HOGBACK VIOLATIONS- DISCLOSURE

[theflyingdude]

It is exhausting combating the repeated lies being posted here: Laszlo has never been to Eagle Rock - don't know why they would ban him. Nor is he unwelcome at multiple sites. Nor are he and Tom serial offenders. - Hugh

I said "apparently" banned from Eagle Rock because I heard that story from multiple sources in the flying community, but not from anyone officially associated with the operation. If that information is incorrect, I apologize for spreading any misinformation and posting something that isn't really directly Germaine to the matter/s at hand.

JR

[mcelrah]

Thank you, JR. Sallie and I look forward to renewing our friendship with you sometime. - Hugh

[RichH]

Although no ban that I'm awear of has been placed on any of the pilots. I did receive communication from 2 site administrators and an Observer and several pilots who noted: Site protocol violations, general complaints of rude behavior, and an incident with an observer at a training site, these complaints are from Region 9 and involved one our both of the 2 pilots involved in the Hogback Violation. These individuals who communicated these issues do not want their names posted on this forum but have filed complaints with the USHPA. This is a fact and is on file with our National organization.

[theflyingdude]

Thank you, JR. Sallie and I look forward to renewing our friendship with you sometime. - Hugh

Likewise, Hugh - maybe we'll get back down to Seneca Rocks for a fly-in one of these days.

JR

[pink_albatross]

Am curious about RichH latest allegations. Probably unsubstantiated or inflated again.

Agree with everything that Hugh and Dan T. have posted.

I would like to point out that the Hogback 2 have been quite an asset to our community: they have observed many new pilots, they have provided mentorship to many new pilots and aspiring XC pilots, they have assisted in the opening and maintaining of our sites. These are the kind of people we want more of: engaged in the community, helpful, always willing to share their knowledge to try to keep everybody safer. I would hate it if this situation resulted in their withdrawal from the CHPGA community. If we were spending a proportionate number of words on the positive impacts that they had on the community, this discussion would probably be lost in the flood.

And yes, if the board was as reactive with praise as they are with blame, these two might have already earned numerous commendations.

-- ellis

[RichH]

Please tell me where I inflated anything I hope you can substiantiate that claim ..I talked personally with everyone of these people and their reports are on the record at USHPA..If you choose to stick your head in the sand and follow someone who wants to attack the messangers ..go ahead! Thats how we got into this mess because individuals choose to support their buddies over the interest of the community..

[pink_albatross]

“…they thumbed their nose at the CHGPA BOD…”
Inflated: They refused to apologize.

“However, we also have the fact that several of these pilots then tried to deceive the authorities”
Inflated: one refused to acknowledge guilt. (something that you are supposed to do until you speak with your lawyer. And something that is even acknowledged on any traffic violation ticket you receive)

“… couple of pilots that has shown little or no remorse for the risk and embarrassment they have placed on our flying community at large”
Unsubstantiated: you are not aware of all the communication that has gone on. You are not privy to communications they may have had within the community, since you are not part of it. And as it turns out they did not place the community at large at risk. The SNP law enforcement, just like law enforcement elsewhere, recognizes the individual responsibility of a person and is not in the business of penalizing a whole community for the acts of a few (they also do not prohibit hiking to all for the misdeeds of a few, they do not prohibit climbing for all for the misdeeds of a few, they do not prohibit all cars for the traffic infractions of many, etc…)

“We gave them a chance for a civil resolution but the fact their was no effort to make amends shows me they have little care for our policies.”
Wrong conclusions: I personally have witnessed the hogback’s two’s efforts for making sure people knew site protocol. They have reminded people of site protocol at other sites, they have even made sure people had the proper permit before flying Dickie’s. In general they have great respect for site policies and help the community to adhere to them. Hogback is just an unusual situation. (thought to be informally okay to fly – particularly after having informally talked to a ranger a few years ago regarding flying at hogback)

“if you continually show disrespect for our rules, laws and protocols you should be held accountable”
Inflated: see above. They have (particularly one of them) probably helped other pilots to be aware of and help adhere to our site rules more than 75% of the members of our club.

“are you awear that both of these pilots have had prior issues? That one of the pilots in question is not even welcome at several sites in our region. At what point do you take some sort of action”
Unsubstantiated: please substantiate. With prior issues? Which pilot is not welcome at what sites?

