Does this punishment fit the crime? 3 cyclists jailed for going thru Grand Canyon

[silver]

I don't have any problem with the punishment. But it just makes me sick that drivers (one in particular) can drive carelessly and kill a cyclist and the punishment is just a slap on the wrist. The punishment should be at least as much as cycling in the Grand Canyon. Better yet, he could spend jail time with the cyclists.

[wannaduacentury]

I was wondering, do you think they snuck through w/o going through the main gates? and then a ranger caught them? I think the 5 yr ban is silly- maybe keep them out og GC for 5 yrs, but the other is over the top. I do agree with the $500 fine to the rescue groups. We've had too many wilderness rescues lately(Mt. Hood). and posting your findings/pics on the internet was dumb. As others have said, if they give more harsh fines and punishment to those who commit worse crimes, we might actually make some progress.

[DeniseGoldberg]

While I agree that the punishment is often too light (or non-existent) for drivers who endanger cyclists, I believe that the punishment in this case is deserved.

There are several issues here, including endangering others who belong on the trail, endangering rescue personnel, and destroying sensitive areas that the National Park Service is trying to protect. Perhaps the 5 year ban is over the top, but I believe the $500 fine is too low.

--- Denise

[Thorn]

While I agree that car driver punishments are beyond just light, you can't use that as guage on this one. If you did, pretty soon, no crime would have a punishment.

I think the punishment was fair. These guys didn't make a little "oops", they knew what they were doing. Trails that are marked for hiking only are marked that way for a reason and bikers need to respect that. A message was being sent by the punishment and valid message. There are trails that bikes simply don't belong on.

While I suspect the trails in the Grand Canyon are more durable than those up in tree cover north, there is also the cost of trail maintenance. We have a long distance hiking trail that is maintained by volunteers. Whether we want to admit it or not, bikes are harder on trails than people. I suspect that there are a few of those volunteer trail maintainers silently cheering and wishing we could do more than slap a $100 fine <sigh>only if they get caught</sigh>

[silver]

I didn't mean to imply that I thought that the grand canyon punishment should be gauged by the car driver punishment.

Just the opposite....shouldn't the careless car driver have at least the same punishment that these guys had.

I definately agree with the Grand Canyon incident punishment.

I was just saddened by the disparity of it all.

[Velobambina]

I also believe the punishment was fair for the various reasons stated in previous posts.

[Thorn]

Sorry, Silver, didn't mean to misinterpret.

It is sad that there is such a disparity in punishments. Reform is long and tedious, although I'm not sure why it has to be.

Still, while most people thought the 48 hours in jail was excessive (perhaps, but the law says you can be held for 48 hours and, just maybe it was meant to make them slow down and think), I liked the fact that they tailored the punishment to the crime. "You disrespect our parks? Then we won't let you back in." But, mostly, I like the forcing them to remove all postings that were inviolation and to post the apology. That's creative on the judge's part. And, while the 48 hours in jail gets them sympathy from some, my gut feel is the web site changes affected them more.

[Duck on Wheels]

I was wondering, do you think they snuck through w/o going through the main gates? and then a ranger caught them? I think the 5 yr ban is silly- maybe keep them out og GC for 5 yrs, but the other is over the top. I do agree with the $500 fine to the rescue groups. We've had too many wilderness rescues lately(Mt. Hood). and posting your findings/pics on the internet was dumb. As others have said, if they give more harsh fines and punishment to those who commit worse crimes, we might actually make some progress.

I would assume that they entered the park at an ordinary gate. How else would one enter the park? I would therefore assume that they paid the ordinary fee (for instance a day use fee), and were given the usual packet of information brochures, which probably included several references to the ban on biking below the rim. After all, bikes ARE allowed on the roads above the rim, so the ranger at the gate would have had no reason to stop them entering.

And I do think the sentence is fair enough. $500 is not an enormous amount, and 2 days in prison is a "lost" weekend (or perhaps more to the point, a weekend's lesson), not a lost lifetime. And the 5-year ban from all nat'l parks is probably pretty standard for infractions of national park rules. Those rules are enforced by the park ranger service, which has police authority over the entire park system. This would not be the only context in which the parks are viewed as a single, collective unit.

As to the balance between the punishment and the impact "value" of the crime: I've walked just a small stretch of those narrow, switchback trails below the rim. Not only would I not want to encounter a cyclist along those trails, and not only would I worry about a cyclist's safety, but there's also the issue of erosion. The Grand Canyon is a delicate treasure to be cared for on behalf of us all. It is already overburdened with users, and let's face it -- off road biking does add to erosion. So it's not just about their own safety. It's about the safety of others and the preservation of this delicate environment.