Special Stage Forums banner

1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
don't cut
Joined
·
4,075 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I would have thought that ultimately the events are put on
>for the spectators. w/o them, there would be no sponsership
>money, and w/o that, there would be fewer people rallying.

Comment from another thread. I have not credited the poster. If they are upset, TS, it is late and I can't rally or put on a rally.

NASCAR, one of the premier (dam my spelling is bad this late) events of auto racing, does not rely on the local spectator. The local promoter certainly does. But not NASCAR. They earn their money from the TV and print exposure.

The local spectator brings Texas Motor Speedway several million dollars. The TV exposure brings NASCAR and the individual sponsors their money. Why would Hewlig (or what ever that sponsor is) Furniture advertise in Texas. They don't have any stores here. But the Texas race is broadcast in areas where they have stores.

Any sponsor I get as a ClubRallyist does not benefit from my appearance in any event. Rather, they benefit from my having the car at their store or shop. Or at a local car show.

End result, ban spectators and ProRally and ClubRally won't be hurt. Except for the fact we now have to find sites where this is possible.
Richard Miller
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,738 Posts
Richard, the tarmac event that I and others are trying to put on would be a perfect example of this. The permit allows me to close down a public road for a 24 hr period. Done by closing gates which prevent vehicles getting on the roads. Only 5 other tracks access the roads I want to use, however, to gain access to these roads one would have to hike at least 4 to 5 miles up a mountain to get to the rally roads. However, on getting to the roads they would be prevented from spectating, either by law enforcement or park ranger. On the other hand, there are safe spectating areas where we can place spectators supervised by safety officials and maybe charge a spectating fee. USFS would benefit from the money taken by the spectators to park and watch. Even before the tragedy, safety was a paramount target for this event as it has never been run before and rules were in place well beforehand. Therefore, why is this event being penalised? I can allow spectators or shut them out altogether. As an aside, the service area is on private property and if the owner didn't want spectators on his land, the liability would be even less. Enlighten me folks and have a great weekend.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
>However, on getting to the roads they would be prevented
>from spectating, either by law enforcement or park ranger.
[cut]

>Enlighten me folks and have a great
>weekend.

Well, could you point me to a copy of their latest Land Use Plan and any subsequent administrative action withdrawing all non-rally recreational uses? Absent that, I'm not sure how the Forest Service (assuming this is feds) could legally prevent any otherwise lawfully present person from standing in proximity to a road (not ON it, but near it). This is assuming that certain recreational activites are in the LUP... which I'll bet they are.

As a practical matter, though, they could scare spectators away by threatening bogus legal action. I'm sure a good conservative like yourself would shudder at the thought of some governmental offical wielding his power in such a tyrannical manner, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
I hiked more than 4 miles to get a good view at the RAC and as anyone will tell you I'm a lazy SOB.

I doubt the rangers have any legal standing to tell you where to go/not go.

The only real threat that can be made is to shut down the stage/event, ala STPR. This was also the threat made at RAC.

Ultimately a stage was cancelled due to "spectators being in a location that emergency vehicles could not reach".....

Glenn
 

·
don't cut
Joined
·
4,075 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
>I hiked more than 4 miles to get a good view at the RAC and
>as anyone will tell you I'm a lazy SOB.
>
>I doubt the rangers have any legal standing to tell you
>where to go/not go.
>
>The only real threat that can be made is to shut down the
>stage/event, ala STPR. This was also the threat made at RAC.
>
>Ultimately a stage was cancelled due to "spectators being in
>a location that emergency vehicles could not reach".....
>
>Glenn
The rangers have the authority to make arrests. They also, as an organization not as an individual, have the authority to declare areas off limits except to competitors. They also have guns. And the ability to use them. The park rangers are not like Ranger Rick of the Yogi Bear cartoons. They are law enforcement officers and in todays world, they have to be prepared for anything.
Richard
 