-- I will not respond or react to any more of RichH's posts. --

[theflyingdude]

I would like to point out that the Hogback 2 have been quite an asset to our community: they have observed many new pilots, they have provided mentorship to many new pilots and aspiring XC pilots, they have assisted in the opening and maintaining of our sites. These are the kind of people we want more of: engaged in the community, helpful, always willing to share their knowledge to try to keep everybody safer. I would hate it if this situation resulted in their withdrawal from the CHPGA community. If we were spending a proportionate number of words on the positive impacts that they had on the community, this discussion would probably be lost in the flood.

And yes, if the board was as reactive with praise as they are with blame, these two might have already earned numerous commendations.

-- ellis

Hmm...how would we know what they've really done, for better or worse, other than by rumor or innuendo? Many aren't privy to that information as, for the most part, it's hidden behind the veil of your private PG Forum and that's probably the primary reason there is such little communication and unity between hang glider and paraglider pilots in this area, IMO.

JR

[hosseinghazvini]

The individuals who engaged in the transgression showed up in court and paid their fines or whatever. That has satisfied the NPS, it should be enough to satisfy us.

Dan

I agree with you Dan.

Hossein

[RichH]

-They thumbed their nose at the CHGPA BOD:If you dont respond to a very simple request than yes I believe that qualifies as
thumbing your nose
-In the original report it states that they (referring to more that one pilot was present when asked about where THEY
launched from. One pilot responded but others were present and involved in the deceit.
-Couple of pilots have shown no remorse? Please tell me what you would call it..as far as your thoughts about the park service ask the USHPA their thoughts on that subject.. If you believe for a moment that the NP service doesn't keep track of illegal actions on the park grounds you are sadly mistaken..You state: Great respect for park policies ARE YOU SERIOUS!! You dont have great repect if you are launching illegally from a NP site.
- Since you and others felt the need to form your own forum it would be hard for me to be as informed as you pretend to be..
- The prior issues that I referenced have been sent to the USHPA from the individual parties involved and I'm not at liberty to
discuss..
-I find it particularly interesting how you and others attack my integrity and in turn defend the pilots who had to show up in court and to pay a fine..
-You and others have found the need to attack my integrity ..and throw out silly statements in an effort to try an support your claims..Those that have flown with me over the 35+ years know who I am ..and what I have done to support this community ..I'll let that stand on its own merit.. If you are uninformed that is your issue not mine..

[Ward Odenwald]

Based on the facts (stated earlier), their significance to our flying sites and the well being of our organization - I have to wonder why these individuals (CHGPA members) have not participated in this conversation. Their silence has morphed into that big hairy thing (you know, the one that's sitting in the corner of this thread) and its presence has done nothing but fuel the realization that - THEY JUST DON'T CARE. Here's a hypothesis that may help explain some or most of the angst that we've been exposed to and its based on several of the posts referring to "fear of DEPORTATION" as a reason for not telling the community. If they're in the USA on an extended Va-K or work related visa then when they leave - heck, its no longer their problem! Its kinda like checking out of a hotel room that you have left in disarray - as you close the door there's that momentary "oh geez" moment, and then your gone - leaving the rest of us to deal with the damage! Ward

[brianvh]

the hysterics are entertaining...there is that at least.

[brianvh]

A tip from Shawn Macduff, who has been president of Hyner club for about a decade and is universally acknowledged as the most effective president they've ever had. It's a sensitive site and maintaining good relations with the park staff is paramount. He says writing letters is the easy way out and probably accomplishes nothing. To really make an impression, put time into a cleanup with lots of before and after pictures, including the money shot of the collected trash. Send it to the rangers who will be happy to forward it to their bosses, for it makes them look good as well as the flying community. Much more productive than flinging words around.

[pink_albatross]

Ward: what real (as opposed to past potential) damage did the Hogback 4 do to our flying and site access?
There is damage to club cohesiveness, but one can reasonably argue that that is not their fault.

For forum discussion: please keep in mind that at least half of the CHGPA members do not engage in discussions on this forum (for reasons stated elsewhere). So please do not assume that what you read here is an accurate reflection of the distribution of CHGPA member opinions.

