night with SCOTT BURKE!!!??? I CHALLENGE him to get in touch with ANYONE OF US BASE jumpers (he knows who WE ARE!!) and explain to us WHY?? THE RANGERS KNEW INFORMATION WE ONLY GAVE TO SCOTT BURKE???

[guest]

Dude, open your eyes. This place is fast becoming a police state. At least in Tibet you know where you stand, and BASE is legal.

[guest]

Being new to BASE,i've tried to keep informed of BASE jumpings fight against the NPS thru this board.I can't seem to understand how we try to blame the NPS,when a BASE jumper gets killed jumping,getting away,or is fined.It seems like we are trying to live in a world of no accountability If we speed and get a ticket,we can't blame the police for doing their job or enforcing that speed limit!If we speed,we all know what can happen if we get caught!I agree we need to get some laws changed,but lets all stick togeather,be accountable for our actions,and intelligently get these laws changed!

[gowaylow]

It's like this.
Do you think Dennis Mcglynn is accountable for Paul Thompson's death??? NO
paul showed up at lake powell in his own car with his own rig and jumped. The NPS held dennis accountable and is now serving a jail sentence.
Do you think Avery is accountable for Jan's death??? NO
Jan showed up to Yosemite on her own with the rig she was willing to give up and she jumped.
Now the NPS wants to hang Avery!!
If the NPS is making these people Accountable for their death then they are just as much Accountable. The two individuals mentioned above had as much to do with the death of paul and jan as the NPS did. Once again it's the NPS policy that has made them accountable. They are the ones that started it we just want to finish it. This sport will never be SAFE but we can help reduce the risk.The NPS is responsible for increasing the risk that makes them accountable.

Have a Go Way Low day

[guest]

Actually, much as I disagree and believe that we all should be accountable for our own actions, it appears that the Department of the Interior is considering holding the head of Yosemite responsible. They are currently investigating whether he had "authority" to authorize people to break the law or whether he should have stopped them before they jumped. He in fact acted as an accessory by willingly allowing the group to break the law and the DOI is debating whether or not he should be held accountable. I believe that the policies of the NPS are wrong. I also believe that many of the laws of this country are wrong, however, that does not give me the right to break them without paying the consequences.