·
don't cut
Joined
·
4,075 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
>Richard, the tarmac event that I and others are trying to
>put on would be a perfect example of this. The permit allows
>me to close down a public road for a 24 hr period. Done by
>closing gates which prevent vehicles getting on the roads.
>Only 5 other tracks access the roads I want to use, however,
>to gain access to these roads one would have to hike at
>least 4 to 5 miles up a mountain to get to the rally roads.
>However, on getting to the roads they would be prevented
>from spectating, either by law enforcement or park ranger.
>On the other hand, there are safe spectating areas where we
>can place spectators supervised by safety officials and
>maybe charge a spectating fee. USFS would benefit from the
>money taken by the spectators to park and watch. Even before
>the tragedy, safety was a paramount target for this event as
>it has never been run before and rules were in place well
>beforehand. Therefore, why is this event being penalised? I
>can allow spectators or shut them out altogether. As an
>aside, the service area is on private property and if the
>owner didn't want spectators on his land, the liability
>would be even less. Enlighten me folks and have a great
>weekend.
I can not answer your main question. I am also asking it. But, I have a thought. This was suggested to me yesterday by a Solo guy. Get a copy of the Solo rules and see if your site would fit the requirements for a hill climb.
Richard
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
> The rangers have the authority to make arrests.

On what charges?

> They also, as an organization not as an individual, have the authority to declare areas off limits except to competitors.

The new "rules" say that any area not marked as a spectator area is restricted, and therefore off limits. So the entire forest is off limits?

Glenn
 

·
400 flat to crest
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
100% Spectator saftey at any Price! Where's John Ascroft

When you really need him?
>>Glenn
>The rangers have the authority to make arrests. They also,
>as an organization not as an individual, have the authority
>to declare areas off limits except to competitors.
They also
>have guns. And the ability to use them.
I think Trevor's talk of 100% spectator saftey as being the ne plus ultra, the alpha and omega, and this talk of Rangers and their guns and ability to use them really points out just how important spectator saftey is.

I think it would be perfectly reasonable for Rangers who spot any naughty spectators to shoot them on sight.
That's a reasonable compromise, iddnit?
Sorta like culling the herd, a controlled harvest.
They ARE authority, and all authority ulitmately rest on the ability to resort to force, so they must be obeyed.

If the Rangers shot the out of bounds spectators there would be no liabilty to SCCA, which at this point would be a good thing AND the stages could continue.

Everybody wins.

The out of bounds spectators are likely EvilDoers, and since we're at war, we need to, in the words of the esteemed President "route them out and get them running".

Why a few "pre-emptive" strikes fired randomly into the Spectator Hold Pens would sure as hell flush out those with borderline evil intent.



The park rangers are
>not like Ranger Rick of the Yogi Bear cartoons. They are law
>enforcement officers and in todays world, they have to be
>prepared for anything.
>Richard
Yes today they must expect the unexpected
(Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition, that is their secret!)

No sacrifice is too great to insure 100% spectator saftey,
even if we have to shoot a few "pour encouragé les autres!"

Who has HOOooooomeLaaaaaand Security's Hotline number?





John Vanlandingham
Seattle, WA. 98168

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

Black Rocket Rally Tires
http://www.blackrockettires.com/

PS: This may be a bit silly but less than expecting people to cough up a grand and more for a chance to drive zero stages if one spectator per stage is out of bounds.>>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,246 Posts
are spectator points and marshall point the same thing?
if spectators are banned the only way to see rally would be to marshall. so maybe we could solve the lack of worker problem and the spectator safety "problem" in one fell swoop.
just my tiny brain chiming in,
greg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
946 Posts
RE: 100% Spectator saftey at any Price! Where's John Ascroft

John

Would you think spectators walking up and down a hot stage would be something to be concerned about? I'm trying to understand if you think there is a problem whatsoever.

Its root out the EvilDoers, you gotta listen to Hanity more...
 

·
don't cut
Joined
·
4,075 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
>> The rangers have the authority to make arrests.
>
>On what charges?
Pick one. Possesion of alcohol seems to be common. Tresspassing maybe. Failure to obey a lawful order of a police official seems like another. I am sure there are many others that I haven't thought about.

>
>> They also, as an organization not as an individual, have the authority to declare areas off limits except to competitors.
>
>The new "rules" say that any area not marked as a spectator
>area is restricted, and therefore off limits. So the entire
>forest is off limits?
Maybe. It's been done before. Have you tried to go into the national forests during fire season? The answer Glenn, is that under all the use plans you can think of, the national forest service or the state forest service, who ever manages the land, can restrict access for various reasons. I take it you do not go out in the woods too often. Other wise you would be familar with all the restriction signs.