[mcelrah]

@RichH: here's the best example of your exaggeration and false rumor-mongering:

Posted by RichH on the forum on Nov. 14, 2013, under the header "Hogback violations!":

"It has come to my attention that 3 PG pilots were cited for violations at the Hogback Launch site in Shenandoah National Park. It appears this was some time ago possibly last spring or even 2012 season not sure, but what seems apparent that some are all of these pilots are CHGPA members..The information I received was that a incident occurred (possibly a blown launch) h and that Rangers were called to the scene and violations were issued..I also have heard but not verified that these 3 pilots defied the Rangers "Apparently, a pilot stuffed a launch, was screaming and swearing about it, so spectators called the rangers and when they arrived, they got a bunch of attitude/rude behavior, so they issued violations to all three PG pilots." In a time when we are discussing the direction of CHGPA I find this incident pertinent to the conversation of all our flying futures. If all this information is accurate I'm amazed I have to hear about it from a outside source. That pilot incidents are occurring with out our clubs knowledge that put our whole flying community and our flying sites at risk..We have always been guest to the NP sites and having flown most of these sites I can attest we do not want to loose them because we can't self police our own community. I'd welcome to hear from someone who has first hand knowledge about this incident."

"Defied the Rangers" - FALSE!

"screaming and swearing" - the pilot in question was Jim McClave. Anyone who knows him knows he wasn't screaming or swearing. He was calmly picking his wing out of the bushes.

This was irresponsible speculation on a matter under litigation.

Hogback has been flown for some years by paraglider pilots (it had been abandoned by the HGers for lack of an LZ) with the knowledge and apparent acquiescence of the rangers. A new ranger shows up and decides to enforce - no warning. Yes, it absolutely would have been better if someone had put effort into revising the site use permit. But it didn't happen. So these are not the only ones "breaking the law", these are just the ones who got caught and pled guilty to settle the matter.

They had to hire a lawyer anyway, so they found an expensive one who had previously represented kayakers against the Park Service - and won for the kayakers an expansion of the site use permit as part of the settlement. I'm not sure if the situation is exactly the same, but we do have a commitment from the Park Service to work with us on redesignating Hogback HG/PG. I am a volunteer to work on this with any others who are willing. Joe Schad, if you are out there, since you worked with NPS on the Dickey's site clearing effort, I solicit your advice/participation. I'm happy to wait until a meeting (before 28 March please!) to get input from everyone including the board.

If we can disband this circular firing squad - to include not shooting ourselves in the foot by taking ratings away from people who have already been adequately punished - we can actually make things better for everybody.

- Hugh

[Taita Falcon]

As a P2 and relatively new member of CHPGA, this post has really alarmed me. We are all BIG risk takers and as such we will all inevitably make questionable decisions at some point, as our passion for flying temporarily trumps our better judgement. I see little of the real Hogback II (hmmm...that sounds like a nice name for a XC wing, no?) in these posts...I have met them at each site improvement event, seen them give advise and helpful tips on flying, heard them cuss like sailors when the wind and thermals woud not bend to their will....These are not the behaviours of 'lone foreign rangers' or 'egotistical maniacs'. These behaviours are the glue that holds our comunity together. I trust that they regret this incident and that is enough for me. I trust that their character will compel them to give back to the club in extra care, advise, mentorship and sheer flying enthusiasm.
CHPGA BOD, here is your silver lining. I didnt know until this post that a rift exists between PG and HG pilots, so there is still hope. Your collective wisdom is sufficient to use this issue to bring the club together, not tear us apart. Perhaps you could start by formaly advising USHPA that the lessons have been learnt from this incident and nothing that furthers the free-flight community's interests would be gained from a USHPA review. Perhaps in our next meeting we can hire some of those inflatable samurai outfits (wind dummies) and have the PGs and HGs have at it to relieve some steam too. In the meantime, it seems that other good things are coming from this incident - Hogback might become PG rated, for instance. And I am hoping to be a more active pilot this year . Lets celebrate those too.

