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?
Stories about:
Story Categories:
A copy of National Parks Traveler's financial statements may be obtained by sending a stamped, self-addressed envelope to: National Parks Traveler, P.O. Box 980452, Park City, Utah 84098. National Parks Traveler was formed in the state of Utah for the purpose of informing and educating about national parks and protected areas.
Residents of the following states may obtain a copy of our financial and additional information as stated below:
- Florida: A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR NATIONAL PARKS TRAVELER, (REGISTRATION NO. CH 51659), MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING 800-435-7352 OR VISITING THEIR WEBSITE. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL, OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE.
- Georgia: A full and fair description of the programs and financial statement summary of National Parks Traveler is available upon request at the office and phone number indicated above.
- Maryland: Documents and information submitted under the Maryland Solicitations Act are also available, for the cost of postage and copies, from the Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401 (410-974-5534).
- North Carolina: Financial information about this organization and a copy of its license are available from the State Solicitation Licensing Branch at 888-830-4989 or 919-807-2214. The license is not an endorsement by the State.
- Pennsylvania: The official registration and financial information of National Parks Traveler may be obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of State by calling 800-732-0999. Registration does not imply endorsement.
- Virginia: Financial statements are available from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 102 Governor Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
- Washington: National Parks Traveler is registered with Washington State’s Charities Program as required by law and additional information is available by calling 800-332-4483 or visiting www.sos.wa.gov/charities, or on file at Charities Division, Office of the Secretary of State, State of Washington, Olympia, WA 98504.
National parks and their natural resources belong to you. The National Parks Traveler works to ensure you know how these essential places are being cared for.
Sign Up For Our Weekly Newsletter
Unsubscribe at any time.
INN Member
The easiest way to explore RV-friendly National Park campgrounds.
Here’s the definitive guide to National Park System campgrounds where RVers can park their rigs.
Our app is packed with RVing- specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 national parks.
You’ll also find stories about RVing in the parks, tips helpful if you’ve just recently become an RVer, and useful planning suggestions.
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.
Very reasonable Wild. In other words, treat it just like rock climbing and rafting.
"Deaths per attempt is the better statistic"
Yes, if you are measuring the risks of the event. Which is why I responded "so what" and not "not so". But the more relevant statistic re the parks is how many times is there a fatal accident because of that activity? There are far more fatal accidents from rock climbing and rafting in the parks and I'll wager you won't find a single example of someone in a park being killed by having a BASE jumper land on them.
"Personal decisions on public lands are under the control of the government, therefore, ban BASE jumping from public lands."
Because the government can they should ban it? Should they ban every other activity as well? Afterall, "personal decision on public land are under the control of the government" (to a limited extent.)
If they are willing to post a bond of say $100,000 and take out a permit, let 'em jump. If they have a successful trip, they can have their money back. If not, the government can pay morticians to scoop up the remains and clean up the site. Until then, why should the rest of us have to pay rangers to deal with their mess?
"why should the rest of us have to pay rangers to deal with their mess?"
Agreed - any why should the rest of us have to pay for the mess from fallen rock climbers, drowned rafters, lost hikers?