>
>Glenn
And JV, I am not saying this is the answer. Just that a person with common sense doesn't piss into the wind or mess around with law enforcement officers carrying guns. It ain't healthy. Some young blue subie drivers are liable to find this out the hard way.
Richard
 

·
don't cut
Joined
·
4,075 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
>are spectator points and marshall point the same thing?
> if spectators are banned the only way to see rally would be
>to marshall. so maybe we could solve the lack of worker
>problem and the spectator safety "problem" in one fell
>swoop.
>just my tiny brain chiming in,
>greg
No, spectator points and marshal points are different. By the way, my computer insists that marshal has only one L unless it is a person's name. It keeps underlining a two L marshal in red. Not that this has any thing to do with the discussion.

A marshal may be posted at a crossroad that is otherwise very boring to watch. The spectator points have to be chosen to piss off the most possible people. Wait that's not it, the spectator points under the new rules have to be chosen for 100% safety. Good practice would also pick these for easy access while the stage is hot and provide porta potties. A good view is nice but secondary. A marshal point may require you to stay until the stage is cold and you hope the bushes don't have poison ivy.

Richard Miller
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,738 Posts
RE: 100% Spectator saftey at any Price! Where's John Ascroft

Hey JVL, this is not the "Off topic" forum. Keep your political views over there. I agree with you Trevor about spectators walking on the stage. I was doing the Hunsruck Rally back in the '80's in a Land Rover running waaaaaaay back in the pack. Walter, Jimmy, Russell et al were already enjoying a break at service. Coming down a slight grade, under trees, spectators were everywhere, so to prevent carnage, I braked to slow down and caught some wet leaves on the tarmac. Into the ditch on the right and eventually stopped. Front bumper, strong as they are, pushed back onto tyre. Brave navvie sees this and attempts to pull said bumper from tyre. Result, big blisters. Obviously hadn't heard of FRICTION!. But your point is well made. I will do everything to ensure that spectators, if they are allowed, will be in specific locations with safety marshals until the stage. Should they wish to move, it will be done under supervision. Richard, you also make some good points too. I'll look into making it a hillclimb in the next couple of days. John does tend to go on doesn't he?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,246 Posts
i was just informed by a safety steward that marshall and spectator points are not the same. a spectator point will have radio and medical. so everyone needs to get their emt friends to volunteer. so we can staff as many marshall points and turn them into spectator points. and it is possible to pick good safe spectator points you just need to put some effort into it.
greg
 

·
400 flat to crest
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
RE: 100% Spectator saftey at any Price! Where's John Ascroft

>John
>
>Would you think spectators walking up and down a hot stage
>would be something to be concerned about? I'm trying to
>understand if you think there is a problem whatsoever.
Of course it CAN be a problem and i've seen stages at Monte carlo wherre the spectators were so thick the rally cars counldn't make it to the ATCs.

But humor aside and not scolding you specifically Trevor, but there is no 100% perfect security or 100% perfect anything, and as in life shooting for and talking about 100% is a means assure yourself of failure.
Who said the perfect is the enemy of the good?
Applies here.
Everything in life is a balance or a tradeoff or a series of compromises, the question is how much are we supposed to risk ourselves in terms of our time and effort and money which may be torpedoed by one "Johnnie Come Lately I seen it on TV and Vid games and I'm gonna see some action" WRX numbskull who gets honery and gets a stage closed down?
>
>Its root out the EvilDoers, you gotta listen to Hanity
>more...





John Vanlandingham
Seattle, WA. 98168

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

Black Rocket Rally Tires
http://www.blackrockettires.com/
 

·
don't cut
Joined
·
4,075 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
A marshal point may also be an emt and radio location. For example, it may be advantagious to post the emt an radio in the middle of a stage to reduce response time. So not only recruit your EMT friends, but get your ham radio license too!
Richard Miller
KD5PXM
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
946 Posts
RE: 100% Spectator saftey at any Price! Where's John Ascroft

>But humor aside and not scolding you specifically Trevor,
>but there is no 100% perfect security or 100% perfect
>anything, and as in life shooting for and talking about 100%
>is a means assure yourself of failure.
>Who said the perfect is the enemy of the good?
>Applies here.
>Everything in life is a balance or a tradeoff or a series of
>compromises, the question is how much are we supposed to
>risk ourselves in terms of our time and effort and money
>which may be torpedoed by one "Johnnie Come Lately I seen it
>on TV and Vid games and I'm gonna see some action" WRX
>numbskull who gets honery and gets a stage closed down?

