INTRODUCTION

The DOI-proposed changes recently highlighted in the news and detailed in a leaked redline version of the internal NPS rewrite of its 2001 NPS Management Policies Section 8.2.2.7 (original text from 2001) eliminates both the declaration that, "BASE jumping is not an appropriate public use in national park areas..." and its blanket prohibition. The mere fact that ANY proposed change may be made in the near future is a very important step in the 26-year-effort to gain fair access to national park units for the sport. There remains much work to be done because additional language proposed in the rewrite is still cumbersome for unit superintendents as well as backcountry parachutists, and is still NOT what the ABP has been asking for all along: a complete rescission of Section 8.2.2.7. Such action on behalf of the NPS would end a quarter-century of institutionalized access discrimination and level the playing field at the unit-level planning table so individual backcountry parachutists would not have to jump the additional hurdle of seeking a waiver to the 2001 Management Policies each time he or she wanted to jump in a national park.

This chronology describes how the impetus for the change seen in the recently-leaked revision came about, and how the ABP played a central role in it.

A BRIEF HISTORY

Two years after Carl Boenish filmed backcountry parachutists jumping from El Capitan in 1978, and two years after the National Park Service instituted a policy of prohibition and prosecution against backcountry jumpers, the NPS decided to create a “legal” program of jumping from El Capitan modeled on its successful hang glider permitting and regulation system. A three-month test program began in early August 1980. This program failed because the NPS, the U.S. Parachute Association, and the jumpers themselves had no idea how to integrate jumping with other backcountry activities.

Unfortunately, NPS considered its program failure to be evidence that the sport could never be integrated into backcountry management and summarily banned it. At the same time, NPS refused to acknowledge that its “management ban” was system-wide; for 22 years, NPS officials said issuance of wilderness parachuting permits was not an NPS policy but a practice left to the discretion of individual superintendents. (For some reason, however, not one superintendent in 22 years exercised his or her discretion to issue a permit, even in remote locations with none of the people and traffic pressures faced by Yosemite managers).

Fast forward to 1999. After 20+ years of what former Yosemite chief ranger Bill Wendt called the “cat-and-mouse game” of rangers hunting backcountry parachutists, the “game” had escalated to the point that Yosemite rangers were using undercover informants to gain information on possible jumping activities. One such informant operation and subsequent stakeout resulted in the June 9, 1999, death of Frank Gambalie III, who ran from the rangers after landing from an El Capitan jump, then jumped into the spring runoff-swollen Merced River and drowned.

Gambalie’s death outraged backcountry jumpers worldwide and they threatened mass protest jumps in Yosemite. Scared by this prospect, Yosemite officials sought a way out of the confrontation and arranged for five people to jump illegally to protest the NPS policy against jumping in the parks. The October 23, 1999, protest jump started off well but ended in tragedy when 58-year-old Jan Davis died when she failed to deploy her parachute.

NPS then used Jan Davis’ death to validate its prohibition of wilderness jumping by deflecting the discussion from access discrimination to safety and, about a year later, NPS finally put in writing the 23-year-old policy prohibition it had previously denied existed: Its 2001 Management Policies manual prohibited parachuting from cliffs in all national park areas as a matter of policy, and was not a discretionary matter for individual superintendents.

FIRST ACTIONS

The NPS policy prohibition seemed to confirm the worst fears of the backcountry parachuting community: Jan Davis’ death had strengthened the NPS position and made jumping legally in the parks a now unattainable goal.

But there were some who did not give up hope - in particular, a 73-year-old BASE jumper named Jim Guyer, who wanted to celebrate his 50th year of parachuting by jumping from El Capitan and landing in the same valley his cavalry lieutenant grandfather had camped in while protecting the valley wildlife from poachers.

When Mr. Guyer wrote to Yosemite superintendent David Mihalic requesting a permit for the jump, Mr. Mihalic turned him down flatly - but also went to great lengths to explain NPS reasoning and policy. He even met with Mr. Guyer personally and “basically,” said Mr. Guyer, “he told me they were going to keep doing it until Congress told them to stop.” (Mihalic's April 2001 response to Guyer)

Mr. Guyer passed along Mihalic’s comment and letter to Robin Heid, who recognized that Mr. Mihalic had handed Mr. Guyer just what the parachuting community needed to start a campaign for fair access. Mr. Heid soon called his old friend Tom Tancredo, who was then (and still is) a Colorado congressman, to ask for advice.

As it turned out, Congressman Tancredo was - at the time - a member of the Parks subcommittee of the House Interior Committee: in plain English, that meant the Colorado congressman was one of the NPS’s primary bosses in Congress.

