Ok,

Landed on a BEACH the other day and got in hot water with a bird watcher. Apparently one form of recreation takes precedent over another, even in Alaska.

Is that better, sheriff?

gbflyer wrote:Ok,

Landed on a BEACH the other day and got in hot water with a bird watcher. Apparently one form of recreation takes precedent over another, even in Alaska.

Is that better, sheriff?

Justin, your Father (GBFlyer Senior) landing on the beach Glacier Bay, AK. You were in the back seat of the Scout. 25’ tides leave a lot of beach every 6 hours.

gbflyer wrote:Ok,

Landed on a BEACH the other day and got in hot water with a bird watcher. Apparently one form of recreation takes precedent over another, even in Alaska.

Is that better, sheriff?

As a general rule, it's been my experience that today the vast majority of people have a sever sense of entitlement. Consequently I strive to land where people (specially the demographics that bird watchers would fall in line with) are non existent. The first step to this is surveying where the nearest road is. If someone else can reach there with out an airplane, it probably doesn't hold much interest to me... sheriff or not

I've had several instances of having to make a snap decision as to continuing an approach to a gravel bar, after spotting fisherpersons in boats, both of us out enjoying the river. About 75% of the time, I have continued to the landing. So far so good, of course I don't over fly them, and my plane is slow and super quiet, that has to help.

Bird watcher was concealed in cover. Confrontation took place at a later date in town. I agree, if I see someone around I don't go there. Avoided many, many unpleasant confrontations over the years with various guides by doing this. It's not hard at all, when you can see them.

Be all that as it may, Alaska is a giant airstrip, like it or not. Even public roads are fair game. There are some exceptions,such as landing on beaches in the National Park. I'm sure there are some others. We're blessed to live in such an aviation-friendly state.

Edit: My glib Sheriff comment was for the mod who took my first post down. I guess I should have said "beach" first.[emoji1]

gbflyer wrote:Edit: My glib Sheriff comment was for the mod who took my first post down. I guess I should have said "beach" first.[emoji1]

The mods just enforce the rules that I have written. Rw2 was professional about it, please afford him the same. He's just the deputy.

Thanks.

One of my dad's friends retired from the gov't and became a volunteer sheriff's deputy. I get a call from my dad asking me about the legality of operating a seaplane on a certain lake here in Texas. It seems deputy dawg got a complaint from a boater about an airplane landing on "his" lake and he took down all the relevant information and wanted to give him a ticket. Problem was he and his fellow donut munchers couldn't figure out what law the pilot broke. All the crime out there and this is what they have to do.

In case anyone is wondering, it is legal to operate a seaplane on Army Corps of Engineers lakes in Texas. (That's most of the surface reservoirs.) They publish a list of where the designated seaplane area is, or where operations are prohibited. The prohibited areas are usually due to submerged stumps or other hazards. Except Grapevine Lake, which is closed to seaplanes. It sits under the traffic pattern of DFW.

Hopefully you took this opportunity to educate your dad's friend, in a friendly fashion of course.
I agree about all the crime etc in our country and they're worried about a boat with wings landing out on the lake.

gbflyer wrote:Be all that as it may, Alaska is a giant airstrip, like it or not. Even public roads are fair game. There are some exceptions,such as landing on beaches in the National Park. I'm sure there are some others. We're blessed to live in such an aviation-friendly state.

Since when can you not land an aircraft on a beach in a National Park in Alaska?

MTV

mtv wrote:

gbflyer wrote:Be all that as it may, Alaska is a giant airstrip, like it or not. Even public roads are fair game. There are some exceptions,such as landing on beaches in the National Park. I'm sure there are some others. We're blessed to live in such an aviation-friendly state.

Since when can you not land an aircraft on a beach in a National Park in Alaska?

MTV

If there are beaches in Alaska closed to aircraft operations, I would like to know what they are. I am not familiar with any such closures.

.

Aren’t all National parks in Alaska fair game to planes? You can go land around Denali if you want right?

