Feds Taking AIM at Adrenaline Seekers in Moab Ut

[wan2doit 6]

Sadly rope line enthusiasts near MOAB Utah are looking at being banned from enjoyment of Corona and Gemini arches by BLM.

After a recent land swap of by BLM and Utah it hasn't taken the Feds long for some reason to seek a ban of this minority of visitors.

Comments can be emailed here: to blm_ut_mb_comm.

Be sure to mention Corona Arch in the subject line.

The comments I sent today are below the asterisks -

BLM's info on this is here http://www.blm.gov/ut/st/en/info/newsroom/2014/august/blm_seeks_public_comment0.html

Hopefully many or at least some here will assist these folks by commenting in their favor.

************************************************

Hello,

I saw mention of this issue on the 6 o'clock news in Miami, Fl a few days ago.

I am from Florida and do not have a huge stake in the outcome but have been subjected to many unacceptable restrictions over the years on my access to lands under Federal agency control (Big Cypress National Preserve) so I am empathetic to the folks losing out.

It is interesting that Corona Arch and Gemini recently came under Federal agency control and within a short time frame a ban against a minority group of visitors is now in full swing (no pun intended).

I am sure local BLM staff is intelligent and far from stupid.

Here is what I can't understand - An immediate 2 year ban with no technical justification other than subjective guess work and reactions to complaints from one type visitor against another. In reality all visitors have more than likely bonded with and developed a sense of place regarding these arches for their own particular reasons - all being equally valid from each person's personal perspective. I do not believe BLM should have a right to determine the validity of another persons reason for loving the area or deny them access to it without documented proof that irrevocable harm will happen within BLM's 2 year study cycle.

I will accept what BLM's spokesperson said on the news "there are other places in the area to do this" or something to that effect. I am sure you all at BLM are aware of the way form cultural and personal bonds with specific places. Rope persons are no different than wilderness entusiasts in that the bonds are often with particular places and not just any old place they are relegated to via government action in fact I would submit that BLM's proposed action in this case may promote more illegal activities in response to what looks to me like overkill due to the ban. In the end it is up to you and I would hope you resolve this in a more equitable manner than originally conceived.

Therefore my suggestion would be for BLM to set up a schedule of allowable use of the arches by rope activity enthusiasts and advertise that schedule on their web sites so that those who enjoy the arches via rope activities or more tranquil/passive activities could choose when it would be best for them to visit the arches and enjoy them as they prefer to.

One other suggestion would be that all BLM staff involved in the planning process participate in a similar rope activity to more fully understand the "quality and joys of life" you are looking to remove from a small minority's life..

Good Luck and Be Fair,

[quade 3]

Sorry, but I can't support your cause.

This wasn't a capricious decision as your post implies. It was the result of truly amateur adventurers killing themselves.

A two year ban to study the issue isn't unreasonable.

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/aug/26/feds-propose-ban-on-rope-swinging-from-utah-arches/

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[wan2doit 6]

Yes in the minimal research I did on this I saw that deaths have happened. So, what does that mean - we shouldn't do dangerous things or make bad mistakes or ban all dangerous activities.

If you read my specific comment and suggestions I don't agree that I was telling BLM they were bad or arbitrary but just asking them politely to consider what I thought would be a more inclusive, balanced and more reasonable interim decision until the 2 year study proved that a total ban was necessary and fully justifiable.

There are other factors other than fatalities pressuring BLM to do this such as other user groups pissed off about people laughing and being vocal during the rope fun.

The ironic part of this is that the arches wouldn't be as popular a destination if some rope swinging video hadn't gone viral bringing lots of attention and interest to the area.

Truth be know though I am an outsider on the issue (never been or lived there) but am empathetic to what is happening due to having been through the same shit down here in So Fl for the last 16 or more years on a different Federally managed property.

[quade 3]

wan2doit

If you read my specific comment and suggestions I don't agree that I was telling BLM they were bad or arbitrary but just asking them politely to consider what I thought would be a more inclusive, balanced and more reasonable interim decision until the 2 year study proved that a total ban was necessary and fully justifiable.

A two year ban while the study is in progress is reasonable when you consider the rapid and rabid growth of what was happening. Not just in the deaths, but also the fly-by-night companies that wanted to run it as a business.

This is roughly analogous to what happened in BASE jumping and specifically at Yosemite. It was great, then assholes came in and screwed it up for everybody, then the US Park Service banned it. Then, at a time when the Park Service was pretty close to reconsidering, a protest took place and a very high level and well known jumper died right there in front of news cameras and her husband who was filming it as part of the protest.

If you want to help the situation, then what you should do is come up with a reasonable use plan and present it to the US Park Service. Attempting to get the practice "unbanned" during the study period is simply a waste of effort. You should also heavily self police the area to ensure people don't attempt to circumvent the ban and make "pirate" rope swings because another death or injury certainly isn't going to help your case.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[normiss 622]

Given the numbers of fatalities in skydiving, the FAA should ban us from jumping while they "study".

Let's just suck all the fun out of life why don't we?
Don't want Johnny getting hurt now do we?

