[at-l] Gathering and the Use of Alcohol and bridge jumping

[dacullen at adelphia.net (Doug Cullen)]

I guess I'll throw my two cents in here

1. The FLC does not allow the use of alcohol on their grounds, period.  
The FLC is private property and entitled  to set their own conditions 
for use.  Whether this rule has been enforced, lightly enforced or not 
enforced at all in the past is not an issue.  Whether  their choice is 
due to  legal liability issues, religious or moral grounds is not an 
issue.  If you wish to use alcohol and are of legal age please do so 
responsibly in another location.  (see you there:-) 

2. I was concerned to read in the Summer 2004 "The Long Distance Hiker" 
(Vol. 15, No. 3) The decision by the board that "we can *enforce* no 
alcohol at Pipestem." (emphasis mine) In looking at the WV state parks 
rules and regulations, it seems that the use of alcohol by those of 
legal age is permitted except at one day use area.  I am curious how the 
board intended to "enforce" the policy there, having no legal standing 
as a law enforcement agency, nor standing as owner or agent for the 
state parks.  Nor is the legal use of alcohol a violation of any bylaw 
of ALDHA. It seems that cooler heads have prevailed and have politely 
asked that we respect the wishes of the FLC as hosts. And we should. If 
members of the board feel that the association should ban the use of 
alcohol, they need to bring the issue before the body of the association 
and abide by decision of the body, personal convictions aside.

3. I understand that in todays litigious climate, an injury or, god 
forbid a death, of anyone associated with ALDHA during the Gathering 
would expose the association to legal action, especially if alcohol is 
involved. Our only defense is to publicly discourage the misuse of 
alcohol.  Ditto the potential lawsuit should someone be crippled or die 
during an illegal bridge jump. I do understand that a small number of 
hikers are endangering services and facilities for all hikers.  I don't 
know what the best answer to the situation is. I am loath to give up my 
personal (and legal) freedoms because a few persons feel that they have 
freedom without responsibility.

4. If the town of Hanover has passed an ordinance prohibiting jumping 
from bridges, then the association must not include said activity as a 
sponsored activity.  If certain individuals feel the need to jump as a 
matter of civil disobedience, that is their choice as individuals.  The 
board of the association has a duty to protect the association from 
legal action, just as they are obligated inform the membership of the 
wishes of our hosts at FLC in regards to alcohol, They are equally 
obligated to inform the membership of the legal situation on the bridge 
jump.  To allow the jump as a sponsored event paints the entire 
organization as scofflaws,  infringes my right to choose to obey the law 
(by association with an illegal event), and is hypocracy of the highest 
degree. Those who contend that jumping is a matter of tradition or 
social conscience simply want what they want,  there are those who might 
argue that alcohol use has also been a "tradition".

5. Associations and organisations are not individuals and hence do not 
enjoy personal choice.  They represent the whole of their membership.  
Any association that espouses disregard for the law endangers the 
association as a whole.  The associations position that discourages the 
use a alcohol in general and affirms the right of the FLC to ban alcohol 
on their property proctects the association (that is, all of us).  As 
individuals we are free to make our own choices, mindfull of the 
responsilities and consequences of our own actions.  Just as it would be 
reckless for the association to sponsor a "drunk driving rally", it is 
also reckless to continue to sponsor the bridge jump under current 
circumstances.  If the association, as a whole, objects to the current 
law then perhaps we could get involved in changing the law. If 
individuals think it a neat activity, then fine jump, AS INDIVIDUALS, 
not as a function of the association.  Likewise, as an individual I 
might point out some great (illegal) swimming wholes to a fellow hiker. 
To do so as an official event or agent of an organization is 
irresponsible.  Yes, democracy. law and personal choice are a sticky 
wicket.

6. The (mis)use of alcohol  is a societal issue, not just a ALDHA issue. 
Many of use have seen the negative effects of alcohol abuse, many of us 
can enjoy alcohol in a responsible manner.  There is no easy answer to 
this issue.