I know the KNWR is closed but thankfully it’s mostly swamp [emoji51]

.

mtv wrote:

gbflyer wrote:Be all that as it may, Alaska is a giant airstrip, like it or not. Even public roads are fair game. There are some exceptions,such as landing on beaches in the National Park. I'm sure there are some others. We're blessed to live in such an aviation-friendly state.

Since when can you not land an aircraft on a beach in a National Park in Alaska?

MTV

I have always been referred to 2. on this list:

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/he ... ies/parks/

Would it hold water? I have no idea. The Rangers I’ve talked to take it as gospel. Never felt like testing it. Really nothing there I need to stop and look at anyway.

Edited to say that it would be interesting to have a definitive answer. 43 CFR 36.11(f)(1) speaks to the subject in general, also acknowledging special agency restrictions and prohibitions. Maybe one of the NPS folks on here could ferret - out a real answer.

.

I am aware of the no landing beach laws in Oregon, CA etc., but curious when it became law and who proposed it and passed it?

AKT

glacier wrote:Yikes. Special rules for a special park, I guess. For what it is worth, I've never considered landing in the bay itself, only the outer coast beaches.

Hahaha. Yeah, pretty special. They actually own the submerged lands too. The Knowles administration tried that one in the courts. The State lost.

I’m not sure their version of the rules are applied to the outer coast. I know for a fact that a commercial operator does trips out there and advertises a beach landing. I’ve been a passenger. Of course it’s entirely different in the Preserve as one gets nearer to the Alsek. Hunting is even allowed there. For now.

gbflyer wrote:

glacier wrote:Yikes. Special rules for a special park, I guess. For what it is worth, I've never considered landing in the bay itself, only the outer coast beaches.

Hahaha. Yeah, pretty special. They actually own the submerged lands too. The Knowles administration tried that one in the courts. The State lost.

I’m not sure their version of the rules are applied to the outer coast. I know for a fact that a commercial operator does trips out there and advertises a beach landing. I’ve been a passenger. Of course it’s entirely different in the Preserve as one gets nearer to the Alsek. Hunting is even allowed there. For now.

Yeah, that splains it, I’ve never consider that to be part of Alaska.....more like coastal BC.

But, seriously, that’s a great list of closures. There aren’t many, but there are some.

Also, be VERY careful of gatherings of Marine Mammals, wherever they may gather on a beach, ice,etc. Walrus are managed by FWS, but seals and sea lions are managed by NMFS, and they have adopted some really nasty penalties if you’re caught disturbing a group of the little rascals. As in you fly by a pod of sea lions, and some stampede into the water......if that was observed, video taped, etc, you could be subject to some REALLY big penalties.

MTV

What does bathroom use have to do with anything?

gbflyer wrote:I have always been referred to 2. on this list:

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/he ... ies/parks/

Would it hold water? I have no idea. The Rangers I’ve talked to take it as gospel. Never felt like testing it. Really nothing there I need to stop and look at anyway.

Edited to say that it would be interesting to have a definitive answer. 43 CFR 36.11(f)(1) speaks to the subject in general, also acknowledging special agency restrictions and prohibitions. Maybe one of the NPS folks on here could ferret - out a real answer.

43 CFR basically says you can use aircraft, except where prohibited and such prohibitions must be NOTAM'd and published in the Alaska Supplement.

The Glacier Bay NP "Compendium" has park specific rules and includes the following:

2.17(a)(1) Aircraft operation: Superseded by 43 CFR 36.11(f)(1).
2.17(a)(2) Aircraft operation near docks, piers, swimming beaches and other designated areas: No areas prohibited at present. Aircraft access to the Public Use Dock in Bartlett Cove is permitted. See also 13.1122 regarding dock use restrictions.

https://www.nps.gov/locations/alaska/upload/glba-compendium-2018.pdf

The FAA link above seems to just be an advisory which is incorrect. I think I recall there was at one time a restriction on beach landings, but I can't find any regulatory evidence that it still exists.