[mcelrah]

@Taita Falcon: what a wise statement. Thank you!
@Ward: Tom and Laszlo have been the most active pilots in our club for about ten years. They have jobs here, own property here, their children and grandchildren are here, Laszlo is retiring here. There is no reason to believe they are more transient than native-born citizens - or that they don't care about site preservation. They hired a lawyer specialized in a previous case involving kayakers and the park service wherein the site permit ended up being expanded - with a view to doing the same with Hogback - and succeeded, we think (that's why I want to follow through with SNP). No, I don't think civil disobedience is the best way to negotiate site access. Nobody put in the work in to fix the site permit before; the new ranger writing them up brought it to a head, and as part of the plea bargain SNP offered the "sweetener" of revising the permit.
- Hugh

[Ward Odenwald]

Hugh, thanks for the additional info, but when you add up the facts: that they knowingly ignored park rules, tried to miss-lead a Park Ranger and have repeatedly shown no respect for CHGPA leadership – I’m not sure if any of the additional details about their personal lives really matters to the mission of our organization including the development and preservation of our flying sites. Ward

[brianvh]

Let me quote from one of my emails with Felipe:

"The pilots involved refused to make an apology requested by the Board of Directors. This has been seen by some as showing a lack of respect for the organization. I would like to argue that this is a misreading.

A public apology is an emotionally fraught issue. Slight variations in words or tone can make it seem like a humiliating request. I was not involved in these proceedings, but can easily see it as tricky waters to navigate. If there is any hint of coercion, the apology morphs from an act of redemption to one of humiliation. How many of us would not do the same under these circumstances? Though it would be better to have an apology I feel the moment has been lost forever.

Given the difficult psychology of the situation, I would not read too much into the pilot's refusal to issue an apology."

[mcelrah]

Well said. Thank you for your help.

I do not wish to criticize CHGPA leadership any more than I already have. It's a hard job and it's easy to have something blow up in your face when you thought you were doing the right thing. I left the presidency of CHGPA with a sense of failure (allowing the treasurer to let our business affairs slide into disarray - again!)

But that demand for a public apology - with a deadline?! - that's what's known as an ultimatum - wasn't respectable. You can't back off to a "request for a promise to be good" with any credibility after that. The Hogback 4 asked for a letter from CHGPA but it was written in such a way as to be of no help and some harm to the pilots' case. CHGPA communications with USHPA on this matter have NOT been supportive of the pilots, on the contrary, and have included dark hints of other skulduggery. I have asked Jon to come out with what he's got so the pilots in question have an opportunity to reply. That's only fair.

I believe the proper business of this association is following through with the expansion of the Hogback site permit as negotiated in the plea bargain - not extorting apologies or taking away ratings.

- Hugh

[brianvh]

I have asked Jon to come out with what he's got so the pilots in question have an opportunity to reply. That's only fair.

No. Don't drag it out any more than it has been. Understandable mistakes made all around on both sides of the table. It's over. Move on to the terms of use agreement and leave the rest behind.

(( And if any more finger pointing goes on I'm riding hard south, stopping off at one of 'em Virginia gun shows on the way. I'm about to start slappin' n poppin'. ))

[dbodner]

CHGPA communications with USHPA on this matter have NOT been supportive [...] Hugh

Step back from the ledge, Hugh. Neither you nor I know what's going on from each person's perspective. Rather than continue arguing with the internet and trying to have the last word, let's go along with the pleas to cool it.

[deveil]

good stuff

good stuff

Amen

[Greg]

Folks,

I've had the pleasure to hang glide & paraglide (biwingual) with the CHGPA family for the last year or so and though I'm only passing through the DC area, I've truly enjoyed the flying and camraderie from all of you. I know both of these pilots fairly well- FWIW,I have learned much from each of them and consider them valued members of our flying community. I am not defending what they did, but in my view they have paid their dues.

I urge all of us to move past this and leave the emotions on both sides behind. We have too much in common as HG/PG flyers to let this take away from our shared passion for free flight.

Respectfully,
Greg K.

[SHORTCUT]

I too have only been here a couple of years, but not flying very often these days. Really looking forward to more flying, meeting more of you, and flying more venues in Region 9.
I think East facing venues generally offer a better opportunity for getting up and breaking out earlier in the day. I hope to connect with the Mountaineers too. I've been to Spruce Knob..looks fantastic!...although, going downwind to the West might make for an adventurous retrieve.

I see this topic making a turn for the better. I would wager that by the March 28 club meeting, guys like me will have a better understanding of site protocols, and have the proper papers filed. Hoping to learn more about the particulars of soaring around this Shenandoah Valley.
Sending a pile of respect and admiration to the the HGers and PGers in this area!

-Greg 'from Elsinore"
Staunton