Washington Seaplane Pilots Association - Legislative Issues Past and Present

Welcome

Dues and Donations by Mail

Dues/Join/Donations on line

Legislative Issues Past & Present

Legislative Issues Past and Present

Present Issue

Ross Lake National Recreation Area

They are working on their new management plan and are saying they'll have something for review this spring. At the suggestion of our friend Chuck Jarecki from the Recreational Aviation Foundation and anticipating what will probably come along, I'd like to receive any historical information you may have regarding seaplanes on Ross.

Your old pictures, stories, dates, memories, etc. could be really helpful. If you do have any of this vital information, knowing the locations on the lake that were visited too could be of great importance. Their plan may be to restrict our use to certain areas, or all together. I can scan your pictures or documents and will of course return them to you if your are not able to send them electronically. Please, even logbook entries will help. email me at BruceH@wa-spa.org

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

The BLM final plan prohibits seaplanes from using the river, but allows other power vessels, even though the BLM admits they’ve still never seen a seaplane there and don’t know that there is really any problem. It appears they have denied our access since we are not “locals” and they wanted to show environmentalists involved that they were being hard on aircraft somewhere in the plan (the BLM allowed several grass strips to remain and this has angered some of the environmental groups).

Two web sites to look at are, first the BLM site of the final report:
http://www.blm.gov/mt/st/en/fo/lewistown_field_office/um_rmp_process/rmp.html
And the second, the Friends of the Missouri Breaks web site showing what they are encouraging their members to object to, like the airstrips and use of the river by power boats: http://www.missouribreaks.org/

The BLM final plan says that seaplanes can use the river in an “emergency” which is something. But the issue is that as a navigable river and a pathway for interstate commerce, the seaplane use should simply be allowed outright. If it remains “emergency” use only, then:

1) the pilot is required to get into an emergency before using the river – rather than using the river before declaring an emergency as precautionary or just good judgment; the history of aviation accidents tells us this will predictably lead to serious accidents; and

2) there is the inevitable problem of what the definition of an “emergency” is, and park rangers are likely to give out a ticket anyway to be safe on their side, which would then require the pilot to return to a court in Montana to defend themselves – guilty until proven innocent.

Aron Faegre, President
Columbia Seaplane Pilots Association