Bullshit Rules

Dear Readers,

If you have been following this little blog for very long, you are probably well aware by now that I dislike unnecessary government restrictions.  Recently I bumped into just such a restriction.  There is a wildlife refuge nearby, and I sometimes go for runs along the trails of this refuge.  Then one day I noticed a homemade sign taped to the window of the always unoccupied guard shack at the entrance that said “No Jogging.”   This sign pissed me off.

I am often overwhelmed with the desire to do the opposite of whatever a sign says.

Now first off, I’m no great runner.  I actually really dislike running.  The Corps requires a certain level of proficiency at this, however, so I must engage in it fairly regularly.  When I do, I try to do it at locations that will allow me to do it without being hit by an automobile.  

I hate being hit by cars even more than I hate running.

There aren’t really that many such safe locations around here.  See my previous post about the traffic, for example.  So when I find a good one, I get a little upset when some bureaucrat tells me I can’t use it for no apparent reason.  I especially hate rules being made when there isn't even anyone around to enforce them.  


This time, I got so upset that I wrote them the following email on the comments link of the Occoquan Bay National Wildlife Refuge website:

I decided to go all "Leslie Knope" on their asses.

SUBJECT: No Jogging Policy

COMMENTS: Recently, I visited the Occoquan wildlife refuge and noticed a sign on the window of the gate station that jogging was not allowed on the refuge.  I also have a friend who tells me that a ranger stopped her and told her she isn't allowed to run there.  Can someone explain why this is the case?  This restriction is not listed on the website, and it really makes no sense to me.  Pedestrian traffic is allowed, in the form of hiking, so why on earth would I not be allowed to observe nature at a faster pace?  Trail running is a valid means of observing and experiencing the wildlife on the refuge.

Please explain this unreasonable restriction of my enjoyment of MY National Wildlife Refuge.  In what way is traveling through the park on foot incompatible with the goals and objectives of the refuge?  And if traveling on foot is acceptable, then my speed of travel should not be an issue.

Thank you,
Walt Carr, Concerned Citizen

Maybe not my very best work, but I don’t think any of it seems all that unreasonable.  Of course I never seem to think I’m being unreasonable, even as I tell someone they are an idiot, so maybe I’m not always the best judge of such things.  In any case, I received the following reply a couple of days later:

Dear Mr. Carr,

I am writing in response to your email inquiry in regards to jogging on Occoquan Bay NWR:

Unfortunately, jogging does not support a refuge purpose, objective, or goal and would not benefit the natural or cultural resources present within the Refuge Complex. It is not identified as a priority public use of the National Wildlife Refuge System under the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. § 668dd-668ee), as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-57).

Foot travel is allowed on all established refuge trails so that visitors may experience the priority public uses of wildlife observation, photography, interpretation, and environmental education. Jogging is not required to experience these uses. Jogging may inconvenience visitors engaged in priority public uses by potentially disturbing wildlife that others are observing or photographing. Another potential conflict is that the typical trail width on the Refuge Complex may require joggers or the wildlife observers to step off trail in order to allow room to safely pass. This activity not only causes inconvenience to visitors engaged in priority public uses, but may also disturb vegetation and wildlife adjacent to the trails. Opportunities for jogging are available at other public lands and parks within a mile of each refuge within the Refuge Complex.

These documents were all released in draft for public review and comment. The 49-day comment period was from January 5 to February 22, 2011. An announcement that these documents were available for review was also published in the Federal Register (76 FR 582) on January 5, 2011, in a newsletter we distributed to individuals on our project mailing list and posted on our Web site, and announced at three public meetings we held on February 2 and 3, 2011. 

No, the jogging restriction in not listed on our website. Instead the website focuses on allowable refuge uses. However, I will consider your feedback when redesigning the refuge website later this year.

**********************************************************
Amanda A. Daisey
Deputy Refuge Manager
Potomac River National Wildlife Refuge Complex
12638 Darby Brooke Ct.
Woodbridge, VA 22192

Apparently, this guy finds the idea of people exercising on  public lands inconvenient.

Now, I am intelligent enough to know when I am being told off by a government flunky.  This little note, when translated from legaleze to English, basically says “Screw you.  We make the rules around here, and we saw you laughing at our funny ranger hats.  Go find somewhere else to run.” 

I get tons of chicks with this hat.

I reacted poorly to this, of course.  At first I was pretty angry, but after a short cooling-off period and a little Duplin wine, I wrote the following reply:

Dear Ms. Daisey,

I appreciate your prompt reply to my question. 

Your explanations do not make very much sense, however.  You simply restated the unsubstantiated claim that running on a path is somehow harmful to the wildlife and other visitors.  You have failed to describe any logical reason why running down a trail is any different than hiking down the trail.  Neither activity is identified as a priority public use of the National Wildlife Refuge System under the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. § 668dd-668ee), as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-57).  What is identified is that activities that allow the public to experience the wildlife should be facilitated, subject to such restrictions or regulations as may be necessary, reasonable, and appropriate.

My position is that your restriction on my rate of travel when on foot is neither reasonable, necessary, nor appropriate.  Frankly, the potential conflicts you describe are ridiculous.  People are allowed to drive their cars down many of these trails, and all are wide enough to allow vehicles to easily traverse them.  Two pedestrians meeting on these trails would hardly be forced to trample any wildlife.  For that matter, in all the times I have traveled those trails, I have never encountered more than a handful of visitors on the entire refuge.  I also do not understand how you assume that a person doing a trail run is not engaging in wildlife observation, photography, interpretation, and environmental education.  Running is not required to do this, but it hardly precludes it either.

I do not in any way consider this matter closed, 49-day comment period notwithstanding.  I believe your policy to be an unreasonable and arbitrary restriction.

Thank you,

Walt Carr

This argument is only just beginning.  I will keep you posted on how it goes.  I fully intend to pester the crap out of these people, while simultaneously breaking this rule as often as possible.  It actually almost makes running fun.