I agree that you can never be 100% safe in anything. Space junk could fall from the sky when you go get your mail at the mailbox and kill you.

I definately think that most spectators are fine, but there are definately some that are dangerous, dumb or drunk (I've seen plenty of the latter when I've spectated). They are the ones I have a problem with. There also are places where they spectate that can/are dangerous. When I watched Oregon Trail in 2001 Several were in questionable areas, fortunately nobody got hurt. Where did I watch? Behind an old growth tree. No way any car was going to even dent that baby.

I know having watched that there is a tendency by spectators to think that after the first 10-15 cars that the other cars aren't going very fast. And true, visually 70mph will not look as fast as 100mph, but if a car hits you at 30mph you are going to spend some time in a hospital.

I'm not for banning spectators, but spectating should be much more controlled. Walking up and down hot stages should not be tolerated.

If the Event Organisers would find themselves a stadium (most places have a state fair place big enough for this) and then have service in it and a 1-2 mile stage that gets ran every time the cars exit service, the spectators could see the cars safely 2-3 times a day, and the ladies would have a flush toilet on top of it and concession too. (Oh, that sounds a whole lot like the ORV park now, doesn't it...).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
>Maybe. It's been done before. Have you tried to go into the
>national forests during fire season? The answer Glenn, is
>that under all the use plans you can think of, the national
>forest service or the state forest service, who ever manages
>the land, can restrict access for various reasons.

I don't really have the energy to go through all this again. Yes, they can restrict access for certain things, at certain times. That is markedly different than closing the entire forest for a rally, though.

>I take it
>you do not go out in the woods too often. Other wise you
>would be familar with all the restriction signs.

I don't speak for him, but some of us who think contrary to you actually do spend A LOT of non-rally time in the forest. Believe it or not, for people like me, the forest is just as big an attraction (if not bigger, even) than the cars.


>Just that a
>person with common sense doesn't piss into the wind or mess
>around with law enforcement officers carrying guns. It ain't
>healthy. Some young blue subie drivers are liable to find
>this out the hard way.

Maybe I'm not a "person with common sense" but some of us "young blue subie drivers" actually make livings "pissing into the wind", as you put it. Closing the forest to spectators is really not as simple as people here wish it were. Find me a real law (like, actual federal citation) that somebody could be prosecuted under for spectating a rally in a non-spectator area. It's not going to happen.

Not to mention the fact that if you really want to shut the sport down quickly, tell the Sierra club they can't play in the woods because you're going to spend some time ripping up the roads in your car. Try telling the hunters that some prime hunting land will now be closed for a few days during the already short hunting season (or, in the alternative, tell them they can hunt only in the spectator area). Think road permits are hard to get now?

I understand the sentiment, but there's no practial way it will ever happen. Holding events on private land is a much more realistic alternative.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
570 Posts
>A marshal point may also be an emt and radio location. For
>example, it may be advantagious to post the emt an radio in
>the middle of a stage to reduce response time. So not only
>recruit your EMT friends, but get your ham radio license
>too!
>Richard Miller
>KD5PXM

Amen, brother -- get your amateur radio licenses folks!
A friend will be after me about not encouraging additional medical training as well, but I am one of those folks who does not react well with blood and guts. I am OK in heavy emergencies (been there!!!), but I may pass out afterwards...

I grew up playing around with all kinds of electronics that folks would throw out. Tried (sometimes accomplished) to build all sorts of things. Love playing around with things automotive, as well... Never quite got around to melding the two together until about a year ago. STPR will need more of both hams and med. staff -- plus spectator marshals -- given the Sawmill incident's impact, and the addition of new spectator areas... IF workers can be found...

See ya in the woods! 73's

Dave Moore -- KB3IEC
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top