Legislative Issues Past & Present

Present Issue

Ross Lake National Recreation Area

As many seaplane pilots are aware, the National Park Service is creating a management plan for Ross Lake National Recreation Area in Washington which would affect a wide variety of activities and, as proposed, would severely restrict (and essentially eliminate) seaplane operations on the lake.  WSPA is leading the effort along with WPA, AOPA and the Seaplane Pilots Association to ensure that seaplanes will still have full access to the lake and are calling on individual pilots to register their feedback.  

Please read the following introduction and then send in your feedback so they understand we are a large constituency and it is important for us to maintain access.  Please let me know if you will be able to submit input so we have our own record.  (email: Stephen@ratzlaff.co).  The official deadline for submissions is September 30^th.  We believe early submissions have greater impact so we are asking that pilots submit their comments by August 31^st.

 Many of our pilots recently attended a series of meetings in Washington hosted by the National Park Service to discuss the draft general management plan and environmental impact statement.  The park service has created four alternative plans for managing the area, and each would have a different impact on the level of seaplane access.  Their preferred option would limit the seaplanes to the north and south ends of the lake, and prevent access to nearly all acceptable seaplane campsites – their proposal would essentially eliminate seaplane access.

The seaplane pilots attending the meetings presented our case in a professional and polite manner.  We reminded the National Park Service that it had already determined that seaplane operations only numbered one or two dozen a year at the lake and there was no history of complaints about seaplanes.  Pilots in attendance explained that limiting operations to certain areas of the lake wouldn’t be feasible because the aircraft often need to land near the center of the lake for wind conditions, water depth, obstructions, and docking facilities.

The NPS officials appeared to understand that the current proposal was not feasible nor was it fair to seaplane pilots.  Furthermore they saw the level of support for maintaining access for floatplanes.  

The next stage in the process is for those concerned to submit formal comments regarding the proposed plan to the NPS.  The deadline for submission is September 30^th, 2010.  If you are a seaplane pilot now or hope to be in the future, and wish to maintain access to this wonderful location, please submit your comments to the National Park Service.

Suggested comments should be provided electronically at the following location:

http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?documentID=34698

·         I support leaving current access for seaplanes as it is today.  It has worked since inception and there is no data to suggest this might change.

·         Few, if any, noise complaints have been raised by visitors or anyone else.  It is unlikely this will increase as seaplane rated pilots are decreasing in number and Ross remains a relatively remote location.

·         The proposal does not provide adequate and secure/safe campsites to seaplane visitors.  Only north facing campsites provide sufficient protection from the southerly swell.

·         Any concerns about noise or excessive use could be readily addressed through the implementation of a standard noise abatement policy and guidelines for seaplane access.

·         A permit system limiting seaplane access is unnecessary and is not supported.

Additional comments may include:

·         Seaplane use of the park has never been excessive and there is no data to suggest that will changes.  This was also a concern when the prior plan was developed in the 1980’s and excessive use has not since materialized.

·         Seaplanes make less noise then outboard engines in aggregate.  It has been estimated that there are probably less than a dozen seaplanes in a season.  Seaplanes only make sizable noise when taking off which only lasts 30 to 60 seconds.  The total time of noise (in excess of an outboard motor) is no greater than 10 to 12 minutes a year.

·         Seaplanes have historical significance to the northwest and should remain a part of Ross Lake.

·         If access is still provided to motorboats throughout the lake, then it is unfair and unjustified to limit seaplanes access.

·         There are only a limited number of campsites (north facing with a dock) which are well suited for float planes.

·         Seaplanes provide access to the elderly and handicapped, who cannot readily access Ross Lake.

·         It is unfair to eliminate access for seaplanes to the preferred campsites.

·         Seaplanes are a classic part of the history of the northwest.

·         Seaplanes are a mode of transportation, unlike jet-skis and ski boats.  They are generally used to access the lake and then leave.  Seaplanes are often used in the same sentence with jet-skis yet they are vastly different in use and noise output.

·         Seaplanes pollute less than any motor boats.  Engine exhaust does not enter the water.

·         Seaplane pilots must be licensed by the federal government and are required to complete recurrent training.  (They are legally bound to not consume alcohol and fly.)  The pilot community is also very effective at policing themselves.  This is one reason few problems occur with those in the seaplane community.

·         Limiting seaplane access to the proposed areas reduces safety by artificially

If you would like to get detailed information about the process and the proposals, download the latest Newsletter from:

http://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?parkID=337&projectId=16940

For more information, please contact Stephen Ratzlaff, WSPA board member at Stephen@ratzlaff.co or Bruce Hinds at brucehinds@earthlink.net .

Stephen Ratzlaff

Past Issues .... are they really past?

Bureau of Reclamation

In Apr'06 new rule making contained language which prohibited seaplane operation on over 400 water resources in 17 western states that are controlled by the Bureau of Reclamation. Over the following 2 years WSPA, CSPA along with other western state organizations in ID and MT were able to get the AOPA and SPA on board and took active position on this issue.

BoR apparently over reacted to a directive where they had to respond to a new "Public Conduct Rule" issued by Homeland Security.  They really did over react!  But finally, December 11th, 2008, BoR published their Final Ruling effectivly reversing the origional ban.

In doing so, their proposal in September of '08 contained language removing  or excluding Seaplanes from the term Vessels while they are on the water.  This concerned many of us.  They also had used the term Managing Partners for the controlling agency for many of their waters and provided us with a useless list of contacts. We will be seeking any information you may receive and we will be working with the "Managing Partners"  to provide you with the best information we can.   

Help us to establish a history through documentation, and of course public relations.

Lake Isabel in the Wild Sky Wilderness Area 

As you may know, most if not all other wilderness areas ban seaplanes.  Wild Sky was written with the provision to allow "Floatplanes" to continue to operate at Lake Isabel.(do you think anyone will notice my Seabee isn't a floatplane?)

It had actually been 9 years in the making.  Wild Sky is no different in it's restriction of motorized vehicles and boats than any other wilderness area, EXCEPT for Floatplanes.  Yes, you heard that right.  As quoted from the bill, "Float Plane Access- As provided by section 4(d)(1) of the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1133(d)(1)), the use of floatplanes on Lake Isabel, where such use has already become established, shall be permitted to continue subject to such reasonable restrictions as the Secretary of Agriculture determines to be desirable."

This is HUGE.  Did you notice the phrase, "where such use has already become established," the fact that we can still use it is because we did establish a history of previous use!  Membership participation with our legislators kept our interests in the spotlight during this long struggle to keep our access.  What does the Secretary of Agriculture have do with it?  I'm not sure. But, he can change this with a stroke of a pen. 

You can see how sensitive these issues can be.  Please be good stewards of these fabulous resources.

Missouri Breaks Still an Issue