Chris McNamara, 30, of SUPERTOPO - BUSTED for BASE Jump

wrote:You are a closet anarchist.

BASE jumping is not a crime?
--- Invalid image id: 107104504 ---

So do the parks ban BASE jumping for any other reason than it's dangerous and that you can damage the landing area? Rather than look into it, I'll ask the legit MP folk.

Jackie Blumberg wrote:Neither is being overweight and hiking into the Grand with inadequate water or navigation tools. That doesn't tax the Park rescue folks at all.

OMG, stop whining. We all go faster than the posted speed limit, we all drank alcohol before we turned 21, we all have cars packed with booze while driving through Utah, have driven without proper insurance... and we knew the whole time that we were braking the law. Base jumping is against the law, period. It's super fun and dangerous, you can't really tell me it isn't, but if you get caught doing it in a NP you'll probably get arrested and have to pay a fine. Next topic please.

What is the rationale behind making BASE jumping illegal? If it was to protect the environment or to protect others, I guess that would make sense. But if it is only to keep adults from putting themselves at risk, well then it is kind of stupid. Might as well make sitting on your ass all day, smoking and eating McDonalds illegal. There are a lot of risks in life, you can't legislate them all away.

DannyUncanny wrote:What is the rationale behind making BASE jumping illegal?

Jack Ubaek wrote: Easy, $$Revenue$$. Next question..

Unassigned User... You are a tool! You sign on with an anonymous name and blast someone to the point of jeopardizing their job. Did you have to dig through the guys old posts and find a picture of him? Did you have to post that picture in this thread? You're a jackass and should be kicked in the nuts (or the cunt, whichever applies)! I hope karma finds you out of work and in jail for breaking some really silly law.

Why don't you post your real name?

do they outsource someone to do the chasing, booking, etc? if not, what would the officials doing the chasing, processing, etc be doing if they weren't performing these arduous tasks?

let's make it a multiple choice

a.) Nothing
b.) Nothing much
c.) Looking for pot smokers
d.) Any of the above

Besides, not that I read the entirety of your linked post, I did find this:

"..Following the conviction, the federal magistrate placed Kauffman on two years' probation and ordered him to pay nearly $9,000 to cover the costs associated with his rescue..."

If that's the case, and they're collecting these costs in addition to established fines, it doesn't sound like they're exactly losing $$ on the deal.

e) None of the above

The right answer is:
Writing tickets for illegal camping and/or speeding or for feeding or harassing wildlife in the national park- something that produces a heavy and reliable revenue stream. Pursuing BASE jumpers is an opportunity cost to them.

well,like i said, it looks like they're billing for those incurred "costs" so i don't see it as an opportunity cost, necessarily. that said, if they are losing money chasing, prosecuting jumpers, it's their fault. the FS is a business. they need to start running it like one.

besides, the question was '..what is the rationale behind making it illegal?', not 'how DO they benefit from it being illegal?'. i wasn't suggesting it IS a source of income. i'm simply not ruling out that they see dollar signs every time they have an opportunity to make something illegal.

The answer to the latter is to prevent it from becoming more popular than it already is and to discourage the public from getting ideas. I am telling you want I think, not justifying my answer.
I respond to the former by answering that while I doubt their accounting figures, the courts in theory are not recouping LE and court costs, they are in theory recouping rescue costs, which is indeed taking advantage of the conviction, but if the $$$ are put into YOSAR as implied and not into LE/courts, then your postulation of LE profiteering would be incorrect.
Although I too am suspicious that they might be taking advantage of the situation more than stated... but I can't trace the $$$. I suppose that they are unmarked bills.
Now, if 'rescue' is rare in BASE cases, and they are not normally doing that sort of financial penalty, then this is still more or less nothing even if there is money moving around and that postulation is still not quite on.

very good points Tony.

What's annoying about the NPS's position on this is that there are dozens and dozens of "inherently risky" things one can do in the park that are perfectly legal; unprepared idiots hiking into the canyon when it's 45C is only one example.

I agree wholeheartedly with the notion that one ought to be able to do as one pleases on the public domain provided it doesn't negatively impact the experience of other humans and non-humans. The argument with BASE jumping is that it potentially requires lengthy, difficult rescues that put rescue personnel at unnecessary risk. This is certainly correct...but the exact same thing can be said of our putative unprepared hiking idiots. Why is BASE jumping being singled out?

Many of us climb (or BASE jump) specifically because it's one of the few remaining recreational opportunities that hasn't been surrounded by guardrails and encumbered by a phone-book-grade set of safety requirements. Get real, NPS--either outlaw all the risky stuff, or back off the BASE jumpers.

Full disclosure: I'm not a BASE jumper. But to loosely paraphrase our man Cactus Ed...I wouldn't jump, but I'd pack your chute.

Some crazy stories in that link Hank put up. I'm kinda scratching my head how those stories actually help the jumpers' cause or put them into a better light. It is kinda funny you can legally fall off a cliff while taking a picture at the Grand Canyon, you just can't do it safely, I guess.

One other non-related item, that one that got fined on the rescue -- the jumper was hanging for hours, interesting in a physio sense. You guys know anything on that one?