[quade 3]

normiss

Given the numbers of fatalities in skydiving, the FAA should ban us from jumping while they "study".

Let's just suck all the fun out of life why don't we?
Don't want Johnny getting hurt now do we?

I think you don't understand how any of these agencies work. It's not about whether you as an individual kill yourself; it's about the potential of people's actions effecting others. This is especially true when you consider things like companies and the potential for killing customers who have no real way of knowing whether or not what they're doing is "safe." It has to do with things like the reasonable expectation of things not killing innocent 3rd parties. It's part of the reason why a place like Eloy might be able to get a permit to drop a car out of the sky, but Perris probably never could.

When people such as yourself talk about the FAA in "nanny state" terms, I'm highly amused. The FAA doesn't care, at all, if you make your first jump, solo, at night as long as reasonable actions are taken to prevent you from free falling into another aircraft or somebody's home. There is literally no FAA regulation against it.

Additionally, it has to do with the natural resource in question, the "natural quiet" and "natural beauty" of the area is there to be enjoyed by all or can that be allowed to be disrupted for the enjoyment of a "minority" (to use a phrase from the OP).

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[wan2doit 6]

Quade - It isn't banned yet - that is why I put this item up here so as to provide folks the chance to offer am better alternative in place of BLM's knee jerk idea.

Comment deadline - midnight their time Sep 25, 2014

If one reads my whole post one can see another option that I offered that folks could back up by commenting before the midnight September 25 deadline is for BLM to organize a schedule for rope use so that those who don't want to be around it can choose a day when rope use isn't being done. To me an interim plan such as that is far better than an up front 100% ban with no real justification other than managements easy solution.

As far as Yosemite goes it was tragic what happened but IMHO that should have fueled the base jumpers resolve along with skydivers helping with comments to go the distance to get approved which sad to say is a 10 year or more process with NPS depending on when their plans come up for renewal.

I may be a whuffo but I know about this Federal planning shit at a very detailed (way down in the weeds) level.

[billvon 2,426]

> So, what does that mean - we shouldn't do dangerous things or make bad
> mistakes or ban all dangerous activities.

I think perhaps a better thing to take away from this is that if your group tends to have violent and bloody deaths in public areas, putting spectators at risk, you might want to work on that. (Same with doing damage to public parks.)

Compare this to rap-bolting or BASE jumping. Rap-bolting a popular climb at Yosemite would likely get you 'escorted' out of the park by other climbers. It's simply not tolerated. In part because of that, climbing is still legal in Yosemite.

BASE jumping, on the other hand, got banned because of the behavior of a few BASE jumpers as Quade mentioned. If they had treated it like BASE jumpers now treat Twin Falls, it might well still be legal.

[lawrocket 3]

normiss

Given the numbers of fatalities in skydiving, the FAA should ban us from jumping while they "study".

Let's just suck all the fun out of life why don't we?
Don't want Johnny getting hurt now do we?

I'm kinda torn on this. As much as I'm about doing what you want on public land, if you're disturbing other people then I have a problem. People out for a hike tolerating hooting and hollering and the occasional splatter should be considered. Like in Canon City a few years ago when Dwain tried to shoot a gap on the Royal Gorge Bridge and got killed up close in front of a lot of people that weren't suspecting it.

Doing stunts around the unsuspecting is bad form. Perhaps if some time was set aside for people to do it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[wan2doit 6]

"Perhaps if some time was set aside for people to do it. "

Agreed. Possibly you could shoot BLM a comment to that effect at the email address in the original post here by Sep 25.

Many folks are or stay down on the Feds when in reality they are just people. My idea is since the Federal agencies do whether we believe it or not listen and react to comments from the public if folks would enter issues that don't impact them directly so as to get agencies to be more flexible in management policies some of the vitriol against them could be reduced and everyone could benefit.

[normiss 622]

I agree and understand.
I can't recall going to place of solitude in this country in forever that didn't have others there disturbing my peace and enjoyment.
Maybe we're all attracted to the same places, yet differing reasons.

Scheduling and sharing should be the first effort. We have to get along with each other.
We used to play nice together, now days someone wants to scream intolerance for what others do that bothers them.
It's just silly to me.
If you don't like other people, get your own planet.

[JerryBaumchen 1,061]

Hi normiss,

Quote

If you don't like other people, get your own planet.

Who would be left here? Not many I'm thinking.



JerryBaumchen

[normiss 622]

Fully agreed.


Take care Jerry!

[kelpdiver 2]

quade

A two year ban while the study is in progress is reasonable when you consider the rapid and rabid growth of what was happening. Not just in the deaths, but also the fly-by-night companies that wanted to run it as a business.

Well, that is easily addressed. No commercial activity on BLM land of this type. Not a 2 year (once established, we're really looking at permament) ban on anything involving a rope - which as your article states, goes far beyond this swinging activity.

"People died there" is the stupidest justification. Look at the number of deaths in front of hundreds of people that occurs on the Halfdome Trail, both at the ladder, and further down at the two waterfalls. Did the park close down the trail? Of course not.