Shenandoah Permit Status

[eggzkitz]

Quick update on the status of the Shenandoah National Park Special Use Permits for Dickie’s Ridge.

Many members have noticed a delay this year in the processing. Unfortunately, none of the permit applications have yet to be processed despite the fact that many people’s application fee checks have been deposited. This is due to an oddity in the way in which the SNP process works, whereby checks are deposited by Finance prior to the paperwork going to the Fee office.

I’ve spoken to Rick Moore (our new POC at SNP) about this and he apologized for the delay and for the awkwardness of having no permit even after someone’s fee has been deposited.

Rick is working to change the system to be more expeditious and to deposit the check only once the permit has been issued.

We discussed potential near-term resolution for this, and he is unwilling to allow people to fly until the 2017 permit has been issued OR an extension to the 2016 permit has been approved.

Good news, he has initiated a request for the latter solution as a near-term fix, and this would be applicable to anyone who had a valid 2016 permit and has applied for a 2017 permit. He’ll let me know when he gets that approval, which he said would be a much faster process because they don’t need to review nearly as much paperwork. He said that could occur as soon as this afternoon (didn't happen) but certainly within a week. I’ll let you know if/when I hear that is the case.

Bottom line, we don’t have any active permit permissions to fly DR. SNP is working the issue and they acknowledge the delay and the inconvenience. Not the best answer, but that’s the best I can do at the moment.

Thanks,
Jeff

[eggzkitz]

SNP continues to work on our permit applications, and we removed a few (hopefully) last remaining hurdles this week. Hopefully, the 2017 permits should be forthcoming soon. We'll continue tracking. The good news is that we're maintaining and rebuilding good relations with the park in the process.

Thanks,
Jeff

[eggzkitz]

Update on the SNP permit terms issue.

I spoke with Rick Moore (our new SNP POC) again last Friday, then conferred with each of the board members in the interim.

Bottom line, our consensus recommendation is to not pursue a legal challenge to the terms. This is based on an assessment that the overall risk here is minimal if we use the permit as it is intended, and with an eye toward potential risk to our broader standing and relationship with the park.

Here is the formal email response I got from Rick:

Thank you for your time and for allowing me the opportunity to discuss your concerns. The points of the permit you asked about are broad, standard language that appears in all National Park Service (NPS) Special Use Permits, regardless of the type of activity authorized under the permit. If the activity requires monitoring, the permittee would receive notification, in advance, such as the examples I spoke with you about, referring to the filming and the bicycle race. The NPS expects that permittees will use the authorized area in a manner that will not cause damage to the resource and that when the activity is finished; the area will look much the same as at the start of the activity. In the event of damage/loss to the resource, the NPS will pursue recovery. For this, or any other activity, the park specifically does not want permittees to engage in any form of vegetation management under the terms and conditions of the permit. If the authorized sites require some form of such management, the park addresses the matter outside a Special Use Permit.

I appreciate the fact we had a frank discussion and I was able to answer your questions. If you have any other questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. I look forward to moving these permits forward and getting you flying again.

Here are some reflections from the more extensive verbal discussions and the overall situation:

Rick has considerable experience administering special use permit programs in a range of different parks, and he’s seen it all. He understands what we’re trying to do, and he doesn’t think we have any reason to be concerned. Rather, he is working with standard language from the special use permit program that is intended to cover a wide range of activities, and he can’t make an exception to that language for us. This is why the permit changed — Chad was replaced by someone with vastly more experience who is now bringing the SNP special use permit program up to what he considers to be the right standard.

As you see from his response, Rick is pleased with our channel of communication and has repeatedly told me how enjoyable it is to have a good relationship and clear channel of communication. He said that he has seen all the extremes, to include some really negative experiences with park user groups, and he really appreciates this kind of positive communication and relationship with us.

My personal assessment is that Rick is reasonable and not trying to constrain us in any way. There is no indication that this is an attempt to push us out or roll back our activities. To the contrary, he’s actually pretty amenable to working with us.

On the specific concerns that were raised:

• "The area must be restored to its original condition at the end of the permit” This is standard special use permit language that appears on every permit. In our context, it essentially means that permit holders are not allowed to materially change the status of the park or do any maintenance. Normal wear and tear is fine and expected, but we can’t do maintenance in the course of normal flying. It doesn’t mean anything beyond that. Site maintenance will remain a case-by-case issue handled directly between the club and the park.
• Para 5: "All costs associated with clean up or damage repairs in conjunction with a revoked permit will be the responsibility of the permittee.” This pertains to situations where permit holders damage the park in a way that requires special clean up or restoration. In the course of normal use, this should not be an issue with our group. He cited an example of a special use permit for boat users who dumped their fuel on a beach, made a big mess, and the park had to bring in a special crew to clean it up. That’s the kind of thing they’re looking to protect against.
• Para 11. "If any additional costs are incurred by the park, the permittee will be billed at the conclusion of the permit.” Again, this is not targeted at us and is standard language mandated by the fact that the special use permit program is a cost recovery program. He said that we would receive notification in advance if they were contemplating changing the management costs of the program, which he said would not happen in our case because we don’t require any monitoring. So he felt strongly that we had no reason for concern on this clause, and insisted several times that even if there were going to be a change, we would be advised in advance of any change.

Our club board recommendation is to not insist on a revision to the terms. We will, however, raise this with the new Superintendent in our next meeting as an area of concern. It is important to keep in mind that the current terms are more consistent with NPS standards, not necessarily a specific targeting of CHGPA activity. In that light, it would be difficult to request an exception to a park system standard. Rather, I believe we will remain in good standing with minimal risk if we abide by the rule of flying in SNP. Obviously, individual permit applicants should make their own decision about what terms they’re willing to accept. Also keep in mind that the new Secretary of the Interior signed an executive order asking the park service to make the parks more accessible to recreational activity (I don’t think he was trying to help us, but we’ll take it). So the winds are actually blowing at our back. After talking to Rick about the intent and background on the terms, I’m comfortable signing the permit and continuing to enjoy flying from Dickies and, soon hopefully, Hogback.

Let us know if you have questions or issues.

Thanks,
Jeff

[eggzkitz]

CHGPA-

We have a new POC for special use permit issues at SNP. The POC is no longer Rick Moore. New POC is:
Andrew J. Gertge | Chief of Commercial Services
Shenandoah National Park |Cedar Creek & Belle Grove National Historical Parks
Office:​ 540-999-3500 X 3374 | ​andrew_gertge@nps.gov

Keep in mind that Andrew needs proof that special use permit applicants are members of CHGPA in good standing (due to landing permission terms), which can be accomplished in a number of ways. For the time being, I’ll provide Andrew a list of current members, but in the future, members will have some means of sending their own proof of membership directly to SNP.

Thanks,
Jeff