Congressman Tancredo did more than offer advice; he offered to help, and Mr. Heid responded by founding the Alliance of Backcountry Parachutists and writing the September 2001 “Tancredo Briefing” to get the congressman up to speed on the issue. (the "Tancredo Briefing")

A week later, the Twin Towers went down in death and destruction, and backcountry parachuting went to the back burner until spring 2002, when the congressman sent his first letter to NPS - a challenge to explain its prohibition and the flawed reasoning and misleading statistics offered in its support. (Congressman Tancredo to R. Clark Cooper April 8, 2002 )

An Aside: Note the date correlation between Tancredo's letters - presented above and below - and Park Service spokesman David Barna's statement in an Oregon Mail Tribune article by Paris Achen, "The move to revise the policies was prompted by a congressional request in 2002 and increasing public demand for modern comforts and activities in parks, such as cell phone reception, base jumping and geocaching."

To Continue: At the same time, NPS managers at New River sought a waiver of the policy prohibition so that traditional jumping at New River, now banned by Section 8.2.2.7, could continue. NPS answered Congressman Tancredo in two months, but only to say the agency was working the problem and would get back to him soon. (Richard Ring's June 4, 2002, response to Congressman Tancredo ).

Four days after NPS director Fran Mainella issued a ten-year waiver of Section 8.2.2.7 to New River, NPS answered Congressman Tancredo in more depth, though mostly to explain that the New River waiver was unique and not applicable to other NPS units; however, it did not address any of the key elements of Congressman Tancredo’s letter (Richard Ring's July 30, 2002 letter to Congressman Tancredo ). The congressman was not deterred, and after winning re-election in 2002, sent an April 2003 letter demanding NPS address the concerns it had ignored in its previous responses. This letter caused consternation within the NPS to the point that it handed off the letter to its parent agency, the Department of the Interior (DOI). DOI finally responded to Congressman Tancredo’s letter after more than a year of delay.

It was worth the wait, however. Despite a long-winded July 1, 2004, letter that again ignored Congressman Tancredo’s concerns, DOI assistant secretary P. Lynn Scarlett made clear that NPS would now include parachuting in its planning process the same way it does for other recurring recreational activities - and she assured the congressman that NPS director Mainella expected her superintendents to act fairly when it came to backcountry parachuting. (P. Lynn Scarlett to Congressman Tancredo, July 1, 2004)

Congressman Tancredo was appreciative of this change, but not satisfied because as long as Section 8.2.27 remained in effect, it represented a continuation of the institutionalized discrimination that had been at the root of the access issue for a quarter century. So, in November 2004, he sent a letter to assistant secretary Scarlett pointing out that - all her fine words to the contrary - nothing would change until Section 8.2.2.7 was suspended or rescinded, and he asked her to do that immediately.(Congressman Tancredo to P. Lynn Scarlett, November 15, 2004)

ABP JUMPS FURTHER INTO THE FRAY

To date he has yet to receive a response, even after sending a May 2005 reminder letter (Congressman Tancredo to P. Lynn Scarlett, May 2005).

In the meantime, the ABP expanded from a couple of people supporting Congressman Tancredo’s efforts to an organization incorporated as non-profits in Georgia and Colorado, with a great website, members, an Advisory Council and, most importantly, an automated letter writing system that resulted in hundreds of letters being sent to dozens of congressmen and senators - all with faxed copies to both NPS director Mainella and DOI assistant secretary Scarlett.

The letter writing campaign proved to be decisive. Now NPS was faced not with one Congressman challenging its unfair access practices, but with several congressmen and senators who made inquiries into the situation - and the dozens more who now knew what was going on (whether they responded to a constituent letter or not).

By August, when the draft changes to the new Management Policies manual were leaked, backcountry parachuting - while still singled out for unfair regulatory scrutiny compared to other non-powered, non-polluting, recurring recreational activities - was no longer considered an inappropriate public use activity within national park areas, nor was it entirely prohibited by 36 CFR 2.17(3).

Since the leaked proposal was made public, the ABP has written to NPS director Mainella (ABP to Director Mainella, September 1, 2005) and to a number of selected superintendents (ABP to selected superintendents, September 2, 2005) of the units in which backcountry parachuting is possible, urging them to take the final step in ending 26 years of access discrimination against backcountry parachutists: Delete Section 8.2.2.7 entirely from both the draft and final versions of the revised Management Policies document.

Stay tuned. More to come SOON. - Your friends at the Alliance of Backcountry Parachutists, Inc.