In mid-May, world-class climber Dean Potter and a friend were killed in a BASE-jumping incident in Yosemite National Park. A lengthy New York Times story examined the accident, and raised some contradictions in National Park Service policies.
In made no sense to Potter, and plenty of others, that climbing was legal, and that falling was legal, but that stopping a fall with a lifesaving parachute was illegal, a result of the application of an arcane law banning the delivery or retrieval "of a person or object by parachute, helicopter or other airborne means."
Later in the story a ranger from Zion National Park was quoted as saying BASE jumping was discouraged in that park because "of the spectacle of it."
"We like to think that people come here to enjoy the scenery, and not the spectacle of people jumping," he said.
Is BASE jumping a spectacle that should be banned in national parks? What do you think?
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
Absolutely YES!
Why single out base jumping? Why is it any more a "spectacle" or any less appropriate than rock climbing in Zion, or white water rafting in the Grand Canyon or Dinosaur?
Is base-jumping legal? According to the Organic Act of the NPS, it may not be. The Sullivan decision (District Court ruling regarding snowmobiles, Sept 15, 2008) includes the following judicial opinion: "While it is true that "enjoyment" is also a fundamental purpose of the parks, enjoyment is qualified in the Organic Act in a way that conservation is not. ... the "enjoyment" referenced in the Organic Act is not enjoyment for its own sake, or even enjoyment of the parks generally, but rather the enjoyment of "the scenery and natural and historic objects and the wild life" in the parks in a manner that will allow future generations to enjoy them as well."
In August 1916, President Woodrow Wilson signed an act creating the National Park Service. The fundamental purpose: "is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations." Base jumpers selfishly put themselves, the park service, emergency services, and visiting public at risk by their high-risk, adrenalin seeking activities. Any such activity that impairs another person(s) ability to freely enjoy a national park should be banned. Which visitor/trekker is going to want to have someone crashing onto them from the sky?
Save it all for a one-day Challenge Darwin Day. You could even do a tasting - a little taste of each experience. Over here the base jumping, over there the rattlesnake wrestling, and in this corner is the Russian Roulette. Everybody signs the same liability releases, the herd gets thinned a bit, and clean-up is all over within a day.
So Anon -we outlaw rock climbing, rafting, peak bagging? These are all activities that would appear to be for enjoyment for their own sake. Heck by your definitions it would seem fishing wouldn't be a legitimate use of the park.
"BASE jumping is much more dangerous than the two other activities you mention."
So what? I would hazard a guess that there have been far more fatalities from rock climbing and rafting than from base jumping. Besides how are we to decide how dangerous an activity someone can engage in. Seems like that is a personal decision.
Require a permit and limit the numbers and places. Increase the penalty for breaking the law and work with the base jumpers so it becomes self policing. And while I am generally opposed to charging for SAR efforts I would have as part of the deal make sure the jumpers fund the cost of the inevitable recoveries.